Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: $250,000 a Year Is Not Middle Class [View all]Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)27. "Middle class" is different from median (middle) income.
Class is a multi-strata category that encompasses income, education, professional status, home ownership, and other markers of standard of living. It's not a well-defined term in the U.S. Income on the other hand is a single stat, easily calculated using hard data.
So "middle class" status may require less than the median national income in some areas and more in others; people who consider themselves middle class may in fact earn far less than the median income or far more.
I get annoyed when pols use "class" to describe people, particularly when they use the term to describe low income and poor people as the "lower class."
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
272 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
But the average in the US is NOT middle class, it is barely scraping by, one paycheck away from
tblue37
Dec 2015
#208
No, it simply is not. I did these calculations last time hill2016 made such a claim.
JonLeibowitz
Dec 2015
#12
That is reality for poor and working poor--it's not reality for "middle class" families.
MADem
Dec 2015
#183
If $250,000 is middle class income, where does my $1645 a month income put me?
LiberalArkie
Dec 2015
#14
Their feeling come from the people they socialize with. I just can't see Hill catching a ride from
LiberalArkie
Dec 2015
#108
A small one bedroom walk up with no real kitchen in Alphabet City costs $3000/mo, more by now.
cui bono
Dec 2015
#189
Oh please. The median income in NYC is $60,000. A New Yorker who earns 250K a year is in the top
Chakab
Dec 2015
#75
Like I wrote in my response to another poster, the conventional definition of "middle class" is so
Chakab
Dec 2015
#111
250K puts a person in the top 2% of earners, not in the middle of earners.
Bluenorthwest
Dec 2015
#118
Obvious troll is more obvious than ever. Goodbye Pretzell_warrior aka functioning_cog.
Electric Monk
Dec 2015
#163
If the net income on your small business or farm is $250,000, you are doing quite well.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2015
#13
yes but we need to start with the top 1%(actually the top .01% but that gets confusing)
questionseverything
Dec 2015
#161
That not what that poster stated ... He/She mentioned revenue, not net revenue.
1StrongBlackMan
Dec 2015
#33
Small business pays the taxes that big business doesn't have to, this is why small business is being
Dont call me Shirley
Dec 2015
#46
I've run a family business, which is basically the same thing when it comes to taxes.
jeff47
Dec 2015
#186
Ridiculous Republican strawman. If a small business is generating $250,000 in net income before tax,
Chakab
Dec 2015
#77
In a country in which some millionaires consider themselves "dead broke" it is.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2015
#10
And to live in West Little Rock, Ar, you would need a household income of over 1 million. So?
LiberalArkie
Dec 2015
#17
You failed to comprehend your own chart. You're carrying water for the rich. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#110
I understand. You live amongst the wealthy, you naturally want to *serve* their interests. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#119
It's "middle class" in America. If that galls, then don't carry water for the wealthy who made it
Romulox
Dec 2015
#129
Unfortunately, she's not telling the truth. The "Fight for $15" doesn't include a sliding scale. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#215
That's not what the "Fight for $15" is about. It doesn't include a sliding scale.
Romulox
Dec 2015
#216
You aren't a socialist anything, so I put forth the amount of energy your output entails.
Starry Messenger
Dec 2015
#221
LOL. Neither are you--you support the obscenely wealthy friend of Wall Street over the people. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#222
Mmm, I'm going to love all the tears during the next 8 years of President Hillary.
Starry Messenger
Dec 2015
#224
Starry 2012: "Complete emancipation of women is possible only under Socialism."
Romulox
Dec 2015
#225
Romulux--total output to support working class issues over all his years at DU
Starry Messenger
Dec 2015
#226
This is sad. I feel bad for you. But at least the jig is up on your phony "socialist" blog. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#229
Agreed. Still the conservative "evolution" of that poster is jarring, given her previous posturing.
Romulox
Dec 2015
#240
And Hillary STILL is against the "Fight for $15", despite your attempted subject change! nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#223
Would you trade a tax increase that is more than offset by lower healthcare costs? nt
Lucky Luciano
Dec 2015
#143
Sorry. I'm not inclined to flatter you by answering an absurd hypothetical.
NurseJackie
Dec 2015
#157
"It's not untrue until I see evidence to the contrary." ---brooklynite, post 47
bvar22
Dec 2015
#268
The top 3% of something cannot be described as the "middle", regardless of attempted misdirection.
Romulox
Dec 2015
#113
At 250K in high cost parts of the country, that's well below the "top 3% of earners.
Gormy Cuss
Dec 2015
#181
Oh, wait, Sanders has come to Hillary's position in raising FICA taxes on those
Thinkingabout
Dec 2015
#29
Bernie has long been for raising the FICA cap, been listening to Brunch with Bernie for a long time.
Dont call me Shirley
Dec 2015
#50
Yes, he was going to remove the max cap, now he is going for the over $250,000
Thinkingabout
Dec 2015
#79
But for accuracy's sake; didn't, HRC promise not to raise taxes on the ...
1StrongBlackMan
Dec 2015
#32
No it is not. 250K is top 2% or 3% of earners, no matter where you are. The fact that your
Bluenorthwest
Dec 2015
#122
This is the problem with the expansive definition of "middle class" that's used in the US. The vast
Chakab
Dec 2015
#87
Then we have a serious semantics problem in the US because the "middle class" is considerably
Chakab
Dec 2015
#94
good gawd but there's a lot of bullshit to wade through going down this thread.
Amimnoch
Dec 2015
#53
It's a matter of basic math, not wish fulfillment. $50k is the *reality* of Middle Class. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#100
It's what the middle class would be, if wages/purchasing power kept up with inflation.
AtheistCrusader
Dec 2015
#83
Depends on where you live. In some major urban areas, this is the high end of middle class
McCamy Taylor
Dec 2015
#97
LOL at the people who think that the mathematical middle is subject to debate. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#103
Your own chart says that $171k/year is top 25% percent in San Francisco. Try again. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#109
Why did *you* offer the chart if it utterly invalidated your position, then? nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#117
It's not middle class, as your chart demonstrates. What point you thought you were making...
Romulox
Dec 2015
#125
It's the "upper end" of middle class, particularly with a two income family in large cities.
MADem
Dec 2015
#154
Just proves that Hillary is clueless as a republican when it comes to income inequality
Ferd Berfel
Dec 2015
#167
Median income has never defined middle class. The true Middle Class is the professional class and
Todays_Illusion
Dec 2015
#187
If you live in a major population center, especially the East Coast, like Boston, NY, Philly, DC.
harun
Dec 2015
#199
Actually, it kinda is. What people are calling "middle class" these days is simply
tblue37
Dec 2015
#207
Unless you show income distribution in the pertinent years you compare, this means nothing. nt
Romulox
Dec 2015
#218
upper middle, especially in some areas for the country. Nice income, if spent wisely.
Hiraeth
Dec 2015
#255