That defines a lower bound. The basic upper bound that separates “middle class” from “rich” is that if you’re “rich” you have the option to say fukitall and quit working while still in the prime of life without impact to your lifestyle.
Income minus expenses. You subtracted off the average health insurance premium and rent increase between 1970 and 2019, right? Surely you checked your figures.
That’s so peculiar… I’m 46 and I grew up in the suburbs to college educated middle class parents, and the general theme of my last couple of years of college (1994-1996) was “Enjoy it now; life is going to suck when you’re out of school on your own, living on your entry level salary and have very little spare cash.” There was a total expectation that regardless of career field, we were all going to start out making squat, and work our way into better money. The follow-on expectation was that we were going to basically start accumulating enough money for a down payment and eventually buy houses with it and settle down.
In practice, it ended up being that we all got out, worked for beans, worked our way up, and most people ended up buying their first houses after they got married in their early-mid 30s. I think I know a very small number of people who bought houses in their late-20s/early 30s before they got married, but not many.
AFAIK, the big sticking point between renting and buying is the down payment. In many cases the monthly payments will be less than renting, depending on what you rent vs. what you buy. But first, you have to get 10-20% of the value of the home accumulated, which can be tough if you’re already paying a mortgage-worth of educational debt, which is something my generation didn’t really have to deal with.
Here’s a datapoint one generation back. I graduated from college in 1973. The possibility of going to live with ones parents was not discussed. We had relatively little debt, and the inflation of the late '70s wiped much of that out. Our parents grew up in the depression and it was expected we’d make more than they did, and we usually did. And sure we could afford a house.
I bought my first house at 28, when I was in grad school and my wife was working. It was $40K, small but in a very nice neighborhood.
I wasn’t nearly as stressed as my kids were, even though they both have done great and they didn’t have any college debt, so relatively speaking they weren’t that stressed either.
Can you provide cites for your “reality”? Because according to everything I’ve been hearing for the past 40 years, REAL household income (adjusted for inflation) for everyone not in the upper quartile has remained stagnant.
I’m the same age and grew up with similar expectations. One phenomenon that’s a bit different from when I was younger is the concept of “superstar cities” like New York, San Francisco, Seattle, Boston and others. This started in the mid 90s with a combination of the tech / Wall Street boom and the cultural shift of places like New York actually being places where affluent people wanted to live. Growing up in the 80s, most major cities were considered “cesspools of crime and violence”, largely due to the “white flight” of the 70s and 80s.
Over the past couple of decades, a lot of young people have descended on these cities for lucrative jobs in tech, finance, and media. Initially young people would only stay there a few years until they saved up enough to buy a home and raise a family out in the suburbs, but more and more they are staying in the cities to raise a family. A lot of Millennials also don’t even want the hassle of owning a large suburban home, long car commute or in many cases a family.
What this has meant in economic terms is that more and more people are being driven towards these cities for the high paying jobs, but much of that is offset by the rising housing costs.
Somewhat ironically, my anecdotal observations are that a couple could live a much higher “middle class” lifestyle holding jobs as police officers, nurses, school teachers or small business owner in a small town hours from the nearest city (because every town needs these jobs) verses an “upper middle class” lifestyle of a family of finance and tech executives bringing in $400k and living in a crowded apartment.
Although what I’ve also observed is that many of these “small town” regions are suffering a sort of reverse “white flight” or brain drain as much of their tax base is drawn off to big city jobs. Many of these regions are suffering economic depression and an influx of crime and drugs they aren’t used to seeing.
You even quoted the publication names.
I just chose to buy a bigger house closer to work. My standard of living didn’t decrease just because I made a more expensive choice. I can’t choose to buy 1970s-style healthcare today because that’s called malpractice. Yes, today, we spend more on housing and healthcare. We also spend less on food, clothing, and transportation. This all laid out clearly in US Census CES.
And never mind that when discussing real costs, the consumer price index accounts for these changes. Whether it does so is certainly a matter that economists debate and we can too.
Did I miss something? It seems everyone (or mostly everyone, if I missed a post) is defining economic class based on their gut feelings. But there are definitions:
Here’s another look at income levels: find your city and state and input an income, and it’ll tell you your income bracket.
In general I think most folks are vastly overestimating the amount of money a person has to earn to be upper-middle-class. That’s probably because our culture (mostly American culture, but also Internet culture) treats middle class as the ideal, and being upper class is a bit shameful.
I’m interested whether folks who say they’re plain old middle class find that the Pew Research Center disagrees with them.
I am about where I said I was - lower, upper-middle class. The Pew website doesn’t consider household wealth, though, just income, and that may or may not change things.
Regards,
Shodan
There are definitions, but they are somewhat arbitrary and they vary. Any definition is still useful for tracking changes over time. Pew looks at income tiers, and income is not necessarily class.* They define “middle” as between 2/3 and 2x the median income, adjusted for household size (divide by square root) and I think for location. This isn’t right or wrong, but you’ll find some people who seem out of place with this definition vs what we see discussed in the wiki article.
*Consider higher-wealth older people with paid-off houses prior to mandatory withdrawal from retirement accounts. “Ruken, I didn’t pay any taxes this year!”
I thought UMC meant having a yacht for sailin’, a private eye for tailin’ my wife if she’s a bit too free.
To me, UMC would mean never having to worry if you can afford something. If you want it, you can have it. You can send the kids wherever they want to go for college, give them new cars when they turn 16, give them lavish weddings. You’d live in one of the better neighborhoods and own a vacation home. You vacation by air in Europe or take the more exclusive cruises. You have enough to retire and not scale back your lifestyle.
That sets the limit for upper middle class way too high - “If you want it, you can have it” ? Suppose what I want is a $3 million private island and a $28 million private plane to get there? If I can afford that, I’m rich not upper middle class
Everyone has a slightly different definition. I think your definition is Upper Class, not Upper Middle Class. UMC can provide a car to their kids, but not a new car. Pay for college, but not any college. etc.
But this thread has made it clear that everyone has a slightly different definition and that each definition is as good as any other.
Thing is, upper middle class is still part of the middle class, right? It’s reasonable to define middle class at least in part by percentage of folks in it: if we define “middle class” as including 99% of people, it’s not much of a definition.
I’d think it’d be expansive to consider middle class to include the middle three quintiles of income, treating them as lower-middle, middle, and upper-middle respectively. Or maybe instead of quintiles, we talk about standard deviations, although at that point I’m a little out of my comfort zone.
But if your definition of upper-middle-class includes folks who are independently wealthy, who never worry about being able to afford things, you’re not leaving much room for the Filthy Rich class.
Based upon nothing but my own impressions:
Wealthy means not needing a salary of any sort; the wealthy might choose to work, but they live off of their investments.
Upper middle means that you still have to work, but your investments would hold you in a pinch. Your lifestyle might suffer a bit, but you wouldn’t lose much.
Upper middle class things I’ve encountered:
Adding an elevator to the home for when Grandma visits
Buying an expensive car on a whim - without consulting one’s spouse - and it’s a lovely surprise.
Owning at least one vacation home, and never considering renting it out.
Traveling for holidays more than once per year.
Having live-in staff of some sort - Nanny, housekeeper, etc.
Differences between Upper Middle (UM) and Upper Class (UC):
UM has a car service on retainer; UC has a chauffer
UM has large, comfortable (or small and powerful) vehicles made for the comfort of the driver; UC has multiple vehicles designed specifically for the back seat riders.
UM has a MIL suite; UC has a guest wing.
UM has a 4,000sq ft home but only 3-4 bedrooms; UC could host a small conference and give everyone their own room.
UM has deep concerns about which schools their kids get into; UC has deep concerns about which schools their names will go on.
UM has live-in staff who are “part of the family”; UC doesn’t necessarily know everybody who works in their house(s).
UM is proud of the fine hotels they have stayed in; UC is embarrassed they didn’t know anyone in a given city and had to stay in a commercial establishment.
UM flies first class; UC has their own transport or borrows a friend’s in a pinch.
UM has occasional casual involvement with charity work; UC has a life-long relationship with charities they support.
I’m more and more curious: what percentage of American adults do folks think fit into the categories? Trucelt, your list of upper-middle-class behaviors include some things that I’d guess fewer than 5% of the population can afford (a 4,000 square foot home with 3-4 bedrooms? regularly flying first class? Live-in staff?), and the upper class list is like way less than 1%. Is that your understanding, that a person is still middle-class if they’re among the wealthiest 3 or 4 percent of the population?
I’ve got a couple of questions, too, **TruCelt. **In addition to what LHOD said above, there also seems to be an excluded class between your UMC and UC . Where does the person who owns a second home and doesn’t rent it out, takes more than one vacation per year and doesn’t fly first class fit? And unless you have a very restricted definition of “traveling” , most plain old middle-class people I know do it more than once a year. Not to Europe, not first class, maybe not even flying- but spending a week as Disney and a long weekend later on in Vegas is still traveling more than once per year.
I will give my guesses.
Upper Class: upper 5% of US population. That includes the 1% of course.
UMC: the next 10% of the population. So we have categorized the top 15% of the population.
MC: the next the next 30% of the population
Lower MC: the next 40% of the population
Poor: the bottom 15%
Note these are just my guesses and they are largely but not entirely determined by income. I think being in the Middle Class (for instance) depends on income, location, attitude and circumstances. A young college graduate with a good understanding and attitude toward building wealth (saving and investing) in a job with good growth potential in a high-cost area may not yet have the income for MC, but to me is clearly already there. Someone with a high current income who spends it as fast as it comes in and leases a fancy car just to show off may not be, IMHO, MC (he/she is lower MC on my scale).
It is an interesting definitional problem as the word “middle” mucks things up, as you tend automatically to think of the halfway point as the middle. The average lifespan in the United States is currently 78.69 years. So is a 39 year-old middle-aged? I’ve had plenty of people tell me huffily otherwise :p.
I’m in the top quintile of US household income. If you took some semi-logical construction like - bottom quintile=poor, middle three quintiles= middle class, top quintile = wealthy, well I’d be wealthy :). But I’ve never flow first class or even business class on my own dime. I drive a mid-sized, mid-priced car. I sure as hell don’t feel wealthy.
Yet I have no real debt, I have a very( very )modest amount of savings exclusive of retirement, I have a decent retirement plan, I can eat out more or less when I please( but not fine dining ), order inexpensive stuff off Amazon( the odd book or CD )as I please, etcetera. So maybe I am wealthy. Relatively. It’s all about perception.
I think you’re describing the UMC lifestyle at the very edge of the upper class- i.e. well paid doctors, partners at law firms and other highly paid professionals, not your average two white collar income UMC families.
Most UMC families don’t own vacation homes, employ live-in staff or fly first class. They may rent a vacation home, or go on a long vacation and fly to it, and they probably have a lawn service and a cleaning person/service (but not live-in).