Why so much focus on helping the middle class?

Shouldn’t the lower class be the biggest priority?

The lower class is getting a lot of help in the relief package. But the middle class is usually where the battle for control between the parties is won and lost so a lot of talking about helping the middle class.

The child tax credit especially helps low income families.
Partial paywall, but the NY Times seems to support this.

Now the money targeting for Small Business assistance helps both the middle income and the lower income. Keeping small businesses in business or helping them grow should keep lower lower income people employed and should add more jobs.

The lower class is getting plenty of help. Food stamps (or whatever it is called now), rental assistance, free phones, reduced or free school lunches, special programs like “shop with a cop”, don’t need to pay the fees for youth activities, etc… I was aware of these as my kids went through school. Our family made too much to be eligible for these programs as we were “lower middle class”.

Now my oldest is starting collage… filled out the FAFSA forms as we were told we would be getting all this tuition assistance. Nope, we make too much money as both my wife and I are employed. Daughter is eligible for only a few thousand in college loans and we can’t afford to help her out because we are “middle class”. We are still unsure how she is going to pay for tuition at the university this fall, she emptied her savings going to the local community college for the last 2 years.

Now, I have a coworker when asked why he doesn’t marry his child’s mother whom he lives with. He said “hell no!, she would lose her housing assistance, day care assistance, food stamps, and she would have to get a job” Yet he mentioned they are going to Jamaica to celebrate their 5 year “anniversary”.

One interesting thing is that a LOT of people consider themselves “middle class” even if they’re not.

Almost 70% of Americans consider themselves to be middle-class, but in actuality only 50% are, according to new research by Pew.

You have people making $25k a year calling themselves middle class and people making $500k a year calling themselves middle class. The term is a rhetorical catch-all for solid real Americans powering the economy and everyone likes the label. And, when 70% of America thinks that they’re middle class, it means that any legislation nominally targeted towards the “middle class” will be seen by 70% of America as helping them, whether it actually does or not.

Simply put, most of the voters are in the middle class (or as per @Jophiel 's post, think they are).

Yeah, nobody actually believes themselves to be “lower-class,” so any policy framed that way would be widely perceived as “helping those other people who are not you.”

This was a problem even twenty years ago. In order to waive the FAFSA requirement for my parents’ income I had to provide extensive documentation that I was a legally emancipated minor, and that I was receiving no help from my parents, and that my parents refused to provide their social security information. I’m pretty sure I would have been considered poor either way, but I knew so many students whose parents were relatively well off but who refused to help them with college. So they were drowning in loans and I had Pell grants and scholarships (I received a full ride for being both poor and a high achiever and from a specific county. It was kind of a freak thing.) They were really worse off than I was. Now some universities are even waiving tuition for the very poor (I believe Columbia does.)

I think we should have a broader safety net for everyone. A lot of people in the middle class are struggling. A person’s income is not a great indicator of financial stability. You could have a middle class income and thousands in medical debt, for example.

When the middle class thrives, opportunities for advancing, for the poorer classes, multiply.
Two birds, one stone.

Couldn’t you use the same argument for the upper class?

Not really. Report after report and study after study shows the a robust middle class (small business) actually produces more jobs and better conditions the upper class keeping more money.

There needs to be some balance of course, but a healthy middle class seems to be the best for a countries economy combined with a solid social net to help the lower class strive for and achieve a middle class standard.

The upper class has enough money that they don’t need to spend it. They save it in places where it doesn’t really drive the economy (the stock market) and when they do spend it, they have the luxury of spending it out of the country.

If you want to take advantage of economic multipliers, a healthy middle class is where it is at. They will spend most of the money they can get their hands on, and what they choose to spend it on is more likely be local - restaurants, trips in country, supporting stores that are close to home.

Yes.
(This response did not meet Discourse’s “You must be this many letters to ride” rule, so I added this stupid bullshit. Happy now, Discourse??)

No, actually. There is no trickle down.

Raising the minimum wage would also absolutely hugely drive the economy. Because the people who get THAT money, will be spending it ALL. Every check. Every month, for years to come.

They’ll spend it on education for their kids, maybe buy a car, or even a home one day. Investing in their futures.

Rich people invest to have MORE! Buy a second home, flashier car, stash more off shore.

Anyone above the poverty line who isn’t part of the 1% qualifies as middle class, with all the faux fawning-over by politicians that entails.

Poor people have a lower voter turnout, and don’t show up to vote as much. Generally its a bad idea for politicians to pander to people who don’t vote.

Plus its easier to drive wedges between the poor and middle class. Programs that help the poor can be used as weapons to build resentment among the middle class and working class. Programs that help the poor cause a lot of resentment among the working class and middle class sadly.

If you think being poor is a good way to get lots of free stuff, why don’t you quit your job and get a divorce. The money will come rolling in so fast and heavy your oldest can just skip college, have a kid without marrying and in no time your family will be millionaires! It’s gold, Jerry, gold!!

See @a6ka97 s post for confirmation of @Wesley_Clark s answer.

That’s funny. My wife and I make well under 1/2 of $500k, but consider ourselves quite well off. If not “upper class”, certainly “upper middle class”. We;ve saved all of our loves, and as we approach retirement, we have considerable savings.

BTW - does anyone have a good cite for income/wealth percentiles in America? If you earn $200k/yr, what percentile are you in?

Just off the seat of my pants, I’d say folk earning between $75-200k have a lot more in common than someone earning $200k has w/ a $500k earner. And then there are the super rich - which I’d say is anyone earning over $1mill.

Again - just seat of my pants estimates w/ little reflection.

But my suspicion is that there is less and less of what I define as middle class - folk earning $75-200k/yr. Instead, the folk above and below that group are growing, and there is less and less opportunity for the poorest folk to claw their way up into what I call the middle class. If there were more jobs that would support a middle class lifestyle - with childcare/healthcare/etc to go along w/ such jobs, more currently poor people could aspire to those jobs.

Hey, looks like my estimate wasn’t insane. Graph here.

25% $34k
50% $68k
75% $124k
90% $201k
99% $531k

I’ve got no problem calling the group from 50-90% middle class - roughly $70-200k.

IMO, anyone who calls themself middle class who earns $25k or $500k is deluding themself - willingly or not.

See , I would say anything earning in the middle would be middle class so $34k-124k.