5 ms·

i'm not sure $125k/year for a family of 3 should really be considered 'upper class'. is 2 working parents barely making 60k each really upper class? i would l

i'm not sure $125k/year for a family of 3 should really be considered 'upper class'. is 2 working parents barely making 60k each really upper class? i would like to see these numbers for 4x or 5x the median (roughly $250k/year). to me that's really where the delta in income starts to become apparent as manifested in lifestyle choices and accumulated wealth. edit: okay, reading the actual research reveals that pew calls it 'upper income', not 'upper class', which i generally agree more with. this is probably a slight editorial twist by nytimes to emphasize the point.

dragontamer 10y ago
I don't think the specific number matters too much. As long as the number was consistent in the survey, the point is made.
- beachstartup 10y ago
  i think it matters a lot. every few thousand you move that line in either direction is going to make a large direct impact on the apparent 'growth' or 'decline' on either side of it.
  - dragontamer 10y ago
    The only number that actually matters here is "median household income". The distance away on both sides doesn't matter, because the article is analyzing movement away from the center. Does it matter if you're capturing the middle 20% or the middle 60% of the country? Not really. There are fewer people in the "middle", for some definition of middle.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Does it matter if you're capturing the middle 20% or the middle 60% of the country? Not really. Its actually capturing a multiplier below and above the median. If it was capturing a fixed percentage in the middle, then the share in the "middle class" could not change over time...
      - dragontamer 10y ago
        Lol, good point. But you'd be able to see the income spread of the middle class. Its the spread that matters, and holding the income multiplier steady and then looking at %... Or holding the % steady (then looking at the income numbers)... That doesn't matter. Really. They all measure the spread away from the median over time.
stanmancan 10y ago
Agreed. We live in Canada. Our household income for a family of 3 is just over $125K and I certainly don't feel like we're "upper class". We can't even afford to buy a house where we live.
- vox_mollis 10y ago
  I live in a town in the US where the median household income is roughly $36k and the median household size is 3.9. Most adults own their home here. I know most HN people tend to see urban/suburban areas as the only habitable zones, but come on - you are definitely living high on the hog, it's just hard to see because you choose a location and lifestyle with very high expenses.
  - g00gler 10y ago
    That's true, but what do you do for a living? I think it'd be significantly harder to find a job as a developer in the middle of nowhere, it's even hard to find an interesting job in the suburbs IME.
    - vox_mollis 10y ago
      I'm a 60% developer / 40% small team lead. Do it all remotely with trips to California every two months or so. Plenty of positions are available for remote workers. From what I've seen, it's not the employers, but rather the employees. For some reason, the convenience and distractions of cities are lifestyle requirements, not employment requirements. Which is fine, but I take issue with the widespread delusion that lifestyle expenses are not a choice, especially for cognitive workers like developers, designers, etc.
      - g00gler 10y ago
        I guess that's true, I'm just a fancyite. Gotta have that sushi delivered to me, etc
      - stanmancan 10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
sosuke 10y ago
We should re-evaluate the class distinctions. Where does upper class start? Upper class to me should feel like upper class. It needs to be as you suggested at 4x or 5x the median income for the area. I think upper class is the ability to afford, without undue stress, an ample house and two car payments while still going to get manicures.
- antisthenes 10y ago
  That's a pretty vague definition. Houses, cars and even food expenditures can easily vary by a factor of 3-4 even within a relatively small area based on individual preferences and habits. What is an "ample" house? Define your terms.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Roboprog 10y ago
If you live in San Jose - no. If you live in Modesto - yes.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  While the NYT article omits this in the description of what the numbers are based on, the source it is drawn from (and which is linked in the article) indicates that the per-metro figures are computed after adjusting for metro-area cost of living. Which should correct somewhat for inter-region variations, but also makes the definition of "middle class" very weird, even as income-based definitions of "class" go.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

dragontamer 10y ago

I don't think the specific number matters too much. As long as the number was consistent in the survey, the point is made.

beachstartup 10y ago
i think it matters a lot. every few thousand you move that line in either direction is going to make a large direct impact on the apparent 'growth' or 'decline' on either side of it.
- dragontamer 10y ago
  The only number that actually matters here is "median household income". The distance away on both sides doesn't matter, because the article is analyzing movement away from the center. Does it matter if you're capturing the middle 20% or the middle 60% of the country? Not really. There are fewer people in the "middle", for some definition of middle.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > Does it matter if you're capturing the middle 20% or the middle 60% of the country? Not really. Its actually capturing a multiplier below and above the median. If it was capturing a fixed percentage in the middle, then the share in the "middle class" could not change over time...
    - dragontamer 10y ago
      Lol, good point. But you'd be able to see the income spread of the middle class. Its the spread that matters, and holding the income multiplier steady and then looking at %... Or holding the % steady (then looking at the income numbers)... That doesn't matter. Really. They all measure the spread away from the median over time.

stanmancan 10y ago

Agreed. We live in Canada. Our household income for a family of 3 is just over $125K and I certainly don't feel like we're "upper class". We can't even afford to buy a house where we live.

vox_mollis 10y ago
I live in a town in the US where the median household income is roughly $36k and the median household size is 3.9. Most adults own their home here. I know most HN people tend to see urban/suburban areas as the only habitable zones, but come on - you are definitely living high on the hog, it's just hard to see because you choose a location and lifestyle with very high expenses.
- g00gler 10y ago
  That's true, but what do you do for a living? I think it'd be significantly harder to find a job as a developer in the middle of nowhere, it's even hard to find an interesting job in the suburbs IME.
  - vox_mollis 10y ago
    I'm a 60% developer / 40% small team lead. Do it all remotely with trips to California every two months or so. Plenty of positions are available for remote workers. From what I've seen, it's not the employers, but rather the employees. For some reason, the convenience and distractions of cities are lifestyle requirements, not employment requirements. Which is fine, but I take issue with the widespread delusion that lifestyle expenses are not a choice, especially for cognitive workers like developers, designers, etc.
    - g00gler 10y ago
      I guess that's true, I'm just a fancyite. Gotta have that sushi delivered to me, etc
    - stanmancan 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

sosuke 10y ago

We should re-evaluate the class distinctions. Where does upper class start? Upper class to me should feel like upper class. It needs to be as you suggested at 4x or 5x the median income for the area. I think upper class is the ability to afford, without undue stress, an ample house and two car payments while still going to get manicures.

antisthenes 10y ago
That's a pretty vague definition. Houses, cars and even food expenditures can easily vary by a factor of 3-4 even within a relatively small area based on individual preferences and habits. What is an "ample" house? Define your terms.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Roboprog 10y ago

If you live in San Jose - no. If you live in Modesto - yes.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 10y ago
While the NYT article omits this in the description of what the numbers are based on, the source it is drawn from (and which is linked in the article) indicates that the per-metro figures are computed after adjusting for metro-area cost of living. Which should correct somewhat for inter-region variations, but also makes the definition of "middle class" very weird, even as income-based definitions of "class" go.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]