8 ms·

This is a big debate in the HN world too, where tech workers in that top 10% think they are working class. The real breakdown here is that in todays day and age

This is a big debate in the HN world too, where tech workers in that top 10% think they are working class. The real breakdown here is that in todays day and age, there's hardly a middle class, there's the working class who struggles, lives basically paycheck to paycheck, and at the age of 45 has up to 40k in wealth to their name. Then there's that top 10% whose able to afford a million dollar home, take yearly vacations, send their kids to college, ect. The things the upper middle class think should be a given to them because they are within a certain economic strata are actually just regular luxuries.

asdffdsa321 8y ago
Huh? That's entirely incorrect. There's definitely a middle class that isn't working paycheck to paycheck but can't afford million dollar homes, vacas and college for their kids.
- CM30 8y ago
  There's also a part of that middle class who can afford vacations and college for their kids, but not million dollar homes. Even if that group is likely bigger outside of the US (since hey, college in European countries like the UK is damn cheap by comparison), it still exists over there in the US too. Neither of those things necessarily require a millionaire income.
- Latteland 8y ago
  To me the point is that "other middle class" you mention, call it lower middle class, is shrinking, falling into the lower class. Because of loss of decent paying factory jobs, retail shrinking, etc. If you are an adult today without special education, it's really hard to have a decent lifestyle. Most of my friends are programmers or teachers, and they most all of them have decent jobs. The teachers are increasingly in that lower middle class category. Software engineers are more fortunate.
  - noir_lord 8y ago
    > Software engineers are more fortunate. We are, I earn significantly more than my partner who has a degree and I don't have a degree. It's one of the last fields that without a degree you can still earn a good living if you can break into it somehow (in my case it was side gigs/contracting to crappy full time position to none-crappy full time position to decent full time position). Though I'm in the UK, I gather the degree requirement is a harder line in the US, also worth noting that by and large university education has had no correlation with programmer ability (in business settings) in my experience, I've met good/bad with degree/without degree. Interestingly the one correlation I have observed is how fascinating people find the field when they are children, young geeks become older geeks. On an unrelated note, this is why I think the programs that encourage young girls to get into computing/programming are the ones with the best likely RoI in terms of re-balancing the field.
    - Latteland 8y ago
      I think it used to be easier in the US to be a dev without a degree, but it's hard to get all the background to pass interviews without serious education, things like time complexity and their of computation.
      - emodendroket 8y ago
        You can easily learn that stuff yourself if you care to; the hardest thing is getting interviews when you don't have the work history yet.
stagger87 8y ago
Roughly 40% of households have an income between 35k and 100k. This makes your statement that "there is hardly a middle class" absurdly wrong.
- unethical_ban 8y ago
  In a given area, someone making 35k and someone making 100k have very different options at their disposal.
- zjaffee 8y ago
  The broader point I'm getting at is that the middle class historically didn't struggle in the way they do now. They used to be able to afford homes, vacations, college, and now that is only available to the upper middle class.
  - phreeza 8y ago
    Important to note that 'historically' here probably refers to the 4 or 5 decades following the second world war, which may well turn out to have been a historical anomaly in the grand scheme of things.
  - surfmike 8y ago
    Agreed that homes and college are getting insanely expensive. But as a counterpoint, a higher % of the population own homes and go to college than in decades past (though certainly accruing higher debt than was needed before).
  - 5DFractalTetris 8y ago
    Simply untrue. Do not change the definition of middle class. A single-wide prefab of real lumber for a family of three costs a year of wage or two for a high school graduate. Resourceful individuals can develop land cooperatives. Vacations and college aren't strictly necessary for many, nor particularly unattainable. A road trip anywhere in the USA or continental Europe is nearly free, and a four-year degree at a State U in eight years will barely touch the discretionary income of the sort of individual who has decided to pursue that objective. The idea of a "middle-class struggle" is confused with changing standards and lifestyles of the middle class. Certainly the regular use of jet airplanes, hotel accommodations, and full-service dining may be out of reach for some, but an urban-agrarian lifestyle with the use of a motorcar and modern conveniences such as electricity and indoor plumbing is cheaper and more accessible than ever.
seem_2211 8y ago
Yep, you see it a lot in San Francisco (I've noticed it creeps into my mind a lot more frequently than I'd like to admit). The thing is, it's like the boiling a frog in water analogy. You get desensitized to it. I tend to work with salespeople, so there's a tendency to get flashier things than a lot of my programming friends, but it manifests in things like always having the latest iPhone (or it's Android equivalent), travelling internationally a couple times a year, going for brunch whenever you feel like it, being able to save a good $10-15k yearly without really trying. Maybe hitting Tahoe a few times in the winter. Going to Soulcycle or Equinox to work out during the week. But you still can't buy a house in San Francisco. So you don't feel rich, but compared to the average American you're taking home a multiple of what they're making. It shocked me to find out the average household income is about $60k annually. We all live in a bubble. San Francisco is a bubble. Dayton Ohio is a bubble as well. And when you live in a city with a ton of rich people (and a sizeable population probably in the bottom 10%) it gets pretty easy to forget about the other 80% who live somewhere in the middle of it all, in Concord, or Pleasanton or whatever they call it in the East Bay.
- taurath 8y ago
  It’s relative on how you define wealth really - ability to provide stability in the form of a mortgage, or amount of money you make. I feel like in SF or any big expensive city owning a home is not something for the middle or upper middle class - there’s a point that no matter how many brunches or vacations you can take, you can’t trade them for a house except in an area where you’ll be basically going down in economic and social class (live out in Tracy or something, have a 2 hour one way commute, far fewer vacations etc). The trade off for that “stability” isn’t one that a lot of people currently renting think is a good deal. IMO the best way to do it is keep on renting while putting as much money in investments and retirement funds as one can, with the idea of retiring somewhere else, or only buying if you get a windfall. But I’m terms of lifestyle, those in that 9.9% have a far richer one than the rest, but they don’t have the long term security of owning their own home.
  - jacob019 8y ago
    Owning a home is overrated, it owns you.
empath75 8y ago
They’re not working class, they’re the professional class, but they’re definitely not ‘wealthy’ in the sense that they don’t primarily earn income through invested capital rather than labor. That said, anyone with a reasonably long career at the upper end of the professional class can make that transition by investing wisely.
wolco 8y ago
If you are still working you are not part of the richest class. Measuring income per year misses the richest group of all. Those who would look down on anyone working.
- returnInfinity 8y ago
  Even the rich need to work to retain their wealth.
  - emodendroket 8y ago
    In fact, the class of people the GP is talking about do not.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  "Every morning when I get up, I look at a list of the richest Americans. If I'm not on it, then I go to work." - Michael Orban
prolikewhoa 8y ago
I find HN fairly right wing economically & willing to dismiss that a large portion of the country isn't so well off right now, and has been steadily declining since the 90's. 78% currently live paycheck to paycheck, with this number rising year after year [0]. The endless consumerism that this type of unchecked capitalism needs to survive looks to have a pretty bleak future if we keep going down this path. [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck...
wetpaws 8y ago
>yearly vacation >kids being able to go to college People must be insane thinking this is some kind of luxury for rich people, not basic human needs.

asdffdsa321 8y ago

Huh? That's entirely incorrect. There's definitely a middle class that isn't working paycheck to paycheck but can't afford million dollar homes, vacas and college for their kids.

CM30 8y ago
There's also a part of that middle class who can afford vacations and college for their kids, but not million dollar homes. Even if that group is likely bigger outside of the US (since hey, college in European countries like the UK is damn cheap by comparison), it still exists over there in the US too. Neither of those things necessarily require a millionaire income.
Latteland 8y ago
To me the point is that "other middle class" you mention, call it lower middle class, is shrinking, falling into the lower class. Because of loss of decent paying factory jobs, retail shrinking, etc. If you are an adult today without special education, it's really hard to have a decent lifestyle. Most of my friends are programmers or teachers, and they most all of them have decent jobs. The teachers are increasingly in that lower middle class category. Software engineers are more fortunate.
- noir_lord 8y ago
  > Software engineers are more fortunate. We are, I earn significantly more than my partner who has a degree and I don't have a degree. It's one of the last fields that without a degree you can still earn a good living if you can break into it somehow (in my case it was side gigs/contracting to crappy full time position to none-crappy full time position to decent full time position). Though I'm in the UK, I gather the degree requirement is a harder line in the US, also worth noting that by and large university education has had no correlation with programmer ability (in business settings) in my experience, I've met good/bad with degree/without degree. Interestingly the one correlation I have observed is how fascinating people find the field when they are children, young geeks become older geeks. On an unrelated note, this is why I think the programs that encourage young girls to get into computing/programming are the ones with the best likely RoI in terms of re-balancing the field.
  - Latteland 8y ago
    I think it used to be easier in the US to be a dev without a degree, but it's hard to get all the background to pass interviews without serious education, things like time complexity and their of computation.
    - emodendroket 8y ago
      You can easily learn that stuff yourself if you care to; the hardest thing is getting interviews when you don't have the work history yet.

stagger87 8y ago

Roughly 40% of households have an income between 35k and 100k. This makes your statement that "there is hardly a middle class" absurdly wrong.

unethical_ban 8y ago
In a given area, someone making 35k and someone making 100k have very different options at their disposal.
zjaffee 8y ago
The broader point I'm getting at is that the middle class historically didn't struggle in the way they do now. They used to be able to afford homes, vacations, college, and now that is only available to the upper middle class.
- phreeza 8y ago
  Important to note that 'historically' here probably refers to the 4 or 5 decades following the second world war, which may well turn out to have been a historical anomaly in the grand scheme of things.
- surfmike 8y ago
  Agreed that homes and college are getting insanely expensive. But as a counterpoint, a higher % of the population own homes and go to college than in decades past (though certainly accruing higher debt than was needed before).
- 5DFractalTetris 8y ago
  Simply untrue. Do not change the definition of middle class. A single-wide prefab of real lumber for a family of three costs a year of wage or two for a high school graduate. Resourceful individuals can develop land cooperatives. Vacations and college aren't strictly necessary for many, nor particularly unattainable. A road trip anywhere in the USA or continental Europe is nearly free, and a four-year degree at a State U in eight years will barely touch the discretionary income of the sort of individual who has decided to pursue that objective. The idea of a "middle-class struggle" is confused with changing standards and lifestyles of the middle class. Certainly the regular use of jet airplanes, hotel accommodations, and full-service dining may be out of reach for some, but an urban-agrarian lifestyle with the use of a motorcar and modern conveniences such as electricity and indoor plumbing is cheaper and more accessible than ever.

seem_2211 8y ago

Yep, you see it a lot in San Francisco (I've noticed it creeps into my mind a lot more frequently than I'd like to admit). The thing is, it's like the boiling a frog in water analogy. You get desensitized to it. I tend to work with salespeople, so there's a tendency to get flashier things than a lot of my programming friends, but it manifests in things like always having the latest iPhone (or it's Android equivalent), travelling internationally a couple times a year, going for brunch whenever you feel like it, being able to save a good $10-15k yearly without really trying. Maybe hitting Tahoe a few times in the winter. Going to Soulcycle or Equinox to work out during the week. But you still can't buy a house in San Francisco. So you don't feel rich, but compared to the average American you're taking home a multiple of what they're making. It shocked me to find out the average household income is about $60k annually. We all live in a bubble. San Francisco is a bubble. Dayton Ohio is a bubble as well. And when you live in a city with a ton of rich people (and a sizeable population probably in the bottom 10%) it gets pretty easy to forget about the other 80% who live somewhere in the middle of it all, in Concord, or Pleasanton or whatever they call it in the East Bay.

taurath 8y ago
It’s relative on how you define wealth really - ability to provide stability in the form of a mortgage, or amount of money you make. I feel like in SF or any big expensive city owning a home is not something for the middle or upper middle class - there’s a point that no matter how many brunches or vacations you can take, you can’t trade them for a house except in an area where you’ll be basically going down in economic and social class (live out in Tracy or something, have a 2 hour one way commute, far fewer vacations etc). The trade off for that “stability” isn’t one that a lot of people currently renting think is a good deal. IMO the best way to do it is keep on renting while putting as much money in investments and retirement funds as one can, with the idea of retiring somewhere else, or only buying if you get a windfall. But I’m terms of lifestyle, those in that 9.9% have a far richer one than the rest, but they don’t have the long term security of owning their own home.
- jacob019 8y ago
  Owning a home is overrated, it owns you.

empath75 8y ago

They’re not working class, they’re the professional class, but they’re definitely not ‘wealthy’ in the sense that they don’t primarily earn income through invested capital rather than labor. That said, anyone with a reasonably long career at the upper end of the professional class can make that transition by investing wisely.

wolco 8y ago

If you are still working you are not part of the richest class. Measuring income per year misses the richest group of all. Those who would look down on anyone working.

returnInfinity 8y ago
Even the rich need to work to retain their wealth.
- emodendroket 8y ago
  In fact, the class of people the GP is talking about do not.
AnimalMuppet 8y ago
"Every morning when I get up, I look at a list of the richest Americans. If I'm not on it, then I go to work." - Michael Orban

prolikewhoa 8y ago

I find HN fairly right wing economically & willing to dismiss that a large portion of the country isn't so well off right now, and has been steadily declining since the 90's. 78% currently live paycheck to paycheck, with this number rising year after year [0]. The endless consumerism that this type of unchecked capitalism needs to survive looks to have a pretty bleak future if we keep going down this path. [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck-to-paycheck.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/24/most-americans-live-paycheck...

wetpaws 8y ago

>yearly vacation >kids being able to go to college People must be insane thinking this is some kind of luxury for rich people, not basic human needs.