What is "Upper" class to you?

[smartestnumber5]

Where I live in NJ, $100,000 is the working middle class, and the bare minimum a household would need to get by.

I can't speak to where you live (since obviously I don't know where that is!) but what do you mean by "bare minimum to get by"?

I found this info on the most expensive cities in the U.S. to live in: http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/18/real_estate/buying_selling/most_expensive_places/index.htm. The methodology of the study seems to be that they took the kind of lifestyle a family of four making $60,000 could live in an average COL area, and then asked how much that family would have to spend in expensive cities to maintain their lifestyle. Of course the results are mind-blowing:

Manhattan $146,060
San Francisco $122,007
Los Angeles $117,726
San Jose $108,506
Washington, D.C. $102,589

But, what the study doesn't note is that $60,000 for a family of four is the median income for the country. That means half of all families of four in the U.S. are making less than $60,000 a year. And so while it might take over $100,000 to live a truly *middle* kind of life in these cities, that still means that 50% of the population in those cities would be making less than that amount.

And in fact, the median incomes of these five cities is actually significantly less than the numbers listed above. So the reality is that a lot more than 50% of the households and families in the 5 most expensive cities in the U.S. are making quite a bit less than $100,000 a year. So I don't think $100,000 could be a bare minimum to get by anywhere (but of course, maybe we have a different definition of "bare minimum").

 

[alldiz]

I believe those numbers came from last month's issues of the Rush Limbaugh Letter and couldn't be further from the truth. You're certainly free to take corndog's good word for it, or you could do a little research to see that Obama's plan actually lowering taxes for the lower, middle and upper middle classes. He proposes funding the tax cuts by rolling back the debt laden Bush tax cuts for the top 1% earners, closing corporate loopholes, cracking down on international tax havens and increasing the dividend-and-capital-gains tax for the super wealthy.

I think that says it all
Kerri

 

[cteddiesgirl]

Rich to me is over 500K. But well off (upper middle class) is pretty much anything over 75k per working person.

But then, I live in central Indiana.

 

[mjkacmom]

I can't speak to where you live (since obviously I don't know where that is!) but what do you mean by "bare minimum to get by"?

I found this info on the most expensive cities in the U.S. to live in: http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/18/real_estate/buying_selling/most_expensive_places/index.htm. The methodology of the study seems to be that they took the kind of lifestyle a family of four making $60,000 could live in an average COL area, and then asked how much that family would have to spend in expensive cities to maintain their lifestyle. Of course the results are mind-blowing:

Manhattan $146,060
San Francisco $122,007
Los Angeles $117,726
San Jose $108,506
Washington, D.C. $102,589

But, what the study doesn't note is that $60,000 for a family of four is the median income for the country. That means half of all families of four in the U.S. are making less than $60,000 a year. And so while it might take over $100,000 to live a truly *middle* kind of life in these cities, that still means that 50% of the population in those cities would be making less than that amount.

And in fact, the median incomes of these five cities is actually significantly less than the numbers listed above. So the reality is that a lot more than 50% of the households and families in the 5 most expensive cities in the U.S. are making quite a bit less than $100,000 a year. So I don't think $100,000 could be a bare minimum to get by anywhere (but of course, maybe we have a different definition of "bare minimum").

I mean live in a modest home, drive older vehicles, spend about $2,000 on vacations, go out to eat once every few months, being able to afford groceries, but still cut coupons, always buy clothing on sale - by no means living large!

 

[Aardvarks]

So in the USA upperclass is described by disposable income, whereas over here it describes lineage, breeding, ancestry, education, social aspiration.

You be as rich as you want in england and never be accepted as upper class.

You would still be a rich working class.

Upper class schools

Eaton, Harrow, Haleybury.

Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial college London

It is also possible to be a pauper and still be upper class

Me ?? lower middle class with working class childhood

 

[alldiz]

So in the USA upperclass is described by disposable income, whereas over here it describes lineage, breeding, ancestry, education, social aspiration.

You be as rich as you want in england and never be accepted as upper class.You would still be a rich working class.

Upper class schools

Eaton, Harrow, Haleybury.

Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial college London

It is also possible to be a pauper and still be upper class

Me ?? lower middle class with working class childhood

Over here that is "new money"......the "upper class" your referring to is probably the "old money" here. The people who have it all and you don't hear about. Ya know the neighbors of the rich and famous...poor things
Kerrik

 

[NotUrsula]

So in the USA upperclass is described by disposable income ...

Don't believe that for a minute. It might be so in some parts of the country, but not everywhere by any means. Where I grew up in the deep South it definitely took way more than money to be upper class, and I knew plenty of upper-class families who had lost all their money in the war -- the Civil War! They were still very much perceived as upper-class, and were powers in the community.

 

[rayelias]

whereas over here it describes lineage, breeding, ancestry, education, social aspiration.

To show an important difference between the US and our older sister, Great Britain, I invite you to peruse the US Constitution, especially the part that says "all men are created equal."

In the US, we have the right to be born with a silver spoon in your mouth and turn into a complete social ****. Conversely, you can be born dirt poor and grow up to prosper and succeed to your heart's extent.

I love our British family, but I'm glad that King George was such a jerk. Got us off our duffs and took things into our own hands.

 

[Aardvarks]

Don't believe that for a minute. It might be so in some parts of the country, but not everywhere by any means. Where I grew up in the deep South it definitely took way more than money to be upper class, and I knew plenty of upper-class families who had lost all their money in the war -- the Civil War! They were still very much perceived as upper-class, and were powers in the community.

Ah...so feudalism still lives on in Dixie. We have more in common than we realise.