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.
70k is 70k if you want to go by statistics which folks here love .
me , i talk in terms of lifestyle and location . for the middle class lifestyle you get here , that can be a very nice upper class lifestyle elsewhere for the same income. .
all that counts is what it means to me and my location . .. upper middle class lifestyles in manhattan can take a lot .
Manhattan’s middle class exists somewhere between $45,000 and $134,000.
But if you are defining middle class by lifestyle, to accommodate the cost of living in Manhattan, that salary would have to fall between $80,000 and $235,000.
Using the rule of thumb that buyers should expect to spend two and a half times their annual salary on a home purchase, the properties in Manhattan that could be said to be middle class would run between $200,000 and $588,000.
that is just to get to a middle class lifestyle according to an article in the new york times that looked at what it takes to live just a middle class lifestyle here . .
the problem is you are all trying to define something that is highly subjective and location sensitive and there is no actual definition for it. the definition depends on who you ask .
Who needs to spend 2.5 times their annual salary on a home purchase when they can rent a stabilized unit in NYC for 0.25 times their annual salary?
you think so , go try it . most are at market today unless you lived in one for decades .
all stabilized means is the rent increases going forward are voted on by a board . in fact stabilized rents for a studio today can be 3400 a month , a one bedroom 5k . all the modern stabilization programs like 451a and j51 allow full market rates . you just have to agree to accept the rent boards decisions .
the increases have been pretty real world for many many years now.
back in the days of rent control tenants paid crazy low rates but those are pretty much gone and only applied to the original tenant .
Who needs to spend 2.5 times their annual salary on a home purchase when they can rent a stabilized unit in NYC for 0.25 times their annual salary?
the problem here is that the 2.50 times your income in manhattan gets you a studio that can't accommodate a family so it really does not even meet the criteria of a middle class life style for a family .
On the low end, the pickings are slim. The least expensive properties are mostly uptown, in neighborhoods like Yorkville, Washington Heights and Inwood. The most pleasing options in this range, however, are studio's or some low end one-bedroom apartments not designed for children or families.
you have to live in the boroughs and while homes start at 600k and go up in to the millions , you can get a 2 bedroom co-op in a nice area about 30 minutes from manhattan for about 300k .
if you don't mind being in an area well away from public transportation you can get a co-op for under 200k .
most real estate is priced based on proximity to manhattan and how close to subway lines it is .
you think so , go try it . most are at market today unless you lived in one for decades .
all stabilized means is the rent increases going forward are voted on by a board . in fact stabilized rents for a studio today can be 3400 a month , a one bedroom 5k . all the modern stabilization programs like 451a and j51 allow full market rates . you just have to agree to accept the rent boards decisions .
the increases have been pretty real world for many many years now.
back in the days of rent control tenants paid crazy low rates but those are pretty much gone and only applied to the original tenant .
the problem here is that the 2.50 times your income in manhattan gets you a studio that can't accommodate a family so it really does not even meet the criteria of a middle class life style for a family .
On the low end, the pickings are slim. The least expensive properties are mostly uptown, in neighborhoods like Yorkville, Washington Heights and Inwood. The most pleasing options in this range, however, are studio's or some low end one-bedroom apartments not designed for children or families.
you have to live in the boroughs and while homes start at 600k and go up in to the millions , you can get a 2 bedroom co-op in a nice area about 30 minutes from manhattan for about 300k .
if you don't mind being in an area well away from public transportation you can get a co-op for under 200k .
most real estate is priced based on proximity to manhattan and how close to subway lines it is .
And then you run out of wood and you're in the Harlem River. I like Inwood, what's not to like about Inwood?
It may sound strange, but in America the upper class isn't defined by income but rather by wealth. Or in other words, the upper class doesn't worry about income, as they have more than enough wealth to tide them over for the next generation or two of their descendants; thus, like income, the size of one's family is immaterial to the question.
Consider Bill Gates. He's definitely upper class. It has nothing to do with how much he currently makes or how many children he and his wife have. In fact, assuming a starting wealth value of $50 billion, Gates and his descendants could lose/spend $100 million a year for the next four hundred years and, with about $10 billion left, still be considered upper class.
The corollary is that if you rely on an income to keep yourself and your family in the style to which you'd like to become accustomed to, then you're at best upper middle class.
Bill Gates isn't just merely "upper class", he's part of a very small group of elite ruling class that (literally) owns this country.
Last edited by UrbanAdventurer; 04-22-2017 at 09:21 PM..
It may sound strange, but in America the upper class isn't defined by income but rather by wealth. Or in other words, the upper class doesn't worry about income, as they have more than enough wealth to tide them over for the next generation or two of their descendants; thus, like income, the size of one's family is immaterial to the question.
Consider Bill Gates. He's definitely upper class. It has nothing to do with how much he currently makes or how many children he and his wife have. In fact, assuming a starting wealth value of $50 billion, Gates and his descendants could lose/spend $100 million a year for the next four hundred years and, with about $10 billion left, still be considered upper class.
The corollary is that if you rely on an income to keep yourself and your family in the style to which you'd like to become accustomed to, then you're at best upper middle class.
This. Upper-class means being able to, if you so chose, live the lifestyle of the middle class without either working or eating into inflation-adjusted assets.
More concretely and assuming a ~3% safe draw-down rate (in a combination of cash and imputed rent), this means a minimum of about $2 million dollars * sqrt(family size), give or take.
While it's all fine and dandy that you max out your retirement accounts and you choose to live frugally... the fact of the matter is that you CANNOT fly first class, take 5-star European vacations, live in a 2 million dollar home or drive an S-Class... even if you wanted to. You don't have the ability to live lavishly.... which to me makes you middle class... perhaps upper-middle in a LCOL area.
Are you doing the right thing at your salary level... Heck yeah! But please don't embarrass yourself by thinking you can hob knob with the Rockefellers
I would say people who have the luxury of agonizing over whether or not they want to start maximizing their 401k and other retirement account contributions in lieu of more immediate financial concerns is a pretty reliable sign of upper middle class membership. There might be some anomaly of course.
While it's all fine and dandy that you max out your retirement accounts and you choose to live frugally... the fact of the matter is that you CANNOT fly first class, take 5-star European vacations, live in a 2 million dollar home or drive an S-Class... even if you wanted to. You don't have the ability to live lavishly.... which to me makes you middle class... perhaps upper-middle in a LCOL area.
Are you doing the right thing at your salary level... Heck yeah! But please don't embarrass yourself by thinking you can hob knob with the Rockefellers
I'm not trying to embarrass myself. But two folks each earning $100,000 would be considered upper class at least in my eyes. Again, your mileage may vary, but thanks for being snide and condescending.
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.
