nobody is calling you rich, FFS. Quit being so damn defensive about nothing and read the thread

I was being condescending because one person annoyed me in the thread by making a comment that insulted me, and for that I apologize.

Like I said, I don't have a problem with things like this, but when you have options you usually go with the better one. When you don't have options you simply take the only one you can. I did exactly that. I'm not ashamed or feel bad about it, if anything I'm proud of it.

We must be reading different threads, because that's not how I feel at all. I think you should re-read the last few pages.

A good friend of mine from high school did this. She was an amazingly diligent worker, bought a car with cash she saved, did community college, did her last 2 years in Michigan, did grad work in Australia, and now works as a marine biologist in waikiki. Pretty sick life.

Also, lol you were at Michigan 04-08?

You think you're middle of the road. I'm telling you that fortunately for you, you aren't. Despite you yourself proving this to us several times, you still think that you're struggling to get by just like the rest of America. Your lack of perspective is pretty staggering

Like I said, we're reading two different threads. I never said I was middle of the road, and I don't struggle, but there are many things that are very much out of my reach.

Wil,

No one has called you rich ITT. I feel like you may be referring to me, but I would like to clarify I merely called you insecure and delusional. I stand by that.

<--- UM 2000-2004 here. Can we get some precise locations of exactly where everyone was in 2004 to determine if we were all in the same classroom at the same time?

This is maybe fit for the Michigan thread in the SE Single Team subforum.

I graduated in '01, so maybe Dvault and I could possibly have crossed paths IRL.

Per CNN Money, 70k in Lincoln = 94k in Philadelphia

The thread feels the need to prove this ad infinitum.

Also wil really really likes talking about how much $$ he makes. This is not the first thread and I doubt it will be the last.

Historically, the middle class has referred not to those who are close to the median in living standards, but those who are neither part of the ruling upper class, nor common peasants or laborers (working/lower class). In this sense, it's not contradictory for those who are in the top 5% or whatever economically to consider themselves middle class. There's been much derision of yuppies who consider themselves middle class proper, as opposed to upper middle class, but historically, that's exactly what middle class meant. It's not necessary for the middle class to include the economic median, nor for it to exist at all.

If anything, the definition has been diluted downward to include those who are part of the working class, I suppose, to reflect the spread of the bourgeois mentality and general increase in discretionary income and to accommodate aspirational self-assessment. Using a more historical definition, the median person in the United States probably qualifies not as middle class, but as working/lower class, just as the median person did when the term originated. Upper middle class seems to be a term made up to mean middle class minus working class people whom we feel like we have to call middle class because that's how they view themselves.

A big part of the right wing con has been making people feel they are better off than they are - having working class people feel "middle class" has probably harmed the progressive cause by allowing them to align politically with their aspirational peers, instead of their actual economic peers. Many of you may see Wil as delusional for not considering himself well-off despite being able to afford or take for granted a bunch of things that are out of reach for average Americans but I'm not sure that's his problem. The problem to me, is that I don't think he makes enough money to look down on community colleges, state schools, public schools or retiring with a million dollars.

lol olds

I like to defend the position. I know many others in the same position and they generally feel the same way. It's not some sort of conspiracy or some underhanded motive. Every time this argument comes up it's always heavily one-sided.

I was. I'm not delusional, I just believe most of you don't know what you are talking about because you are not in the position. I still feel a lot of pressure that it seems like people think wouldn't exist. That's not the case.

Another point is I don't know where this sentiment of "looking down" came from. I've done some pretty crappy jobs, and I hang around with many people who primarily work in the service industry (crappy jobs) who I consider good friends. I don't look down on anyone.

Yeah, Exeter should at least get you into Princeton even if you can't quite make the cut at a real school.

In 04 I spent like two months in classes before I had to drop due to illness.

You entered a thread about the "rich" to constantly talk about yourself and about how much pressure you have in your position and that nobody knows what it's like to be you and you talk about how you expect to retire being worth 8 figures, afford to raise your daughter in a major Metro city and fully pay for her education, etc all in a pretty disgusting and offensive "woe is me" manner. You have told me to stop working at Walmart. You have scoffed at the notion of sending your daughter to Penn State University. Not only are you delusional and insecure but you seem to be pretty narcissistic as well.

You're taking the entire thing out of context and purposefully so. The discussion started around a certain income level, not specifically about me, and there were other people involved in it. I actually really think you just have no idea what you are talking about. And the last comment is just lol. Good for you.

I apologized for the Walmart comment.

What exactly do you mean by "I actually really think you just have no idea what you are talking about" and why do you think that?

I think your purposefully being argumentative or fail to see points I'm trying to make. I think it's hard to judge in this particular case unless people have had some sort of experience with it. From your comments, it seems that is the case.

What else would I have meant?

Edit : these discussions about money are utterly ridiculous. They always turn into the same stupid arguments. "Blah blah what the hell do you spend X on?!" People try to explain it, in quite a bit of detail, and people still handwave it as some sort of extravagant lifestyle. Rinse, repeat.

Do you think I don't know what it's like to make the amount of money you make? That's certainly not the case.

Do you think I don't understand the costs and expenses involved in living in a major USA city? That's certainly not the case.

Do you think I don't know what it's like to have societal pressure to keep up with my peers? That's certainly not the case.

From your comments it seems like you have issues with not being satisfied and never having enough. This is a very a common observation of American society and culture and you appear to be addicted to the pressure and stress of your lifestyle.

Relax man, take a little bit out of your projected 8 figure retirement and try to live a less stressed and pressure filled life.

Ya, no. As mentioned earlier, I'm close to your age and income. Your life isn't some mystery that no one can possibly understand.

I'm misunderstood. In general, I'm a happy jovial constantly drunk individual. I like my life, my wife, my child. That isn't the issue. The issue is I think its abhorrent how many people in the US struggle.

As I've said earlier in the thread I think its absolutely disgusting that two people with entry level (or slightly higher) professional salaries can be in the top 25% of income earners. Really, where does all this money go? It's obviously going to the companies/investors, and not the workers. It burns me up to see hardworking people struggle for basics while the companies pay slave wages and constantly strive for higher productivity with less pay. I think it's unfair and immoral.

Along with that I believe some people have resentment towards people with good incomes, and I don't think that's justified. Sometimes it just annoys me and it might come out wrong.

Would you say the majority of people who are usually critical in these discussions share your experiences or no? It seems to me it leans much more towards the latter.

Henry,

1. Your analogy is bad. The basal metabolic rate (i.e., basic caloric requirement) of the average human is an objective measurement. So when we say that both groups are underfed, we have an objectively determinable point for our frame of reference. This is not the case with wealth.

2. Hashing out what exactly constitutes wealthy is a large part of what is going on in this thread. I'll grant that it is not being done well, but that is actually what is happening. Unfortunately, unlike basal metabolic rate, many specific components of a "wealthy life" are subjective. So, coming up with a consensus on what those are is going to be more difficult. That's partly why this thread is such a pile of AIDS, but I think most understand the problem.