5 ms·

Was less than 10% of the population. Today is around 30%. Meanwhile the lower-middle and lower classes have shrunk. https://www.aei.org/economics/the-us-middle

Was less than 10% of the population. Today is around 30%. Meanwhile the lower-middle and lower classes have shrunk. https://www.aei.org/economics/the-us-middle-class-is-disappearing-into-the-upper-middle-class-but-theres-more-to-the-story/ https://www.aei.org/economics/the-us-middle-class-is-disappe... We are eliminating poverty and making more people rich. People in the middle might feel poorer since there’s more people “above” them today, but they aren’t.

bumby 6y ago
As the WSJ article referenced in the link says, there is no codified definition to upper/middle class. Most other references I’ve seen define it as the the upper quintile, minus the top percentile or few. So by that definition, it’s always around 15%-19% of the population. It’s a bit odd to me that the Census Bureau uses a hard income level instead but it is useful in putting inequality in a different light. Not saying it’s wrong, but it could open the door for statistical shenanigans. I do think it may be bad form that the researchers focused on income rather than wealth to define class.
- nemo44x 6y ago
  I think what it means is 50 years ago you had to be a doctor, lawyer, or high level business exec to be in that group. Today most of this forum is in the upper middle class as it has expanded into many professional occupations like software engineers, etc. We have grown the pie and created more opportunities for individuals to claim a larger piece of it (regardless of race, gender, or sexuality) all while eliminating abject poverty.
  - bumby 6y ago
    I agree in part, but to play devils advocate I don’t know that it fully encapsulates the problem of the shrinking middle class. 50 years ago you could be middle class with just a high school education, largely fueled by the manufacturing sector. I don’t think those equivalent cohorts in today’s economy moving up to the upper middle class in the methods you describe but rather they are left to fill the lower strata.
    - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
      50 (or 80) years ago, you could get a high school education, get a job in a factory, and be middle class. From there, you could learn what was going on, show that you knew your stuff, and move into management, which would put you at least on the edge of the upper middle class. Today, you may be able to get a middle class job without a college degree. But the route from there to the upper middle class is much harder. That may be what people are feeling. There's a much harder ceiling above the middle class than there was before.
      - bumby 6y ago
        I think we may be saying the same thing from different angles. So are you saying it's easier to move from middle class to upper middle class today than before? My point is that feels true only for a much smaller subset of the middle class today (maybe I'm wrong). It would seem that it's only attainable for a group with a specific skill set. To the original point, I'm not sure this convincingly makes the case that 'The middle class is shrinking because more people are moving to the upper middle class'
        AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        > I think we may be saying the same thing from different angles. Yes, I thought I was agreeing with you. > So are you saying it's easier to move from middle class to upper middle class today than before? Absolutely not. Quite the opposite, in fact. >> There's a much harder ceiling above the middle class than there was before. That is, those in the middle class have a much harder time rising to upper-middle class than they did in the past.
        nemo44x 6y ago
        If it’s harder than why are there so many more people in the upper middle class today? Look at the data. It points to the opposite of what you believe. If it were harder then there would be fewer people in the upper middle class when it fact it is continuing to expand. We have been fed narratives for political reasons. But they aren’t true.

bumby 6y ago

As the WSJ article referenced in the link says, there is no codified definition to upper/middle class. Most other references I’ve seen define it as the the upper quintile, minus the top percentile or few. So by that definition, it’s always around 15%-19% of the population. It’s a bit odd to me that the Census Bureau uses a hard income level instead but it is useful in putting inequality in a different light. Not saying it’s wrong, but it could open the door for statistical shenanigans. I do think it may be bad form that the researchers focused on income rather than wealth to define class.

nemo44x 6y ago
I think what it means is 50 years ago you had to be a doctor, lawyer, or high level business exec to be in that group. Today most of this forum is in the upper middle class as it has expanded into many professional occupations like software engineers, etc. We have grown the pie and created more opportunities for individuals to claim a larger piece of it (regardless of race, gender, or sexuality) all while eliminating abject poverty.
- bumby 6y ago
  I agree in part, but to play devils advocate I don’t know that it fully encapsulates the problem of the shrinking middle class. 50 years ago you could be middle class with just a high school education, largely fueled by the manufacturing sector. I don’t think those equivalent cohorts in today’s economy moving up to the upper middle class in the methods you describe but rather they are left to fill the lower strata.
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    50 (or 80) years ago, you could get a high school education, get a job in a factory, and be middle class. From there, you could learn what was going on, show that you knew your stuff, and move into management, which would put you at least on the edge of the upper middle class. Today, you may be able to get a middle class job without a college degree. But the route from there to the upper middle class is much harder. That may be what people are feeling. There's a much harder ceiling above the middle class than there was before.
    - bumby 6y ago
      I think we may be saying the same thing from different angles. So are you saying it's easier to move from middle class to upper middle class today than before? My point is that feels true only for a much smaller subset of the middle class today (maybe I'm wrong). It would seem that it's only attainable for a group with a specific skill set. To the original point, I'm not sure this convincingly makes the case that 'The middle class is shrinking because more people are moving to the upper middle class'
      - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        > I think we may be saying the same thing from different angles. Yes, I thought I was agreeing with you. > So are you saying it's easier to move from middle class to upper middle class today than before? Absolutely not. Quite the opposite, in fact. >> There's a much harder ceiling above the middle class than there was before. That is, those in the middle class have a much harder time rising to upper-middle class than they did in the past.
        nemo44x 6y ago
        If it’s harder than why are there so many more people in the upper middle class today? Look at the data. It points to the opposite of what you believe. If it were harder then there would be fewer people in the upper middle class when it fact it is continuing to expand. We have been fed narratives for political reasons. But they aren’t true.