How much you have to earn to be considered middle class in every US state

  • metta

    Posts: 39090

    Apr 06, 2015 8:40 PM GMT
    How much you have to earn to be considered middle class in every US state

    middle-class-cutoff-table%20(1).png

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/middle-class-in-every-us-state-2015-4
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Apr 06, 2015 9:27 PM GMT
    If you're single and not making 100K, you're not middle class. That factors to, 60k(?) in net take home. That's only 5K a month. That's almost unlivable, and literally living paycheck to paycheck. Anything less than 100K annually (gross) is "working class" or "working poor."

    I have nothing against the MANY people who are working class/poor, but let's not delude ourselves.

    Same at the other end. If you count your worth in terms of XYZ dollars per year, you're, at best, "working rich." You have to have a net worth of 1M or more in assets to begin to call yourself 'rich', and I'd argue that 1M isn't what it was a couple decades ago. The new 1M is actually 2M or 3M.

    Single person:
    0-30K, impoverished.
    30K-60K, working poor.
    60K-100, working class.
    100-250, middle class.
    250-700, working rich.
    700K+ annually, "rich" (at least after a few years at it)
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14310

    Apr 06, 2015 9:47 PM GMT
    Svnw688 saidIf you're single and not making 100K, you're not middle class. That factors to, 60k(?) in net take home. That's only 5K a month. That's almost unlivable, and literally living paycheck to paycheck. Anything less than 100K annually (gross) is "working class" or "working poor."

    I have nothing against the MANY people who are working class/poor, but let's not delude ourselves.

    Same at the other end. If you count your worth in terms of XYZ dollars per year, you're, at best, "working rich." You have to have a net worth of 1M or more in assets to begin to call yourself 'rich', and I'd argue that 1M isn't what it was a couple decades ago. The new 1M is actually 2M or 3M.

    Single person:
    0-30K, impoverished.
    30K-60K, working poor.
    60K-100, working class.
    100-250, middle class.
    250-700, working rich.
    700K+ annually, "rich" (at least after a few years at it)
    Well it is obvious to me that I fall into the impoverished category since my yearly income is slightly less than $20,000.icon_sad.gif
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Apr 06, 2015 10:01 PM GMT
    Every year I am, just barely, an average "middle income"
    American here in New Orleans..
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Apr 06, 2015 11:03 PM GMT
    I'm hearing I should make my money in Maryland, and then retire in Mississippi.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Apr 06, 2015 11:32 PM GMT
    Svnw688 saidIf you're single and not making 100K, you're not middle class. That factors to, 60k(?) in net take home. That's only 5K a month. That's almost unlivable, and literally living paycheck to paycheck. Anything less than 100K annually (gross) is "working class" or "working poor."

    I have nothing against the MANY people who are working class/poor, but let's not delude ourselves.

    Same at the other end. If you count your worth in terms of XYZ dollars per year, you're, at best, "working rich." You have to have a net worth of 1M or more in assets to begin to call yourself 'rich', and I'd argue that 1M isn't what it was a couple decades ago. The new 1M is actually 2M or 3M.

    Single person:
    0-30K, impoverished.
    30K-60K, working poor.
    60K-100, working class.
    100-250, middle class.
    250-700, working rich.
    700K+ annually, "rich" (at least after a few years at it)


    I don't think you realize that the cost of living is also different from state to state. $5K a month goes a lot further in some states compared to others.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Apr 06, 2015 11:35 PM GMT
    @CoolArmyDude

    I take your point to heart. But I'd argue it's LESS state to state, and more City to City.

    It costs next to nothing to live in Buffalo, New York (a small city). It costs more to live in Tulsa, Oklahoma (a large city). I was assuming most LGBTs live in a medium, large, or mega city.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 07, 2015 12:51 AM GMT
    "Pew defined middle class households as those earning 67%-200% of a state's median income. "

    Yay! So if everybody's broke, we all get to be middle class!

    They ought to define it in multiples of the housing costs or something.

    By this analysis a "middle class household" is one that shares a one-bedroom apartment with other "middle class households." icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Apr 07, 2015 12:59 AM GMT
    I'm for INCREASING the Federal minimum wage. If it means anything, and is to exist, it must mean a person working FULL TIME can afford a modest apartment, 3 square meals a day, public transportation, clothing, and a birthday cake or new washing machine every now and then.

    RAISE THE WAGE FOR THE AVERAGE WORKING MAN! It'll have a trickle up for those making more than the minimum wage too. It's win/win/win, except for investors. Oh, but wait, the DOW just had its best year....ever, and corporate profits are off the charts. Literally, off the charts.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14310

    Apr 07, 2015 1:11 AM GMT
    Svnw688 said@CoolArmyDude

    I take your point to heart. But I'd argue it's LESS state to state, and more City to OceanicCalifornian Re: I have hot listed you 3:37 PM N N

    It costs next to nothing to live in Buffalo, New York (a small city). It costs more to live in Tulsa, Oklahoma (a large city). I was assuming most LGBTs live in a medium, large, or mega city.
    FYI, Buffalo is not a small city. Granted the central city's population has declined from 581,000 in 1950 to 262, 000 in 2010, the Buffalo-Niagara Metro Area is still around 1.2 million in population. Buffalo is a pretty easy and pleasant city to live in and yes it is relatively cheap when compared to other cities both its size and larger.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 07, 2015 7:21 AM GMT
    Damn. The first quarter of 2015 is over and I barely earned $3,000. I guess I need a raise.icon_lol.gif