3 ms·

> The few that I know for a fact come from exceptional money The article is not about people "coming from exceptional money". And I bet a lot of the people you

> The few that I know for a fact come from exceptional money The article is not about people "coming from exceptional money". And I bet a lot of the people you are assuming are "middle class" aren't actually middle class. There is a really bad habit in this country of assuming that you can have money, but unless you are "movie star rich" then you are middle class. That's not the case. A lot of people work for a living but are not middle class (nor are they CEOs of fortune 500 companies). More specifically a lot of the people reading HN right now likely fall into the category the researchers talk about. If you work in tech there is a very, very good chance you are not middle class. Just because you don't think of yourself as rich doesn't make you middle class. It's something that being in an echo chamber of tech that people easily forget. Someone can go look up a more precise definition, but if middle class were the middle 50th of household incomes, then if you have a household income (not individual, but combined AGI) that is > $100k you are not in the middle-class.[1] That doesn't mean you have multiple yachts, or act privileged or have exceptional money. It simple means (by that definition) you aren't middle class. And before someone replies with it, "Cost Of Living" arguments do not change this substantially at all. Look at the AGI tables below, many people who think of themselves as middle class, are not. And if you're on HN reading that post, with a US job in tech, there is a good chance that includes you. [1] Income in the United States - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_States

FloorEgg 11mo ago
Okay how about this then to cut through the ambiguity of terms. 1) Someone in their 20s who can live with their parent(s) while they get a startup off the ground has an advantage. It doesn't matter if they are below or above median household income so long as they can allocate majority of their time to it. 2) Someone who has capital and connections because their family is wealthy has other advantages, but many people coming from this situation also have other disadvantages, because they have often been shielded from discomfort and struggle and a lot of entrepreneurship is being tolerant (and even seeking) discomfort and struggle. 3) Someone in their 40s who has been frugal and saved by living within their means and has a spouse who works can allocate either part time or full time and be successful. In the examples above I consider 1&3 as not coming from money but are the most common paths to entrepreneurial success that I have seen anecdotally. My 2nd example I would consider coming from money in the context of the article (a good concrete indicator is access to family seed capital), and this doesn't seem to me to be the most common path to success.
fragmede 11mo ago
Rich and wealthy and middle class and poor aren't rigorously scientifically defined terms, the only one that is, is that the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has a definition for poverty wages, but even that isn't simply a number. People that live at the luxury don't necessarily have the money for it. To bring cars into the picture, an older model Mercedes Benz that's a falling apart money pit costs less than a brand new Honda Civic. In my mind, the line for middle class is how long you can pay your bills at without working. If you've got enough money that the answer is a while, then you're rich. If you have so much that you're able to fund other people's dreams, then you're wealthy. If you're a short order cook at a diner that saved up enough money to have a go at running a food truck, you're scrupulous. There's all sorts of caveats, and we can be super judgey about how other people are spending their money (and time) on bad/wrong/frivolous things, but I'd bet that most people here still have to work for a living and to me, that's middle class, even if the cars are flashier and vacations are to a different continent rather than a road trip and staying in motels, for those in the upper middle class.
- BoiledCabbage 11mo ago
  > In my mind, the line for middle class is how long you can pay your bills at without working. If you've got enough money that the answer is a while, then you're rich. If you have so much that you're able to fund other people's dreams, then you're wealthy. If someone has a $10M/yr salary, but chose to buy a mansion and their income can only cover their bills for a few months they are still "rich" (using your term). Or "upper income" / "not middle-class" using more standard terms. I mean it's great you have your own definition, but that doesn't really make it apply generally.

FloorEgg 11mo ago

Okay how about this then to cut through the ambiguity of terms. 1) Someone in their 20s who can live with their parent(s) while they get a startup off the ground has an advantage. It doesn't matter if they are below or above median household income so long as they can allocate majority of their time to it. 2) Someone who has capital and connections because their family is wealthy has other advantages, but many people coming from this situation also have other disadvantages, because they have often been shielded from discomfort and struggle and a lot of entrepreneurship is being tolerant (and even seeking) discomfort and struggle. 3) Someone in their 40s who has been frugal and saved by living within their means and has a spouse who works can allocate either part time or full time and be successful. In the examples above I consider 1&3 as not coming from money but are the most common paths to entrepreneurial success that I have seen anecdotally. My 2nd example I would consider coming from money in the context of the article (a good concrete indicator is access to family seed capital), and this doesn't seem to me to be the most common path to success.

fragmede 11mo ago

Rich and wealthy and middle class and poor aren't rigorously scientifically defined terms, the only one that is, is that the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has a definition for poverty wages, but even that isn't simply a number. People that live at the luxury don't necessarily have the money for it. To bring cars into the picture, an older model Mercedes Benz that's a falling apart money pit costs less than a brand new Honda Civic. In my mind, the line for middle class is how long you can pay your bills at without working. If you've got enough money that the answer is a while, then you're rich. If you have so much that you're able to fund other people's dreams, then you're wealthy. If you're a short order cook at a diner that saved up enough money to have a go at running a food truck, you're scrupulous. There's all sorts of caveats, and we can be super judgey about how other people are spending their money (and time) on bad/wrong/frivolous things, but I'd bet that most people here still have to work for a living and to me, that's middle class, even if the cars are flashier and vacations are to a different continent rather than a road trip and staying in motels, for those in the upper middle class.

BoiledCabbage 11mo ago
> In my mind, the line for middle class is how long you can pay your bills at without working. If you've got enough money that the answer is a while, then you're rich. If you have so much that you're able to fund other people's dreams, then you're wealthy. If someone has a $10M/yr salary, but chose to buy a mansion and their income can only cover their bills for a few months they are still "rich" (using your term). Or "upper income" / "not middle-class" using more standard terms. I mean it's great you have your own definition, but that doesn't really make it apply generally.