• eek2121@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 years ago

    People think I am full of it when I say that my household income (largish household with kids) is a quarter million a year and we are basically living like we are middle class. Money just doesn’t go as far as it used to.

    As a millennial, I never would have imagined working my way up to this point only to find I can’t even buy a house. Oh sure, I could make the bare minimum down payment and get stuck with a super high mortgage payment, but if I lose my job or become disabled or unable to work, we would have no way to pay for it.

    Groceries, housing, and insurance costs have more than doubled for us since 2019.

    • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      $250,000 a year is middle class and has been for a long time - it’s about how much a doctor (who isn’t in a particularly high-paying specialty) makes. But DINKs with that household income could afford a million-dollar house.

      • CarnivorousCouch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 years ago

        By what definition of middle class are you considering $250,000 to be middle class? That’s greater than the 90th percentile income.

        • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          My personal definition of “upper class” excludes anyone who actually has to work. Wikipedia seems to agree, putting “CEOs and successful business owners” in the upper middle class. And the New York Times considers the 90th to 99th percentile of earners upper-middle-class.

          I do see some places defining “upper class” as those earning at least twice the median household income (so about $150,000) but I don’t think that matches common usage. Is a software developer right out of college upper class? Or a nurse practitioner? I would say “clearly no, unless they happen to be from a very wealthy family”.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            It most assuredly is not.

            Median income there is $54k or less in both of those cities. 5x median income is not middle class.

            • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              I really don’t think that’s a good metric given that the average house cost in San Francisco is 1.12 million dollars. Someone making $250,000 a year isn’t affording that house any more than someone making $54,000. They’re both priced out. That’s the point everyone else is making. That and the new idea what anyone working for a living is not upper class.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                People in upper class society worked even during the height of the Robber Barons, so I’m not sure why you’re pretending that’s new.

                Have you just like, not read The Great Gatsby or something? Shit, wealthy landowners in colonial days worked - even those with slaves.

                Your points need to be grounded in reality somewhere.

                San Francisco specifically being expensive to buy a home in has no bearing on what “middle class” represents whatsoever.

                The “tax the rich but oh wait not me” liberals and progressives are the absolute worst