Happiness is a different subject… 
I think that’s one of the things that bothers me about the essay this thread was started to discuss and the other I posted a link to-the author’s failure to recognize her privilege. For instance, in the second piece she writes that she knows what a Northface jacket is because she had one for her family ski trip to Tahoe but that when she discovered how cold it was in Michigan she went out the next day and bought Hunter boots and a Patagonia jacket. She doesn’t seem to realize that most kids don’t go on pricey ski trips and can’t easily afford to drop an instant $400-500. There’s nothing wrong with spending that kind of money for clothing but the fact that she doesn’t recognize the ability to do so without a second though as a mark of privilege is itself a mark of privilege.
Yes, I think when one is scrambling to meet basic needs like food and shelter due to very limited resources, that could seriously cause significant unhappiness!
Being rich doesn’t guarantee someone has any class
Thats for sure, GMTplus7
Aw darn. I better be next year or my future husband is going to have some splainin’ to do 
I’ve generally considered “middle class,” from lower middle to upper middle, to be about 40th percentile to 99.3rd or 99.4th percentile in “richness” (some combination of net worth and income). Characterized by people who have “regular” jobs without major company equity with some level of professionalism or skill. To characterize it as the middle 50% is kind of useless. What is the difference between someone in the 80th percentile of “richness” and the 70th percentile? Nothing really. Now, obviously 40th to 99.3rd percentile is a wide range, so we have different groupings within middle class.
You could define middle class in terms of relation to your neighborhood, your region, your state, your country, or the full world. You could define it in terms of income, net worth, how much you spend, your lifestyle, your profession, your mindset, or a combination. You could define it in terms of 25/75th percentile, 30/90th percentile, 40/99,4 percentile, or other arbitrary limit. It seems like an arbitrary concept that is mostly used to assist people who are into characterizing their income in relation to others to do so in a way that meets their expectations, much like the author did in the linked article.
Many do not think this way, particularly among college students a similar age to the author. When I was in college in Palo Alto, for the most part, I didn’t know or care how much the families of different students made. Once in a while, there were clues like a student inviting anyone from the dorm who cared to join her on a Tahoe trip to a location owned by her family. At the time this struck me as a friendly gesture, without any thought of SES class or any feelings about being uncomfortable due to class issues. I wore clothing almost entirely chosen for comfort, with out any concept of brands, nearly the same outfit most days. I had no concept of whether clothing others were wearing was desirable or not. For many years after college, I had the same mindset. Having started my first full time job, I wasn’t making a huge amount of money, but I almost never thought about money and never thought about relative income in relation to others. I had enough income to live my modest lifestyle (at the time) and beyond that, it didn’t really matter. Years later, I sort of fell into starting a successful Internet company and had a huge increase in income over a short period. Now that I was making notable income and regularly getting related praises/comments, my mindset changed. I started caring more about money, purchases, getting the best deals, working longer hours to continue making more money, money in relation to others, etc. At this point in my life was the time when I was most concerned with income in relation to others and related divisons, Today I spend a lot less time working, have a lot lower income, and like to think I’ve moved beyond that mindset.
I have not read all 14 pages of this thread, but I do agree with the title. We make a substantial amount of money, but we live in one of the wealthiest counties in the US, and my husband and I are both government employees. We don’t feel at all " rich" compared to those around us, but we do recognize we are doing fine. If we had our salaries in many parts of the country, we would be doing great. But I’m not sure we could afford to live in The San Francisco Bay Area, or Hawaii on what we make. It is “all relative.”
I would not be surprised if most of those who say that “$250,000 is really not that much” are those whose spending habits tend to increase with every increase in income, so that they are not really saving enough for future needs, and feel financially stressed even at very high income levels. Of course, any reduction in income level becomes painful, and they tend to complain the most about taxes.
On the other hand, someone earning $250,000 per year but spending like someone earning $50,000 per year (the median household income in the US) or even $121,000 per year (the median household income in Palo Alto, CA) will probably accumulate substantial wealth fairly quickly and find himself/herself in a very financially secure position.
"What about the guy who for the last couple of years has been making $250K but has been living beyond his means (on the assumption his income will continue to rise), but, unbeknownst to him, his employer has decided to can him with, say, 3 months notice? "
Seriously? He was an upper middle class person who didn’t plan wisely when he was making money. He didn’t magically retroactively become middle class.
Are we talking about gross income or adjusted? If you do my kind of adjustment - mortgage, tuition, transportation…I am lower class. As soon as my kid is out of school, mortgage gone and I am too old to move, I will then be upper class, but by then it wouldn’t really matter.
How do people envision middle middle-class? I see here people earning quite the income, $200,000-$250,000, say they are “middle-class” simply due to location (“but you don’t know the cost to live in NYC/SF/LA/DC…” - well, yes, I do)
So, what do you think of families living on $60,000-$75,000 in these areas? Are they poor in your eyes? Struggling? Lower middle class? What about the families earning $80,000 - $150,000 in these high cost areas? Assume AGI numbers (sorry, just did my taxes) identical family composition.
Like @1214mom, we earn a good income (or so I thought until I came onto CC and realized we aren’t). We have the ability to send our children to an inexpensive private school (less than $20,000) until high school, save for retirement, and have some niceties in our lives but we have to prioritize. We can’t afford a vacation and a new or even used car purchase in the same year or two. The mere fact that we can even consider private school, however affordable, tells me we’re doing well and lead a very comfortable life. We may be the “poorest” family in the private school or on our block but that doesn’t mean we’re poor, or even “middle class”. We may not be wealthy but we are definitely doing better than even the 75th percentile.
People who were able to save $240,000 a year per child in 18 years probably fall in the upper middle class or affluent class. This assumes the couple was also able to save for retirement. That simple sum in a savings or investment account alone places one in a small group of individuals. Why are people so defensive about having these funds? This is a good thing. Being able to and being smart enough to do so, is a great accomplishment.
It’s not so much that they are poor, but that to people making :'250, they are invisible.
If a family can write checks over 4 years that total a quarter of a million dollars and still pay for housing AND utilities AND food costs AND transportation AND have a reasonable chance of retiring, they aren’t middle class. They are solidly upper class.
“It’s not so much that they are poor, but that to people making :'250, they are invisible”
Maybe they are invisible to you, but you certainly can’t speak for everyone.
By that definition, (according to the US Census figures) incomes of $100k are upper class. The 25-75% range is $25-99k.
If he’s earning $250k/year, he’s upper class. He’s also apparently foolish, but no economic class has the corner on that. Many of the working poor walk that line every day without the assets to fall back on when they’re laid off and there’s no work to be had. His economic class in 3 months depends on his assets. Has s/he downsized? Do people who make $250k get unemoyment? If so, how much is it and how long do they receive it?
By that definition, people who earn $1 million/year and don’t save any of it are also lower class.
" Do people who make $250k get unemoyment? If so, how much is it and how long do they receive it?"
Certainly they do. They have the same benefits as everyone else, why would they not? Their employers have paid into the system just like everyone else’s has, probably far more than most. They would receive the max amount allowed.