Are You Middle Class (Calculator)?

[jazz4cash]

i’m guessing everyone will disagree with this calculator from the Washington Post for one reason or another, but hey it’s just for fun!


“Up to 87% of Americans identify as middle class — but few agree on what that means. Here’s what your income says about you, your community and the country.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...-class-income/

[GenXguy]

It considers your location and size of household, so I think it's ok. It says my income is too high to be middle class since I'm still working. And that matches up with other middle class calculators I've used in the past.

Edit: I only used job income, not investment income in the calculator. I suppose I'll fall back to middle class when I retire. I read over some of the comments there. Pretty funny seeing people's complaints about the calculator.

[Amethyst]

One thing I know: money and class have little to do with one another.

And once you have enough to pay your bills, "Class" is what counts.

[Jerry1]

So what is my income? When I was working, I was clearly over middle income. Now, I think of my spend as essentially a surrogate for my income. I could use our SS and pension but that doesn’t capture interest and dividends and then there’s capital gains which if unrecognized I guess shouldn’t be counted.

Since it doesn’t consider net worth, I think it’s missing a big piece. There’s probably multi millionaires on this site that hardly have any income (recognized) and spend very little but who are clearly middle class or more.

FWIW, it said I’m basically middle class though I can attest that if it wasn’t for low class, I’d have no class at all.

[Gumby]

I've never aspired to rise beyond my status as a member of the lumpen proletariat.

[Irishgirlyc58]

I took that test yesterday.
It says that my income is too high to be considered middle class.
It thinks I’m rich but then again so does the federal government at tax time.
I can assure everyone that I am not rich.

[rodi]

Solidly middle class... by those metrics. Our income is around $100k. Puts us in the middle for San Diego metro and for our zip code... Doesn't take into account we're in the SFR part of our zipcode, and the other part is all rentals and condos and student dorms... (skews the middle income down).

Of course the reason our income is middle is because I choose not to withdraw more than we need.

Income was easy to figure out: DH's SS, my teeny pensions, rental income, and what we pull from our nest egg. We only pull what we need.

I put a family of 3 since one of our sons is fully our dependent, in reality and for tax purposes. Other son makes enough at his part time job and is going to a cheap enough community college that he is not our dependent, even though we help him with rent and school fees.

But... we're above middle class when you look at assets... paid off house, decent nest egg, etc.

[Sunset]

Seems great for a working person to use to have fun.

Including Roth Conversions seems like that is something I shouldn't do as it's not actually earnings or spending, just really moving money around.

[ElizabethT]

Well, to my surprise, we are still considered upper income. Our annual income was very high pre-FIRE, and we now are living at about 50% of what it used to be, but that apparently still keeps us in the upper income stratosphere- cool!

The reality is that we live in coastal S. Orange County, a very high net worth & income area, and the WP calculator is using LA as it's metric, which is all over the board as an income measurement, from low and quite modest (San Fernando valley) to very high (the Westside). So we definitely don't feel upper income in our current location, instead we feel middle-of-the-pack.

Which is exactly what WP article said- most of us measure where we are relative to those we live amongst. Here, our denoted upper income feels more like an 'average' income. Everyone travels, has newer cars, eats out, goes out, i.e., all the things we do. Elsewhere we would probably feel 'rich,' but since there's no 'elsewhere' in our future, we'll remain happily upper-but-really-just-middle-income in our home near the sea.

[Koolau]

Yeah, big difference if I go by gross income or adjusted gross income.

[ElizabethT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amethyst One thing I know: money and class have little to do with one another. And once you have enough to pay your bills, "Class" is what counts.

Agreed. All references to 'Class' in this regard should be permanently replaced with 'Income.'

'Class' denotes behavior. There is no intrinsic correlation between income level and class, i.e. behavior.

Or elongate Class to what it probably was originally- Classified. (Higher (Income) Classified, Middle (Income) Classified, Lower (Income) Classified.

[Badger]

From the article - “People define the middle class by comparing themselves to people around them,” says Rakesh Kochhar, senior researcher at the Pew Research Center.

Just using the houses on block where I live then the great majority of them have annual property taxes that exceed what I paid for my house before their McMansions were built and they own cars that are BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, Lexus, etc.
Our annual income/expenses/spending from SS and small pensions place us in the middle 40% of incomes of middle class although there are savings from retirement investments. We could spend more money and join the ranks of "keeping up" but don't see a need to as long as we are satisfied with our lifestyle and comfort. From what I see we have more "Class" than most.

Cheers!

[frayne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gumby I've never aspired to rise beyond my status as a member of the lumpen proletariat.

[VanWinkle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amethyst One thing I know: money and class have little to do with one another. And once you have enough to pay your bills, "Class" is what counts.

+1

[DrRoy]

The thing is, our income changes based on what we have decided to spend in a particular year. A bit above 'middle'.

[MichaelB]

Talking about class

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDIHrX-Jp2E

[Koolau]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElizabethT Agreed. All references to 'Class' in this regard should be permanently replaced with 'Income.' 'Class' denotes behavior. There is no intrinsic correlation between income level and class, i.e. behavior. Or elongate Class to what it probably was originally- Classified. (Higher (Income) Classified, Middle (Income) Classified, Lower (Income) Classified.

"Should"? According to whom? Do we now change the dictionary as well? If we do, how do we make sense of the tens of millions of references to "class" that still exist and are a treasure trove of data in our past literature? Imagine your kid is doing a paper on the "new word" for middle class. When she Googles that new word - virtually nothing will come up. Her base of data will encompass 2023 forward. Not very useful.

Pretty soon, we'll have references like "Income Classified at Lower Levels than Average" and then someone will object to the word "average" as being applied to a human. It won't end if we start changing the language now every time someone imagines a word to be derogatory. Every word is probably derogatory in someone's mind.

I'm not a big fan of changing words that have been around for a long time with their meanings well understood - by anyone willing to understand rather than looking to be offended. That someone might now be offended by the word "class" is unfortunate, but not enough reason to come up with a new and improved, shiny, sanitized word that (in this case) primarily means economic status, denoted by income. We use "class" because we know it means "economic status denoted by income" and it's a heck of a lot easier to say "class" than "economic status denoted by income." And, we've been using it that way for 100 years or more.

I've grown up with the word "class" and have never given it a second thought about referring to anyone's behavior or societal value. That someone now does take the time to think about various connotations of the word, doesn't mean we have to change the word. That can get old pretty quickly. 'Cause then we'll soon be off to the next, new, more appropriate, acceptable word when someone new is offended by the old "new" word. Lower, middle and upper class have been around as long as I can recall and they've been used in news articles, economic studies and every-day speech as long as I can remember and I easily remember their use back to the 50s. I don't recall them ever being used as derogatory references. No word is perfect and every word can be misused. Having said that, lower class, middle class and upper class have come to be well understood whether someone can find a way to make them sound derogatory or not. Of course, since we all think differently about such things, YMMV.

[ElizabethT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolau "Should"? According to whom? Do we now change the dictionary as well? If we do, how do we make sense of the tens of millions of references to "class" that still exist and are a treasure trove of data in our past literature? Imagine your kid is doing a paper on the "new word" for middle class. When she Googles that new word - virtually nothing will come up. Her base of data will encompass 2023 forward. Not very useful. Pretty soon, we'll have references like "Income Classified at Lower Levels than Average" and then someone will object to the word "average" as being applied to a human. It won't end if we start changing the language now every time someone imagines a word to be derogatory. Every word is probably derogatory in someone's mind. I'm not a big fan of changing words that have been around for a long time with their meanings well understood - by anyone willing to understand rather than looking to be offended. That someone might now be offended by the word "class" is unfortunate, but not enough reason to come up with a new and improved, shiny, sanitized word that (in this case) primarily means economic status, denoted by income. We use "class" because we know it means "economic status denoted by income" and it's a heck of a lot easier to say "class" than "economic status denoted by income." And, we've been using it that way for 100 years or more. I've grown up with the word "class" and have never given it a second thought about referring to anyone's behavior or societal value. That someone now does take the time to think about various connotations of the word, doesn't mean we have to change the word. That can get old pretty quickly. 'Cause then we'll soon be off to the next, new, more appropriate, acceptable word when someone new is offended by the old "new" word. Lower, middle and upper class have been around as long as I can recall and they've been used in news articles, economic studies and every-day speech as long as I can remember and I easily remember their use back to the 50s. I don't recall them ever being used as derogatory references. No word is perfect and every word can be misused. Having said that, lower class, middle class and upper class have come to be well understood whether someone can find a way to make them sound derogatory or not. Of course, since we all think differently about such things, YMMV.

Whoo - a nerve was apparently hit!

Class denotes observed, or presumed behavior to me, while income does not.

High class vs low class anyone?

And of course, YMMV.

[Koolau]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElizabethT Whoo - a nerve was apparently hit! Class denotes observed, or presumed behavior to me, while income does not. High class vs low class anyone? And of course, YMMV.

Yeah, I have one good nerve left. And someone is getting on it.

And you all know me, if something is worth whining about...

Returning you now.

[Andre1969]

I actually detect a little snobbery in the article. This, in particular, I have a problem with:

“A lot of people in the top 5 or 10 percent would define themselves as upper-middle class, because people don’t like to define themselves as upper class,” Sherman explained.

She later added, “There’s a lot of ambivalence about being rich, and wealthy people resolve that by thinking of themselves as hard-working and implicitly middle class.”

Now, going by that income calculator, it only puts me in the top 20%, but I've done those wealth calculators before, and recall they'd put me somewhere in the top 4-5%. Maybe things have changed, but I seem to recall a net worth of $1M would put you more or less in the top 10%, and $2M would get you into roughly the top 5%.

I don't know how accurate those wealth calculators really are, but I've always considered wealth a more important indicator of how well off you are than income, especially in your later years.

The calculator came to the conclusion that "Your household’s income is too high to be considered middle class, and you have financial security. " To me, that's a contradiction right there, as one of the very foundations of "middle class" in my opinion at least, is having financial security. If the difference between your lifestyle and the homeless shelter is missing a couple of paychecks, then that's not middle class. That's frontin'. Or, posing. Or whatever they call it these days.

Anyway, I'd consider myself upper middle class. However, I don't really feel "wealthy". And it's not that I'm trying to resolve any guilt issues with having money, and saying I'm down with the working man, and stuff like that. It's just that, I'm still the same me that I always was. Just me, with more money.

Plus, I imagine most people live among their financial peers, so they tend to just feel like nothing extravagant. For example, I have a swimming pool, which many people might think of as a sign of wealth. And, according to the company that maintains it, it's the largest residential pool they service. But, it's also old, and it came with the house. Swimming pools usually don't add much value to a house when you sell, so I look at it as, I bought the house and they threw in the pool for free. Anyway, the neighbors across the street have a pool. It's tiny compared to mine. But it's newer, and really fancy looking with a stone diving board, waterfall, some kind of pebble-grain texture, etc. Neighbors behind me have a pool as well, and it's heated.

The people across the street also have a lawn service. For $225 a week, they come out and cut the yard, and do all the trimming, edging, and so on, so the place looks like it's ready to put on the market at a moment's notice. Meanwhile, I'm out with my 2016 Cub Cadet, every few weeks. I'll cut one side of the driveway one day, the other side on another, and it takes about 90-105 minutes for each side. They have a fairly new Benz, and a GMC crew cab with lots of chrome on it. I have an '03 Buick Regal and a Ram with an 8-foot bed (i.e., basically a work truck).

So, it's not like I'm really living in the lap of luxury, while my neighbors are in squalor. And when I drive around, I see a good deal of Teslas (the expensive ones), Benzes, BMWs, 3/4-ton and up pickups, and so on.

In an odd sort of way, I actually felt "wealthier" when I lived in my old house, when I compared it to the rest of the neighborhood. I had 4+ acres in an area where multi-family housing, McMansions built out almost to the property line, etc were becoming the norm. My modest 1500 square foot, c1916 house was in need of a lot of repairs, and had its issues, but it was paid for. Meanwhile, most of the people in that neighborhood WERE the "frontin'" types, a few paychecks away from the poor house. And it showed, during the Great Recession, when a wave of foreclosures swept the county, those fancy cars got repopped, etc.

Anyway, I guess I look at "middle class" as a combination of things. There can be middle class income, middle class wealth, and a middle class lifestyle. Depending on how you can combine them, someone can look middle class, but not be it. Or, vice versa.

Anyway, I'm not sure what level of income/wealth it would take for me to feel "wealthy." It's probably more of a psychological thing, rather than any physical number I could put down. For instance, I could afford to buy an upscale new car if I wanted. I could afford a lawn service. And a lot of other hedonistic type stuff. I just don't want it.

I dunno...maybe if my investible assets swelled up to $5M, I'd feel wealthy. At that point, with my current mindset at least, I couldn't imagine what I'd do with the kind of withdrawal rate that would throw off.