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.
Totally agree with you.. There are many Long Islanders who are just house poor. I see this all the time - young couples making around $100-150K combined with mortgages in the $400-600K range, and basically are 1 step away from foreclosure if there is a job loss or medical emergency. I dont like to live that much on the edge. Should I lose my job or my husband lose his job, either one of us can comfortably pay our mortgage/taxes for almost a year. My husband and I easily qualify for a mortgage in the $500-600K range based on our salaries alone, but we have no intention of carrying a mortgage with a $300K balance or more. Too many people look at the monthly payment and don't factor in that the ideal situation is for 1 partner to be able to carry the entire mortgage plus PITI/taxes, insurance, etc.
In a nutshell, you just illustrated the difference between middle, upper-middle, and rich people. Upper-middle class people are still middle class people. Middle class people need to worry about the situations you describe. They are dependent on their jobs for their survival. Job loss or catastrophic illness can be devastating to their situation. Upper-middle people also need to worry. They are likely to have better benefits, more assets and savings, but ultimately, they are still dependent on their jobs (although they have a better chance of comfortable and earlier retirement). Rich people, truly rich people, may or may not be dependent on their incomes. Most likely they're not, and accumulating more wealth is more of a game than a means to survival. If you've been making 7 figures for 15+ years or you inherited/were trust-funded 20 million, you're not worried about medical bills, job security, or mortgages. Many can stop working, and depending on the portfolio, have enough wealth so that generations of their progeny don't have to work before slipping into upper-middle territory (having to go to work). There aren't a lot of rich people on in the United States (less than 1%), but a whole lot of them live in the NYC area, and many of them concentrate on the Gold Coast.
Thats why I agree with LIGuy1202 that the minimum threshold in the NYC region for upper-middle is $250k gross. CNN, using IRS data, places minimum entry into the top 1% of earners (who grab about 22% of the income in US) at $343,927 annually (it was $424,000 in 2007, so it fluctuates). On average, Top 1-percenters made $960,000. Even then, other factors come in. How much debt is there? Net worth? Single income? Job security? Many of these $960k people can still easily fall back into financial dire straights. For, example, 78% of NFL players are bankrupt or in financial distress within 2 years of retirement. Yes, by spending and investing wiser, many of them could have lived comfortable upper middle/wealthy "lifestyles." But, who's really the "rich" person, the NFL player, or the guy or gal who pays him? The guy who pays him can take multimillion dollar losses and still be "rich." It's a game, not survival.
The true 1% aren't the top earners, but the people with the top net worth. [/url] The generally accepted estimate is that top 1% control 50.3% of the financial assets while the bottom 90% only held 14.4%. Remember, the "middle class" is a construct of the 20th century. 100 years ago in 1912, smallest section on the Titanic was 2nd class (which today would be upper-middle class or business class). Most of us are workers. That's why I don't think CDP's like CSH and Woodbury are "rich." It would be inaccurate look at CSH as lower-wealthy and Lloyd Harbor as upper-wealthy. CSH is upper middle class. IMO, most families in CSH have more in common with people in Hicksville than they do with the truly wealthy in places like Lloyd Harbor and Cove Neck.
interesting but what is the net effect. tax savings for the self employed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocngypz
Picked this up from their website:
Since the Land Rover LR4, Range Rover Sport and Range Rover each have a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR)** of between 6,000 and 14,000 lbs, they qualify for an accelerated tax depreciation schedule. When used for business over 50% of the time, they can even be depreciated at a faster rate than other luxury vehicles.
In a nutshell, you just illustrated the difference between middle, upper-middle, and rich people. Upper-middle class people are still middle class people. Middle class people need to worry about the situations you describe. They are dependent on their jobs for their survival. Job loss or catastrophic illness can be devastating to their situation. Upper-middle people also need to worry. They are likely to have better benefits, more assets and savings, but ultimately, they are still dependent on their jobs (although they have a better chance of comfortable and earlier retirement). Rich people, truly rich people, may or may not be dependent on their incomes. Most likely they're not, and accumulating more wealth is more of a game than a means to survival. If you've been making 7 figures for 15+ years or you inherited/were trust-funded 20 million, you're not worried about medical bills or mortgages. Many can stop working, and depending on the portfolio, have enough wealth so that generations of their progeny don't have to work before slipping into upper-middle territory (having to go to work). There aren't a lot of rich people on in the United States (less than 1%), but a whole lot of them live in the NYC area, and many of them concentrate on the Gold Coast.
Thats why I agree with LIGuy1202 that the minimum threshold in the NYC region for upper-middle is $250k gross. CNN, using IRS data, places minimum entry into the top 1% of earners (who earn ____ % of of US) at $343,927 annually (it was $424,000 in 2007, so it fluctuates).
On average, Top 1-percenters made $960,000. Even then, other factors come in. How much debt is there? Net worth? Single income? Job security. Many of these $960k people can still easily fall back into financial dire straights. For, example, 78% of NFL players are bankrupt or in financial distress within 2 years of retirement. Yes, by spending and investing wiser, many of them could have lived comfortable upper middle/wealthy "lifestyles." But, who's really the "rich" person, the NFL player, or the guy or gal who pays him? The guy who pays him can take multimillion dollar losses and still be "rich." It's a game, not survival.
The true 1% aren't the top earners, but the people with the top net worth. [/url] The generally accepted estimate is that top 1% control 50.3% of the financial assets while the bottom 90% only held 14.4%. Remember, the "middle class" is a construct of the 20th century. 100 years ago in 1912, smallest section on the Titanic was 2nd class (which today would be upper-middle class or business class). Most of us are workers. That's why I don't think CDP's like CSH and Woodbury are "rich." It would be inaccurate look at CSH as lower-wealthy and Lloyd Harbor as upper-wealthy. CSH is upper middle class. IMO, most families in CSH have more in common with people in Hicksville than they do with the truly wealthy in places like Lloyd Harbor and Cove Neck.
Generally good points but the fact remains that I don't see there being a huge (or much of a negligible) gap between 'lower' middle, 'middle'-middle, and 'upper'-middle class because there really is no set definition for what consitutes lower/middle/upper. There are some people who view lower middle class as just plain POOR. Especially in a country like the USA where one day you are riding high on the stock market with a $1.2 million net worth, and the next day you're wiped out and desperate for a credit card cash advance. There are multiple families that claw their way up from lower middle to upper middle in as short as 1 or 2 generations (my immigrant parents are a good example, compared to them, I might as well be Warren Buffett in their eyes given the income I earn and the assets I can afford.) This the only part where I have to say, "the entire Middle Class is just that..Middle." and arguing who is better off or worse off on a rather arbitrary benchmark like who makes more or less than $250K seems facetious to me. My husband and I make almost that every year (both of us are professionals with graduate degrees) but we choose to live well BELOW our means - and this point is what gets lost amongst Long Islanders. People are always quick to assume that a certain address, driving a certain luxury car = you must be 1% when we all know that could be farther from the truth (and I saw this first hand with our neighbor who drives Lexus and Mercedes SUVs (all leases), owns a boat, took exotic vacations with his family twice a year, and bragged about much $$ he spent central A/C installation, inground sprinkers around the house, new pool, new chandeliers and furniture, only to be laid off from his job a few years ago, and was forced to declare bankruptcy just to stay afloat. He is a perfect example of someone who lives WAY above his means - he had ZERO in savings for whatever emergency happened.
For the most part, the TRULY rich really have very little to worry about. The Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffetts, Donald Trumps, former US Presidents' and their offspring, etc who have amassed fortunes and invested them in assets that can be easily liquidated into cash in the event of an emergency or forgo early retirement will always have that cushion of wealth to fall back on. The truly rich are people like Queen Elizabeth, Prince William, the Kennedys. I'd say there is a difference between the truly rich and the "nouveau" rich (ie lottery winners, that trash woman Kim Kardashian, Lindsey Lohan, top athletes, certain movie stars that have clawed their way up the Hollywood ladder like Marky Mark Wahlberg, trashy reality TV stars, etc) who must still depend on their skill or a a steady income stream to maintain their wealth/lifestyle. I would say there there probably divisions within that 1%, as evidenced by social clubs in NYC and the small circles that only truly rich inhabit. For the folks classified as "nouvea riche" - all it takes is bad media exposure, a physical or mental injury/catastrophe, a downturn in their particular field/career, and its over for them.
Last edited by LegalDiva; 07-09-2012 at 12:40 PM..
Given the low percentage of people that belong to the upper middle class it seems unlikely they would congregate together in a single town and make up enough of that town's population to allow that town to be called "upper middle class". Or is it enough to have 20-40% of a town's population to be earning upper middle class incomes for the town to be considered upper middle class?
I can see neighbourhoods being upper middle class, but a whole town? Wouldn't a town need a large percentage of working class people to keep the town functioning?
I think if the majority of the households can be classified as upper-middle, then the town/hamlet/village/zip code is upper-middle. It's also why I see truly upper-middle communities as few-and-far between, places CSH, Lattingtown, Woodbury, etc. No, 20-40% don't cut it, which is why I view places like Huntington, Syosset, Miller Place, Sea Cliff, etc. as middle class.
The one statement that I dont agree with overall is the living within the means of a single income so that if one loses their job, the other can still support the household. Let's be honest here - in order to afford a house in general comfortably (anywhere in LI) I think a ballpark figure is around 90K- 100K. In many, if not most situations, only one person in the relationship would likely be close to that income - for example the very popular wife that teaches and the husband that works in the private sector. Ok yes if you are in your 40's or 50's the teacher can be close to that income. But take my wife and I - we make combined around 235K- I make around 75% of our earnings. Are we supposed to only rent since if I lost my job, my wife wouldnt be able to carry the mortgage? What type of mortgage can you even afford on a 55K salary? So I guess my point is that if you are lucky enough that the variance of incomes is alot smoother, you can more comfortably leverage yourself overall. In our situation, we budgeted everything out to things as small as my $13 haircuts, and we are more than comfortable with our debt load given the money we make combined. But if I lost my job, we would be screwed. But why should we not be able to buy a nice home to raise a family that is comfortable for us and affordable given our incomes? I think it is great that someone could pay their mortgage off 3 times based on their savings (I wish I could) but there are so many idiosyncratic factors to each situation that you cant even begin to assess if someones situation is that way because of smart financial savvy or something else. Paris Hilton can pay off any mortgage probably 1000 times over but we all know how she received her wealth. In the end, you need to do what makes you the most comfortable. Some people will lose jobs and others will make millions. But who can tell the future? So just do what is best for you and hope that things work out. Sorry for the giant run on paragraph!!! LOL
Yes, whole towns are defined that way. If you don't know any towns that are considered upper middle as a whole, then I don't know what to tell you. There are certainly plenty with that reputation. Why would a town need a segment of working class folks to function? I'm not following you.
I consider "working class" to be people of an income level (at it's upper-most level of income) in which working is required for survival at a reasonably basic, modest level of comfort.
Earning more than what is required for a basic, modest living would be, at least, "middle class" (the class between "working" and "wealthy"; "wealthy" being that class that works only for the challenge or diversion it brings because they have enough wealth to be "middle class" without working).
21 pages later, has a decision been reached as to what the most unpretentious upper middle cclass town on LI is?
Only goes to show, if there isn't a clear consensus on the definition of subjective terms no decision can be reached. Or, if the definitions aren't accurate, the decision is faulty.
Perhaps it would have been a better question if the OP asked something like: "What is the most 'Mayberrry'-like or 'Eureka'-like town on LI?"
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.
He is a perfect example of someone who lives WAY above his means - he had ZERO in savings for whatever emergency happened.
