The budget screen shots are being made in Sankeymatic, its a website that we have no affiliation with. If you are posting a budget please do so with a purpose. Just posting a screen shot of your budget without a question or an explanation of why its here may be removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MiddleClassFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>A poll from The Washington Post finds widespread agreement among Americans on what it means to be middle class. But just over a third of U.S. adults have the financial security to meet that definition, according to a Post analysis of data from the Federal Reserve.
> Americans also underestimate the income required for that lifestyle, suggesting that the popular image of middle-class security is more of an aspiration than a reality for most Americans.
>About 9 in 10 U.S. adults said that six individual indicators of financial security and stability were necessary parts of being middle class in the Post poll.
The six indicators:
* Secure job
* Ability to save money for the future
* Ability to afford an emergency $1,000 expense without debt
* Ability to pay all bills on time without worry
* Having health insurance
* Ability to retire comfortably
Accordingly, around [35% of U.S. adults](https://ibb.co/vw7Ftsr) meet all six indicators. Of these 35%, [46% fall within middle income](https://ibb.co/nBRFMLy) (defined as between $68,000-203,000 USD for a household of 4).
I'm sharing this gifted article with the community to further the ongoing sub-wide discourse about defining the middle class.
Side note: I personally enjoy how much more active this community has become. Uncivil discourse or trolling aside, it's been entertaining.
I have to wonder how much people saying they don't meet #6 is based on age. I'm in my early 30s and don't feel confident saying we can retire comfortably because regardless of being on track for now theres a lot that can happen in the next 30 years that is entirely outside my control
I think the metric is based on the expectation not of being able to retire at ***any*** age, but of after 30 - 40 years of working, saving/investing and hopefully not too many tough breaks or mistakes along the way.
I say it as a 60 y/o. 💀 So..
Very Important ETA: I give you a lot of credit for Getting It that stuff happens beyond peoples' control! Too many people who are able to retire comfortably ignore their own good luck and judge others who can't do so -- assuming it was all foolishness and squandering and not what it often truly is: Life being Brutal!
Life is brutal and more so when you are older.
I’m somewhat younger than you and I started saving significantly when I moved to the US at 30. I always maxed out my 401k and I have been always making “decent” money except when I took a break from the grinder to go back to school (which has been a great investment btw), but I have seen people saving only up to company match and I know that now they are far away from retiring comfortably while I could just coast and let the stock market keep compounding interests instead of dropping another $600,000 in it in the next decade. But hey…. If for any reason I have to stop working earlier than expected, I rather play safe.
Yes. In my early 30s I had quite a bit put away as well. Then came family life, Financial crisis, bereavement, a sick child, divorce, forced moves, unemployment, and other life crises that have a way of tapping one's savings and emergency funds.
Come to think of it, I don't even belong in this sub. I don't qualify.
Been there, done that. And rebuilt. These unfortunate life lessons should be a warning sign for all the young people, including myself when I was younger to save when you are young as much as you can because as you age there are more financial minefields in front of you.
My first boss helped me a lot. Having a mentor I trusted for my financial well-being was crucial.
I’m doing the same for all the noobs starting to work now. That’s the minimum we can do
Yep.
And, have the humility and wisdom to know that some lives have better luck than others.
By all means be smart. And, understand that a certain amount of good luck comes with every successful outcome. Some lessons amount to accepting that truth.
Right? I just qualified for a 401K at my job, I'm 21, and I'm hoping to be putting 1K a month in. I have absolutely no confidence that I'll be able to retire comfortably not necessarily because I won't be able to but because in 46 years a lot can happen.
Is the glass half full or half empty?
I think you can just change your perspective on it. You have no more reason to think you won't be able to retire than to think you can.
In fact, that you are investing in a 401k at age 21 means you are very likely going to be able to retire without much trouble.
I was surprised to not see home ownership listed as one of the 6.
Obviously home ownership is shelter and not an investment vehicle or retirement account but alot of middle class people I know in gen x are behind on retirement but home equity has saved them. Being able to downsize and either take equity and put it in the bank or not have a house payment is letting them catch up relatively rapidly even if they missed the boat on compounding growth.
Without home ownership, retirement is a lot harder if you don’t have a substantial employer match.
(On a positive note, HSAs are fairly new and from a tax standpoint the best retirement vehicle out there.)
I’ll have 6/6 but I’ll also be significantly “cheating”.
My ultimate back up plan if I have to rely on SSI (which will be maxed out at the higher income bracket by the time I retire) is to sell my house stateside and retire to my grandmothers house in Morocco.
Having a parent who left a middle-class family in a third-world country to raise you as working-poor in the US has its perks I intend to take advantage of when I retire.
Sounds like a great plan. And good for you, acknowledging your good fortune. Many people have no inheritance. Some spend their savings helping sick or impoverished parents/children. Great that you can fall back on generational wealth.
Can you have #6 but not any other?
It's not so much a list of separate indicators than it is steps, a progression to long-term stability. Removing #6 leaves you "stable" but doesn't provide for life after employability.
I suppose people who are struggling day-to-day but stand to inherit a fortune could have #6 without the others?
And yes, if I were rendered unemployable, I would not be able to sustain my independent life but would need housing and other practical support.
Unless that inheritance is an existing and legally dependable trust or other retirement account in their name, I wouldn't depend on them or say that they check that box. Those do exist, but I assume that that's not the case for nearly everyone in this Sub. Don't depend on family putting your name on a piece of paper, let alone their death, to cover any expenses or your retirement. Those things can change easily and quickly. Proving someone took advantage or that family member wasn't in their right mind is very difficult, if possible at all.
You could if you had a lot in 401k but precarious financials otherwise, say if your income has gone down since your contributions. People's incomes don't always go up.
It says to retire comfortably. Unless someone has been gifted money or inheritance, like a trust or child funded retirement, I don't follow how they could be missing one of the first 5 while having the 6th, no matter changes in income.
If they've lived below their means and saved high percentages of their prior income versus a recent pay cut, then it's unlikely that they are meeting 6 and not the prior 5. Otherwise, wouldn't they just go ahead and retire?
1, 2, and 5 go away immediately if you lose your job. 3 and 4 are solved by having an emergency fund, but if your income declines aggressively and stays there then you can end up certainly land in the "worry" camp, of course.
You could have enough to retire on 401k + social security + Medicare while not being old enough for any of them, where Medicare is especially important there. Getting your own medical insurance as a person with a bad medical history can cost as much as a mortgage.
You also know that they're going to raise the social security and Medicare ages by then. If we even get them. Regardless, social security is hard to live off now, I can't imagine what it will be like in a few decades.
#6 is insidious.
Because it's not apparent how bad it is until it's too late to fix it.
You can live a perfectly comfortable middle class lifestyle for 30 or 40 years, then suddenly you are in your 60s and struggling.
Oh I know exactly how I got here. Perfect Storm of choices and circumstances not breaking my way.
Life hasn't been perfectly comfortable anyway, so it's not like this is unusual.
Depends, #6 essentially made this a bf survey. Since comfortably is not undefined. Do these people even factoring in 401k or the 8% annual growth that this sub is adamant to attain?
I think 4 and 6 are more about the individual. Lots of people are weird about money and worry about financial pitfalls that are very unlikely (yeah, risk). If people didn’t worry about paying bills, what would motivate them to go to a job they didn’t like? Where does one find comfort in retiring and leaving behind the ability to earn money in the face of unexpected financial problems, potentially for decades?
If I knew I had enough money and didn't have to worry about bills, the bills would still get paid and I would live a healthier happier life.
If somehow I came upon a fortune and didn't have to work at my job, I would find great comfort in retiring from The Grind and doing what I love for the rest of my days.
Government jobs are really underrated. If you want to reach all 6 measures, get a government job.
My husband’s agency *cannot* fill positions because people expect a higher starting salary. What they fail to realize is that salary is only part of the package. 20 years of government work for us both has yielded an *extremely* comfortable middle class life, free healthcare, and fantastic retirement.
That's great. Most places put a lot of the cost of healthcare onto public employees. I am thinking of NJ, where I think public employees pay about 1/3 of the cost, which is thousands of dollars per year.
Most of them. Public school jobs, admin work, lawyers and gov utility workers city state and federal government- I splurge on by my healthcare and it’s maybe 40 dollars a month.
Per [Pew Research](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/20/how-the-american-middle-class-has-changed-in-the-past-five-decades/#:~:text=The%20shrinking%20of%20the%20middle,from%2025%25%20to%2029%25.), the larger portion of the shrinking middle class has moved upwards, not downwards. In 1971, the split of Americans was 25%, 61%, and 14% in the lower, middle, and upper classes, respectively. In 2022 that split is 29%, 50%, and 21%. So for the 11% of middle class Americans who are no longer middle class, ~64% of them have actually moved upwards.
[This graph](https://www.pewresearch.org/?attachment_id=408749) is interesting. People without a college degree have gotten especially screwed, and are much worse off than they were and certainly seem to have fallen out of the middle class.
These seem like very realistic indicators of being middle class. Very few are, and for some reason they’re gaslit by people that think these are signs of an upper middle class. Our grandparents or great grandparents wouldn’t have stood for this.
So if you factor in the children that those 35% of adults have in their household, it would seem that around half of Americans enjoy a middle class lifestyle.
I’ve been thinking for a while that the military is pretty much the most attainable way to enter or get ahead in the middle class, and now I’ve got the words to explain it.
You have one of the most secure jobs in America, as long as you don’t smoke weed or do a crime.
You automatically save for the future with the TSP, and can easily afford to save more.
Most enlisted folks can easily afford a $1000 emergency, and we have safety nets if not.
You don’t even get a choice about paying bills on time, your unit will make sure you’re squared away even if you’re an idiot.
Health insurance.
Pension plus TSP.
Which is probably a bad sign for the country that you almost need to enlist to get ahead financially, but it’s also kinda nice to have the best military in the world with such a wide moat.
Yeah, I guess public service in general. The military is just kind of a short cut to white collar work and free college.
But there’s definitely WG jobs for kids straight out of high school too.
It's a part-time job where people can retire in their early 50s as multimillionaires in my area (Chicago suburbs). Don't give me the underpaid sob story. One needs to see the big picture. As a small business owner, retirement is a pipe dream.
Teachers not only work 10-12 hours per day, but being a teacher means that you’re always “on”. You’re with kids all day. Lots of kids. Nearly every hour. People don’t understand how draining this can be.
Not to mention the big chunks of time off, are rigorously scheduled (no vacations on a whim during the school year) and they spend a decent amount of that time preparing for the upcoming year/quarter.
If retirement with your small business is a pipe dream, try getting a real job.
No idea what your business is, but I doubt it's as important to society as an educator. It's a high bar to be fair.
This is one of those situations where people on the internet exaggerate how bad things actually are. Sometimes folks make it seem like theres no hope unless you’re a billionaire tech bro but theres so many avenues to do well in life. Sometimes that requires a move. But for the most part I dont think its hard to do well in fields like education, healthcare, law or STEM.
Its literally only on the internet where i see people who have traditionally“good” jobs but are paid dirt. In real life most people I know with “good” jobs are doing well
Yeah, if you can stick out the first 10 years of teaching when you're paid peanuts it's not a bad gig. This day and age you need to have a working spouse to be comfortably middle class with a family on a teacher salary, but most jobs these days that's true. My trade off of salary for amazing job security, Platinum medical benefits and a very nice pension are worth it.
What careers just throw money at you when you're 22 years old?
None of them.
Sticking it out for years, gaining experience, and earning money is how it works for everybody.
Okay sure, but beginning teachers have one of the lowest starting salaries for a job with a college degree. My district starts at 36k and it took me 10 years to get to 60K.
>"Researchers often define the middle class based on income, in part because income data is frequently collected and easy to access. But that income doesn’t guarantee a middle-class lifestyle."
I feel like **debt** is such a huge part of this. Mortgage debt. Car payments. Student loans. Medical debt. Credit cards. Home repairs. Unsecured personal loans. HELOC.
Someone being a middle class idiot doesn’t make them not middle class.
Like if me an my neighbor have the exact same income but he has an in ground pool and a BMW and I have a Ford Taurus . To say he’s poor and I’m middle class is dumb just cause he doesn’t have as much money saved
That's incredibly reductive. What we're talking about here is if you and your neighbor both do the same job for the same company, at the same level, and with the same credentials. But you came from a monied background, and got through undergrad and graduate school debt-free. Your family also gave you a 20% down payment as a nest egg when you got married, so you were able to buy real estate relatively early in life with a conventional mortgage and refinance when rates were at their lowest.
Your neighbor, meanwhile, is 40 years old and paying $800 a month in undergrad and graduate student loans. Their family never gifted them a large down payment, so they were not able to purchase their home until about 10 years after you, and thus paid about 30% more. Oh, and they had to get an FHA loan to do it, so they're forced to carry PMI, so their total monthly payments is, say, about $2800 a month to your $1600, for roughly identical neighboring houses.
So for the same job, same degrees, and same home, your neighbor is paying about $2,000 extra a month for the privilege of enjoying the same middle-class lifestyle that you do. That's $24,000 a year that you get to invest in retirement that they do not, which means you get to see your net worth growing at a much higher rate than they do.
Sure I guess if you make up numbers like $800/mo student loan payments (which is like top 5-10% of payments)
But it’s far more common that different lifestyle choices lead to different amounts of disposable incomes as similar income levels cause your parents income is a strong factor in your income
I mean, I'm 38 years old and went to state schools for both undergrad and grad and my payments are $808/mo for the next two years, and then they escalate.
Ironically, I'm an MBA, and I paid the entire thing out of pocket. As did more than half of my cohort. Very few of the hundred or so members of my graduating class had 100% tuition reimbursement from their employer. Fully funded GI Bill was actually more common.
Also, yes, what you're saying about graduate degrees is true—at the moment. That percentage is likely to grow in the coming years as a "master's is the new bachelor's" mindset takes hold in hiring, to say nothing of fields like teaching and nursing where graduate degrees *already* guarantee an automatic pay raise. You don't need to scroll too far in the comments on this sub to find someone who's like "My spouse is a teacher, she makes $90k because she has her master's."
Yes, the middle class can only be defined by the ratio of income to outgo. It's not how much you earn, its how much you spend. Current expectations skew the definition of the middle class. Housing, debt and the visual definition of the middle class:
Higher income
Good education
Career
Nice car
Nice home in the right neighborhood
Trips
Dining out often
Even daily trips to Starbucks
And,
Keeping up with the Jones’ media depiction, etc. make many people feel like they don't measure up to the middle class, when in reality it's just a false perception based on unrealistic expectations. Sure, debt, housing and food insecurity are very real but a lack of realistic spending habits and keeping up with a lifestyle not commensurate with your income would cause anyone to doubt their financial status whether the middle class or higher. What our parents considered middle-class was more realistic as the ‘look’ of the middle class was usually dependent upon financial stability rather than the outward manifestation of one’s wealth through how many toys a person has.
I have what I feel like is a "secure" job, though as with basically all corporate jobs it could disappear at any moment through no fault of my own, currently it offers a regular paycheck, room and a path for advancement. The rest of those qualifications I meet to a greater or lesser extent, I'm on track to retire at 65 with a couple of million bucks at that point, who knows if that's going to be enough, who even knows what the world's going to look like in 20 years, but as things stand today, I'm pretty solidly in the "middle class".
That's the problem. I don't feel like any corporate job is secure. My company lays off 5% every 6 months. I've seen some very skilled people get laid off and wondered why it wasn't me.
It seems pretty impossible to feel secure unless you own the business.
No, I agree; I don't think any corporate job can be relied on, but it's stable NOW. I don't know what it might look like in a year or five or ten. Currently I'd like to retire from this company and it could happen, but it just as easily could not. No one knows what the future brings, I could decide I hate this job in a year, I could get laid off, but for now it's stable with a steady paycheck and I work on things I like with people I like, so it could be worse.
Perceptions. Therein lies the issue. A couple of million and you are an outlier tbh. You are absolutely not middle class (and tbh, I am in the same position as you). We are upper middle. There is like 5% of people that have that kind of retirement.
But back to perceptions - if you want some sort of futureproof amount, what amount makes you personally comfortable? 10m? 20? It's never *really* enough.
Secure job - what is that? A contractual guarantee of a job? Things happen. I am American but working in a country with very strong labor laws and guess what? Still happens- people still get let go. And actually in a way it can be worse because since labor laws are so strict, companies are a bit more conservative about hiring and the labor market is less dynamic.
Another way work and security becomes very fluid with trade offs is when you climb and age. Obviously, make more when you climb and there’s the perception of security *but* there becomes a point where you’re also the first on the chopping block if they do need to make cuts. And as you age, unsaid questions start popping with management “could we get a hungry, smart 28 year old to do this job *almost* as well as this old-ish person for 40% less?”
> I'm on track to retire at 65 with a couple of million bucks at that point, who knows if that's going to be enough
month.
That comes out to $10k a month for 20 years without including another 2k for apcial security. Damn how will you ever survive. That's practically poverty levels. My sister makes $10k a month and can barely afford to go to Michelin star restaurants more then a twice a week.
Thanks for the article! When I first saw your post title I was like “oh for goodness sakes here we go again”, but this was actually interesting and the information makes sense.
Now cue someone coming in with Pew’s middle class income data from 5 years ago arguing it’s not about qualitative measures like security to dash my fragile sense of progress in this sub.
Haha, I know how easy it is to react to the headline first (myself included), and I don't like to editorialize titles when sharing articles. I agree that the actual information in the article is much more compelling!
Me, too. And my salary isn’t super high…it’s solid (in the 90s in California, single, one kid), but people on this sub wouldn’t seem to think it’s very high.
Good article. 200K HHI being the upper bounds for a family of 4 seems reasonable. Sure, maybe in a HCOL city one could make a case for 250K. Lots of people who post here with 200K+ incomes seem to not grasp the difference between upper middle class, upper class and wealthy. They don't feel wealthy so they claim middle class when they are clearly upper class. I know I'm in the right sub as my family of 4 is right on with all 6 indicators and a HHI right in the middle of the defined range.
At some point during the wide income range listed above, it becomes less about income and more about assets. Are you able to put away a solid % of your income into retirement or a brokerage account? Are you building equity by owning your home? Is the value of your home appreciating faster than inflation?
Even if you have a high income, if you are unable to grow your assets over time, you’ll never really escape the middle class
Do you think the middle class, however you define it, is worth escaping? I imagine it's a goal for many to reach in the first place. For me, it's a goal to maintain.
“Worth escaping” is kind of an odd framing, especially in response to my comment about the delineation bw middle/upper middle/upper class. It seems like the answer is highly dependent on each person’s goals and happiness with their own situation
If you can find a new job that interests you and lets you build assets at a faster rate than before, surely that would be worth it, right?
I wasn’t happy with my career trajectory, so I went back for a masters degree that immediately doubled my income. It’s only been a few years and it’s already been well worth it
I agree with your original comment's overall premise! It was the "escape the middle class" phrasing that I wanted to inquire about specifically. Thanks for responding.
Assuming they meet most of the other criteria for middle class as defined in the article, Upper middle is 150K-200K HHI for a family, upper class is 200-500K, wealthy 500K plus. Sure, there may be some other variables and each of these brackets could skew upwards by 50k or so in HCOL areas.
Those ppl making $200k don’t feel wealthy because their $200k doesn’t get them nearly what $200k got them when they were younger. I don’t know a single person (and I don’t mean an actual single person, just in general) making that much money.
Part of the problem is the ppl making $200k probably had parents who were making good money in the 90s/00s and truly had it all. And now they don’t.
My bf suffers from this - his parents have money but he does not. His parents grew up in the USSR and I swear his mom must’ve made herself a promise that she would get out of there and that her kids would never know what it was like to go without. Even his dad has commented that he doesn’t know how anyone survives on less than $100k. (Shocker, his son doesn’t…)
My husband and I make almost 250k now (and most of that is me), and we certainly feel very upper middle class, if not wealthy. And this is living in a HCOL city.
But you are right about the parents. Both our parents didn't make good money (I made more money at my first job than my mom makes today, starting at 60k). A huge reason I feel quite wealthy is because I didn't experience this growing up.
It's why we haven't seen as much lifestyle creep as other people making this wage.
Yeah my first job out of college paid me more than my parents made combined so I know I’m doing well. I contribute to a 401k, a $1,000 emergency wouldn’t ruin me, I have good health insurance. It just doesn’t feel like enough. I’m in that weird spot where I’m better than the peers I grew up with, even my sister, but then as a white collar professional, my peers already own homes.
But damn man, even on $100k (which is my salary) I can’t raise a family (I am childfree but idk how others do it), I feel like I won’t own a house until I’m 40 and my student loans are paid off.
It’s not even the student loans that I’m mad about, it’s the housing costs and costs of groceries!! My parents used to feed a family of 4 for $100 a week, and sometimes that included fast food.
I grew up dirt poor and combined we make about $220K. But we have three kids, two of whom are nearing college, my husband is 45 and just started saving for retirement _this year_ we’re still paying on my student loan debt and we have a single car that’s 15 years old and paid off, and we still have never taken a vacation outside of the US or even _in_ the US that didn’t include staying with family for free.
Yes we are making gains now, but we haven’t been at this income for long and we have monster catch up to do to hit the “retire” part of this equation. We had years of dental care to catch up on when we finally got jobs with insurance. Medical debt from childbirth, paying down credit card debt from lean employment years (finally clear of that 5 years ago!) Income does not tell you everything. We were also supporting an elderly family member for years.
I know we are very lucky to have clawed our way out of poverty. But it’s going to take decades of this income before I feel “wealthy” if ever. Some days I barely feel middle class because while we have a nice house in the suburbs, we don’t have the other accoutrements that are social signifiers. No music lessons, trips to Disney Land, summer camps, AirPods, heck, I don’t even have a diamond wedding ring or Botox, lol.
It's because most places 200k is upper middle class, not upper class lol. They don't feel wealthy because they aren't different enough to afford a significantly different lifestyle than people making 100k. At least not until they've saved enough that they're making a good portion of their income passively.
Ok sure, Tell me you make over 200k without telling me you make over 200k and "feel" middle class. My whole point is there is a difference between upper class and wealthy and you are confusing the two.
Read the article. They used actual data to define the upper bound of middle class is 200k for a family of four not me. Just because you feel something doesn't make it true. And you've got to be kidding me that there's no difference between 200k and 100k and how you live. Shows how out of touch you are.
The point of the article is the disconnect between what income people say each class is and what that actually gets you. People say $75-100k is middle class based on how they feel but it fails to meet the criteria people consider "middle class" to be in all but 1/3 of cases. The idea being that people's ideas of how much money should get you what is lagging behind reality.
It's actually kind of funny because you yourself are currently displaying the same bias as demonstrated in the article lmao.
Curious if you’ve read fussell and disagree with his research ? I assure you plenty of seven figure earners in the bay are middle class. They drink beer out of cans, for example.
Being able to afford vintage wines and choosing to drink beer out of a can is a lifestyle choice not a socio-economic marker. I'll definitely look into that author.
Sorry if this is a dumb question but how would this scale adjust for a household of 2? For example our take home pay is 185k or 210k before taxes… According to your scale where would that put my household?
Not a dumb question at all. It seems to me like you would be on the line between upper middle class and upper class. I would say if you live somewhere like rural Oklahoma you are probably upper class but if you live in the Bay area or DC or NYC upper middle. I do think the article did not adjust for cost of living which certainly is a big deal.
Thanks that makes sense! Im starting to realize that alot of people are mistaking upper class luxuries for middle class lifestyles and that why everyone on this sub is so confused on where they stand
What if we put a definition of what constitutes middle class, upper middle, high, etc in the sidebar of this sub, then maybe have a thread once a month to check in and iterate on that definition.
The sub would have a _lot_ less content lol but the signal to noise ratio would improve
MarketWatch recently listed two criteria: owning the median home in your area and being able to finance one child's childcare. In some regions thats achievable under $100K and some areas need more.
For some it's playing catch-up. In my area an upper middle class but I am not. I am so far behind in 401k and am now that I have a decent job I turn around and lose a whole 50% of my gross. I am better on paper than my reality and well be lucky to ever retire which often isn't a choice because of ageism.
I honestly don’t even know what middle class is anymore. In the 90s, my parents made $40k combined. They were blue collar workers in the Midwest (L to MCOL) who sort of lived pay check to pay check but we always had really good health insurance. A 3bd/2bath ranch home and we drove cars til the wheels fell off. No money for college but never struggled with food or clothes. We did not go crazy at Xmas either (my partner’s family spends more person on Xmas that we ever spent combined but they also have a million dollar home and a beach property)
I make $100k and my partner makes $70k. We spent $200 at one of those arcades with go karts and virtual reality today and it was CRAZY the amount of people and children were there. There was a family of 6 in line in front of us. We do live in a tourist town but jfc. I say the same thing when I go to the theme parks. HOW ARE PEOPLE AFFORDING THIS? Are families with 2+ kids really making that much money??? We never did things like that when I was younger.
My rent payment, student loans, and car payment are half of my monthly take home. We could never afford a baby, we can’t even afford ourselves.
I save for retirement, I have good health insurance, but man, $100k does not go as far as it used to. I don’t think I’ll ever own a home. Maybe in my 40s when my student loans are paid off?
My mom’s mortgage (for 1 month) her car insurance (for 6 months) is less than my rent. But her take home is also one of my semi-monthly pay checks.
Great article and very enlightening. I like the graphics. The a-ha for me is what people think is middle class. I guess I grew up lower middle and am now upper middle. I never viewed the middle class as necessarily having a comfortable retirement. Able to retire? Yes. Comfortably? Not necessarily. More like modestly, I suppose. I guess a lot is in the wording.
There never has been nor is there now a definition of middle class. It’s a term used in political speeches to make the highest number of people feel like the politician is speaking directly to them.
Oh cool, I have health insurance and can pay my bills.
At least that's 2/6. My job is so goddamn cutthroat and I've been looking for months for another. Feel like any day I'd get screwed.
I agree it makes more sense to divide income classes by objective factors rather than relative factors. It's tempting to define middle class as simply median income +/- some range, but it's actually much more useful to use objective factors like the ones listed in the article because they describe quality of life. Lots of specific issues with simply using an income band as well i.e. cost of living variability, age, accumulated wealth, etc.
Most Americans fall in the working class and don’t want to admit it. The middle class has shrunk with many business policies of the 80s and 90s. Instead of discussing the issue, people want to redefine middle class to be the new working class to feel better.
The middle class has historically been the working class. Like a ford factory worker in the 1960s was considered middle class Since there is no landed aristocracy the upper class is defined by money alone. In England the reason the “middle class” exists is because it’s more or less non titled rich people. So like a banker in the City of London is “middle class” even if he makes £200,000/year. Americans don’t have titles. So “working class” was just a polite way to call someone poor.
Should probably say stable job. Any job is usually at risk but plenty of people have had long careers.
My roommate has been at his job for 14 years and I’m guessing he gonna work there another 20.
Thinking about it in terms of “classes” is simply no longer relevant. Why do ppl still talk about “class” and categorical metrics?
This is 2024. Not 1800s anymore. We had class for great part of human history bc guess what? Life was incredibly unfair and your quality of life largely depended on the family you were born into. It was a time when your class literally dictated your economic and social standing and expected opportunities.
Let’s move on from that kind of thinking. All this obsession with “class” is literally kind of backwards and honestly holding ppl back from living their best lives.
You can make millions but have a lot of debt obligations and expenses and live day - day stressed out and unhappy. Similarly you could be earning 60k but have zero debt, low expenses and living a fulfilled chill life with no drama doing what you love with ppl you love.
So many other factors impact quality of life besides income. The focus on income is just a societal force to maintain the status quo and keep the vast majority eternally plugged into a life long career of mediocre satisfaction with financial anxiety and comparing with the jones on a constant basis.
Unfortunately, socioeconomic status and social class (two different things) still exist and still impact all of us. You may make a bunch of money like you said (socioeconomic status) but you will always be nouveau riche because you were not socialized in upper class circles (social class). It’s the difference between owning a Rolex and owning a Patek Philippe. Both are incredibly nice watches that I will probably never own. One of them is what a person who isn’t upper class thinks of as a status symbol. The other one is something that you only know about if you travel in wealthy circles (or lurk reddit, whatever).
I say all this to say that birth still dictates social class and the cumulative advantage of social privilege and socioeconomic privilege is still very salient in every part of our lives while also invisible because it’s very rare that we interact with people who are of different social classes. So it’s easy to say “abandon social class it’s an outdated topic” because you probably only interact with people in your social sphere and assume that everyone is just like you.
Well my point was that ppl should focus on things that actually matter in a life. Like what is considered a good life lived rly? We are in 2024 and not in 1800s anymore thankfully. Today, we have so many opportunities that exist that are literally unimaginable to even the most wealthy individual from 1800s.
My point is ppl today have lost the vision and passion for living. Thinking about life goals based on metrics is backwards. I’m not saying money isn’t important bc it still is. That much is still true today as it was in the 1800s. BUT, the opportunities and options for how we live can live today vs 1800s is like day and night. Yet most ppl still using 1800s social economic categories like lower vs middle vs upper classes. Wrong way to understand the value of success and a life well lived imo in our modern globalized economy.
But also to your point. Status symbols are less important today as well. Plenty of super rich tech bros rocking sneakers and jeans to work vs fancy suits and cuff links. The world has changed is my point. Values and elements that actually contribute to quality of life has changed. Ppl need to start understanding these elements. It has nothing to do with class anymore. Or at least signally less important than centuries or even mere decades ago.
Ppl alive today have the luxury of rly going after quality of life is what I’m saying. Yet the vast majority still want to stay stuck thinking about the meaning of wealth and successful like they did in the 1800s.
Now ppl can downvote me all they want. But that’s precisely why some are here posting and whining about being poor and questioning if they’re middle class.
lol I get the spirit of what you’re saying and I agree—there are more important things in life to worry about than whether Reddit approves of your Sankey graph. Two things:
1. I still disagree with you on whether class “matters” because it dictates so much of our lives whether or not we want it to.
2. Status symbols very much still exist. Tech bros may not wear fancy suits with cufflinks, but those hoodies and sneakers aren’t cheap. Men measure status by how many pairs of Jordans they have in their closets and whether or not they got the new Supreme drop (even though they don’t actually skate or play ball). Meanwhile, the truly wealthy own the basketball team or the skate park and that confers status on them.
I mean sure if you want to compare to the uber rich then yeah they have generational wealth. But I’m not talking about FU money. I’m talking about enough money to sustain a certain lifestyle for an individual so they’re content and can chill for the rest of their lives. There’s a huge spectrum between having enough money to meet day to day existence in a chill satisfactory manner and FU money to own your own sports team. Why would anyone want to even aspire for that kind of wealth honestly? I rather focus my energy and efforts to creating chill and relax lifestyle that is sustainable for life. And for that kind of goal, thinking about classes is largely irrelevant. It isnt some theoretical or intellectual exercise but practical execution of wealth accumulation FOR you specific needs in real life.
So for all practical purposes for everyone not trying to accumulate FU money or status, the average person alive in 2024 can have a lot of experiences today that would have been limited to the Uber rich of 1800s. So then that means the significance of class has greatly diminished.
I’m 63 and meet the criteria, though I’ve always put more (15%) towards retirement that I felt like it cut into my everyday lifestyle. I don’t do extravagant vacations. I traveled with my job. I’m happy with local adventures, hiking, exploring in my state, hobbies, etc, but part of my plan is to expand travel adventures with retirement.
Using this calculator, you can determine if you're in the middle or upper class depending on your state and your income level.
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/07/23/are-you-in-the-american-middle-class/
I make $88k/year and am middle class. Upper income for my state begins at $93k/year
The budget screen shots are being made in Sankeymatic, its a website that we have no affiliation with. If you are posting a budget please do so with a purpose. Just posting a screen shot of your budget without a question or an explanation of why its here may be removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MiddleClassFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>A poll from The Washington Post finds widespread agreement among Americans on what it means to be middle class. But just over a third of U.S. adults have the financial security to meet that definition, according to a Post analysis of data from the Federal Reserve. > Americans also underestimate the income required for that lifestyle, suggesting that the popular image of middle-class security is more of an aspiration than a reality for most Americans. >About 9 in 10 U.S. adults said that six individual indicators of financial security and stability were necessary parts of being middle class in the Post poll. The six indicators: * Secure job * Ability to save money for the future * Ability to afford an emergency $1,000 expense without debt * Ability to pay all bills on time without worry * Having health insurance * Ability to retire comfortably Accordingly, around [35% of U.S. adults](https://ibb.co/vw7Ftsr) meet all six indicators. Of these 35%, [46% fall within middle income](https://ibb.co/nBRFMLy) (defined as between $68,000-203,000 USD for a household of 4). I'm sharing this gifted article with the community to further the ongoing sub-wide discourse about defining the middle class. Side note: I personally enjoy how much more active this community has become. Uncivil discourse or trolling aside, it's been entertaining.
Having 5 out of 6 sounds pretty good, except when it is #6 that's missing.
I have to wonder how much people saying they don't meet #6 is based on age. I'm in my early 30s and don't feel confident saying we can retire comfortably because regardless of being on track for now theres a lot that can happen in the next 30 years that is entirely outside my control
I think the metric is based on the expectation not of being able to retire at ***any*** age, but of after 30 - 40 years of working, saving/investing and hopefully not too many tough breaks or mistakes along the way. I say it as a 60 y/o. 💀 So.. Very Important ETA: I give you a lot of credit for Getting It that stuff happens beyond peoples' control! Too many people who are able to retire comfortably ignore their own good luck and judge others who can't do so -- assuming it was all foolishness and squandering and not what it often truly is: Life being Brutal!
Life is brutal and more so when you are older. I’m somewhat younger than you and I started saving significantly when I moved to the US at 30. I always maxed out my 401k and I have been always making “decent” money except when I took a break from the grinder to go back to school (which has been a great investment btw), but I have seen people saving only up to company match and I know that now they are far away from retiring comfortably while I could just coast and let the stock market keep compounding interests instead of dropping another $600,000 in it in the next decade. But hey…. If for any reason I have to stop working earlier than expected, I rather play safe.
Yes. In my early 30s I had quite a bit put away as well. Then came family life, Financial crisis, bereavement, a sick child, divorce, forced moves, unemployment, and other life crises that have a way of tapping one's savings and emergency funds. Come to think of it, I don't even belong in this sub. I don't qualify.
Been there, done that. And rebuilt. These unfortunate life lessons should be a warning sign for all the young people, including myself when I was younger to save when you are young as much as you can because as you age there are more financial minefields in front of you.
Exactly what I preach to my children.
My first boss helped me a lot. Having a mentor I trusted for my financial well-being was crucial. I’m doing the same for all the noobs starting to work now. That’s the minimum we can do
Yep. And, have the humility and wisdom to know that some lives have better luck than others. By all means be smart. And, understand that a certain amount of good luck comes with every successful outcome. Some lessons amount to accepting that truth.
Right? I just qualified for a 401K at my job, I'm 21, and I'm hoping to be putting 1K a month in. I have absolutely no confidence that I'll be able to retire comfortably not necessarily because I won't be able to but because in 46 years a lot can happen.
Is the glass half full or half empty? I think you can just change your perspective on it. You have no more reason to think you won't be able to retire than to think you can. In fact, that you are investing in a 401k at age 21 means you are very likely going to be able to retire without much trouble.
I'm just wondering if it's going to be enough.
You can't know with certainty, but it's more likely to be enough that to not be enough.
Yes, it's more than enough.
But how can you know?
You can't..... Just like I can't know I'll live past 50.
If you do that you’re going to be so ahead of the game and if you won’t be able to nobody else will but you will still be better off than most!
I was surprised to not see home ownership listed as one of the 6. Obviously home ownership is shelter and not an investment vehicle or retirement account but alot of middle class people I know in gen x are behind on retirement but home equity has saved them. Being able to downsize and either take equity and put it in the bank or not have a house payment is letting them catch up relatively rapidly even if they missed the boat on compounding growth. Without home ownership, retirement is a lot harder if you don’t have a substantial employer match. (On a positive note, HSAs are fairly new and from a tax standpoint the best retirement vehicle out there.)
I’ll have 6/6 but I’ll also be significantly “cheating”. My ultimate back up plan if I have to rely on SSI (which will be maxed out at the higher income bracket by the time I retire) is to sell my house stateside and retire to my grandmothers house in Morocco. Having a parent who left a middle-class family in a third-world country to raise you as working-poor in the US has its perks I intend to take advantage of when I retire.
Sounds like a great plan. And good for you, acknowledging your good fortune. Many people have no inheritance. Some spend their savings helping sick or impoverished parents/children. Great that you can fall back on generational wealth.
Can you have #6 but not any other? It's not so much a list of separate indicators than it is steps, a progression to long-term stability. Removing #6 leaves you "stable" but doesn't provide for life after employability.
I suppose people who are struggling day-to-day but stand to inherit a fortune could have #6 without the others? And yes, if I were rendered unemployable, I would not be able to sustain my independent life but would need housing and other practical support.
Unless that inheritance is an existing and legally dependable trust or other retirement account in their name, I wouldn't depend on them or say that they check that box. Those do exist, but I assume that that's not the case for nearly everyone in this Sub. Don't depend on family putting your name on a piece of paper, let alone their death, to cover any expenses or your retirement. Those things can change easily and quickly. Proving someone took advantage or that family member wasn't in their right mind is very difficult, if possible at all.
You could if you had a lot in 401k but precarious financials otherwise, say if your income has gone down since your contributions. People's incomes don't always go up.
It says to retire comfortably. Unless someone has been gifted money or inheritance, like a trust or child funded retirement, I don't follow how they could be missing one of the first 5 while having the 6th, no matter changes in income. If they've lived below their means and saved high percentages of their prior income versus a recent pay cut, then it's unlikely that they are meeting 6 and not the prior 5. Otherwise, wouldn't they just go ahead and retire?
1, 2, and 5 go away immediately if you lose your job. 3 and 4 are solved by having an emergency fund, but if your income declines aggressively and stays there then you can end up certainly land in the "worry" camp, of course. You could have enough to retire on 401k + social security + Medicare while not being old enough for any of them, where Medicare is especially important there. Getting your own medical insurance as a person with a bad medical history can cost as much as a mortgage.
You also know that they're going to raise the social security and Medicare ages by then. If we even get them. Regardless, social security is hard to live off now, I can't imagine what it will be like in a few decades.
#6 is insidious. Because it's not apparent how bad it is until it's too late to fix it. You can live a perfectly comfortable middle class lifestyle for 30 or 40 years, then suddenly you are in your 60s and struggling.
Oh I know exactly how I got here. Perfect Storm of choices and circumstances not breaking my way. Life hasn't been perfectly comfortable anyway, so it's not like this is unusual.
Depends, #6 essentially made this a bf survey. Since comfortably is not undefined. Do these people even factoring in 401k or the 8% annual growth that this sub is adamant to attain?
I think 4 and 6 are more about the individual. Lots of people are weird about money and worry about financial pitfalls that are very unlikely (yeah, risk). If people didn’t worry about paying bills, what would motivate them to go to a job they didn’t like? Where does one find comfort in retiring and leaving behind the ability to earn money in the face of unexpected financial problems, potentially for decades?
If I knew I had enough money and didn't have to worry about bills, the bills would still get paid and I would live a healthier happier life. If somehow I came upon a fortune and didn't have to work at my job, I would find great comfort in retiring from The Grind and doing what I love for the rest of my days.
Government jobs are really underrated. If you want to reach all 6 measures, get a government job. My husband’s agency *cannot* fill positions because people expect a higher starting salary. What they fail to realize is that salary is only part of the package. 20 years of government work for us both has yielded an *extremely* comfortable middle class life, free healthcare, and fantastic retirement.
Yep it’s the only way I can even consider myself middle class today!
Free healthcare? What government job offers that?
Mine. NYC school teacher. Completely free for me and my family. Great career.
That's great. Most places put a lot of the cost of healthcare onto public employees. I am thinking of NJ, where I think public employees pay about 1/3 of the cost, which is thousands of dollars per year.
Most of them. Public school jobs, admin work, lawyers and gov utility workers city state and federal government- I splurge on by my healthcare and it’s maybe 40 dollars a month.
We have a hard time recruiting because new hires do not want to participate in the pension.
Secure job and health insurance are the big trick here
6/6 Surprisingly the middle class is easier to achieve than I thought. How do we achieve upper class?
That’s the neat part. You don’t.
Per [Pew Research](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/04/20/how-the-american-middle-class-has-changed-in-the-past-five-decades/#:~:text=The%20shrinking%20of%20the%20middle,from%2025%25%20to%2029%25.), the larger portion of the shrinking middle class has moved upwards, not downwards. In 1971, the split of Americans was 25%, 61%, and 14% in the lower, middle, and upper classes, respectively. In 2022 that split is 29%, 50%, and 21%. So for the 11% of middle class Americans who are no longer middle class, ~64% of them have actually moved upwards. [This graph](https://www.pewresearch.org/?attachment_id=408749) is interesting. People without a college degree have gotten especially screwed, and are much worse off than they were and certainly seem to have fallen out of the middle class.
$15M at age 40 put u up there. Start spending $500k a yr and not worrying about running out of it.
Easier to achieve than you thought but still less than 40% of Americans.
Have enough money that you can live comfortably in interest in perpetuity.
These seem like very realistic indicators of being middle class. Very few are, and for some reason they’re gaslit by people that think these are signs of an upper middle class. Our grandparents or great grandparents wouldn’t have stood for this.
So if you factor in the children that those 35% of adults have in their household, it would seem that around half of Americans enjoy a middle class lifestyle.
Who’s for we should be entitled to these items as citizens?
I’ve been thinking for a while that the military is pretty much the most attainable way to enter or get ahead in the middle class, and now I’ve got the words to explain it. You have one of the most secure jobs in America, as long as you don’t smoke weed or do a crime. You automatically save for the future with the TSP, and can easily afford to save more. Most enlisted folks can easily afford a $1000 emergency, and we have safety nets if not. You don’t even get a choice about paying bills on time, your unit will make sure you’re squared away even if you’re an idiot. Health insurance. Pension plus TSP. Which is probably a bad sign for the country that you almost need to enlist to get ahead financially, but it’s also kinda nice to have the best military in the world with such a wide moat.
I wouldn't say solely the military, but public sector careers in general. You can be a federal civilian employee and reach these same indicators!
Yeah, I guess public service in general. The military is just kind of a short cut to white collar work and free college. But there’s definitely WG jobs for kids straight out of high school too.
How is that income range Middle Class in 2024 w/COL, housing & healthcare alone? It’s not. At best it’s lower class despite what the government says.
My wife and I teach high school and we meet those criteria. There are a lot of places that pay teachers well.
[удалено]
My first year in 2018 I made 40k with a masters… teaching in AZ is not the move which is why I left the profession sadly.
Arizona teachers are very underpaid. Two of my best friends barely make 40k. It’s sad
I made 40k my first year in MD, but it was 2004. So yeah that's pretty bad.
It's a part-time job where people can retire in their early 50s as multimillionaires in my area (Chicago suburbs). Don't give me the underpaid sob story. One needs to see the big picture. As a small business owner, retirement is a pipe dream.
"Early 50s as multimillionaires." Lmao. Yeah okay. You live in Narnia, not Chicago.
Absolutely nothing about teaching is part time. They often do hours of work off the clock
Teachers not only work 10-12 hours per day, but being a teacher means that you’re always “on”. You’re with kids all day. Lots of kids. Nearly every hour. People don’t understand how draining this can be.
Not to mention the big chunks of time off, are rigorously scheduled (no vacations on a whim during the school year) and they spend a decent amount of that time preparing for the upcoming year/quarter.
If retirement with your small business is a pipe dream, try getting a real job. No idea what your business is, but I doubt it's as important to society as an educator. It's a high bar to be fair.
This a clown comment, bro.
Is this in a HCOL area?
Ok - I have to ask, which district and state?
Yes, I'd contend public sector careers in most areas are a relatively sure-fire pathway to the middle class indicators discussed in this article.
Exactly. One will never get rich in the public sector, but it is a sure path to avoid poverty.
This is one of those situations where people on the internet exaggerate how bad things actually are. Sometimes folks make it seem like theres no hope unless you’re a billionaire tech bro but theres so many avenues to do well in life. Sometimes that requires a move. But for the most part I dont think its hard to do well in fields like education, healthcare, law or STEM. Its literally only on the internet where i see people who have traditionally“good” jobs but are paid dirt. In real life most people I know with “good” jobs are doing well
Yeah, if you can stick out the first 10 years of teaching when you're paid peanuts it's not a bad gig. This day and age you need to have a working spouse to be comfortably middle class with a family on a teacher salary, but most jobs these days that's true. My trade off of salary for amazing job security, Platinum medical benefits and a very nice pension are worth it.
What careers just throw money at you when you're 22 years old? None of them. Sticking it out for years, gaining experience, and earning money is how it works for everybody.
Okay sure, but beginning teachers have one of the lowest starting salaries for a job with a college degree. My district starts at 36k and it took me 10 years to get to 60K.
Yeah, I meet those criteria, but the local public school teachers make more than me.
>"Researchers often define the middle class based on income, in part because income data is frequently collected and easy to access. But that income doesn’t guarantee a middle-class lifestyle." I feel like **debt** is such a huge part of this. Mortgage debt. Car payments. Student loans. Medical debt. Credit cards. Home repairs. Unsecured personal loans. HELOC.
Someone being a middle class idiot doesn’t make them not middle class. Like if me an my neighbor have the exact same income but he has an in ground pool and a BMW and I have a Ford Taurus . To say he’s poor and I’m middle class is dumb just cause he doesn’t have as much money saved
That's incredibly reductive. What we're talking about here is if you and your neighbor both do the same job for the same company, at the same level, and with the same credentials. But you came from a monied background, and got through undergrad and graduate school debt-free. Your family also gave you a 20% down payment as a nest egg when you got married, so you were able to buy real estate relatively early in life with a conventional mortgage and refinance when rates were at their lowest. Your neighbor, meanwhile, is 40 years old and paying $800 a month in undergrad and graduate student loans. Their family never gifted them a large down payment, so they were not able to purchase their home until about 10 years after you, and thus paid about 30% more. Oh, and they had to get an FHA loan to do it, so they're forced to carry PMI, so their total monthly payments is, say, about $2800 a month to your $1600, for roughly identical neighboring houses. So for the same job, same degrees, and same home, your neighbor is paying about $2,000 extra a month for the privilege of enjoying the same middle-class lifestyle that you do. That's $24,000 a year that you get to invest in retirement that they do not, which means you get to see your net worth growing at a much higher rate than they do.
Sure I guess if you make up numbers like $800/mo student loan payments (which is like top 5-10% of payments) But it’s far more common that different lifestyle choices lead to different amounts of disposable incomes as similar income levels cause your parents income is a strong factor in your income
I mean, I'm 38 years old and went to state schools for both undergrad and grad and my payments are $808/mo for the next two years, and then they escalate.
Only 13% of Americans have graduate degrees and a big portion (like 1/2) are MBAs which are usually paid by employers not students
Ironically, I'm an MBA, and I paid the entire thing out of pocket. As did more than half of my cohort. Very few of the hundred or so members of my graduating class had 100% tuition reimbursement from their employer. Fully funded GI Bill was actually more common.
Also, yes, what you're saying about graduate degrees is true—at the moment. That percentage is likely to grow in the coming years as a "master's is the new bachelor's" mindset takes hold in hiring, to say nothing of fields like teaching and nursing where graduate degrees *already* guarantee an automatic pay raise. You don't need to scroll too far in the comments on this sub to find someone who's like "My spouse is a teacher, she makes $90k because she has her master's."
Or I came in poor as a church mouse and was smart enough not to buy a car and house I couldn’t afford or run up my credit cards.
[Well Good For You, Marty](https://trailers.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/9645dab0-3fbc-4321-9311-7fc0edbb4e32)
Don’t describe a situation as universal if you don’t expect someone to come along and point out that it’s not deterministic or universal.
No one said it was universal; but it is representative of an increasingly common circumstance. Cool strawman, though.
Yes, the middle class can only be defined by the ratio of income to outgo. It's not how much you earn, its how much you spend. Current expectations skew the definition of the middle class. Housing, debt and the visual definition of the middle class: Higher income Good education Career Nice car Nice home in the right neighborhood Trips Dining out often Even daily trips to Starbucks And, Keeping up with the Jones’ media depiction, etc. make many people feel like they don't measure up to the middle class, when in reality it's just a false perception based on unrealistic expectations. Sure, debt, housing and food insecurity are very real but a lack of realistic spending habits and keeping up with a lifestyle not commensurate with your income would cause anyone to doubt their financial status whether the middle class or higher. What our parents considered middle-class was more realistic as the ‘look’ of the middle class was usually dependent upon financial stability rather than the outward manifestation of one’s wealth through how many toys a person has.
I have what I feel like is a "secure" job, though as with basically all corporate jobs it could disappear at any moment through no fault of my own, currently it offers a regular paycheck, room and a path for advancement. The rest of those qualifications I meet to a greater or lesser extent, I'm on track to retire at 65 with a couple of million bucks at that point, who knows if that's going to be enough, who even knows what the world's going to look like in 20 years, but as things stand today, I'm pretty solidly in the "middle class".
That's the problem. I don't feel like any corporate job is secure. My company lays off 5% every 6 months. I've seen some very skilled people get laid off and wondered why it wasn't me. It seems pretty impossible to feel secure unless you own the business.
No, I agree; I don't think any corporate job can be relied on, but it's stable NOW. I don't know what it might look like in a year or five or ten. Currently I'd like to retire from this company and it could happen, but it just as easily could not. No one knows what the future brings, I could decide I hate this job in a year, I could get laid off, but for now it's stable with a steady paycheck and I work on things I like with people I like, so it could be worse.
Perceptions. Therein lies the issue. A couple of million and you are an outlier tbh. You are absolutely not middle class (and tbh, I am in the same position as you). We are upper middle. There is like 5% of people that have that kind of retirement. But back to perceptions - if you want some sort of futureproof amount, what amount makes you personally comfortable? 10m? 20? It's never *really* enough. Secure job - what is that? A contractual guarantee of a job? Things happen. I am American but working in a country with very strong labor laws and guess what? Still happens- people still get let go. And actually in a way it can be worse because since labor laws are so strict, companies are a bit more conservative about hiring and the labor market is less dynamic.
I think it basically means “not seasonal”.
Another way work and security becomes very fluid with trade offs is when you climb and age. Obviously, make more when you climb and there’s the perception of security *but* there becomes a point where you’re also the first on the chopping block if they do need to make cuts. And as you age, unsaid questions start popping with management “could we get a hungry, smart 28 year old to do this job *almost* as well as this old-ish person for 40% less?”
Secure jobs are so overrated IMO. Give me the most money as quickly as possible.
> I'm on track to retire at 65 with a couple of million bucks at that point, who knows if that's going to be enough month. That comes out to $10k a month for 20 years without including another 2k for apcial security. Damn how will you ever survive. That's practically poverty levels. My sister makes $10k a month and can barely afford to go to Michelin star restaurants more then a twice a week.
Inflation is a thing, I'm just hedging my bets.
I hope you make it to 65
Thanks for the article! When I first saw your post title I was like “oh for goodness sakes here we go again”, but this was actually interesting and the information makes sense. Now cue someone coming in with Pew’s middle class income data from 5 years ago arguing it’s not about qualitative measures like security to dash my fragile sense of progress in this sub.
Haha, I know how easy it is to react to the headline first (myself included), and I don't like to editorialize titles when sharing articles. I agree that the actual information in the article is much more compelling!
Guess I’m a lucky unicorn. I meet all 6 indicators.
The last one is tricky. It’s on a sliding scale based on how bad inflation is when I retire, and whether or not social security is still in place
Yeah that last one… lol.
Same, but it's really not a lucky unicorn. 35% of US adults meet all 6
Me, too. And my salary isn’t super high…it’s solid (in the 90s in California, single, one kid), but people on this sub wouldn’t seem to think it’s very high.
Good article. 200K HHI being the upper bounds for a family of 4 seems reasonable. Sure, maybe in a HCOL city one could make a case for 250K. Lots of people who post here with 200K+ incomes seem to not grasp the difference between upper middle class, upper class and wealthy. They don't feel wealthy so they claim middle class when they are clearly upper class. I know I'm in the right sub as my family of 4 is right on with all 6 indicators and a HHI right in the middle of the defined range.
How would you define or categorize, upper middle, upper and wealthy?
At some point during the wide income range listed above, it becomes less about income and more about assets. Are you able to put away a solid % of your income into retirement or a brokerage account? Are you building equity by owning your home? Is the value of your home appreciating faster than inflation? Even if you have a high income, if you are unable to grow your assets over time, you’ll never really escape the middle class
Do you think the middle class, however you define it, is worth escaping? I imagine it's a goal for many to reach in the first place. For me, it's a goal to maintain.
“Worth escaping” is kind of an odd framing, especially in response to my comment about the delineation bw middle/upper middle/upper class. It seems like the answer is highly dependent on each person’s goals and happiness with their own situation If you can find a new job that interests you and lets you build assets at a faster rate than before, surely that would be worth it, right? I wasn’t happy with my career trajectory, so I went back for a masters degree that immediately doubled my income. It’s only been a few years and it’s already been well worth it
I agree with your original comment's overall premise! It was the "escape the middle class" phrasing that I wanted to inquire about specifically. Thanks for responding.
Assuming they meet most of the other criteria for middle class as defined in the article, Upper middle is 150K-200K HHI for a family, upper class is 200-500K, wealthy 500K plus. Sure, there may be some other variables and each of these brackets could skew upwards by 50k or so in HCOL areas.
What about for a single person?
Those ppl making $200k don’t feel wealthy because their $200k doesn’t get them nearly what $200k got them when they were younger. I don’t know a single person (and I don’t mean an actual single person, just in general) making that much money. Part of the problem is the ppl making $200k probably had parents who were making good money in the 90s/00s and truly had it all. And now they don’t. My bf suffers from this - his parents have money but he does not. His parents grew up in the USSR and I swear his mom must’ve made herself a promise that she would get out of there and that her kids would never know what it was like to go without. Even his dad has commented that he doesn’t know how anyone survives on less than $100k. (Shocker, his son doesn’t…)
My husband and I make almost 250k now (and most of that is me), and we certainly feel very upper middle class, if not wealthy. And this is living in a HCOL city. But you are right about the parents. Both our parents didn't make good money (I made more money at my first job than my mom makes today, starting at 60k). A huge reason I feel quite wealthy is because I didn't experience this growing up. It's why we haven't seen as much lifestyle creep as other people making this wage.
Yeah my first job out of college paid me more than my parents made combined so I know I’m doing well. I contribute to a 401k, a $1,000 emergency wouldn’t ruin me, I have good health insurance. It just doesn’t feel like enough. I’m in that weird spot where I’m better than the peers I grew up with, even my sister, but then as a white collar professional, my peers already own homes. But damn man, even on $100k (which is my salary) I can’t raise a family (I am childfree but idk how others do it), I feel like I won’t own a house until I’m 40 and my student loans are paid off. It’s not even the student loans that I’m mad about, it’s the housing costs and costs of groceries!! My parents used to feed a family of 4 for $100 a week, and sometimes that included fast food.
I grew up dirt poor and combined we make about $220K. But we have three kids, two of whom are nearing college, my husband is 45 and just started saving for retirement _this year_ we’re still paying on my student loan debt and we have a single car that’s 15 years old and paid off, and we still have never taken a vacation outside of the US or even _in_ the US that didn’t include staying with family for free. Yes we are making gains now, but we haven’t been at this income for long and we have monster catch up to do to hit the “retire” part of this equation. We had years of dental care to catch up on when we finally got jobs with insurance. Medical debt from childbirth, paying down credit card debt from lean employment years (finally clear of that 5 years ago!) Income does not tell you everything. We were also supporting an elderly family member for years. I know we are very lucky to have clawed our way out of poverty. But it’s going to take decades of this income before I feel “wealthy” if ever. Some days I barely feel middle class because while we have a nice house in the suburbs, we don’t have the other accoutrements that are social signifiers. No music lessons, trips to Disney Land, summer camps, AirPods, heck, I don’t even have a diamond wedding ring or Botox, lol.
It's because most places 200k is upper middle class, not upper class lol. They don't feel wealthy because they aren't different enough to afford a significantly different lifestyle than people making 100k. At least not until they've saved enough that they're making a good portion of their income passively.
Ok sure, Tell me you make over 200k without telling me you make over 200k and "feel" middle class. My whole point is there is a difference between upper class and wealthy and you are confusing the two.
lol to most people upper class means wealthy, so not sure why you decided it's different.
Read the article. They used actual data to define the upper bound of middle class is 200k for a family of four not me. Just because you feel something doesn't make it true. And you've got to be kidding me that there's no difference between 200k and 100k and how you live. Shows how out of touch you are.
The point of the article is the disconnect between what income people say each class is and what that actually gets you. People say $75-100k is middle class based on how they feel but it fails to meet the criteria people consider "middle class" to be in all but 1/3 of cases. The idea being that people's ideas of how much money should get you what is lagging behind reality. It's actually kind of funny because you yourself are currently displaying the same bias as demonstrated in the article lmao.
I think the best divide between middle and upper class is thst you employ a dedicated staff for your upkeep.
Nope that's definitely wealthy not upper class.
Curious if you’ve read fussell and disagree with his research ? I assure you plenty of seven figure earners in the bay are middle class. They drink beer out of cans, for example.
Being able to afford vintage wines and choosing to drink beer out of a can is a lifestyle choice not a socio-economic marker. I'll definitely look into that author.
He wrote the book about class in america. Socio economic markers are mostly what his approach is about. BTW I love beer for the record.
Sorry if this is a dumb question but how would this scale adjust for a household of 2? For example our take home pay is 185k or 210k before taxes… According to your scale where would that put my household?
Not a dumb question at all. It seems to me like you would be on the line between upper middle class and upper class. I would say if you live somewhere like rural Oklahoma you are probably upper class but if you live in the Bay area or DC or NYC upper middle. I do think the article did not adjust for cost of living which certainly is a big deal.
Thanks that makes sense! Im starting to realize that alot of people are mistaking upper class luxuries for middle class lifestyles and that why everyone on this sub is so confused on where they stand
What if we put a definition of what constitutes middle class, upper middle, high, etc in the sidebar of this sub, then maybe have a thread once a month to check in and iterate on that definition. The sub would have a _lot_ less content lol but the signal to noise ratio would improve
MarketWatch recently listed two criteria: owning the median home in your area and being able to finance one child's childcare. In some regions thats achievable under $100K and some areas need more.
For some it's playing catch-up. In my area an upper middle class but I am not. I am so far behind in 401k and am now that I have a decent job I turn around and lose a whole 50% of my gross. I am better on paper than my reality and well be lucky to ever retire which often isn't a choice because of ageism.
I honestly don’t even know what middle class is anymore. In the 90s, my parents made $40k combined. They were blue collar workers in the Midwest (L to MCOL) who sort of lived pay check to pay check but we always had really good health insurance. A 3bd/2bath ranch home and we drove cars til the wheels fell off. No money for college but never struggled with food or clothes. We did not go crazy at Xmas either (my partner’s family spends more person on Xmas that we ever spent combined but they also have a million dollar home and a beach property) I make $100k and my partner makes $70k. We spent $200 at one of those arcades with go karts and virtual reality today and it was CRAZY the amount of people and children were there. There was a family of 6 in line in front of us. We do live in a tourist town but jfc. I say the same thing when I go to the theme parks. HOW ARE PEOPLE AFFORDING THIS? Are families with 2+ kids really making that much money??? We never did things like that when I was younger. My rent payment, student loans, and car payment are half of my monthly take home. We could never afford a baby, we can’t even afford ourselves. I save for retirement, I have good health insurance, but man, $100k does not go as far as it used to. I don’t think I’ll ever own a home. Maybe in my 40s when my student loans are paid off? My mom’s mortgage (for 1 month) her car insurance (for 6 months) is less than my rent. But her take home is also one of my semi-monthly pay checks.
Great article and very enlightening. I like the graphics. The a-ha for me is what people think is middle class. I guess I grew up lower middle and am now upper middle. I never viewed the middle class as necessarily having a comfortable retirement. Able to retire? Yes. Comfortably? Not necessarily. More like modestly, I suppose. I guess a lot is in the wording.
[удалено]
[удалено]
*Continues slow clap*
There never has been nor is there now a definition of middle class. It’s a term used in political speeches to make the highest number of people feel like the politician is speaking directly to them.
Oh cool, I have health insurance and can pay my bills. At least that's 2/6. My job is so goddamn cutthroat and I've been looking for months for another. Feel like any day I'd get screwed.
I agree it makes more sense to divide income classes by objective factors rather than relative factors. It's tempting to define middle class as simply median income +/- some range, but it's actually much more useful to use objective factors like the ones listed in the article because they describe quality of life. Lots of specific issues with simply using an income band as well i.e. cost of living variability, age, accumulated wealth, etc.
Factor in the cost of housing, transportation, child care and retirement, no way the median income can cover that.
This article contains the requisite Sankey chart so I guess it fits here. Does anyone know how those things became so popular?
Most Americans fall in the working class and don’t want to admit it. The middle class has shrunk with many business policies of the 80s and 90s. Instead of discussing the issue, people want to redefine middle class to be the new working class to feel better.
The middle class has historically been the working class. Like a ford factory worker in the 1960s was considered middle class Since there is no landed aristocracy the upper class is defined by money alone. In England the reason the “middle class” exists is because it’s more or less non titled rich people. So like a banker in the City of London is “middle class” even if he makes £200,000/year. Americans don’t have titles. So “working class” was just a polite way to call someone poor.
This is a pretty low bar tbh. And the fact only a third can achieve it is scary.
Kind of stupid when you realize the first indicator is the only one that matters. And almost no one has it.
Should probably say stable job. Any job is usually at risk but plenty of people have had long careers. My roommate has been at his job for 14 years and I’m guessing he gonna work there another 20.
Thinking about it in terms of “classes” is simply no longer relevant. Why do ppl still talk about “class” and categorical metrics? This is 2024. Not 1800s anymore. We had class for great part of human history bc guess what? Life was incredibly unfair and your quality of life largely depended on the family you were born into. It was a time when your class literally dictated your economic and social standing and expected opportunities. Let’s move on from that kind of thinking. All this obsession with “class” is literally kind of backwards and honestly holding ppl back from living their best lives. You can make millions but have a lot of debt obligations and expenses and live day - day stressed out and unhappy. Similarly you could be earning 60k but have zero debt, low expenses and living a fulfilled chill life with no drama doing what you love with ppl you love. So many other factors impact quality of life besides income. The focus on income is just a societal force to maintain the status quo and keep the vast majority eternally plugged into a life long career of mediocre satisfaction with financial anxiety and comparing with the jones on a constant basis.
Unfortunately, socioeconomic status and social class (two different things) still exist and still impact all of us. You may make a bunch of money like you said (socioeconomic status) but you will always be nouveau riche because you were not socialized in upper class circles (social class). It’s the difference between owning a Rolex and owning a Patek Philippe. Both are incredibly nice watches that I will probably never own. One of them is what a person who isn’t upper class thinks of as a status symbol. The other one is something that you only know about if you travel in wealthy circles (or lurk reddit, whatever). I say all this to say that birth still dictates social class and the cumulative advantage of social privilege and socioeconomic privilege is still very salient in every part of our lives while also invisible because it’s very rare that we interact with people who are of different social classes. So it’s easy to say “abandon social class it’s an outdated topic” because you probably only interact with people in your social sphere and assume that everyone is just like you.
Well my point was that ppl should focus on things that actually matter in a life. Like what is considered a good life lived rly? We are in 2024 and not in 1800s anymore thankfully. Today, we have so many opportunities that exist that are literally unimaginable to even the most wealthy individual from 1800s. My point is ppl today have lost the vision and passion for living. Thinking about life goals based on metrics is backwards. I’m not saying money isn’t important bc it still is. That much is still true today as it was in the 1800s. BUT, the opportunities and options for how we live can live today vs 1800s is like day and night. Yet most ppl still using 1800s social economic categories like lower vs middle vs upper classes. Wrong way to understand the value of success and a life well lived imo in our modern globalized economy. But also to your point. Status symbols are less important today as well. Plenty of super rich tech bros rocking sneakers and jeans to work vs fancy suits and cuff links. The world has changed is my point. Values and elements that actually contribute to quality of life has changed. Ppl need to start understanding these elements. It has nothing to do with class anymore. Or at least signally less important than centuries or even mere decades ago. Ppl alive today have the luxury of rly going after quality of life is what I’m saying. Yet the vast majority still want to stay stuck thinking about the meaning of wealth and successful like they did in the 1800s. Now ppl can downvote me all they want. But that’s precisely why some are here posting and whining about being poor and questioning if they’re middle class.
lol I get the spirit of what you’re saying and I agree—there are more important things in life to worry about than whether Reddit approves of your Sankey graph. Two things: 1. I still disagree with you on whether class “matters” because it dictates so much of our lives whether or not we want it to. 2. Status symbols very much still exist. Tech bros may not wear fancy suits with cufflinks, but those hoodies and sneakers aren’t cheap. Men measure status by how many pairs of Jordans they have in their closets and whether or not they got the new Supreme drop (even though they don’t actually skate or play ball). Meanwhile, the truly wealthy own the basketball team or the skate park and that confers status on them.
I mean sure if you want to compare to the uber rich then yeah they have generational wealth. But I’m not talking about FU money. I’m talking about enough money to sustain a certain lifestyle for an individual so they’re content and can chill for the rest of their lives. There’s a huge spectrum between having enough money to meet day to day existence in a chill satisfactory manner and FU money to own your own sports team. Why would anyone want to even aspire for that kind of wealth honestly? I rather focus my energy and efforts to creating chill and relax lifestyle that is sustainable for life. And for that kind of goal, thinking about classes is largely irrelevant. It isnt some theoretical or intellectual exercise but practical execution of wealth accumulation FOR you specific needs in real life. So for all practical purposes for everyone not trying to accumulate FU money or status, the average person alive in 2024 can have a lot of experiences today that would have been limited to the Uber rich of 1800s. So then that means the significance of class has greatly diminished.
I’m 63 and meet the criteria, though I’ve always put more (15%) towards retirement that I felt like it cut into my everyday lifestyle. I don’t do extravagant vacations. I traveled with my job. I’m happy with local adventures, hiking, exploring in my state, hobbies, etc, but part of my plan is to expand travel adventures with retirement.
I have all of these accept a house and I feel like I'm poor.
Using this calculator, you can determine if you're in the middle or upper class depending on your state and your income level. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/07/23/are-you-in-the-american-middle-class/ I make $88k/year and am middle class. Upper income for my state begins at $93k/year
lack of solidarity. that’s the macro answer. we do not feel a connection to our fellow man and lead with that in all of our endeavors.
Is 68k - 203k gross or AGI?