7 ms·

A 150k-250k analyst isn’t upper class. Nor is it really middle-class (although that would depend on the cost of living). It’s that weird in-between, where one

by ElFitz 3y ago

A 150k-250k analyst isn’t upper class. Nor is it really middle-class (although that would depend on the cost of living). It’s that weird in-between, where one still needs to earn a living and make even more money for someone else. A 25M / year CEO is far past "earning a living" and really only works because they want to.

freetanga 3y ago
Could be family money. A lot of IB folk come from wealthy families to begin with, then off to expensive Universities, and close the circle. Upwards mobility my ass.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  "a lot" describes one area in one department in very large global organizations. For every daddy money nepobaby, theres 1000 other roles filled by people who got there the hard way. There's only so many of these people you can find if you are hiring for orgs of 50K people.
mytailorisrich 3y ago
A junior analyst at Goldman Sachs who's having lunch in the Hamptons, in a restaurant the CEO also goes to, is probably upper class, just very young/recenly graduated though we don't know the details. Social class is not just about your current salary, although 200k soon after graduation isn't exactly 'average'... Some might even say that walking up to the CEO like that indicates upper class self-assurance...
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Taking the other side - the junior was out to lunch with a bunch of coworkers. In the office setting the CEO would never been seen anywhere near the same floor that such junior people are working or eating, never having the opportunity to introduce themselves. One bank famously had a special CEO elevator so the guy could seamlessly get from the garage to his high-rise executive suite without bumping into a single soul. I recently found myself out to dinner a table over from a C-suite exec at my company. I did not introduce myself because I'm a socially damaged introvert. It's a pretty easy bet that the kid was a major extrovert on the other hand, more than some assumption they must already be upper class. You'd be surprised about the class mobility on Wall St vs other industries. When I graduated, Google famously did not even recruit from anything other than a small handful of schools and screened out a pretty high GPA minimum like 3.75 or so. Meanwhile every bank came to my college and I had like 5 offers. A good number of my coworkers spent some time at community college, had parents without college degrees, are first gen immigrants, etc. Outside of glad-handing networking roles that lean on peoples connections like in IB, "already rich" is the exception rather than the rule. Bear was famous for saying they didn't hire MBAs, but instead PSDs — poor, smart and had a deep desire to be rich
  - notfromhere 3y ago
    Finance is kind of unique is that it’s a weird mix of a strict meritocracy and a deeply seated upper crust that’s incredibly nepotistic. The meritocrats are the ones that work the jobs where they actually have to make money and profits. Nepos are shunted to roles where that isn’t as direct.
- sheepscreek 3y ago
  I like to believe the analyst likely came from money. The son of another executive possibly? Which would explain why he was at this restaurant in the Hamptons. And likely why he didn’t flinch to introduce himself.
red-iron-pine 3y ago
upper middle class is the common term. or to use an older one: petit bourgeoisie
- jselysianeagle 3y ago
  "petit bourgeoisie" used to mean "lower middle class".
  - hughesjj 3y ago
    The middle class is gone now so that's kind of fitting. I like the term "working class" as in "I need to work to survive". It covers a huge breadth of the population but that's better anyway imo
  - CapstanRoller 3y ago
    No, it never meant that. "Middle class" is a USAmerican invention, and an incoherent one at that. Class is defined by one's relationship to the means of production (e.g. whether you work in a factory, or own the factory where people work)
rayiner 3y ago
This recent (and self-serving) tendency of reducing “class” to only the extremely wealthy and everyone else is reductive and obscures important economic dynamics. It’s ridiculous to treat a master plumber that owns a plumbing business as “bourgeoise” while treating an Amazon engineer who has tremendous human capital as being a “proletariat.” Even in Marx’s time, there was substantial debate about how to classify the salaried professionals that served as the agents of the capital owners. In the modern economy, capital owners are reliant on a class of non-fungible white collar workers that bring their own human capital. The two groups have myriad common interests. Those interests are in many cases in opposition to those of ordinary workers who lack human capital and are fungible and easily replaced.
- kevinventullo 3y ago
  You think software engineers aren’t fungible? Facebook hires SWE’s based on generic technical interviews and doesn’t even assign them a team until week six.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    That just means they’re not literally irreplaceable, not that they’re fungible. The pool of people who could do the job, even with training, is a tiny fraction of the overall population.
    - austhrow743 3y ago
      Gold is rare too.
- notfromhere 3y ago
  Well paying engineers is more of a function of US dynamics in tech. Engineering salaries are down to earth basically everywhere else. They’re proles by the definition of how they earn their labor. If the pool of labor expands beyond the available roles, those high salaries would crash down.
- ElFitz 3y ago

by ElFitz 3y ago

freetanga 3y ago

Could be family money. A lot of IB folk come from wealthy families to begin with, then off to expensive Universities, and close the circle. Upwards mobility my ass.

steveBK123 3y ago
"a lot" describes one area in one department in very large global organizations. For every daddy money nepobaby, theres 1000 other roles filled by people who got there the hard way. There's only so many of these people you can find if you are hiring for orgs of 50K people.

mytailorisrich 3y ago

A junior analyst at Goldman Sachs who's having lunch in the Hamptons, in a restaurant the CEO also goes to, is probably upper class, just very young/recenly graduated though we don't know the details. Social class is not just about your current salary, although 200k soon after graduation isn't exactly 'average'... Some might even say that walking up to the CEO like that indicates upper class self-assurance...

steveBK123 3y ago
Taking the other side - the junior was out to lunch with a bunch of coworkers. In the office setting the CEO would never been seen anywhere near the same floor that such junior people are working or eating, never having the opportunity to introduce themselves. One bank famously had a special CEO elevator so the guy could seamlessly get from the garage to his high-rise executive suite without bumping into a single soul. I recently found myself out to dinner a table over from a C-suite exec at my company. I did not introduce myself because I'm a socially damaged introvert. It's a pretty easy bet that the kid was a major extrovert on the other hand, more than some assumption they must already be upper class. You'd be surprised about the class mobility on Wall St vs other industries. When I graduated, Google famously did not even recruit from anything other than a small handful of schools and screened out a pretty high GPA minimum like 3.75 or so. Meanwhile every bank came to my college and I had like 5 offers. A good number of my coworkers spent some time at community college, had parents without college degrees, are first gen immigrants, etc. Outside of glad-handing networking roles that lean on peoples connections like in IB, "already rich" is the exception rather than the rule. Bear was famous for saying they didn't hire MBAs, but instead PSDs — poor, smart and had a deep desire to be rich
- notfromhere 3y ago
  Finance is kind of unique is that it’s a weird mix of a strict meritocracy and a deeply seated upper crust that’s incredibly nepotistic. The meritocrats are the ones that work the jobs where they actually have to make money and profits. Nepos are shunted to roles where that isn’t as direct.
sheepscreek 3y ago
I like to believe the analyst likely came from money. The son of another executive possibly? Which would explain why he was at this restaurant in the Hamptons. And likely why he didn’t flinch to introduce himself.

red-iron-pine 3y ago

upper middle class is the common term. or to use an older one: petit bourgeoisie

jselysianeagle 3y ago
"petit bourgeoisie" used to mean "lower middle class".
- hughesjj 3y ago
  The middle class is gone now so that's kind of fitting. I like the term "working class" as in "I need to work to survive". It covers a huge breadth of the population but that's better anyway imo
- CapstanRoller 3y ago
  No, it never meant that. "Middle class" is a USAmerican invention, and an incoherent one at that. Class is defined by one's relationship to the means of production (e.g. whether you work in a factory, or own the factory where people work)

rayiner 3y ago

This recent (and self-serving) tendency of reducing “class” to only the extremely wealthy and everyone else is reductive and obscures important economic dynamics. It’s ridiculous to treat a master plumber that owns a plumbing business as “bourgeoise” while treating an Amazon engineer who has tremendous human capital as being a “proletariat.” Even in Marx’s time, there was substantial debate about how to classify the salaried professionals that served as the agents of the capital owners. In the modern economy, capital owners are reliant on a class of non-fungible white collar workers that bring their own human capital. The two groups have myriad common interests. Those interests are in many cases in opposition to those of ordinary workers who lack human capital and are fungible and easily replaced.

kevinventullo 3y ago
You think software engineers aren’t fungible? Facebook hires SWE’s based on generic technical interviews and doesn’t even assign them a team until week six.
- rayiner 3y ago
  That just means they’re not literally irreplaceable, not that they’re fungible. The pool of people who could do the job, even with training, is a tiny fraction of the overall population.
  - austhrow743 3y ago
    Gold is rare too.
notfromhere 3y ago
Well paying engineers is more of a function of US dynamics in tech. Engineering salaries are down to earth basically everywhere else. They’re proles by the definition of how they earn their labor. If the pool of labor expands beyond the available roles, those high salaries would crash down.
ElFitz 3y ago