uh there are still loads of people living on like 30k/yr. you 100k people will fucking live
Over $100K ain't chump change, but that also isn't the line where "upper income" starts.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/heres-minimum-salary-required-be-considered-upper-class-2025
The Pew Research Center defines upper-income households as having incomes greater than $169,800, based on three-person households. For a household with a single earner and no additional income, that $169,800 is the minimum salary required to be upper class. With two earners, each with the same salary, that minimum would be $84,900 each.
chunes@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Nougat@fedia.io 3 weeks ago
I never suggested otherwise. I was pointing out how disconnected from reality the really “upper income” CEO is.
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The only people you should be concerned about are the ones in the 270k/yr and up tax bracket.
100k/yr isn’t enough in a lot of places.
DireTech@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
This has gotta be some AI drivel. It even tried to say upper class in San Francisco starts at $69k so unless they’re talking about 1930 this is nonsense.
Reyali@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
And the difference between that level of “upper class” vs the truly wealthy is insane.
Unless you’re in places like CA or NYC, $170k allows for a very comfortable life. It’s nothing to scoff at and it is absolutely beyond what most people in this country have.
But when thinking of the “upper class,” I think most people picture lush lives. Mansions, yachts, foreign vacations, private schools, house staff, etc.
I don’t think most people imagine someone who lives in a nice suburban neighborhood, saves enough money for retirement that they actually expect to retire in their 60s, and takes a modest vacation every year. But that’s closer to what $170k gets you. It’s comfortable and it’s a life most people would kill to have. But it’s a whole lot closer to a stereotyped “middle class” experience than it is to what most people imagine “upper class” to look like.
MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I was curious how many U.S. households earn at least $170k, and this website responded to asking about 170k by saying that the 80th percentile is $165,068.
yeather@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
So the top 20%, seems a reasonable metric to consider wealthy.
MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
I’d go with 20% as upper class. I think of “wealthy” as having money that lets you come and go as you please, just buy a fancy car if you want without really having to think about the finances of it.
There is a D&D-type game that measures wealth as a rating of 0 to 5, and you can make essentially unlimited purchases of items costing up to 1 below your wealth rating essentially at-will. So someone can buy a sandwich whenever, someone else could take a decent vacation/cruise whenever, another could buy a decent car without worry, one could buy a nice house like it’s nothing, and finally someone who could buy a mansion or private jet without real concern. Those in the couple-hundred-million to billions range.
I’d draw the Wealthy line somewhere in the mid-4 range on that scale. You could also consider it as “the point where safe/moderate investments could continue supplying a family plenty of comfort without working for two+ generations”.
Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
You lost me at “vacation”, like that’s a real thing? (/s)