what is upper middle class to you?

[TravelingChris]

I found out that 58% of white married people with bachelor's degrees are upper income in my age range.  I am surprised by this figure.  I also saw that my metropolitan area has a higher than average percentage of people in upper income and a lower than average percentage in lower income. Since we are a low cost area, I was surprised by that too.  

[raptor_dad]

I would define upper middle class as >$150k which according to the NYT's "What's Your Percent", http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html , puts you in the upper 15% in every census defined metro area if not every city. Wage growth has been so stagnant since 2012, I assume its stills accurate.

 

I think upper class starts roughly once you are no longer eligible for any college financial aid... so  ~>$250K.

 

$50-150K would be middle class. $50K is also median household income nationwide. You could reasonably argue that middle class doesn't start until more like $75k but I think lots of more modest earners would be offended.

 

<$50K would be lower middle. Poverty line for a family of 4 is ~$25K. Where you draw the line between lower middle and poor is a matter of taste. I'd probably draw it at 150% of poverty, so $37.5K.

[FaithManor]

I would define upper middle class as >$150k which according to the NYT's "What's Your Percent", http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html , puts you in the upper 15% in every census defined metro area if not every city. Wage growth has been so stagnant since 2012, I assume its stills accurate.

 

I think upper class starts roughly once you are no longer eligible for any college financial aid... so  ~>$250K.

 

$50-150K would be middle class. $50K is also median household income nationwide. You could reasonably argue that middle class doesn't start until more like $75k but I think lots of more modest earners would be offended.

 

<$50K would be lower middle. Poverty line for a family of 4 is ~$25K. Where you draw the line between lower middle and poor is a matter of taste. I'd probably draw it at 150% of poverty, so $37.5K.

Raptor Dad, financial aid phases out LONG before $250K. Around here the kids are getting nothing if their parents make $75,000.00. Our kids can only get unsubsidized stafford loans so we pay the interest for them during their school years so the balance doesn't grow.

[Barb_]

I found out that 58% of white married people with bachelor's degrees are upper income in my age range.  I am surprised by this figure.  I also saw that my metropolitan area has a higher than average percentage of people in upper income and a lower than average percentage in lower income. Since we are a low cost area, I was surprised by that too.  

 

 

Yeah, around that much here too.  In fact in both areas (chicago and phoenix), 41% of black households and 39% of hispanic households in our age group are considered upper middle.  It must have to do with reaching peak earning power.

[Luckymama]

I would define upper middle class as >$150k which according to the NYT's "What's Your Percent", http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html , puts you in the upper 15% in every census defined metro area if not every city. Wage growth has been so stagnant since 2012, I assume its stills accurate.

 

I think upper class starts roughly once you are no longer eligible for any college financial aid... so  ~>$250K.

 

$50-150K would be middle class. $50K is also median household income nationwide. You could reasonably argue that middle class doesn't start until more like $75k but I think lots of more modest earners would be offended.

 

<$50K would be lower middle. Poverty line for a family of 4 is ~$25K. Where you draw the line between lower middle and poor is a matter of taste. I'd probably draw it at 150% of poverty, so $37.5K.

  

Raptor Dad, financial aid phases out LONG before $250K. Around here the kids are getting nothing if their parents make $75,000.00. Our kids can only get unsubsidized stafford loans so we pay the interest for them during their school years so the balance doesn't grow.

I took Raptor Dad's comment to mean the absolute end of financial aid by the best-endowed schools like Harvard. We are solidly into the upper middle class yet Harvard's Net Price Calculator says we have "need" :rolleyes:

[raptor_dad]

Raptor Dad, financial aid phases out LONG before $250K. Around here the kids are getting nothing if their parents make $75,000.00. Our kids can only get unsubsidized stafford loans so we pay the interest for them during their school years so the balance doesn't grow.

 

I was referring to the most generous schools like the Ivy's where you can get some financial aid making over 200K a year, certainly at many schools even the middle class is getting severely squeezed. I've personally had multiple top 20 school fundraisers pitch for donations to allow more financial aid  to "middle class" families making up to 250K.

 

ETA:By college fundraisers I mean those overly earnest undergrads they have manning the phone banks and the mailers not some sort of sophisticated development officers.

Edited June 23, 2016 by raptor_dad

[StephanieZ]

We've talked about this several times. Because someone is going to bring up location soon, here's a link to how you place in your local metro area: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/11/are-you-in-the-american-middle-class/

 

One of the most interesting thing I saw in this calculator is how strongly demographics are correlated with "class".

 

My ##s put us in "upper" class which was 16% of the population in our metro area (20% nationally). Curiously, my demographics (white, college educated, married, age) indicate that 58% of of folks in my demographics are "upper" income nationally (as opposed to 20% across the board). Demographics are still destiny to a large degree in our country  . . . Rather sad, to me. 

[DawnM]

 

I was just reading in WSJ that Upper Middle Class was growing and they defined it as 100k to 350k for a family of 3.   

 

How do you define Upper Middle Class?

 

 

 

The difference between making 101K vs $350K is HUGE.  

[DawnM]

  

I took Raptor Dad's comment to mean the absolute end of financial aid by the best-endowed schools like Harvard. We are solidly into the upper middle class yet Harvard's Net Price Calculator says we have "need" :rolleyes:

 

I will happily take that "need" if my son can go there!

[Anacharsis]

Putting an upper limit on the upper middle class seems misleading to me, because the difference between the upper class and the middle class isn't money -- it's soft power. They used to call this the Old Money / New Money divide.

 

The Old Money upper class wasn't necessarily richer than the New Money upper middle class, but they had more power, because they controlled things money couldn't buy. Marxists would say that they had "cultural hegemony" -- they controlled the definition of success. Consider accents -- in America, people with British accents are often seen as more educated than foreigners with other accents, regardless of their actual educations. This is because the American upper class has historically been Anglophile. Or travel -- migrant laborers and refugees who move from country to country do quite a bit of travel, but they are never called globe-trotters or adventurers, even if they visit the same countries as globe-trotters or adventurers. A person might gladly post photos on social media of drinking Campari at a cafe in Rome, but would be ashamed to post photos washing dishes in the kitchen of that same cafe. The travel is the same, but not the same -- the difference is in soft power.

 

The same is true with a lower limit, as the floor of the middle class is being a landowner debt-free. The poor farmer who has no money whatsoever to his name but who owns where he sleeps unconditionally, owns their own well, and grows enough food that hunger is never a concern, is middle class, even though their lifestyle would be one of middle-class poverty. The reason they still count as middle class is because fundamentally they can always afford to say no -- their basic life needs are already met. They have food, water, and shelter that cannot be taken away from them legally. So when they come to the bargaining table, they have the ability to walk away if the terms are unfavorable; they'll work for money, not for peanuts -- they can grow their own.

 

If they lose that land, they become working class. This is true even if they are quite wealthy -- their existence depends on the patronage of others, and if that patronage goes away, there is nothing to fall back on.

[Carrie12345]

I feel like it would be in our area for a family of 3.  Family of 7, not so much!

[AimeeM]

That is middle-class to me.   In fact most of the descriptions in this thread describe middle class to me.  

 

For example someone said buying a splurge pair of designer shoes.  That they are a splurge means not Upper Middle.  Upper Middle means designer shoes are the norm and you buy your toddler's shoes at Nordstrom's and they have many.   In fact, with the Upper Middle Class concern for status symbols, all shoes would be designer shoes.  

 

The best way to find out what class someone is is to ask them and subtract a level.  So, it makes sense that people are describing middle class but labeling at upper class.  

Rude, completely inaccurate, and prejudiced. 

[shawthorne44]

How do you come up with this kind of prejudice?

There are plenty of people whose incomes put them solidly into upper middle class who don't buy any designer shoes, who shop frugally, drive their cars for more than a decade, and don't give a fig about "status symbols". Because they prefer to spend their money on things that are not "stuff".

 

Often, you'd have not the slightest idea of the kind of income some people have when you look at how they dress and what cars they drive. Or even what kind of trips they take. 

 

But it isn't entirely about income.   Upper middle class have the peak of concern for status symbols.  Needing Status Symbols and the ability to buy them is one of the hallmarks of being Upper Middle Class.  

 

On the other hand, both of the Upper Classes have less need for status symbols.   They don't need the display, and in fact buying cheaper because you enjoy it is its own status symbol.   The examples you mentioned are more likely to be in the lower upper class.  

 

And I am totally familiar with the millionaire next door in real life.  I truly don't care what income someone has.  I also don't think that any class is better than another class.   

[prairiewindmomma]

What does ultra sports have to do with being upper middle class?

 

I know plenty of people with low or modest incomes who rock climb, do triathlons and ultra bike races, climb high mountains, or hike long distance.

Those are all much cheaper than having your kid in gymnastics or on the travel soccer team.

 

The young woman I met on my last backpack who was on an 800 mile solo cross country hike through the Southwestern desert was a nurse.

 

 

 

 

 

I do not think that spending $30 per week on oneself (which is what it costs at our local gym) is only attainable for upper middle class people. 

 

Regentrude--I know people of all incomes who do ultra sports. In fact, I have a cousin right now on his second trek on the PCT, and another who regularly runs ultra marathons.  Some extreme sports, however, are extremely expensive, not only in terms of gear, but also in terms of travel expenses and in terms of vacation time.  Most middle class Americans only have 1-2 weeks of vacation a year. It is the upper middle class who can tend to be able to do such things on a regular basis.  It's scale, duration, and frequency that distinguishes between the two.

[SKL]

Yes some of the most frugal spenders I've met have plenty of money.

 

And that might be *why* they have plenty of money.  :)

[SKL]

But it isn't entirely about income.   Upper middle class have the peak of concern for status symbols.  Needing Status Symbols and the ability to buy them is one of the hallmarks of being Upper Middle Class.  

 

On the other hand, both of the Upper Classes have less need for status symbols.   They don't need the display, and in fact buying cheaper because you enjoy it is its own status symbol.   The examples you mentioned are more likely to be in the lower upper class.  

 

And I am totally familiar with the millionaire next door in real life.  I truly don't care what income someone has.  I also don't think that any class is better than another class.   

 

So I guess my complete lifelong disinterest in Status Symbols meant that when I was upper middle, I was clearly just passing through.  :P

 

[shawthorne44]

So I guess my complete lifelong disinterest in Status Symbols meant that when I was upper middle, I was clearly just passing through.  :p

 

 

You probably weren't Upper Middle Class.   Having the money to BE Upper Middle Class doesn't mean that you truly are, or even that you would want to be.   

 

You can have lots of money and still be Middle Middle class.   

[kewb]

Upper middle class is not me. I used to be upper middle class. Now, even though income still considers me middle class I would say I am one of the working poor.

 

For me, upper middle class means an emergency savings account. Able to eat out or take in once a week without blowing the budget. Able to outsource tasks I hate like lawn care and cleaning. Not take vacation. Not have to look at every purchase with an eye towards the bank balance.

[SKL]

You probably weren't Upper Middle Class.   Having the money to BE Upper Middle Class doesn't mean that you truly are, or even that you would want to be.   

 

You can have lots of money and still be Middle Middle class.   

 

Hmm, I think we define it very differently.

 

With that logic, I'm solidly working class.  :P

 

[regentrude]

On the other hand, both of the Upper Classes have less need for status symbols.   They don't need the display, and in fact buying cheaper because you enjoy it is its own status symbol.   The examples you mentioned are more likely to be in the lower upper class.  

 

Hm... not buying designer shoes, driving old cars, shopping frugally is a hallmark of being "lower upper class"?

Heck, this describes pretty much my entire town. It is true for our secretary, the lecturers, the professors, my boss...

I don't know a single person here who gives a fig about designer anything. I shall tell them that that makes them lower upper class.

Edited June 23, 2016 by regentrude

[regentrude]

You probably weren't Upper Middle Class.   Having the money to BE Upper Middle Class doesn't mean that you truly are, or even that you would want to be.   

 

You can have lots of money and still be Middle Middle class.   

 

so how do YOU define Upper Middle Class then if money is not the criterion?

Edited June 23, 2016 by regentrude

[Ausmumof3]

The difference between making 101K vs $350K is HUGE.

This is what I thought too! 100K means still being careful about money, maybe one activity per kid, healthy food options but not the most expensive ones. Rarely eating out. Dentist and dr bills hurt. Definitely restrictions on school curriculum options and $30 a week gym would be a significant expense to take into account if affordable at all. At $300k most of those limits wouldn't apply.

[Ali in OR]

You probably weren't Upper Middle Class.   Having the money to BE Upper Middle Class doesn't mean that you truly are, or even that you would want to be.   

 

You can have lots of money and still be Middle Middle class.   

 

I'm curious where you come up with your definitions. Most people identify amount of money with class level. Most people do not identify importance of status symbols with class level. It seems like such a strange way to classify people. I honestly can't think of anyone in any income range who gives status symbols much importance. People want a better way of life, and for most people, that's a safe, attractive home, good education for the kids, healthcare, time to enjoy life/hobbies/interests. For most people it's NOT a BMW or designer shoes. I think for a lot of us, class level reflects how easy/hard it is to acquire the things that truly matter (not designer shoes).

[amy g.]

I think of upper middle class as $200,000 and above in a low cost of living area and $400,000 plus in a high cost of living area.

 

I realize that is way out of line with reality. Maybe because it has been 20 years since we were a family of 3.

 

I remember once we had a trip planned and my son got sick so I stayed home with him while Dh took the girls on vacation.

 

We had take out for every meal and I kept saying,"I can't believe how cheap this is! I would be so rich if I only had one kid! "

[TravelingChris]

Well class and income are not the same.  Your children when they are in college are usually very low income but they are not low class because university education is at least a middle class value if not higher.  I read a book about the division of classes in the US from 1960 to 2010 and the stats available showed that the classes interacted with each other much more in 1960 than they do now.  Anyway, there was a lot of correlation between class and income but not 100%.  Specifically, if someone with middle class values and interests wins the lottery, they don't suddenly reject all their previous enjoyments and totally change what they like.

 

Marketing experts have come about how to to divide us by income, shopping strategies, activities, etc and it is much more detailed than simple five group.  I looked at the predominant one for my area and it was pretty accurate for me and my family.  It had nothing to do with status symbols of designer clothes or shoes or whatever.  But it dud accurately reflect that we spend a higher proportion of our income on experiences rather than accumulation of stuff.  

[umsami]

I'll also add that in my experience people who are upper class, tend to think of themselves as upper middle class.  We had friends who made millions per year back in the 70s and 80s, and they thought of themselves as upper middle class.  Most physicians would put themselves in that bracket, too, whether they're a primary care provider or a specialist.   Why? I'm not sure.  Maybe left over from puritan days?

[Anacharsis]

I'm curious where you come up with your definitions. Most people identify amount of money with class level. Most people do not identify importance of status symbols with class level. It seems like such a strange way to classify people. I honestly can't think of anyone in any income range who gives status symbols much importance. People want a better way of life, and for most people, that's a safe, attractive home, good education for the kids, healthcare, time to enjoy life/hobbies/interests. For most people it's NOT a BMW or designer shoes. I think for a lot of us, class level reflects how easy/hard it is to acquire the things that truly matter (not designer shoes).

 

A couple interesting books on the subject:

 

Class: A Guide Through the American Status System by Paul Flussell. Written as a "ha ha only serious" parody, which seems like a good way to approach a sensitive subject. The particular sociological markers are dated, of course, and were exaggerated for parody's sake, but still a good introduction to different ways to think about social class in a "classless" society, provided you can see it as a point-of-view rather than a guidebook.

 

Old Money: The Mythology of Wealth in America by Nelson W. Aldrich. An obtuse writing style, but the best book I have ever read on the distinction between upper class and upper middle class from an American perspective. A good mix of the personal and intellectual, as Mr. Aldrich uses examples from his own upbringing and family history to help explain the larger system.

[Arcadia]

I'll also add that in my experience people who are upper class, tend to think of themselves as upper middle class. We had friends who made millions per year back in the 70s and 80s, and they thought of themselves as upper middle class. Most physicians would put themselves in that bracket, too, whether they're a primary care provider or a specialist. Why? I'm not sure. Maybe left over from puritan days?

I know people who think of the upper class as people who are themselves wealthy and came from generations of old wealth. So new wealth would make someone a upper middle but not an upper. Which could probably be due to the class system in the colonial (East India Company) days in the case of my home country.

[Guest]

Based on that pew calculator our income with eight people puts us in the 56th percentile for our area. We make 130k per year and are firmly average. That's middle class around here, adjusted for our number of dependents.

[Guest]

The difference between making 101K vs $350K is HUGE.

Yeah, it really, really is. Especially given that fixed expenses are surprisingly similar in all but the highest and lowest brackets.

[Crimson Wife]

To me, upper middle class is only partly about income. It is also about education and occupation. A skilled tradesman who owns his own business might be very well off financially but to me he isn't "upper middle class" because he only has vocational training rather than a degree from a good college and he works in a blue collar field. Whereas a physician completing his residency might be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and be making a low salary but he's "upper middle class" by virtue of his graduate degree and white collar occupation.

[madteaparty]

It makes a difference where money is coming from. You can be in the upper 1% by income and still have negative net worth.

Eta that I would not consider anyone any sort of class unless a majority of the $ is coming from some sort of fund where principal is not being touched. Because people with 200k salaries lose their jobs too. And you can't discharge student loans in bankruptcy.

Edited June 24, 2016 by madteaparty

[Anacharsis]

Another good source for historical context might be The Middle-Class Gentleman (Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme) by Molière, which talks about this issue from a 17th century French perspective. Maybe a fun play to watch or read if you are looking for more points of view.

Edited June 24, 2016 by Anacharsis

[umsami]

To me, upper middle class is only partly about income. It is also about education and occupation. A skilled tradesman who owns his own business might be very well off financially but to me he isn't "upper middle class" because he only has vocational training rather than a degree from a good college and he works in a blue collar field. Whereas a physician completing his residency might be hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and be making a low salary but he's "upper middle class" by virtue of his graduate degree and white collar occupation.

 

Yes, but I wonder if that holds true today where it often seems as if money trumps everything else.

 

Let's take for example extremely well paid reality TV stars, athletes, musicians, movie stars, etc.  By income, they are obviously wealthy....upper class.   But is, for example Kylie Jenner or Kim Kardashian, upper class? They both have millions, but nothing more than a high school diploma.  Mom, I believe did not attend college, but Kim's Dad was a lawyer (so might work in her favor) and Kylie's Dad is a beloved Olympic athlete. 

 

Yet behavior wise, I'm not sure that leaked porn tapes and a career in selfies....qualifies or does it?  Is being so over concerned with brands and bling upper class? I would have said "no" based on my experience. 

 

Is class just a matter of wealth or do other things like education, behavior,  or even occupation matter?  Does it only matter for "new" wealth?

[pinkmint]

That calculator shows that for my demographic, I'm part of a very small percentage of households with income so low. Hooray for outstanding achievement! :huh:

[mommyoffive]

That calculator shows that for my demographic, I'm part of a very small percentage of households with income so low. Hooray for outstanding achievement! :huh:

 

 

Just hugs.

 

Are there any programs that you and your dh would qualify for?   Please don't take any offense to that, because none is meant by it.  I don't even know what programs are out there or your current situation.  But maybe there is something? 

[pinkmint]

Just hugs.

 

Are there any programs that you and your dh would qualify for?   Please don't take any offense to that, because none is meant by it.  I don't even know what programs are out there or your current situation.  But maybe there is something? 

 

It's ok. Hugs well taken. At this point I think the best program would be a better job. We're working on it. Have been for a long time. I think our situation is sort of a unique set of circumstances and uphill battles. One thing I have learned is that hard work does not always equal a good income. I truly believe some people benefit from their good choices and hard work, but it's not fair or accurate to look at folks like us and say it's all 100% bad choices and laziness. It's just not. And I think that notion ties into this thread. I hope one day I can report back here on this forum that things have changed. I am very discouraged at times but remain hopeful.

Edited June 24, 2016 by pinkmint

[StephanieZ]

That is middle-class to me.   In fact most of the descriptions in this thread describe middle class to me.  

 

For example someone said buying a splurge pair of designer shoes.  That they are a splurge means not Upper Middle.  Upper Middle means designer shoes are the norm and you buy your toddler's shoes at Nordstrom's and they have many.   In fact, with the Upper Middle Class concern for status symbols, all shoes would be designer shoes.  

 

The best way to find out what class someone is is to ask them and subtract a level.  So, it makes sense that people are describing middle class but labeling at upper class.  

 

I think you're confusing Upper Middle with Upper Class / Very Wealthy. Upper Middle is defined in various ways, but for these purposes, seems to be top 15% of income. You're also using spending habits to equate with wealth/income. I know plenty of big spenders who have relatively low incomes and likely very low assets. Similarly, I know plenty of very wealthy people and/or people with high incomes who are not frivolous spenders. There are some very frugal very wealthy people around . . . I have personally found that big spenders are often not very wealthy. "New money" and all that . . . people trying to prove something with a label . . . I've known people with *serious* money who, I swear, dressed like bag ladies and had couches that I wouldn't put in my kids' basement play room . . . And I'm sure we all know plenty of people who wear fancy labels and shop until they drop but who can't afford piano lessons for their kids because they maxed out their CC on crap they didn't need. Spending habits do not equal income/class IME. 

 

And, FWIW, I think the idea of subtracting a level from what someone says to estimate their "level" is bonkers. For one, no one talks about that IRL. Second, no one IRL that I've met would self-identify as "upper class" even those who make well into the top 2-5% of national income percentiles (and have corresponding significant net worth). People just don't talk that way or even think that way IME. Certainly not anyone I know --- professionals, people who mostly earned their own money with probably some modest family support along the way (but not trust fund babies) folks making 150-500k/yr, with substantial assets as they get into their 40s/50s . . . I really can't imagine anyone self-identifying as "Upper Class". I know I wouldn't. I imagine that there are some people who come from *serious* family money -- as in million dollar trust fund babies -- who would have to presumably self-identify that way, but no one I know well enough to know how they think/talk would. It sounds crass. And weird. And snotty. I'd call myself Upper Middle, as I would bet 80% of zillions of folks I know who earn in the top 2-15% of national incomes would. The other 20% would identify as "Middle" despite their high incomes, probably self-identifying "lower" because they didn't "come from money" and/or are still paying off student debt or just getting started building their assets. . . so they feel poorer than their income would predict . . . I am pretty sure not more than 1/100 would self-identify as "Upper Class". Now, if you just asked for income %iles, most would be honest (if anonymous), and I'm pretty sure very few would claim a HIGHER income bracket than they have. A significant minority might claim a LOWER income due to modesty or embarrassment (for sure, if not anonymous, many/most would do this.) 

[mommyoffive]

It's ok. Hugs well taken. At this point I think the best program would be a better job. We're working on it. Have been for a long time. I think our situation is sort of a unique set of circumstances and uphill battles. One thing I have learned is that hard work does not always equal a good income. I truly believe some people benefit from their good choices and hard work, but it's not fair or accurate to look at folks like us and say it's all 100% bad choices and laziness. It's just not. And I think that notion ties into this thread. I hope one day I can report back here on this forum that things have changed. I am very discouraged at times but remain hopeful.

 

 

I agree with you that it isn't all hard work.  We are given different situations in life.  Some people have an easier start than others.  I do so too hope that you can report back (soon) that things are better.  

We are here trying to help in any way we can.  Ideas, support, just to listen.

 

Are there any programs that would provide free training for a better job?

 

I liked the idea of getting a part time job that the kids could come along with you to.  Childcare center at a gym.

 

Hope is a powerful thing.  Keep that.

[TravelingChris]

See I don't see the Kardashians as upper class at all regardless of their income.  The same would apply to many of the entertainment rich and the sports rich,.  They are rich but aren't upper class.  

[PinkyandtheBrains.]

 

It's not just income.

It's how you shop.

Where you shop.

How you determine what you can afford to buy.

How you save.

 

 

Levels of income certainly play a part, but long term, their are significant differences in how you use the money you do (or don't) have. The thinking and decision making process is often much different.

[Tita Gidge]

Spending habits do not equal income/class IME. 

 

 

StephanieZ, I nodded through almost all of your post. This one sentence is something I wanted to touch on, WRT shawthorne44's POV. I was a paid sociologist and see where shawthrone44 is coming from. I don't share her takeaway on which habits fall into which levels, but her insight that those habits exist is spot on.

 

You are absolutely correct in saying that spending habits do not EQUAL income or class.  And shawthorne44 is correct in recognizing that there are identifiable spending habits FOUND within each income and class level. They won't represent everyone within a given class or income level (as evidenced through experiences shared within this very thread), but these habits often shed insight into the overall norms of a stated demographic. It's stereotypical, but also fairly predictable. Even people who aren't name-brand conscious for the commonly thrown around luxury goods (designer leather or shoe brands, e.g.) will have status symbols reflective of their social community.

 

I made a great income analyzing people's spending habits :lol: I worked from home and on location as a consultant. This gave me the flexibility to move from a HCOL area (where I was middle-class income) to a LCOL area (where the same income was now upper-middle). The change in COL is what enabled me to retire early with a solid middle-class passive income on par with what my neighbors make by getting up early and going to work 5-6 days a week.

 

The median income for my suburb of is $155K, which is $100K+ higher than the state median. According to this link, my state's COL rank is in the bottom (lowest) 15 nationwide: https://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/  There are many people living in this town who, like me, came from HCOL areas and are benefitting from the COLA. Longtime locals consider us transplants to be upper-middle, but really our spending habits still typically reflect the middle class we were in HCOL areas. We just came with enough positive cash flow to invest in bigger homes and newer cars. And that excess allows us to pay for landscaping, housekeeping, tutors, competitive pay-to-play sports for our kids, overseas vacations, and other things mentioned here as upper-middle class. Being able to afford those things reflects our COL more than it does our class level.

 

I'm nodding in agreement with those who say income alone doesn't define class; I consider the majority of us transplants to be middle-classers in upper-middle-class clothing. I agree with your assessment, StephanieZ, that most people will self-identify at, or under, their accurate level. At least for me, "upper class" has the connation of having been born into it. And I like what someone said up thread about it being about power more than money.

[shawthorne44]

I'm curious where you come up with your definitions. Most people identify amount of money with class level. Most people do not identify importance of status symbols with class level. It seems like such a strange way to classify people. I honestly can't think of anyone in any income range who gives status symbols much importance. People want a better way of life, and for most people, that's a safe, attractive home, good education for the kids, healthcare, time to enjoy life/hobbies/interests. For most people it's NOT a BMW or designer shoes. I think for a lot of us, class level reflects how easy/hard it is to acquire the things that truly matter (not designer shoes).

 

It was a serious rabbit trail into sociology as a preteen.  The American class structure is a fascinating study.   It is also only somewhat related to income.  For example, a University Professor has a much higher social level than the income would indicate.  

 

But, income is quantifiable and therefore easier to discuss.  Although, if income as compared to others is the sole definer than what is being defined is your income percentile, not your class.    

 

"I think for a lot of us, class level reflects how easy/hard it is to acquire the things that truly matter (not designer shoes)."

That is not an upper class viewpoint.  Think about it, if the things you listed were as easily and thoughtlessly acquired as the air you breathe, then that would not be how you define class.  

[Katy]

so how do YOU define Upper Middle Class then if money is not the criterion?

The calculator defines us as upper class for our area, but I don't because I took a sociology class on this sort of thing in college.  We're upper middle at most, and frankly I spent enough time in the upper class with my ex that I know I don't want to be there.  Attitudes about family, money, religion...  intangible matters of taste all vary greatly among the different classes.

 

A couple interesting books on the subject:

 

Class: A Guide Through the American Status System by Paul Flussell. Written as a "ha ha only serious" parody, which seems like a good way to approach a sensitive subject. The particular sociological markers are dated, of course, and were exaggerated for parody's sake, but still a good introduction to different ways to think about social class in a "classless" society, provided you can see it as a point-of-view rather than a guidebook.

 

Old Money: The Mythology of Wealth in America by Nelson W. Aldrich. An obtuse writing style, but the best book I have ever read on the distinction between upper class and upper middle class from an American perspective. A good mix of the personal and intellectual, as Mr. Aldrich uses examples from his own upbringing and family history to help explain the larger system.

 

I'm not at all aware that Paul Fussell (not Flussell) wrote anything as a parody.  Class might be funny and somewhat outdated, and his insistence that the Class X was above the other classes was a bit self-serving, but he was taken seriously in academic circles, having taught at Rutgers and the University of Pennsylvania.  I was assigned two books of his in separate classes in college.  One was Class.

 

If I remember correctly the gist of that book is that there are three main groups of classes, and your income can be anywhere on the spectrum - low to high - in either of the three groups.

[Crimson Wife]

 

Let's take for example extremely well paid reality TV stars, athletes, musicians, movie stars, etc.  By income, they are obviously wealthy....upper class.   But is, for example Kylie Jenner or Kim Kardashian, upper class? They both have millions, but nothing more than a high school diploma.  Mom, I believe did not attend college, but Kim's Dad was a lawyer (so might work in her favor) and Kylie's Dad is a beloved Olympic athlete. 

 

Yet behavior wise, I'm not sure that leaked porn tapes and a career in selfies....qualifies or does it?  Is being so over concerned with brands and bling upper class? I would have said "no" based on my experience. 

 

Is class just a matter of wealth or do other things like education, behavior,  or even occupation matter?  Does it only matter for "new" wealth?

 

Wealthy =/= upper class. Just like financially comfortable =/= upper middle class.

 

I will never be upper class no matter how wealthy I were to become because I don't have the right background. Now if we were to win that $200M PowerBall jackpot, we could probably make our kids upper class by sending them to exclusive prep schools (assuming they did well enough on the admissions test), trying to get my girls accepted as debutantes, having them take up upper-class hobbies like polo and yachting, etc., etc. I'm not sure we would bother aside from the prep schools because we're not the social-climbing type. Kate Middleton's parents did it for her and Pippa.

[Anacharsis]

I'm not at all aware that Paul Fussell (not Flussell) wrote anything as a parody.  Class might be funny and somewhat outdated, and his insistence that the Class X was above the other classes was a bit self-serving, but he was taken seriously in academic circles, having taught at Rutgers and the University of Pennsylvania.  I was assigned two books of his in separate classes in college.  One was Class.

 

If I remember correctly the gist of that book is that there are three main groups of classes, and your income can be anywhere on the spectrum - low to high - in either of the three groups.

 

Thanks for the catch -- I always typo his name for some reason. :-) I think the reason I saw it as a parody was the over-serious tone combined with the silly illustrations:

 

Edited June 24, 2016 by Anacharsis

[Carrie12345]

The HUD site lists low-income and very-low-income thresholds for households up to 8 people.  For our household size, we're about 4x the very-low-income and 3x the low-income for our specific region.

 

Thinking it over, I might feel more high-middle if we didn't homeschool.  But I suppose it's only fair to recognize that we make the choice to spend what we do on homeschooling (and other activities that we might forego if they had a more traditional education) because we have the income that we do.  So it may in fact be statistically different from how it *feels.

 

The numerical breakdown may be important for determining community needs, but I don't see how it says very much about individuals.  If I have a low-income relative with zero housing or childcare expenses and a high income relative with a large family that also supports in-laws, their ideas of disposable income may be much closer than one might expect!

Edited June 24, 2016 by Carrie12345

[Scarlett]

I think education can sometimes indicate class but I have seen some highly educated people with no degree and some very UNedcuated people with Masters.

 

I would have called us working class....is that a class? LOL.....but the calculator puts us at middle class. I think. I did it yesterday and can't remember for sure.

 

Yes middle class.

 

Money is an issue all of the time with us. We are taking the boys on a big vacation to NYC this summer. I am terrified of spending that much money but we decided the experience will be valuable to them and worth the money.

Edited June 24, 2016 by Scarlett

[Bluegoat]

That is middle-class to me.   In fact most of the descriptions in this thread describe middle class to me.  

 

For example someone said buying a splurge pair of designer shoes.  That they are a splurge means not Upper Middle.  Upper Middle means designer shoes are the norm and you buy your toddler's shoes at Nordstrom's and they have many.   In fact, with the Upper Middle Class concern for status symbols, all shoes would be designer shoes.  

 

The best way to find out what class someone is is to ask them and subtract a level.  So, it makes sense that people are describing middle class but labeling at upper class.  

 

I think a lot of people are actually differentiating between middle class, and upper middle class - both of which fall within the middle class.  "Upper class" would be something else - in some ways it might actually be a little harder to pin down, it includes some pretty different lifestyles.

[Guest]

so how do YOU define Upper Middle Class then if money is not the criterion?

This is what I'm thinking.

 

I don't define classes buy what people buy. I would define it by income, although, of course, I don't actually know the specific income of very many people. Certainly not any friends or acquaintances. When I have any idea at all, it's because they are family, and/or I can take a stab at a guess because I know the type of income one would expect from that profession. There aren't many working class surgeons, for example.

 

How people spend their money is a weak indicator of how comfortable their income may be. I know one person who is very brand-conscious, but her mother supplies a lot of the money for the brands. Some people just don't mind debt. Some people focus a lot of their income into something like private school or special activities, because they prioritize those things, not because they have so much money to burn. So they shop at Aldi and drive an ancient car, but their kids go to a nice college debt-free.