Changing definitions of middle class

originally posted by: Nyiah

Seems like a rather odd way to quantify MC vehicle qualifications. Why a type & not price range?

An AMG or Maserati SUV. My doggies need to stick their heads out of the window at 120mph for them to feel like their in the middle class.

a reply to: starwarsisreal
Where I want. I like being out with nature. I have done no destination vacations before. They have provided me with some of my fondest and funniest memories.

I stayed at KOAs and State Parks. Short visits from State to State until I find my favorite spots and then choose my spot by the season and the mood.

While traveling, some Walmarts will give you short term stay privileges, but that too has been going away. There are lots of places to bed down for a night or two. When I am ready to stay still for a while, then I will go back to the home to the home base, or do short stays with my relatives that have space for my camper.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Nyiah

Seems like a rather odd way to quantify MC vehicle qualifications. Why a type & not price range?

An AMG or Maserati SUV. My doggies need to stick their heads out of the window at 120mph for them to feel like their in the middle class.

Heh! I don't live too far from a Maserati dealership, they're very nice vehicles. But my younger kid wants the hubs to consider the Alfa Romeo Stelvio over the Levante someday. Frankly, just give me the GranCabrio, that works for me.

My older kid prefers Lexus LX. Pfft. The sweet 16's are going to cost the old man a fortune.

originally posted by: Nyiah
LMFAO. No. Not necessary to have to consider yourself MC.

So middle class is people who can't afford to go out?

Depends on the quality of the brands. If something is poor quality & not going to last, they're really not investing their income wisely.

The article covered this. It specified which brands.

Seems like a rather odd way to quantify MC vehicle qualifications. Why a type & not price range?

The article covered this too, they listed an actual car, it was a Volvo.

If you can, sure. But it's not going to work out well if you're dumping your money on date nights, child care, overpriced clothing, keeping-up-with-the-Joneses vehicles, and excessive living space.

So you don't think middle class should have safe vehicles, the ability to go out, pay for child care, and shop at mid tier retailers?

originally posted by: Aazadan
So you don't think middle class should have safe vehicles, the ability to go out, pay for child care, and shop at mid tier retailers?

Never said that, people can burn through their money however they want. My issue is the price tag's own benchmark for MC frivolity expenses is more than ridiculous. I'd go so far as to say unrealistically lavish for MC expectations based on previous decades'.

You don't have to hemorrhage money to be MC, it's just posturing at that point. The Joneses aren't important enough NEED to cruise around in the latest high-priced SUV in Donna Karan threads while putting the kids in daycare for the afternoon lunch/evening dinner date with the spouse. It's a pretty empty life if that's how it stacks up.

a reply to: Nyiah

I see it as another way of controlling the mind set of the masses. Another way to keep people chasing their tails.

If you don't fit the standard after checking all the little boxes or going through the process, then you don't make it to Elysium or to the Off Shore.

Middle class is a label. A dream designed by those that wish to maintain that control. Your goal should be to be comfortable and content with the life that you choose to live. Regardless if it fits the description engineered by someone else or by society.

Anyway that is the way I see it.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I wish more people here can see the writing in the wall and realize they can no longer stay where they lived (CA, Florida, NY).

I get for many people, their families, friends and communities are important which explains why they want to stay but rising costs made it impractical.

What's your advice for me moving out of California? My plan is to make some money here and then move out of the state.

I survive on less then $10,000 a year and handouts from the government.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: stormcell
You can always escape from the rat race. Save up some money and then set yourself up as a contractor/consultant.

Is that really escaping though? You're claiming no car, and no budget for any other travel. You're eating bottom tier food. You're very lightly insured despite probably having quite a lot of assets due to what I assume is high savings. You have no vacation time and your clothing budget is essentially what you can buy from good will, alongside the fact that you've given yourself no money for entertainment.

Is that really middle class if you have none of that stuff?

As working from home and being able to choose my own hours, I feel that I am on vacation - no rushing around like a madman to get to work exactly at 9am just in order to attend a morning meeting. No spending hours each evening just trying to get home. Those extra hours are golden. No office politics where everyone is fighting over what few interesting programming tasks there are. No distractions from banging doors, dropped boxes, people shouting or squeaking rubber toys. That gave me an arterial ulcer in my last job.

Having moved around the world, I've learned to keep to the basics. The most stressful part of my life is trying to avoid recruitment agencies who try and press-gang me into hard-to-fill/hard-to-escape corporate jobs. I'm in a downtownish type of area - supermarkets, cafes, bars are all on my street. I'm in Valhalla getting to with new hardware and software skills every day. My only belongings are desktop PC's and a 48" TV.

Even if I did take a corporate job, I'd have to relocate, put my belongings in storage, be disconnected from the world while moving, live in hotels/B&B's and/or bedroom communities, wait months for somewhere of equivalent location to come on the market, and end up with a 1 to 2 hour reverse commute as I had before. What point is there earning less than I am now, if I just end up with a load of stress from being in charge of something I have no control over, and have a long commute from a bedroom community to an industrial estate or downtown with no time to access entertainments?

With London, the majority of workers have to commute in to the downtown area with a 1 hour commute (Basingstoke, Oxford, Reading). They'll only earn 25K to 30K as workers, and 40K as managers, and they dream of becoming directors of non-profit organizations. With the film industry there, many move over to LA.

originally posted by: angeldoll
Class designation depends on which study you look at. There are more characteristics that describe the middle class, than just singularly income. If this were the case, the middle class would be significantly diminished, such as in the OP's description, which omits other factors.

Other factors, and the most significant one, is having a college education. If you have a college degree, you are middle class, like it or not, or so they teach in universities. The middle class share a work ethic and values. For the most part they are not criminals. Their children are taught to be clean and dressed in clothing of good repair. They have a social network, though work or church, and above average communication skills. There are also personal attributes associated with the middle class.
They don't speak in a very loud voice. They don't call attention to themselves in large groups, they don't scream and carry-on at funerals, but grieve in private. They don't give a lot of personal information except to close friends.

These are facts. There is a behavior, values, and many other characteristics that go along with being middle-class other than just annual income.

Of course, if that is all you are interested in, then, too bad for you.

Here is a good explanation. If you are trained in a particular skill, then you are middle class compared to the unkilled population:

www.southwoodsalt.com...

a reply to: Aazadan

Don't see an actual sheet to fill out, just the article you posted in both links.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Aazadan

Don't see an actual sheet to fill out, just the article you posted in both links.

Interesting, it comes up on my tablet, but not my desktop

here

There are no classes. Everyone reading this is poor.

The wealthy don't know what ATS is.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: angeldoll

What good is a college education if it doesn't get you anywhere? If it doesn't increase your earnings potential it's a liability (and I say that as someone who has 5 and nearly 6 degrees).

I totally disagree about work ethic and values. My work ethic is that I'm going to put in 8 hours a day, and some days less. I've been working 4 hours a day for the past 9 months. I see others who put in 12+ per day who get less done.

Let me say this to you. Apparently your "work ethic" is to be a perpetual student. Nobody needs six degrees. You've obviously had a difficult time adjusting to the work ethic; because universities are a type of play ground, and unless you've gotten your degrees online, then you know this.

Most people, even those with the highest credentials spent less time and money on degrees. If four hours a day is what you can muster, asadan, then it is what it is. You see people continuing to work past retirement age, not only because they need the money sometimes, but because they like feeling productive and as though they are contributing. In other words, they like working. I do. I can't imagine not working, and as soon as I graduated I couldn't wait to test my wings in a work environment.

I don't sense that you like it. Academic environments are wonderful. I was very successful at Universities, but when it's time to join the adult world, it's time, otherwise all your education serves no one.

ETA: my colleagues and I all do well, and we all have advanced degrees. Sometimes people make poor choices into what to go into, and find it's not highly desirable, and the pay is not good. That is the fault of the student. If six degrees "don't get you anywhere", than neither would have two, or ten. It's the person too. Not just the number of degrees they have.

originally posted by: SR1TX
There are no classes. Everyone reading this is poor.

The wealthy don't know what ATS is.

You are quite mistaken, and I'll just leave it at that.

originally posted by: angeldoll
Let me say this to you. Apparently your "work ethic" is to be a perpetual student. Nobody needs six degrees. You've obviously had a difficult time adjusting to the work ethic; because universities are a type of play ground, and unless you've gotten your degrees online, then you know this.

My work ethic is to eventually not be an ignorant fool. People also need more than six, because the older one gets, the broader their scope of knowledge should become. Informal learning is just that, there's no proof you've learned the material unless the person interviewing you knows the material in question and can call you on it. Degrees are the closest thing there is to proof. I'm under the belief that everyone should be a polymath. They should develop an expertise in multiple subjects, and be well schooled in several more. The older you get, the greater the expectations become.

In the last 12 years I've obtained degrees in Computer Science, Simulation and Game Engineering, Business, Computer Graphics, Web Programming, and Interactive Digital Technology. In the next 12 my current plan is to learn three languages, Norwegian, Swedish, and French (I'll be starting from scratch in all three), gain a degree in Mathematics (I'm about 75% of the way there with this already), a degree in Political Science (will be starting from scratch), and a Masters in Computer Science.

Most people, even those with the highest credentials spent less time and money on degrees. If four hours a day is what you can muster, asadan, then it is what it is. You see people continuing to work past retirement age, not only because they need the money sometimes, but because they like feeling productive and as though they are contributing. In other words, they like working. I do. I can't imagine not working, and as soon as I graduated I couldn't wait to test my wings in a work environment.

See, you're talking about working for money, so we're already referring to different things. If you do interesting and useful things in life, the money will naturally follow, you don't have to go out of your way for it. I don't work for money and I make 6 figures working part time. I've lived under a bridge before, I would be willing to do it again. I also have a large enough inheritance that should I choose to accept it no one in my family would ever have to work again, for the rest of time. Though the current plan is to not accept it, and instead give it away, I would rather be able to die saying I built a fortune rather than simply having been given one.

Work should be done on your own terms, not on someone elses.

I don't sense that you like it. Academic environments are wonderful. I was very successful at Universities, but when it's time to join the adult world, it's time, otherwise all your education serves no one.

This is the type of thinking I disagree with. It's not that you should be choosing between the real world and improving yourself. It's that you should be doing both. The single guiding principle is this: You should be a more capable person today than you were yesterday. This also means that as you age and start declining mentally and physically, you need to work twice as hard to make up for that.

ETA: my colleagues and I all do well, and we all have advanced degrees. Sometimes people make poor choices into what to go into, and find it's not highly desirable, and the pay is not good. That is the fault of the student. If six degrees "don't get you anywhere", than neither would have two, or ten. It's the person too. Not just the number of degrees they have.

I didn't say that 6 degrees don't get you anywhere. I said that if they don't directly translate into your earnings potential, then it's a liability. Though I should amend that and add that if it doesn't open doors to the type of career you want (which may not necessarily be the highest paying), then it's also a liability.

originally posted by: Aazadan

I personally think we're seeing way too many people slide out of middle class and into something else, but still defend that lifestyle as middle class as there's ample people worse off than them.

It is hard to figure Middle Class since we are talking about huge living costs differences. 300k anywhere is not middle class though. I feel I would be above middle class even at 150k since I can do everything on that list with even 150k quite easily, but I do believe middle class is a combine household income of around 100k now with 50k as poor.

The problem is when you start talking about the Bay Area, or NY City, or many parts of LA area, housing alone will be 2 to 5x other places. I live in a 4700 sq ft house as example that is about 700k where I live in Washington but 1000 sq ft house in the Bay might be 1 million.

Another thing to think about is when middle class came about there wasn't a lot of costs and expectations that we have today. As example, annual vacation, a weekly date night, child care, mid tier clothing have more been luxuries for a very long time, but now I guess they are middle class, along with the 5 Star Bucks a day too.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
It is hard to figure Middle Class since we are talking about huge living costs differences. 300k anywhere is not middle class though. I feel I would be above middle class even at 150k since I can do everything on that list with even 150k quite easily, but I do believe middle class is a combine household income of around 100k now with 50k as poor.

The median income is $56,000. That would put the median household at $112,000.

Housing does vary wildly, but the other thing I think you need to take into account is the time cost of your commute. Whatever your hourly rate is, you're effectively spending that for every hour of your commute. If your median household is $112,000 that's about $54/hour. Two people each commuting for 90 minutes a day is 3 hours of household time lost. That has a value of $162/day, which is $42,120 per year that should be considered an additional household cost. If moving into a city increases your mortgage by $2500 a month but reduces your commute by 2/3, you save $28,080 in commute costs and pay $30,000 in increased housing, which works out to being roughly equal.

The problem is when you start talking about the Bay Area, or NY City, or many parts of LA area, housing alone will be 2 to 5x other places. I live in a 4700 sq ft house as example that is about 700k where I live in Washington but 1000 sq ft house in the Bay might be 1 million.

Another thing to think about is when middle class came about there wasn't a lot of costs and expectations that we have today. As example, annual vacation, a weekly date night, child care, mid tier clothing have more been luxuries for a very long time, but now I guess they are middle class, along with the 5 Star Bucks a day too.

Most people think they are middle class but comparable to wealthy elite; dirt poor might be a more apt description.

www.washingtonpost.com... s/?utm_term=.4b9c30a7c854

a reply to: Aazadan

Nope. You are the one making monetary references, over and over.

Listen to this. In my family a genius was born. (A fluke.) A real one, not some on-line IQ test BS. He got his first degree when he was twelve. After that, universities were knocking his door down, trying to recruit him with full scholarships, and he took advantage of the offers. I don't know how many degrees he has. Many. I know he has a law degree, and an M.D. He has other doctorates as well.

He's 45 now. He lives in a trailer, mooches off his parents, and spends the day learning, and satisfying his own curiosity.

Who does it benefit? NO ONE is who. He doesn't even have any interest in teaching what he personally refuses to do.

My point was I'd rather be out working doing the things I've been trained to do, and contributing to society, along with being independent and supporting myself, of course. That's a part of it too.
I'm just saying the path of multiple degrees does not necessarily mean success. In fact, it can be an excuse to avoid functioning in a work environment.

I'm glad you have a job and are doing well.