Wil just puttin on a show in here

A couple of things may be informing Wil's viewpoint.

First, if you live in a major metro center (NYC, LA, San Fran, etc.), work as a professional (meaning in finance, law, or as a doctor) in the private sector, went to fancy schools, and are earning $250K mid-career, you may well feel like a professional failure because you will know so many people who are making so much more than you. This is particularly true of NYC, which is the home of 33 year old finance whizzes who make $3-6 million per year. I wish that all the idiots who favor a flat tax would keep that group in mind.

Second, I have lived in NYC for about 20 years. When I was in my mid-20s, other professionals my age speculated that they would need $10 million in liquid assets in order to feel comfortable retiring. As I have gotten older, I have heard many professionals my age cite the same number -- around $10 million. I guess the number remains the same because it is being spread over fewer years.

It may well be a sign of the fall of the Roman Empire, but it is not uncommon to run into people who express one or both views.

Wil would scoff.

This is actually a great way to go. Saves a bundle on the 1st 2 years. Granted, sometimes their credits don't transfer to private schools(which, surprise, have high disparities in both race and class), which can limit some choices cost-wise.

But then, GASP, what would the neighbors or coworkers say if they found out!?! Oh, the shame of going to a CC...just ask Wil.

Of course, there is some stratification/exclusiveness within colleges (ivy league). A name of a school can open up more doors than others.--still a mechanism for social reproduction.

b

Wow, I thought you were older than that. (assuming you went to college soon after HS)

b

Distortion, but true for most everybody. We get caught up in how the folks in our circles are faring and lose perspective of the big picture.

In Virginia, if you earn an associates degree with at least a 3.5 (i think) gpa from a va cc you are guaranteed transfer admission to any Virginia public university (includes uva and William and Mary). I try not to think about how much money I burned by not going that route.

They have that in Washington, too for University of Washington. Not sure if WSU has something similar.

b

On the bigger scale, man think they(and others) are doing better (wealthwise) than they actually are. <that doesn't mean they think they're rich, but it's interesting to note>

The wealth distribution graphic that makes the rounds over and over shows this nicely.


About the top 80% think they're in the top 40%

b

See dude, you're being an ass to me on purpose. There's just no reason for that.

Why do I have to go over the universally agreed upon point that if you have the option, you take the best choice, over taking the only choice?

I went to a community college. I worked full time while going to school. I got a crappy GPA. I struggled during those long 8 years (year, a 4 year degree took me 8, I'm stupid, it's ok). If I have the choice, everything I can do to help my child through those same years will be taken. Every parent would do that if they could. Why do you portray me as some elitist condescending prick?

What parent wouldn't want their child to have it easier than they did, and why do you hold this against me?

This discussion is superstupid. Wanting to define "rich" is as useless as wanting to define "poor". There are way more useful markers of class. When it comes to money it is income derived of labour vs. wealth (or income derived of wealth). When it comes to wealth it is wealth in land vs. wealth in financial assets. When it comes to political power it is indirect power vs. direct power. Pretty sure almost everybody posting in this thread is in the "poor" class in this respect.

You did that on your own.

Among other choice quotes:

Congrats.

b

Alright, you win.

Just get rid of that ****ing "b" at the end of every post it's driving me ****ing crazy.

Exeter to academic probation at Princeton is a well worn path.

While scoffing at Penn State (in this context at least) is ridiculous, I would say that I would not want any of my kids to have to decide their university largely based on what I can and cannot afford. (In some sense this is becoming more of an issue for higher income folks as alot of the best schools have really, really good non loan based aid for even the "comfortably upper middle class")

Dude, no one here is saying you shouldn't send your kids to a private college. No one's saying there's anything wrong with you making loads of money.

Sure. The point is, middle-class people generally don't have the luxury of being able to send their kid anywhere.

Agreed, I think this lack of luxury can (and usually does) extend into families with low six figure incomes.

I wasn't actually scoffing at Penn State. I was more scoffing at the "rape u" comment.

I have no problem with a kid going to a state school. That whole thing just got twisted. I have to go back and read it but I was referring to the rape stuff.

Edit : After reading it, I was more saying taking classes and switching universities wasn't an optimal plan. It works and I did exactly that, but it wasn't optimal. I actually wouldn't want my kid to go to Penn State because of that whole rape thing though.

I know I have more than the majority of people on Earth, and the majority of people in the USA. But I don't "feel" rich. Television and the media have showed us what "rich" is, and I am not one of them. Therefore, I am not rich. /thread

On the topic of television...

Modern Family redefines middle class if you think about it.

Those guys, especially Al Bundy, are solidly UMC and probably rich by most American standards.

But they are the Modern Family... so by definition middle class?

Yeah, I was thinking about this as well (not particularly Modern Family, which is a great example) but about how popular TV families drive alot of the formation of class distinctions, especially for kids. The Simpsons was my example, in the sense that they are portrayed as lower middle class in alot of ways but also live in a fairly large 2 story house in the suburbs. But in a town that is purposely portrayed as Nowhere, USA.

Not sure if this we was mentioned already, but USA Today recently did an analysis where they tried to put a price tag on the "American Dream". It's basically a typical middle-class lifestyle (own a $275k home, own 1 car, 1 vacation a year, internet access, cell phones, etc.). They came up with about $130k.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...ream/11122015/

And if, as they say, only 1 in 8 Americans can actually life that lifestyle, is that middle-class? Maybe in the 60s when inequality wasn't out of control and wages were still right in line with growth, but not today. People have to abuse credit and cut corners to get by.

Lol I just read that. They're including contributing $17500 per year to a retirement account, another $2500 per year for each kid's college fund and another $4000 per year per kid in educational expenses. Also something like $250 per week in groceries with other money for restaurants on top. It's way inflated from what an actual middle class family would need or any American dream I remember hearing about when I grew up.

Lol and the car is a 4 wheel drive SUV to boost the gas and insurance cost. What ever happened to the minivan?

They won't elaborate but something tells me these kids spend a week at disney world every year too

Yeah its pretty bad when USA Today is coming out with fear mongering sensationalist BS.

Is this a slow recovery and are people struggling? Sure but lol @ those estimations. 11k for a SUV a year? RAV4 is like 20k a few years used, after gas/insurance/maintenance probably like 5k yr.

Most people making 130k putup more than 10% for their home as well. Just a lot of leaps in that piece.

A decent minvan like a Honda Odyssey costs more than that SUV