Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

blog.sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#41

Post by clarkm »

anovikov wrote: post #38
waterlesscloud wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you're right. $250 k would only put you in the top 2.32% in 2011. Let's be absolutely clear here. A six figure household income puts you in the top 20% of the US. You are not middle class. You are in fact upper class.

A class is not about what you can buy, or what people think of you. It is about SOURCE of your income, not where it ends up. The concept of class was invented by Karl Marx, a person belongs to some class based on his/her relation to the means of production. There are 3 factors of production: labor, capital, and land (that final one is of much less importance now than it used to be in Marx's era, but still). So there…

> The concept of class was invented by Karl Marx, a person belongs to some class based on his/her relation to the means of production.

Please. Class and caste have been around since the dawn of civilization.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#42

Post by [deleted] »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #33
patio11 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There exists a lot of literature about class, which is a very fluid term. I think to the extent that people react really negatively when you suggest $100k is upper class, they're reacting to other associations they have with that term. For example, educational attainment or social advantage are also class markers, and many people at $100k won't particularly have them. For another, material advantages of being wealthy…

I fully realize that objectively wealthy people want to perceive themselves as middle class. But come on, the fact that your career path doesn't tolerate 2 week vacations doesn't move you down the percentile ladder. As far as your last paragraph, that's my point. If you're making six figures, you're "rich" in America, still, whether you want to accept it or not. To think you're not is to be very, very out of touch.

[deleted]

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#44

Post by patio11 »

clarkm wrote: post #40
patio11 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There exists a lot of literature about class, which is a very fluid term. I think to the extent that people react really negatively when you suggest $100k is upper class, they're reacting to other associations they have with that term. For example, educational attainment or social advantage are also class markers, and many people at $100k won't particularly have them. For another, material advantages of being wealthy…

The fluidity of a term like "middle class" really does muddle conversations. That's why SWPL is one of my favorite neologisms. The fact there is a definitive list of SWPL characteristics makes it so much more descriptive than other, more ambiguous terms like yuppie.

It's great, right?

For folks who are confused by this: SWPL is the acronym for Stuff White People Like, which is a blog. It basically described (by means of caricature) an emerging social class in America of urban, socially liberal, upper middle class professionals. Kinda like "yuppie" but with acid tests more appropriate to 2012.

"SWPL" has subsequently been appropriated to describe that social class by commentators on the Internet. It's not a perfect map to the territory but fits it closely enough to have significant predictive power.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#45

Post by klipt »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #30
anovikov wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was 350K in 2009, in the midst of a crisis (incomes of people like that have a lot to do with performance-based bonuses, stock appreciation and the like, so they dipped a lot in the crisis, much more than oridinary people's). In 2012 it was already $560K. And the definition for upper class as being top 1% is arbitrary, it is in fact invented by Obama during his first presidential campaign, solely for finger-pointi…

"Upper class is people other than us." Go ahead, enter your household income here, find out where you really fall. http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2013/09/what-is-yo... Hint- if you're a techie in SF, you're reaaaaallll near the top.

US rank isn't very informative though. It doesn't take into account cost of living, or (assuming they're using pre-tax salary) even the difference in state taxes.

A comfortable salary in Houston would be much less comfortable in San Francisco because you're suddenly paying 10% of your income to state taxes and paying 4x as much rent.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#46

Post by jedmeyers »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #33
patio11 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There exists a lot of literature about class, which is a very fluid term. I think to the extent that people react really negatively when you suggest $100k is upper class, they're reacting to other associations they have with that term. For example, educational attainment or social advantage are also class markers, and many people at $100k won't particularly have them. For another, material advantages of being wealthy…

I fully realize that objectively wealthy people want to perceive themselves as middle class. But come on, the fact that your career path doesn't tolerate 2 week vacations doesn't move you down the percentile ladder. As far as your last paragraph, that's my point. If you're making six figures, you're "rich" in America, still, whether you want to accept it or not. To think you're not is to be very, very out of touch.

There is a big difference between making 100k in salary and 100k from investments. If you have to work to put food on the table then you are definitely not the upper class. I have read about a good middle class marker recently - if you have or will have a mortgage, then you are middle class. Upper class don't need one and lower class won't get approved for one.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#47

Post by Element_ »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #25
anovikov wrote: post #21

I think it's some definition of 'middle class' coming from the 1970s and never inflation-adjusted since then. A person making $35K is anything but a middle class in every place i seen, let alone Silicon Valley. Maybe, a lower middle in totally clapped out East European countries like Ukraine.

You can live middle-classly on 40-60k in most of America still. Techies seem to be anxious to claim middle-class status, but if you're in a 6-figure household family, you're still pushing upper class compared to nearly anywhere. And the statistical fact is that if you're $250 k in the US in household income, you are in fact the 1%.

There was a segment on PBS news hour yesterday that mentioned police officers in California are making 100-250k+ a year and are able to retire with 6 figure pensions & full union benefits. I think most people would class policing as a middle class job.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#48

Post by eaurouge »

billyjobob wrote: post #35
anovikov wrote: post #21

I think it's some definition of 'middle class' coming from the 1970s and never inflation-adjusted since then. A person making $35K is anything but a middle class in every place i seen, let alone Silicon Valley. Maybe, a lower middle in totally clapped out East European countries like Ukraine.

The American English definition of 'middle class' is bizarre and seems to include anyone who has a job and isn't homeless. The correct English meaning of the word is someone who works for themselves rather than a boss in a profession which has a guild to ensure exclusivity, e.g. doctor or lawyer. Or the owner of a small business which employs other people. It's mostly inherited upon birth and has little to do with in…

I think it's bizarre that in England your status in society is based mostly on whether you won or lost the birth lottery.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#49

Post by DanBC »

eaurouge wrote: post #48
billyjobob wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The American English definition of 'middle class' is bizarre and seems to include anyone who has a job and isn't homeless. The correct English meaning of the word is someone who works for themselves rather than a boss in a profession which has a guild to ensure exclusivity, e.g. doctor or lawyer. Or the owner of a small business which employs other people. It's mostly inherited upon birth and has little to do with in…

I think it's bizarre that in England your status in society is based mostly on whether you won or lost the birth lottery.

Do you think it's bizarre that it is more true for the US?

EDIT: accidentally downvoted you. Sorry.

Re: Middle class leaving San Francisco, census says

#50

Post by eaurouge »

DanBC wrote: post #49
eaurouge wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's bizarre that in England your status in society is based mostly on whether you won or lost the birth lottery.

Do you think it's bizarre that it is more true for the US? EDIT: accidentally downvoted you. Sorry.

I don't think it's more true in the US. It's easier to get into the best universities in the US than it is in the UK. If you manage to make it, (for the most part) no one cares who your parents or grand parents were. In the UK these things matter to the point of absurdity. In the UK, the system was rigged centuries ago; here in the US our rigged system is still very much in its infancy, relatively speaking of course.
Post reply on HN