Quote:
Originally Posted by crusinsusan
Artificial label? I never said that. Not even close. Nothing "artificial" about it.
|
No, I'm the one saying it's artificial. There's no reason why the label "middle class" should apply to people making $37K to $112K rather than $40K to $60K. It's an arbitrary range defined by a Pew analyst to aid in analyzing data to fit people into a "middle class" pigeonhole, nothing more.
Quote:
|
As to the second half of your question, here's just *one* useful idea: I know that a certain income will be fine if one lives in one area, and not in another.
|
And your believing that about life in different areas has absolutely nothing to do with labeling yourself middle class or not. Plus as others have pointed out, an income being "fine" for person X depends on the lifestyle they're aiming for, not some arbitrary number. Your "useful idea" hasn't demonstrated any value in it.
Quote:
|
Seriously, there's no more to say. It's become silly, IMO. I'm off.
|
The article in question created their table of states based on the notion that "middle class" meant someone who earned between 67% and 200% of the state's median income. It's not based on some objective reality, it's an arbitrary (artificial) rule of thumb, equivalent to defining someone shorter than 5 foot 11 as "weency", anyone between 5 foot 11 and 6 foot 4 as "tall" and anyone over 6 foot 4 as "ginormous". And that kind of
reification is the very definition of "silly". I'm done now.
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.
