Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I see, so stating income as a fact of figuring economic class is "resentful, narrow minded and intolerant"? Wow. I must have missed that in statistics.
Anyway, not sure why I'm continuing to debate (but I will anyway) with you since earlier you stated....
NO, you labeling others and telling others how to live:"There's an obvious want by rich people to pretend they are middle class and thus the category "upper middle class" is what they refer to themselves as. It's a bad joke."
If you make a $100,000 a year or more as a household, you are in the top 10-15th percentile of income. How does that qualify as "middle class" in any stretch of the imagination? Factually the average household income of ALL of Naperville is $100,000, not just White Eagle or Tall Grass, I would imagine their household income average is much higher. Quit pretending. Rich people are rich people.
YES, I find your statement above resentful, intolerant and narrow-minded.
It's not "pretending", it is an approach to life my Texas friends might describe as "small hat, big cattle" instead of "big hat, small cattle" Again, I suggest you read "The Millionaire Next Door" it may surprise you and it is informative and fun to read. Your local library should have copies available. Those who appear solidly middle class may be the truly wealthy and those living in the McMansion driving $80K cars might not be.
With that in mind, if you could just stop worrying about the fees (that I supposedly don't pay because I'm not "grown up") that you mentioned earlier, you'd be RICH, and if we could all just not worry about those fees we could all live happy and wealthy in your world of make believe....right?
So when the bills come to pay for doctors visits, braces, park district sports programs, school registration fees, groceries, clothing and everything else, I should stop worrying and magically I will be rich? And I'm living in a world of "make believe?!?!" What was the figure I remember hearing about regarding the cost of raising a child through age 18; $250K? So if I have 2 kids that's $27K per year. So,(Using fictional numbers) if I was making $65K before kids I was "middle class" and if I am now making $92K I am "rich"? Even though my expenses have eaten up the $27K more per year I am making?!?!
As others have also said, cost of living and NET WORTH have such a large impact on being "rich" that only looking at income is incomplete.
So when the bills come to pay for doctors visits, braces, park district sports programs, school registration fees, groceries, clothing and everything else, I should stop worrying and magically I will be rich? And I'm living in a world of "make believe?!?!" What was the figure I remember hearing about regarding the cost of raising a child through age 18; $250K? So if I have 2 kids that's $27K per year. So,(Using fictional numbers) if I was making $65K before kids I was "middle class" and if I am now making $92K I am "rich"? Even though my expenses have eaten up the $27K more per year I am making?!?!
As others have also said, cost of living and NET WORTH have such a large impact on being "rich" that only looking at income is incomplete.
Wow, you just keep burying yourself deeper. You seem to think that if you establish a higher cost of living, that means you're not in the upper class, at least that's what you're inferring. In your wild world of make believe, "income doesn't matter", you say that if you spend a lot, and make a lot you're "poor". Hey, if it makes sense to you, more power to you.
I never knew that people who made minimum wage, but were careful with their money could be "rich", but you are making a convincing argument.
Convincingly obtuse.
Wow, you just keep burying yourself deeper. You seem to think that if you establish a higher cost of living, that means you're not in the upper class, at least that's what you're inferring. In your wild world of make believe, "income doesn't matter", you say that if you spend a lot, and make a lot you're "poor". Hey, if it makes sense to you, more power to you.
I never knew that people who made minimum wage, but were careful with their money could be "rich", but you are making a convincing argument.
Convincingly obtuse.
It is all about Net Worth. Suppose I make $60K, which is "middle class" in your definition. Let's say I am a good saver and live a modest lifestyle. After 40 years I have a million dollars in savings, but my income never rose above the statistical "middle class" income level. Let's compare that with the doctor who has never learned to save. He has $200K in med school debt and spens all he earns. His income puts him in the "rich" category by your definition. After 40 years he has $80K in savings.
Who is rich? Who is middle class? Why do YOU need to put this label on people? Why the resentment(evident in earlier posts) towards those who are doing well?
And you are quick to tell me I use "make believe" thinking but yet you have not answered the question of: Have you been faced with the expenses of raising a family in suburban Chicago?
Quote:
"There's an obvious want by rich people to pretend they are middle class and thus the category "upper middle class" is what they refer to themselves as. It's a bad joke."
Very true Vlajos. My eyes are now opened to the fact that you can be rich on $27k annually if you live in a tent with your kids and eat gruel every day. We are all rich, for some it will just take more time.
Then again, I'm not sure how to pay for "doctors visits, braces, park district sports programs, school registration fees, groceries, clothing and everything else" on my $27k and be rich, or even upper middle class, but I'm sure more on that equation is coming. I can't wait to see it.
Wow, you just keep burying yourself deeper. You seem to think that if you establish a higher cost of living, that means you're not in the upper class, at least that's what you're inferring. In your wild world of make believe, "income doesn't matter", you say that if you spend a lot, and make a lot you're "poor". Hey, if it makes sense to you, more power to you.
I never knew that people who made minimum wage, but were careful with their money could be "rich", but you are making a convincing argument.
Convincingly obtuse.
Quote:
Cubssox: It is all about Net Worth. Suppose I make $60K, which is "middle class" in your definition. Let's say I am a good saver and live a modest lifestyle. After 40 years I have a million dollars in savings, but my income never rose above the statistical "middle class" income level. Let's compare that with the doctor who has never learned to save. He has $200K in med school debt and spens all he earns. His income puts him in the "rich" category by your definition. After 40 years he has $80K in savings.
Who is rich? Who is middle class? Why do YOU need to put this label on people? Why the resentment(evident in earlier posts) towards those who are doing well?
And you are quick to tell me I use "make believe" thinking but yet you have not answered the question of: Have you been faced with the expenses of raising a family in suburban Chicago?
Quote:Chummy Waters
"There's an obvious want by rich people to pretend they are middle class and thus the category "upper middle class" is what they refer to themselves as. It's a bad joke."
Quote:
Chummy Waters: I get it now, you are completely indecisive. Hence your moniker, of course "upper middle" class makes sense to you.
Cubsox:NO, the 2nd statement above is YOURS, not mine.
And you answered my question of "Why the resentment?" with this
Quote:
Very true Vlajos. My eyes are now opened to the fact that you can be rich on $27k annually if you live in a tent with your kids and eat gruel every day. We are all rich, for some it will just take more time.
Then again, I'm not sure how to pay for "doctors visits, braces, park district sports programs, school registration fees, groceries, clothing and everything else" on my $27k and be rich, or even upper middle class, but I'm sure more on that equation is coming. I can't wait to see it.
I understand how you can see someone making over $70K as being "rich"
It is simple envy/jealousy/resentment of those earning more and having the "gall" to claim they aren't rich or claim they are middle class when you insist they should be labeled "upper middle class".Would you like us to label you, your life-style and your salary?!
When you earn $30K does that mean you will be middle class? Will you feel middle class? Or will that occur when you make $31K or $42K?? What if the range goes up but your salary doesn't? Then you are poor again, right?
Do you wonder why no one else is chiming in cubssoxfan? It's because to most around here, I'm a "troll", but behind the scenes you wouldn't believe how many people compliment me. That being said, whether or not I told you I was an astrophysicist or the guy who lives in the van down by the river, no one would believe me.
All of the supposed "envy/jealousy/resentment" that you keep trying to claim that I have is naught. My point remains the same, people who are obviously wealthy, rich, or upper class (whatever moniker one prefers), don't necessarily see themselves as such, when their income makes them such.
Some, perhaps like yourself, have some belief that because they spend foolishly or have too many fees, etc. that it puts them in another classification, even though all people have different spending habits, fees, etc.
To me, and many other economists, financial classifcation based on income is cut and dry. Obviously to someone like yourself, you prefer to try and skew things by adding emotions, feelings, etc. If it continues to make sense to you, so be it. It matters not to me.
Do you wonder why no one else is chiming in cubssoxfan? It's because to most around here, I'm a "troll", but behind the scenes you wouldn't believe how many people compliment me. That being said, whether or not I told you I was an astrophysicist or the guy who lives in the van down by the river, no one would believe me.
All of the supposed "envy/jealousy/resentment" that you keep trying to claim that I have is naught. My point remains the same, people who are obviously wealthy, rich, or upper class (whatever moniker one prefers), don't necessarily see themselves as such, when their income makes them such. I can agree with that. what I took exception to was your sarcastic, demeaning tone. I was also explaining how for some, like me, who are only marginally above your empirical limit to being "middle class" we do not feel or consider ourselves "upper middle class", rich or wealthy. Some of us are this way because we have parents who suffered through the Great Depression or WWII and we were brought up to live at or below our means. Here is what you said that rankled me immensely:
Quote:
Quote:
"There's an obvious want by rich people to pretend they are middle class and thus the category "upper middle class" is what they refer to themselves as. It's a bad joke."
No, it's not a bad joke. It's something most of us from many income levels are feeling. An increased cost of living, stagnant pay with no raises, increased taxes, big increases in health care costs and on and on. Absolutely it affects those in the lower income brackets much more. But your comments smack of "They're rich; they make X amount and how dare they "pretend" to be middle class or complain about how difficult it is to stretch a dollar."
Some, perhaps like yourself, have some belief that because they spend foolishly or have too many fees, etc. that it puts them in another classification, even though all people have different spending habits, fees, etc. Not me. I wasn't brought up that way. That's "big Hat and No Cattle" foolishness.
To me, and many other economists, financial classifcation based on income is cut and dry. Obviously to someone like yourself, you prefer to try and skew things by adding emotions, feelings, etc. If it continues to make sense to you, so be it. It matters not to me.
And to me it is inaccurate. $71K in Omaha NE goes a lot farther than $71K in suburban Chicago. But $71K goes a lot farther in suburban Chicago than in the San Francisco Bay area. Perhaps it is time to agree to disagree.
This was entertaining for a while but I think this thread has run its course. Started out with a neighborhood recommendaton and quickly closing in on a dozen pages about what defines middle class lol
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
