staceyshearrion said:
In one of my poli-sci classes it was pointed out that in the US just about everybody defines themselves as Middle Class.
and life in general, but I could be wrong) that the stigma associated with being "working poor" or "working class" is what makes just about everybody with a job claim "middle class" status...otherwise I'm unsure of why I'm the only person so far to admit that my family scored below the 50 percentile on the NY Times link...I assume that 50 percent of the population scores below that percentile, unless I'm understanding percentiles incorrectly...I know there are other people with similiar education levels, income levels, occupational levels to me who use the net and take their families to WDW, I'm just curious why they aren't here on this thread.
It seems that so far just about everyone who has responded is "above average" according to the Times.
hmmmm, curious. (well, to me anyway...)
I've also had poly sci classes in which we discussed how everyone defines themself as middle class. (Numerous posters here have said they "feel" middle class no matter what number the NYTimes measure spits out--not that the NYTimes tool is necessarily accurate.) The result, the professor claimed, is that the U.S. has much less "class warfare" than a country like England, thus there is much less interest amongst the working class here in unionization and less demand for state intervention in class inequalities. Also, some posters have pointed out that the tool doesn't take debt into account or the fact that some millionares live in tiny houses and hoard all their money. I see these as issues of (conspicuous?) consumption, not of class. Consumption often correlates to class, but I don't see why it should be a factor in class. (I can kind of see why considering student loans might be a legitimate aspect of class.) So, if one has a very large mortgage, that is likely a result of the kind of house they chose to buy. We can't very well take debt into account when a lot of the working class is not financially capable of accumulating such large debts. For instance, rental prices are often just as high (or higher) than monthly mortgage payments, yet renters don't have housing related debt.
Anyway, in answer to your question--I did post about having less than 50% on the NYTimes tool:
smartestnumber5 said:
I'm 53, 91, 18, and 25 for an average of 47.
Clearly while I'm doing great on education and good on job prestige, my income and wealth numbers are WAYY below others I've read here. What's amazing is I did the numbers for my dad and he got 39, 48, 69, 37 for an average of 48th percentile. Thus even though he makes $30,000 more per year than I do and has probably $15,000 more in 401k stuff, he is just 1 percentile point ahead of me because I went to college and he didn't!! I think that's quite amazing. If I add in my mom's work they get bumped up to 51% (another $12,000 or so in income and a little more wealth).
I'm also a graduate student right now, so technically I should be getting bumped up after my 6 years of graduate school...then I should be something like 74, 99, 69, 29 for an average of 68.
