patrick.net

lb51 says

In some cities, a $100,000 six figure salary for a family of four does not go very far.

If that's so, then $100k doesn't go much farther for a single. I know kids are expensive, but they aren't that expensive.

Zoom image

Now, housing costs should really be a constant regardless of whether or not you have kids. A middle class house costs the same for a single person as a married couple with two kids. So subtract the "housing" part from the real cost since you're paying that anyway. Also subtract "education" since it's free and child care is something you choose to buy. You can raise your own kids yourself.

By counting vertical pixels, that means the real cost is 53.4% of what the above graph says. So that most expensive kid, the one on the right, should really cost only $7225.02 per year. If your kids cost more than that, tell them to get a job.

Your kid can pay for him/herself at minimum wage working only 19 hours and 10 minutes a week. I believe that Huntington Moneyworth III, Esq has a factory with openings.

Dan8267 says

Once again, I find that I'm referencing the following chart.

Poor is the 0 to 20 percentile

Middle class is the 20 to 98 percentile

Upper middle class is 98 to 99 percentile

Rich is 99 to 99.5 percentile

Ultra-rich is 99.5 to 100 percentile

By the way, for those who say taxing the rich can't solve our debt problem... The area under the curve, i.e. the integral of this curve, is the income that can be taxed. Notice that most of the area under the curve is in the top 2% and a healthy portion is in the top 1%.

Hey, you did not finish the curve. There is a hugh area under the portion of the curvebetween 99.9% and 100%. It's more than 20% of total national income.

Bellingham Bob says

2) raise taxes on parasitical wealth and not productive wealth?

No. Because that will allow parasits to decide which wealth is parasitic.

tts says

>michaelsch says

But this is still in the diamond model - very much outdated in USA.

As a measure of economic class the "diamond model" isn't very good since things get so lop sided at the top by so very few people.

That's exactly what I wrote in the second part of the message. When you deal with percentiles of income distribution rather than percentiles of population you get to a pyramid rather than a diamond.

benviews says

would be a fair definition of middle class

it depends on individual perception.

no matter how much money you have, if you feel you
still need to work to support your lifestyle, then you are
in middle class zone.

but if you don't have any money , and you do need to work to pay basic bills, then you are not middle class, you are poor.

Dan8267 says

Upper middle class is 98 to 99 percentile
Rich is 99 to 99.5 percentile
Ultra-rich is 99.5 to 100 percentile

By the way, for those who say taxing the rich can't solve our debt problem... The area under the curve, i.e. the integral of this curve, is the income that can be taxed. Notice that most of the area under the curve is in the top 2% and a healthy portion is in the top 1%.

That's a great description using the chart. Thanks!

By the way, what are the break points you are using at 98, 99, 99.5, 99.9? Where'd you get them? It seems like you have 2 other points -- what are those?

Yep, all the discussion about who's in and who's out of the middle class works well for that construct they prop up to distract the rest of Us from Them, the Super Rich. To Them, we are all the same, we're not them.

Regarding child expenses: The cost of a kid is much higher than Dan8267 indicates.

If you have a one-parent household, there must be childcare during the first five years of life, else there will be no household income. If you have a two-parent household, raising your own kid yourself means dropping or reducing one (or both) incomes--there cannot be two full-time careers in the absence of childcare. And childcare alone easily hits $11,000 (up to $25,000) per year for one child around here. The alternative to childcare would be to drop one career, not just for a few years but maybe forever--it is not always possible to get back in.

Once the kids hit elementary school, childcare costs are still significant if the parent(s) need to be employed full-time. Even given a public school, there will be a need to pay for aftercare (around $700 per month around here) as well as Thanksgiving, Winter Break, Spring Break, and Summer camps (usually $200-300 per week here).

We are not even considering food, clothing, diapers, toys, musical instruments, mandatory donations to public schools, the extra room in your house where the kid will live, or the cost of the safer neighborhood and the better school.

Let's not minimize--kids are incredibly costly.

@John B.

>I think the change has been from an American Middle Class with everyone else in the world much poorer, to a global Middle Class.

You have some good insight here.

American, the more chatter from Us "everyone else" (vs Super RIch) about "who's in, who's out" of the middle class, more chits in the gotcha! column of the Super Rich.