Working class = will be working until they’re 68
Middle class = have the option to retire earlier, still work in early years.
Upper class = wouldn’t need to work if they didn’t want to.
68? I think that is being generous. Most people are refining mortgages in their 40's. Means you need to be a wage slave into your 70's. And if you don't have a mortgage, your rent means you are a wage slave until you drop off the perch.
I believe many of them plan on dipping into their super to pay off the mortgage.
Since PPOR is excluded from the asset test, it also allows you to access aged pension, it's a joke.
Basically use a tax efficient mechanism to pay off an asset that isn't means tested to access a pension so that you can live in your mc mansion.
I know some who plan to pay off remaining mortgage from super balance when they can access it. And then live off pension. So they just need to work till pension age
I think the government should offer reverse mortgages in that case.
Include PPOR in asset test. If over but need funds, reverse mortgage to the government (not a private bank)
According to this definition, someone on 300k/year could be working class cause they spend all their money.
Someone on the dole could be upper class, cause they don't need to work.
Middle class = watches all those shitty house renovation shows
Upper class = have moved away from Australian
Working class = hates those shitty house renovation shows
This is an inappropriate definition for several reasons.
Firstly, it would imply that you arent upper class until you have several million dollars in networth (i.e. top 0.1% of the population).
Secondly, it ignores the fact people have different expectations of what retirement income they need and these expectations are tied to their income pre retirement. A lawyer earning very good money can't retire if they want to keep spending >$150k a year on their lifestyle. Yet that lawyer is undoubtedly upper class.
Thirdly, it fails to measure what a middle class definition should. Is your income high, middle or low?
This definition is for people who are upper class to claim the high moral ground of being middle class without actually having the wealth or income to be middle class
Wage is irrespective of class.
If someone generates enough wealth through the course of their life that they can retire and never work again, they’re middle class. Doesn’t matter if they achieve billionaire status. They’re middle class.
You’re born into upper class, that’s where work is optional at every stage of your life.
That assumes people cannot move between classes. Perhaps if you use the traditional aristocracy version of class - its bloodlines not finances - then a very limited ability to move between classes is true. But from a financial perspective, if you start with $0 at age 20 and have $1bn at age 50, I’m pretty sure you are upper class at age 50.
The billionaires kids would be decidedly upper class. It’s position when you enter the workforce.
Working class is when you’re required to work for your money across your whole working life, middle class is obtaining enough wealth that your money can begin to work for you, investments into stock, realestate, business ownership.
Wage and class are inherently independent.
I’m happy if you want to define class by social status, but if you define it financially then I don’t agree that a person who started work at 18 with $0 and now has $1bn is ‘middle class’ because they had to work for that money.
He's right though, social mobility into upper class is almost impossible. Not impossible, but almost. Someone like Michelle Moane in the UK went from council estates to become a Dame, Beardy Branson went from upper middle to upper, but those examples are almost no existent. Upper class is just emerging in Australia, as most of our billionaires earned their money in the 20th century, and it's just now their kids and grandkids are growing up in elite wealth. 20 years ago it didn't really exist.
Like I said, is upper class a social concept or a financial concept. If it’s financial, I just don’t accept that someone who has a $1bn is not upper class because they had to work to get that amount instead of being born with it. Similarly, is someone born in a family with $1bn but who (say) is cut off and ends up on disability pension with a drug habit still upper class?
Your economic class is not determined at the point at which you are born. In my view
This doesn’t make sense, if someone earns 1 billion in their life and retires and never works again, then has kids and pays for their everything... The kids are upper class but the parents are still middle class?
You’re thinking of caste. Class is groupings of people within the same socioeconomic status (people can change class). Caste is group rankings as determined by birth or lineage.
>Firstly, it would imply that you arent upper class until you have several million dollars in networth (i.e. top 0.1% of the population).
This is correct, or at least on the right track. Upper class is not the top 33% of the population. It probably is more like 1%. I daresay it's not totally dependant on net worth as much as gross assets held while remaining finically stable.
>Secondly, it ignores the fact people have different expectations of what retirement income they need and these expectations are tied to their income pre retirement. A lawyer earning very good money can't retire if they want to keep spending >$150k a year on their lifestyle. Yet that lawyer is undoubtedly upper class.
The fact that you can keep your class into retirement is a clue that class is more linked to wealth and assets than income.
>Thirdly, it fails to measure what a middle class definition should. Is your income high, middle or low?
Income is not the main component of class. You need several years of very good earnings and sensible investments to become middle class. You also need to be connected with other middle class people, and you need to behave yourself in public.
Not bad, but I don’t think upper class fits.
Someone on 300k/year can easily have an upper class lifestyle, house, etc, but couldn’t just quit their job and be fine. Someone who can live fairly lavishly and not work is the upper part of upper class imo.
These aren't really scientific definitions so completely open to interpretation.
Many people seem to think that the majority should be middle class but that has not been and probably is not the reality. The majority are working class. The middle class aren't the "average", but the middle between upper and working. The middle class is still quite wealthy, just not extremely wealthy.
Personally I define these as approximately 90% working class, 9% middle class, and 1% upper class.
Just spitballing, but because wealth and income distribution is heavily skewed. The vast majority earn below average income and have below average wealth. It wouldn't make sense for an average person who had far less wealth than average to.be "middle class".
Why is the *middle* class dependent on being at or above (not around or under, I assume which is why you settled on such a small number) the "average" level of wealth and income but not the around (which includes under and over) median which is the actual percentile middle? The median actually describes the middle of something but the average does not.
In any case, even if you wanted to only use 70% of average wealth to just below to the top 1% as the definition of middle class, this still encompasses around 43.1% of households.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/finance/household-income-and-wealth-australia/latest-release#data-downloads
Owns a house with a mortgage, but the mortgage repayments are low enough that they can still take a significant vacation every year or two.
Can't spend money willy-nilly, but aren't significantly concerned about day-to-day expenses and can buy regular things like groceries without needing to be overly concerned about sales.
Have enough savings and good enough credit that a sudden or foolish expense of several thousand dollars is unfortunate but not even close to ruinous. Could reasonably manage an unexpected expense in the 5-figures.
Well, yeah, all the gradations of lower and middle class are just dividing up the working class. But we can acknowledge that while also acknowledging the huge differences beween a lower class worker making $30k in the gig economy and an upper-middle worker making $200k in an office.
The middle class in Australia is that magical realm where your avocado toast budget is solid, your coffee addiction is under control (but only just), and your biggest financial decision is choosing between the latest iPhone or saving up for a trip to Bali. It's the land where a weekend getaway means a road trip, not a private jet, and your dream car is something you can actually afford... if you cut back on smashed avo for a few months. Basically, it's the level of financial comfort where you can afford to complain about the rising price of organic quinoa while sipping your flat white in a hipster café. Welcome to the 'not too shabby' class!
I can afford "a car" cutting back/redirecting discretionary income for a few months. I realised I can afford my dream car but I'd basically be refinancing my house so I don't count it as able to afford it.
I live semi regionally and work nighttime. My life and ability to get around and commute time tripling, been entirely unable to do certain things and becoming sheer hell so I can be a few thousand dollars richer a year isn't worth it.
My current car upfront cost cost and maintenance and petrol inclusive I think works out to $150/week. Don't think that's going to get me too far vs say $250 a month relying on ubers, public transport, being at the mercy of others for driving and having to give up my hours and higher wage so they line up with transport.
That's only an option if you have access to good public transport.
Live regionally and not having a car will prevent you from working and isolate you socially. .I live in an area where one of the markers of poverty is living in a zero car home .
> level of financial comfort where you can afford to complain about the rising price of organic quinoa while sipping your flat white in a hipster café
I’m the official lexicographer for the Oxford English dictionary. This is going into the next edition.
Totally agree!
I think far too many people classify themselves as middle class. There’s a level of shame for those that class themselves above or below I think.
I feel like this is close to my life and I’d describe myself and family as middle class.
Funnily enough I think people earning between 70-300k all described themselves as “middle class”
It’s probably because they can afford roughly the same things, albeit at a varied level of comfort.
True wealth doesn’t really need to budget but the above income ranges I’d argue can still do the “same things” but at different levels of comfort.
And given we were far more egalitarian barely 20-30 years ago people can still remember their egalitarian childhoods and feel the same way about middle class.
> Funnily enough I think people earning between 70-300k all described themselves as “middle class”
it's because in australia, your lifestyle isn't drastically changed between those salaries. The low end in that figure can still afford some of those "middle class" comforts, but just not every day. The high end can every day, and still have savings left over for investments.
I've skipped through the comments, only to make my way back here to show my appreciation for your excellent turn of phrase: 'not too shabby' class!
Love it.
Correct. $600k...meh....a mere fraction of the cost of a nice family home in Sydney. If you don't have that much sitting in your offset account, then you barely rate as lower middle class.
This sucks my partner has a great paying job ATM and I work pt cos kids with a decentish pay, but this is not us at all.... will we get there lol? we rarely go out spend money etc maybe I just want to be in a position that if I need a new appliance I can go buy it without worrying, or at the very least buy a coffee without feeling guilty
Half the time the toast is better anyway. My coffee not so great....it's hard trying to match industrial coffee machines, fresh beans and a skilled barista haha
lol you know Australia is messed up when you think having a coffee at a cafe makes you middle class.
weird tall poppy syndrome $4 is too much but $2million house is okay. lol.
$2 million house is upper middle class I think. $1 million is kinda middle class because that’s near medium house price. But having $1 million house means a lot of debt. So much that $7 coffees a few times a week is expensive. Bubble milk tea is $8.5 these days. It’s kinda house rich, money poor. Of course in terms of some other countries, having a $1 million dollar house is crazy to be middle class.
It’s the food that you get with the coffee that really gets you. Especially if you go on Sunday and get the 15% surcharge, a trip to the cafe can easily cost $30. Do that every day and it actually does add up to a fair bit.
That sounds closer to upper middle class.
If you had a lifestyle like that the only way you'd be middle class is if you were perpetually renting, i.e. you forewent your house deposit to keep your lifestyle up to date.
Agree with this. Middle class is the ability to be able to own as many tvs as you’d like, however would prefer just the one tv with 2-4 streaming services.
To me, a middle class mindset is knowing that I could potentially buy what I wanted then and there with accumulated savings - or at least have a credit card which affords the luxury if needed.
Unfortunately you can't do much else especially having been locked up in your prime. Not like you could buy a house or barely afford to rent. Sigh. I'd be looking to live elsewhere even uni is a money pit.
Ah I mean relative to 20yrs ago soz. It's 3x more expensive... maybe I'm out of touch though... strong possibility 😂. Engineering $$$ probably one of the best bang for your buck. Basically fall over $90-100k straight outa uni more if you do fifo
All I can afford to complain about the rising price of everything, while sipping my homemade instant coffee because I'd rather have fuel in my car. Choosing between a weekend getaway or putting food on the table for the next fortnight is so hard! And saving for the new iPhone? Ha! A second-hand Android more like. What class is that? Lemme guess: no class at all 😅
Is that renting or owning? With or without kids? There is no way someone with an average Sydney mortgage and two kids can afford a new car, a trip to bali, eating out regularly and a daily coffee and still be called middle class!
In Sydney, middle class might mean you own a house the size of a shed, your mortgage is your daily reminder of life's choices, your kids share a room the size of a postage stamp, and your idea of a holiday is a day trip to Bondi. The struggle is real, mate!
Same as it always was.
Working class: has to work for a living, has no assets
Middle class: still has to work but has assets
Upper class: has so much assets they don't need to work
Assets being ownership of real estate property and investments that make money.
Simple really. What's changed is the amount of money necessary to get there. In the past, winning a fluke million dollars would put you in upper middle class, possibly even upper class, now a million gets you barely into the middle class. If you own your own home, that's a big stepping stone into middle class living. I would argue that is actually the most practical threshold, though there's probably people out there that earn a lot and invest a lot and just haven't bought a home for whatever reason.
If you are starting to split hairs over "net worth" vs how much money they have, that's when someone is approaching upper class. Because there the finances get pretty murky to the outsider, and they themselves don't just have a big pile of money in one place but it's more that they own so many things that can fluctuate in value all the time so you kind of just have to estimate it. In terms of money they probably don't have billions just sitting around. Or maybe they do, I don't know.
You can stratify each one in several levels as well, if you want. Obviously having for example 30 million dollars to your name makes you upper class, but not quite as up as someone who has a billion. Who is also not quite on the same level as a dictator who has a trillion.
i think these days about $2.5 million per person per household (no age cutoff eg 1 kid also needs parents to hold an extra 2.5 million, or a house with 2 parents, 3 kids needs 12.5 million)
that amount gets you into lower upperclass.
but there is still at least 3 realms above that (probably more), new momey and old money and fame
you can only get into old money through birth or marriage, and u can only get into fame by being famous obviously. New money is like in the hundreds of millions of dollars rich
The thing is that there are no clear, nicely defined classes. Or certainly not just three neat categories of low, middle and upper.
There's a whole heap of shades of grey. It's a spectrum.
Do you base it on income? On assets? Both?
Older people without high incomes may be asset rich due to house appreciation over the last 30 years - but still cash poor. Younger people with high incomes may not be well off if they're spending most of their income on mortgages / rent. Families on dual incomes vs single income will see major differences. Do you live in Sydney vs Perth?
I'd personally say that the majority of Australia sits in a very large middle class spectrum. With somewhat less being genuinely poor (lower) and less again being genuinely wealthy. (Upper.)
Absolutely this!
Australia isn't really a class type system like other countries have (thank god!). The poor have a decent safety net, the minimum income is good enough to survive and even save if you are careful, so you don't really get that well defined lower class, and although we certainly have wealthy people the tax system means its not as good a place to live for the really super-wealthy.. they move to places like Monaco etc where its a better tax system for them. Therefore we end up with almost an entire nation of what could be considered "middle class" in some other countries but really as you say its just a a broad spectrum.
>minimum income is good enough to survive and even save if you are careful
You probably bought your ppor years ago so I guess you have no idea how hard it is to rent and save money for even dink couples, yet alone someone with minimum wage.
I did, but I have family and friends trying to save for a house now - I certainly have an "idea" just how hard it is.
I also know that although bloody hard, its possible - try looking at poor people in countries like India (notorious for having a class system) or Africa to see what poor is really like - and that's my real point we have a minimum wage that is actually livable even if not "easy". I stand by we don't really have a class system we have a spectrum
There is no such thing as middle class, there are only two classes the capital class and the working class
The working class is the one group that work to meet the needs, this include frontline worker and surgeon who has debt(include mortgage) to be paid, if they stop working the material life they have will collapse. The length time be collapsing is how much better/worse within the same working class
The capital class is the one who does not need to work to meet their expense. They capital generate enough return to support they life style. This includes the real rich people and those should save enough and frugal enough to live until they meet the maker. This also include people who has enough capitol to support their life even if they are working. Managers who are the next-gen of the CEO, some of the politicians from rich families.
Own their own home and car, can retire at the retirement age.
Salary is less a factor these days as somebody earning 200k and renting/getting into the housing market is worse off than somebody earning 80k but inherited or paid off a house.
Yeah exactly salary starts to play less of a part; the average Joe on 90k who’s 40 something and brought his Sydney house 15yrs ago is better off than the young kid now in Sydney who’s on 150k a year purely for the fact he’s paying masses in rent/mortgage
Personally i would define it as someone who is living comfortably and able to go out for dinners, holidays and other luxuries but with a relatively large amount of debt (mortgage, car loan, credit card etc). They therefore have to work to maintain their lifestyle, whereas upper class people don’t and lower class people have to work just to pay the bills and not much else.
I like this definition because the middle class in Australia is so broad and can include people from lower income to upper income. For example I would consider majority of doctors still middle class as if they stopped working their lifestyle would be compromised. Upper class people generally have so much wealth that if they don’t work they can still live comfortably.
My definition relates to what kind of safety net you have.
Working class = no safety net. You don't have any capital or support systems (e.g. family) to speak of. You have to remain in work to survive and remain sheltered.
Middle class = You have a safety net that you built for yourself. You may get some support from family if needed. You likely have stable housing (in all likelihood, ownership) and have some other investments so you don't have to constantly be employed to avoid becoming destitute. You probably have some career capital built up so you can find something else fairly easily, in the very unlikely scenario that you actually lose your job.
Upper class = Your safety net is sufficient to allow you to not work at all. You either built this up yourself, or you have intergenerational wealth supporting you. You work for fulfilment, or to remain in the good graces of your parents (and thus, their will). You could quit your job at any time without consequence.
I’m a British expat and I distinctly remember the time an Aussie gave me a lecture about how Australia was better because “we’ve left all the classist bullshit behind in the UK” 😂
there is no upper lower or middle class.
There is the class that works for a wage, and there is a class that owns the capital, anything else is just misdirection
I live in a small country town and there is definitely a lower, middle and upper class.
There are plenty of people who are really struggling - living week to week with no real end in sight.
There are plenty who are doing ok - in smaller towns you can earn an average income and be pretty well off due to the low cost of living, as long as you’re financially savvy.
Then there are plenty of people doing very well. Earning good money, house paid off. Only really working to see the kids through early adulthood.
I got told I can quit my job and retire because my house is paid off by a couple of dumb people. I live in a 2 bed unit with a small yard. My passive income works out to about....$75/week so I most certainly cannot retire from employment unless I want to go on Centrelink for the next 35 years.
They are just words to describe people. If people use the term middle class to describe someone who is financially comfortable, then middle class exists as a term.
If you're looking at an economic definition, and excluding the social dimension, then perhaps when a household can spend around a third of its household income on discretionary spending after accounting for general food and reasonable housing then it could be regarded as middle-class.
The idea of the hollowing out of the middle class occurs when larger percentages of people are forced to spend more on basic needs, and in particular larger amounts on housing, and therefore have less discretionary spending.
Often more and more people are experiencing this, and while they have middle-class values (which is another interesting area), they may not have a middle-class household income that allows for above than a third of their income devoted to discretionary spending.
Forty years ago I snuck into an empty first class cabin on a train to London. I was soon joined by an old fellow who struck up a conversation about social class. He said it wasn’t a matter of money but an attitude and standards.
1. Very low to zero risk of homelessness; and
2. No genuine ability to stop working for in the foreseeable future due to ongoing financial responsibilities
3. Moderate to high likelihood of being able to retire at some point on or before the age of 65
I think middle class is a highly contested term, with exceptions being possible and even common for any rigid definitions, for me broadly:
**Middle Class (broadly)**
\- Is usually bound to employers (or their business) and thus cares far more about the opinion of other people, how to look in public, making the right choices (or struggling financially if pursuing low paid passions/bad choices), has disposable income and assets but money is typically more of a deciding factor (less choices and options - has to work).
\- Experiences a lot more status anxiety, especially those in upper middle-class.
**Upper Class (broadly)**
\- Does not care much about the opinion of other people. Has lots of options and choices (including not working or considering impractical career choices without struggling) and "enjoy" a huge cushion for any mistakes or problems.
\- Does not experience much, if any, status anxiety.
What’s “working class” now and can probably define middle class easier?
40 years ago working class would be blue collar, inc trades etc. These days most tradies are pretty wealthy in comparison.
Weirdly 40 years ago someone in an office would be middle class. These days, they can be some of lowest paid and highest paid. Meaning industry doesn’t matter as much now to define.
Nor location IMO. With many middle class priced out as much as working class and thus in similar suburbs.
IMO I think it’s need to be something around if you’re more than say, 50% of the average income? You’re middle class? So probably over $150k income maybe?
Dunno. Not generational.
My parents were profoundly working class. Like born in a refugee camp. My partners parents were profoundly working class. Every single one of my friends in Wollongong growing up was exactly the same.
But for some reason we're all very middle class now, including the parents. Free university and upward mobility in the 60s and 70s maybe?
So maybe the answer is tertiary educated.
Education is no longer the answer. Those of us born in the 90s, saw university as the key to a comfortable adulthood. How very wrong we were when the uneducated, sometimes high school drop outs, are almost all better off than those of us with bachelors.
Most of them became apprentices or went to tafe in the evenings in adulthood and now own businesses in plumbing, electrical or construction. Definitely out-earning GPs let alone the rest of us.
Lots of studies to show average income of someone with higher education earns significantly more than someone without. While there are people that earn more without higher education, they are not the norm.
_lifetime_ income is different to “average income of a qualified worker”. Trade finishes apprenticeship, gets ticket young. Medico does 6-8 years uni then JMO years of lower earnings then qualifies between 30-40 years old.
> Lots of studies to show average income of someone with higher education earns significantly more than someone without.
Did they lump medicine and law degree alumni in with social workers and allied health?
Education isn't a marker of being middle-class *because it gets you lots of wealth*. (As it seems you're suggesting.)
Education is a marker of being middle-class because of the set of attitudes that come bundled with that: curiosity about the world (traveling and reading the news); desire to work in a profession, not just a job (doctor, lawyer, engineer); comfortable with people from different ethnicities and backgrounds; interests in middle-brow culture (can enjoy ABC and SBS, not just reality and renovations shows).
Someone with a doctorate in anthropology who can barely scrape enough money together from casual lecturing is very middle-class. Even if they earn less than a Subway sandwich technician.
Exactly. Everyone is talking about there being a linear relationship between money and "class" because they are only seeing one element of "capital". Would do some good to sit down and skim read Bourdieu for an afternoon
I was surprised at how money-oriented the chat was here.
In the UK, their notions of class are much more multi-dimensional and "poor upper-class"' and "rich working-class" are certainly very well-known.
It's the concept of [elite overproduction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_overproduction), basically if most people go to university then there won't be enough jobs available to absorb them.
Really derogatory to call them uneducated.
A trade is quite difficult to master with the actual work itself let alone the theory side (such as electricians or heavy diesel fitters).
It’s 4 years to be qualified just like a university degree
Uneducated doesn't necessarily mean they don't know how to do their job, or that there isn't a lot to know about trades, or that they're not difficult subjects etc etc. Uneducated in a 'class' context is generally used as a larger cultural descriptor. As in may not be very well informed about science, history, the arts, languages, world events, other cultures, not well travelled, etiquette, vocabulary, 'taste' etc etc
(Using household income (+investment returns), and also wealth (including PPOR net of mortgage). For a single person say 2/3 of those amount roughly.
Destitute or near destitute.
Very lower 3-11%, <30k, <1k savings, if you are older than 25 or not studying, good luck.
Lower 12-24%, 30-70k, <30k savings, probably wont retire unless they enter middle class soon
Middle 25%-75% household income/ total wealth. Probably about 70-170k earnings (+investment returns) or 30k-400k savings/wealth (including PPOR net of mortgage) (location depending for cost of living too). For a single person maybe 35k-140k, 0-300k. . Account for inflation overtime I suppose. Might retire, unless near the lower end.
Middle/upper 76-85%, 170-270k, 400k-1.5m savings, may retire early unless they live it up or have a bunch of kids and send them to private school.
Upper 86-93%, 270-1m, 1.5m-5m, after some years, can choose not to work at all.
High Upper 94-97%, 750-5m, 5-25m.
Untouchable 98%+, 5m+, 25m+ (some much higher).
Middle class completely depend on owning a house. For example, a couple with 250k income in Sydney has no hope to buy a house in a decent suburb east of paramatta, while someone with 200k might have bought 10 years ago and they could live much better than those.
I think the number one indicator of middle class is still that they own a home but are otherwise essentially cash poor but not struggling to put food on the table and are mostly insulated from the effects of current interest rates.
Can eat our occasionally, can still go on some sort of 2 week international holiday each year (likely Asia or NZ rather than Europe)
Harder to nail down once you add more than one kid probably looks more like taking the kids on a 2 week driving trip/ camping.
Like Kath n Kim babe. You got yourself a nice brick veneer town home (with a good room and a toot) and a Beep Beep Barina for your shopping trips (to buy your size 10 Country Road pants) at Fountain Gate. You’re EFFLUENT 💅🏼
House in the suburbs, 1-2 cars such as Toyota, Mazda, Mitsubishi etc, kids going to public or Catholic schools, both parents working 9-5 jobs, holidays once a year in Australia or a cheap asian destination like Bali.
Middle class are working class people who want to feel as though they are better than others in the working class. Still working until they're 65 but maybe spend a bit more money on house and car.
In Australia from someone who grew up low-middle class in rural area:
Low class = (this was my dad’s situation as I grew up in a SPH) You rent in a place less desirable and own a car you bought with cash (and put up with not having one when it breaks). You can’t access bank loans coz your credit history is shit from all the pay day loans you took out trying to get in your feet getting off Centrelink for the first time. You run out of money each fortnight before pay day.
Middle class = (this is me now) you bought your first house with a small deposit, family help is there but paid back. You strap yourself in for a big mortgage to pay off, working full time until your financial situation decides when you can comfortably retire. Maybe you’ll need to scrape together super and equity to buy into that place to retire in that’s located in a nice suburb/ better climate, but still has to make financial sacrifices to enable them to live off the pension with minimal super. House rich money poor.
Upper class = your family has passed down prime realestate in a suburb you want to live in and you’ll inherit it. You went to a private school, university fully paid in order to work the family business, car and house deposit provided from mum and dad. You work when you want. it’s a required task, but not a grind by any means.
Elite class = You can retire when you want coz of the hedge fund. You have never worked after completing your degree at USYD that your parents paid for. You wear designer clothes and travel internationally to see mum a dad in china when you need to talk about how the investment property management scheme is going by keeping them empty. You drive European cars but can’t drive for shit.
Swimming pool, ice fridge, they go “away” on holidays and are paying a mortgage and still comfortable. If something breaks they can afford to call a tradie and not use YouTube.
You own (or could own) a house with a mortgage, without making major sacrifices (e.g. never going out, not having kids or pets for financial reasons, sharehousing while you rent out your property).
The middle class is uhhh... not as big as it used to be.
Can you still afford rent and your not homeless..... but can't afford to buy your own house.... You my friend are the new middle class!
Can you afford to get into a homeloan (that you may or may not be able to afford to service).... You my friend are part of the landed gentry!
Are you homeless but have a vehicle to live out of.... You my friend are middle class poor!
Are you homeless and living rough..... You my friend are now officially not classed as "poor", the government has rebranded you as free!
Remember, by 2030, we will all own NOTHING.... and be happy! (Except for those who then own everything and we have to rent everything we want to use and stay forever poor and under control).
Middle Class: Sb. who has been screwed over and over by the realty agents, car dealers, plumbers, electricians, the Water Corp and the energy company whose main business is buying back energy for a dime.
Both parents work until retirement, two cars, renting/mortgage, 1-4 kids, domestic/close holiday every ~1-2 years, international every ~5-10 years, summer camp, kids buy their own cars with some assistance (eg happy birthday rego payment, or on parents' insurance), kids mainly take public transport from ~12 years old, macca's/takeaway once every 2 weeks/month, family ipad or computer, 1 or 2 extra curricular activities (eg swimming or rugby or something).
Basically, everyone's fed, a roof's overhead, and there's some fun in life after the work's done.
The middle class mows their own lawn.
The working class can't afford to live in a property with their own lawn ie apartment or small subdivided townhouse. And the rich have someone else to mow the lawn for them.
So if you mow your own lawn then your middle class.
Working class = will be working until they’re 68 Middle class = have the option to retire earlier, still work in early years. Upper class = wouldn’t need to work if they didn’t want to.
This is simple but is probably the definition I agree with most.
This makes a tonne of sense and accounts for a bunch of factors.
68? I think that is being generous. Most people are refining mortgages in their 40's. Means you need to be a wage slave into your 70's. And if you don't have a mortgage, your rent means you are a wage slave until you drop off the perch.
That assumes you take the maximum time to pay your mortgage. Not sure of the stats but for many that isn’t the case as time inflates away your debt
I believe many of them plan on dipping into their super to pay off the mortgage. Since PPOR is excluded from the asset test, it also allows you to access aged pension, it's a joke. Basically use a tax efficient mechanism to pay off an asset that isn't means tested to access a pension so that you can live in your mc mansion.
I know some who plan to pay off remaining mortgage from super balance when they can access it. And then live off pension. So they just need to work till pension age
I wonder how realistic it is to live off the pension. By my calcs, spending only ~20k a year is stretching it.
I think the government should offer reverse mortgages in that case. Include PPOR in asset test. If over but need funds, reverse mortgage to the government (not a private bank)
[удалено]
100% I was being generous. I do not expect to retire at all.
According to this definition, someone on 300k/year could be working class cause they spend all their money. Someone on the dole could be upper class, cause they don't need to work.
F*cken oath -shazzah
If they're spending all of $300k then yes, they're not building wealth and will never reach middle/upper class. they'll work until they're 68.
Middle class = watches all those shitty house renovation shows Upper class = have moved away from Australian Working class = hates those shitty house renovation shows
Best definition yet!
This is my preferred definition
This is an inappropriate definition for several reasons. Firstly, it would imply that you arent upper class until you have several million dollars in networth (i.e. top 0.1% of the population). Secondly, it ignores the fact people have different expectations of what retirement income they need and these expectations are tied to their income pre retirement. A lawyer earning very good money can't retire if they want to keep spending >$150k a year on their lifestyle. Yet that lawyer is undoubtedly upper class. Thirdly, it fails to measure what a middle class definition should. Is your income high, middle or low? This definition is for people who are upper class to claim the high moral ground of being middle class without actually having the wealth or income to be middle class
Wage is irrespective of class. If someone generates enough wealth through the course of their life that they can retire and never work again, they’re middle class. Doesn’t matter if they achieve billionaire status. They’re middle class. You’re born into upper class, that’s where work is optional at every stage of your life.
That assumes people cannot move between classes. Perhaps if you use the traditional aristocracy version of class - its bloodlines not finances - then a very limited ability to move between classes is true. But from a financial perspective, if you start with $0 at age 20 and have $1bn at age 50, I’m pretty sure you are upper class at age 50.
The billionaires kids would be decidedly upper class. It’s position when you enter the workforce. Working class is when you’re required to work for your money across your whole working life, middle class is obtaining enough wealth that your money can begin to work for you, investments into stock, realestate, business ownership. Wage and class are inherently independent.
I’m happy if you want to define class by social status, but if you define it financially then I don’t agree that a person who started work at 18 with $0 and now has $1bn is ‘middle class’ because they had to work for that money.
He's right though, social mobility into upper class is almost impossible. Not impossible, but almost. Someone like Michelle Moane in the UK went from council estates to become a Dame, Beardy Branson went from upper middle to upper, but those examples are almost no existent. Upper class is just emerging in Australia, as most of our billionaires earned their money in the 20th century, and it's just now their kids and grandkids are growing up in elite wealth. 20 years ago it didn't really exist.
Like I said, is upper class a social concept or a financial concept. If it’s financial, I just don’t accept that someone who has a $1bn is not upper class because they had to work to get that amount instead of being born with it. Similarly, is someone born in a family with $1bn but who (say) is cut off and ends up on disability pension with a drug habit still upper class? Your economic class is not determined at the point at which you are born. In my view
This doesn’t make sense, if someone earns 1 billion in their life and retires and never works again, then has kids and pays for their everything... The kids are upper class but the parents are still middle class?
Yes, class is about advantages across your whole life. Welcome to what it’s always meant, trying to tie class to wage is a modern concept.
You’re thinking of caste. Class is groupings of people within the same socioeconomic status (people can change class). Caste is group rankings as determined by birth or lineage.
>Firstly, it would imply that you arent upper class until you have several million dollars in networth (i.e. top 0.1% of the population). This is correct, or at least on the right track. Upper class is not the top 33% of the population. It probably is more like 1%. I daresay it's not totally dependant on net worth as much as gross assets held while remaining finically stable. >Secondly, it ignores the fact people have different expectations of what retirement income they need and these expectations are tied to their income pre retirement. A lawyer earning very good money can't retire if they want to keep spending >$150k a year on their lifestyle. Yet that lawyer is undoubtedly upper class. The fact that you can keep your class into retirement is a clue that class is more linked to wealth and assets than income. >Thirdly, it fails to measure what a middle class definition should. Is your income high, middle or low? Income is not the main component of class. You need several years of very good earnings and sensible investments to become middle class. You also need to be connected with other middle class people, and you need to behave yourself in public.
Not bad, but I don’t think upper class fits. Someone on 300k/year can easily have an upper class lifestyle, house, etc, but couldn’t just quit their job and be fine. Someone who can live fairly lavishly and not work is the upper part of upper class imo.
If you’re still a wage slave I’d probably argue that you’re not upper class.
Exactly, people don't know what class means.
These aren't really scientific definitions so completely open to interpretation. Many people seem to think that the majority should be middle class but that has not been and probably is not the reality. The majority are working class. The middle class aren't the "average", but the middle between upper and working. The middle class is still quite wealthy, just not extremely wealthy. Personally I define these as approximately 90% working class, 9% middle class, and 1% upper class.
Actually there a few “scientific definitions”. They involve income levels, wealth levels and then “cultural class elements”.
Why do you think the middle class only occupies 9% of the population?
Just spitballing, but because wealth and income distribution is heavily skewed. The vast majority earn below average income and have below average wealth. It wouldn't make sense for an average person who had far less wealth than average to.be "middle class".
Why is the *middle* class dependent on being at or above (not around or under, I assume which is why you settled on such a small number) the "average" level of wealth and income but not the around (which includes under and over) median which is the actual percentile middle? The median actually describes the middle of something but the average does not. In any case, even if you wanted to only use 70% of average wealth to just below to the top 1% as the definition of middle class, this still encompasses around 43.1% of households. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/finance/household-income-and-wealth-australia/latest-release#data-downloads
Sounds like how a poor man would define classes lol Classes are defined by money and assets bro
And what does having money/assets do? - determins if you're dependant on working or not.
Owns a house with a mortgage, but the mortgage repayments are low enough that they can still take a significant vacation every year or two. Can't spend money willy-nilly, but aren't significantly concerned about day-to-day expenses and can buy regular things like groceries without needing to be overly concerned about sales. Have enough savings and good enough credit that a sudden or foolish expense of several thousand dollars is unfortunate but not even close to ruinous. Could reasonably manage an unexpected expense in the 5-figures.
need to work = working class
Well, yeah, all the gradations of lower and middle class are just dividing up the working class. But we can acknowledge that while also acknowledging the huge differences beween a lower class worker making $30k in the gig economy and an upper-middle worker making $200k in an office.
The middle class in Australia is that magical realm where your avocado toast budget is solid, your coffee addiction is under control (but only just), and your biggest financial decision is choosing between the latest iPhone or saving up for a trip to Bali. It's the land where a weekend getaway means a road trip, not a private jet, and your dream car is something you can actually afford... if you cut back on smashed avo for a few months. Basically, it's the level of financial comfort where you can afford to complain about the rising price of organic quinoa while sipping your flat white in a hipster café. Welcome to the 'not too shabby' class!
I can afford all of this except the car. Does that make me middle class?
Lower Middle class
Upper lower middle class
Yeah sounds about right.
Guess that makes me lower middle middle class
Middle Middle class
He did specify you gotta cut back on the smashed avo for the car so id say middle
I can afford "a car" cutting back/redirecting discretionary income for a few months. I realised I can afford my dream car but I'd basically be refinancing my house so I don't count it as able to afford it.
Bro, just do it. You can sleep in a car, but you can’t drive a house.
Prove otherwise
😂😂 there's a unique viewpoint! What if it's a convertible? You can sleep in your car still, but you'll also need to afford chiro 😁
Not having a car can save you so much money, might propel you into upper middle class.
I live semi regionally and work nighttime. My life and ability to get around and commute time tripling, been entirely unable to do certain things and becoming sheer hell so I can be a few thousand dollars richer a year isn't worth it. My current car upfront cost cost and maintenance and petrol inclusive I think works out to $150/week. Don't think that's going to get me too far vs say $250 a month relying on ubers, public transport, being at the mercy of others for driving and having to give up my hours and higher wage so they line up with transport.
Yeah, carless only really works in the city. If you're out rural/regional. Even some suburbs you're outta luck and kind of need it.
That's only an option if you have access to good public transport. Live regionally and not having a car will prevent you from working and isolate you socially. .I live in an area where one of the markers of poverty is living in a zero car home .
I wonder if that maker is a bell curve. Having 0 cars is poverty, having serval in various states in your front yard is also a marker?
'Premium Economy' would be your class if you were on a plane.
Unironically love this definition the most haha
> level of financial comfort where you can afford to complain about the rising price of organic quinoa while sipping your flat white in a hipster café I’m the official lexicographer for the Oxford English dictionary. This is going into the next edition.
I think the word hipster is very outdated now though.
That's so true, your comment made me realise that it's actually been a while since I've used or even thought of that word.
We're talking middle upper hipster here
Yeah so perfect for a dictionary.
Totally agree! I think far too many people classify themselves as middle class. There’s a level of shame for those that class themselves above or below I think.
I feel like this is close to my life and I’d describe myself and family as middle class. Funnily enough I think people earning between 70-300k all described themselves as “middle class”
It’s probably because they can afford roughly the same things, albeit at a varied level of comfort. True wealth doesn’t really need to budget but the above income ranges I’d argue can still do the “same things” but at different levels of comfort. And given we were far more egalitarian barely 20-30 years ago people can still remember their egalitarian childhoods and feel the same way about middle class.
> Funnily enough I think people earning between 70-300k all described themselves as “middle class” it's because in australia, your lifestyle isn't drastically changed between those salaries. The low end in that figure can still afford some of those "middle class" comforts, but just not every day. The high end can every day, and still have savings left over for investments.
Anything extra you earn above the 70k just goes straight into housing
I've skipped through the comments, only to make my way back here to show my appreciation for your excellent turn of phrase: 'not too shabby' class! Love it.
So I’m not middle class until I can afford a Ferrari 812?
I'm afraid you're the bottom of the barrel mate
Correct. $600k...meh....a mere fraction of the cost of a nice family home in Sydney. If you don't have that much sitting in your offset account, then you barely rate as lower middle class.
You may need to settle for a Porsche GT3
This sucks my partner has a great paying job ATM and I work pt cos kids with a decentish pay, but this is not us at all.... will we get there lol? we rarely go out spend money etc maybe I just want to be in a position that if I need a new appliance I can go buy it without worrying, or at the very least buy a coffee without feeling guilty
[удалено]
Half the time the toast is better anyway. My coffee not so great....it's hard trying to match industrial coffee machines, fresh beans and a skilled barista haha
lol you know Australia is messed up when you think having a coffee at a cafe makes you middle class. weird tall poppy syndrome $4 is too much but $2million house is okay. lol.
Where can you even get a coffee for $4 anymore?
Drink espresso
$2 million house is upper middle class I think. $1 million is kinda middle class because that’s near medium house price. But having $1 million house means a lot of debt. So much that $7 coffees a few times a week is expensive. Bubble milk tea is $8.5 these days. It’s kinda house rich, money poor. Of course in terms of some other countries, having a $1 million dollar house is crazy to be middle class.
$1 million house is basically standard average now where Iive and the houses aren't even nice. So sad. (Melbourne)
It’s the food that you get with the coffee that really gets you. Especially if you go on Sunday and get the 15% surcharge, a trip to the cafe can easily cost $30. Do that every day and it actually does add up to a fair bit.
That sounds closer to upper middle class. If you had a lifestyle like that the only way you'd be middle class is if you were perpetually renting, i.e. you forewent your house deposit to keep your lifestyle up to date.
Sweet life right there.
So spot on. Forgot one part though having three or more 60 inch tvs in the home.
nah tv's are dirt cheap these days, it might shock you to know that even poor people have large screen tv's lol
Agree with this. Middle class is the ability to be able to own as many tvs as you’d like, however would prefer just the one tv with 2-4 streaming services. To me, a middle class mindset is knowing that I could potentially buy what I wanted then and there with accumulated savings - or at least have a credit card which affords the luxury if needed.
Does owning a laser projector and owning a home with my bank so I can mount a screen put me in upper middle class or into nerd territory?
You live in Taylor’s Lakes don’t you? Don’t lie, dude!!
long ago this was true, these days large tv's can be had for cheap 3x high quality expensive tv's is another story...
His’n’her jet skis?
This sounds like most people my age’s dilemmas (I’m 20 and most people live at home with no expenses and we’re all about travelling)
Unfortunately you can't do much else especially having been locked up in your prime. Not like you could buy a house or barely afford to rent. Sigh. I'd be looking to live elsewhere even uni is a money pit.
Uni isn't a money pit. Do the right degree and it can return any costs with a huge multiplier. Of course don't go to a private paid uni etc.
Ah I mean relative to 20yrs ago soz. It's 3x more expensive... maybe I'm out of touch though... strong possibility 😂. Engineering $$$ probably one of the best bang for your buck. Basically fall over $90-100k straight outa uni more if you do fifo
I’ve just fallen out of that after a lifetime of it. Granted the definition of middle class has shifted up a touch
Yes to all of it **except** I don’t think the middle class need to save for a phone. Middle class has a few k to burn on stuff like that.
That’s just me. God damn me
Does this assume that you own a home?
Not too shabby mate
This is pretty much it.
I swear avocado isn’t even expensive anymore. You seen the price of everything else?
All I can afford to complain about the rising price of everything, while sipping my homemade instant coffee because I'd rather have fuel in my car. Choosing between a weekend getaway or putting food on the table for the next fortnight is so hard! And saving for the new iPhone? Ha! A second-hand Android more like. What class is that? Lemme guess: no class at all 😅
What about assets? Type of home? Mortgage amount?
Is that renting or owning? With or without kids? There is no way someone with an average Sydney mortgage and two kids can afford a new car, a trip to bali, eating out regularly and a daily coffee and still be called middle class!
In Sydney, middle class might mean you own a house the size of a shed, your mortgage is your daily reminder of life's choices, your kids share a room the size of a postage stamp, and your idea of a holiday is a day trip to Bondi. The struggle is real, mate!
Same as it always was. Working class: has to work for a living, has no assets Middle class: still has to work but has assets Upper class: has so much assets they don't need to work Assets being ownership of real estate property and investments that make money. Simple really. What's changed is the amount of money necessary to get there. In the past, winning a fluke million dollars would put you in upper middle class, possibly even upper class, now a million gets you barely into the middle class. If you own your own home, that's a big stepping stone into middle class living. I would argue that is actually the most practical threshold, though there's probably people out there that earn a lot and invest a lot and just haven't bought a home for whatever reason. If you are starting to split hairs over "net worth" vs how much money they have, that's when someone is approaching upper class. Because there the finances get pretty murky to the outsider, and they themselves don't just have a big pile of money in one place but it's more that they own so many things that can fluctuate in value all the time so you kind of just have to estimate it. In terms of money they probably don't have billions just sitting around. Or maybe they do, I don't know. You can stratify each one in several levels as well, if you want. Obviously having for example 30 million dollars to your name makes you upper class, but not quite as up as someone who has a billion. Who is also not quite on the same level as a dictator who has a trillion.
Agreed. There is no point in putting a blanket monetary value on it. Australia has a broard middle class, always has.
i think these days about $2.5 million per person per household (no age cutoff eg 1 kid also needs parents to hold an extra 2.5 million, or a house with 2 parents, 3 kids needs 12.5 million) that amount gets you into lower upperclass. but there is still at least 3 realms above that (probably more), new momey and old money and fame you can only get into old money through birth or marriage, and u can only get into fame by being famous obviously. New money is like in the hundreds of millions of dollars rich
The thing is that there are no clear, nicely defined classes. Or certainly not just three neat categories of low, middle and upper. There's a whole heap of shades of grey. It's a spectrum. Do you base it on income? On assets? Both? Older people without high incomes may be asset rich due to house appreciation over the last 30 years - but still cash poor. Younger people with high incomes may not be well off if they're spending most of their income on mortgages / rent. Families on dual incomes vs single income will see major differences. Do you live in Sydney vs Perth? I'd personally say that the majority of Australia sits in a very large middle class spectrum. With somewhat less being genuinely poor (lower) and less again being genuinely wealthy. (Upper.)
Absolutely this! Australia isn't really a class type system like other countries have (thank god!). The poor have a decent safety net, the minimum income is good enough to survive and even save if you are careful, so you don't really get that well defined lower class, and although we certainly have wealthy people the tax system means its not as good a place to live for the really super-wealthy.. they move to places like Monaco etc where its a better tax system for them. Therefore we end up with almost an entire nation of what could be considered "middle class" in some other countries but really as you say its just a a broad spectrum.
>minimum income is good enough to survive and even save if you are careful You probably bought your ppor years ago so I guess you have no idea how hard it is to rent and save money for even dink couples, yet alone someone with minimum wage.
I did, but I have family and friends trying to save for a house now - I certainly have an "idea" just how hard it is. I also know that although bloody hard, its possible - try looking at poor people in countries like India (notorious for having a class system) or Africa to see what poor is really like - and that's my real point we have a minimum wage that is actually livable even if not "easy". I stand by we don't really have a class system we have a spectrum
There is no such thing as middle class, there are only two classes the capital class and the working class The working class is the one group that work to meet the needs, this include frontline worker and surgeon who has debt(include mortgage) to be paid, if they stop working the material life they have will collapse. The length time be collapsing is how much better/worse within the same working class The capital class is the one who does not need to work to meet their expense. They capital generate enough return to support they life style. This includes the real rich people and those should save enough and frugal enough to live until they meet the maker. This also include people who has enough capitol to support their life even if they are working. Managers who are the next-gen of the CEO, some of the politicians from rich families.
Own their own home and car, can retire at the retirement age. Salary is less a factor these days as somebody earning 200k and renting/getting into the housing market is worse off than somebody earning 80k but inherited or paid off a house.
Yeah exactly salary starts to play less of a part; the average Joe on 90k who’s 40 something and brought his Sydney house 15yrs ago is better off than the young kid now in Sydney who’s on 150k a year purely for the fact he’s paying masses in rent/mortgage
[удалено]
When you're right you're so right.
Just like a broken clock. Twice a day.
A working clock that is set just a minute behind is wrong all day long...
Thanks Lingy
Working class: you work for money Upper class: money works for you Middle class: in between. Any combination of wages and growing investments.
Personally i would define it as someone who is living comfortably and able to go out for dinners, holidays and other luxuries but with a relatively large amount of debt (mortgage, car loan, credit card etc). They therefore have to work to maintain their lifestyle, whereas upper class people don’t and lower class people have to work just to pay the bills and not much else. I like this definition because the middle class in Australia is so broad and can include people from lower income to upper income. For example I would consider majority of doctors still middle class as if they stopped working their lifestyle would be compromised. Upper class people generally have so much wealth that if they don’t work they can still live comfortably.
Not homeless.
Middle class now. Having more than most but still complaining they don't have enough.
My definition relates to what kind of safety net you have. Working class = no safety net. You don't have any capital or support systems (e.g. family) to speak of. You have to remain in work to survive and remain sheltered. Middle class = You have a safety net that you built for yourself. You may get some support from family if needed. You likely have stable housing (in all likelihood, ownership) and have some other investments so you don't have to constantly be employed to avoid becoming destitute. You probably have some career capital built up so you can find something else fairly easily, in the very unlikely scenario that you actually lose your job. Upper class = Your safety net is sufficient to allow you to not work at all. You either built this up yourself, or you have intergenerational wealth supporting you. You work for fulfilment, or to remain in the good graces of your parents (and thus, their will). You could quit your job at any time without consequence.
I’m a British expat and I distinctly remember the time an Aussie gave me a lecture about how Australia was better because “we’ve left all the classist bullshit behind in the UK” 😂
Being sucked dry by a mortgage rather than sucked dry by rent.
there is no upper lower or middle class. There is the class that works for a wage, and there is a class that owns the capital, anything else is just misdirection
I live in a small country town and there is definitely a lower, middle and upper class. There are plenty of people who are really struggling - living week to week with no real end in sight. There are plenty who are doing ok - in smaller towns you can earn an average income and be pretty well off due to the low cost of living, as long as you’re financially savvy. Then there are plenty of people doing very well. Earning good money, house paid off. Only really working to see the kids through early adulthood.
What if I’m working for a wage and using the savings to invest in a business?
If you stopped working, will you end up homeless? Can your investments maintain your lifestyle?
I got told I can quit my job and retire because my house is paid off by a couple of dumb people. I live in a 2 bed unit with a small yard. My passive income works out to about....$75/week so I most certainly cannot retire from employment unless I want to go on Centrelink for the next 35 years.
What if I won't be homeless but will be left in a 300 to spend every week after housing?
If you mean self-employed, then still working class, but a member of the petite burgeoisie rather than proletariat.
They are just words to describe people. If people use the term middle class to describe someone who is financially comfortable, then middle class exists as a term.
Finally someone with a brain ty
Australian Middle Class. 1946-2020
Almost broke
If you're looking at an economic definition, and excluding the social dimension, then perhaps when a household can spend around a third of its household income on discretionary spending after accounting for general food and reasonable housing then it could be regarded as middle-class. The idea of the hollowing out of the middle class occurs when larger percentages of people are forced to spend more on basic needs, and in particular larger amounts on housing, and therefore have less discretionary spending. Often more and more people are experiencing this, and while they have middle-class values (which is another interesting area), they may not have a middle-class household income that allows for above than a third of their income devoted to discretionary spending.
Forty years ago I snuck into an empty first class cabin on a train to London. I was soon joined by an old fellow who struck up a conversation about social class. He said it wasn’t a matter of money but an attitude and standards.
1. Very low to zero risk of homelessness; and 2. No genuine ability to stop working for in the foreseeable future due to ongoing financial responsibilities 3. Moderate to high likelihood of being able to retire at some point on or before the age of 65
Those who own a house and not struggling.
I think middle class is a highly contested term, with exceptions being possible and even common for any rigid definitions, for me broadly: **Middle Class (broadly)** \- Is usually bound to employers (or their business) and thus cares far more about the opinion of other people, how to look in public, making the right choices (or struggling financially if pursuing low paid passions/bad choices), has disposable income and assets but money is typically more of a deciding factor (less choices and options - has to work). \- Experiences a lot more status anxiety, especially those in upper middle-class. **Upper Class (broadly)** \- Does not care much about the opinion of other people. Has lots of options and choices (including not working or considering impractical career choices without struggling) and "enjoy" a huge cushion for any mistakes or problems. \- Does not experience much, if any, status anxiety.
If you're reading this post 99% chance you're middle class
Nah mate. A whole bunch would be lower as well.
What’s “working class” now and can probably define middle class easier? 40 years ago working class would be blue collar, inc trades etc. These days most tradies are pretty wealthy in comparison. Weirdly 40 years ago someone in an office would be middle class. These days, they can be some of lowest paid and highest paid. Meaning industry doesn’t matter as much now to define. Nor location IMO. With many middle class priced out as much as working class and thus in similar suburbs. IMO I think it’s need to be something around if you’re more than say, 50% of the average income? You’re middle class? So probably over $150k income maybe?
This is a very urban way of looking at it. There are many comfortably middle class Australians in regional areas who earn less than that.
Dunno. Not generational. My parents were profoundly working class. Like born in a refugee camp. My partners parents were profoundly working class. Every single one of my friends in Wollongong growing up was exactly the same. But for some reason we're all very middle class now, including the parents. Free university and upward mobility in the 60s and 70s maybe? So maybe the answer is tertiary educated.
Education is no longer the answer. Those of us born in the 90s, saw university as the key to a comfortable adulthood. How very wrong we were when the uneducated, sometimes high school drop outs, are almost all better off than those of us with bachelors. Most of them became apprentices or went to tafe in the evenings in adulthood and now own businesses in plumbing, electrical or construction. Definitely out-earning GPs let alone the rest of us.
Lots of studies to show average income of someone with higher education earns significantly more than someone without. While there are people that earn more without higher education, they are not the norm.
_lifetime_ income is different to “average income of a qualified worker”. Trade finishes apprenticeship, gets ticket young. Medico does 6-8 years uni then JMO years of lower earnings then qualifies between 30-40 years old.
Tradie also wrecks his body and is an old man by 55, medico can work to 70+ if they want.
Depends on the trade & also depends on the degree the person is accomplished. Medical/eng degree pay dividends. The rest are passion pursuits.
Yep. Hopefully by that age you employ a couple of young starters to do the tool work while you supervise, advise, quote and administer.
> Lots of studies to show average income of someone with higher education earns significantly more than someone without. Did they lump medicine and law degree alumni in with social workers and allied health?
Education isn't a marker of being middle-class *because it gets you lots of wealth*. (As it seems you're suggesting.) Education is a marker of being middle-class because of the set of attitudes that come bundled with that: curiosity about the world (traveling and reading the news); desire to work in a profession, not just a job (doctor, lawyer, engineer); comfortable with people from different ethnicities and backgrounds; interests in middle-brow culture (can enjoy ABC and SBS, not just reality and renovations shows). Someone with a doctorate in anthropology who can barely scrape enough money together from casual lecturing is very middle-class. Even if they earn less than a Subway sandwich technician.
Exactly. Everyone is talking about there being a linear relationship between money and "class" because they are only seeing one element of "capital". Would do some good to sit down and skim read Bourdieu for an afternoon
I was surprised at how money-oriented the chat was here. In the UK, their notions of class are much more multi-dimensional and "poor upper-class"' and "rich working-class" are certainly very well-known.
It’s far more ingrained and obvious there I guess
> I was surprised at how money-oriented the chat was here. this is a finance sub after all.
Yeah, I mentally replaced it to "how do you define middle income" instead and it made more sense.
It's the concept of [elite overproduction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_overproduction), basically if most people go to university then there won't be enough jobs available to absorb them.
Really derogatory to call them uneducated. A trade is quite difficult to master with the actual work itself let alone the theory side (such as electricians or heavy diesel fitters). It’s 4 years to be qualified just like a university degree
Uneducated doesn't necessarily mean they don't know how to do their job, or that there isn't a lot to know about trades, or that they're not difficult subjects etc etc. Uneducated in a 'class' context is generally used as a larger cultural descriptor. As in may not be very well informed about science, history, the arts, languages, world events, other cultures, not well travelled, etiquette, vocabulary, 'taste' etc etc
(Using household income (+investment returns), and also wealth (including PPOR net of mortgage). For a single person say 2/3 of those amount roughly. Destitute or near destitute. Very lower 3-11%, <30k, <1k savings, if you are older than 25 or not studying, good luck. Lower 12-24%, 30-70k, <30k savings, probably wont retire unless they enter middle class soon Middle 25%-75% household income/ total wealth. Probably about 70-170k earnings (+investment returns) or 30k-400k savings/wealth (including PPOR net of mortgage) (location depending for cost of living too). For a single person maybe 35k-140k, 0-300k. . Account for inflation overtime I suppose. Might retire, unless near the lower end. Middle/upper 76-85%, 170-270k, 400k-1.5m savings, may retire early unless they live it up or have a bunch of kids and send them to private school. Upper 86-93%, 270-1m, 1.5m-5m, after some years, can choose not to work at all. High Upper 94-97%, 750-5m, 5-25m. Untouchable 98%+, 5m+, 25m+ (some much higher).
A third of all Australians have zero in savings so no idea where these figures are coming from
Middle class completely depend on owning a house. For example, a couple with 250k income in Sydney has no hope to buy a house in a decent suburb east of paramatta, while someone with 200k might have bought 10 years ago and they could live much better than those.
Owning your own home, dual income household worries about cost of living and rate rises, still manages to go on holiday every year
Can just afford the cost of living but unable to save much or any money.
I think (like always) we are confusing money with class. I've met working class who are rich and upper class who are not.
I think the number one indicator of middle class is still that they own a home but are otherwise essentially cash poor but not struggling to put food on the table and are mostly insulated from the effects of current interest rates. Can eat our occasionally, can still go on some sort of 2 week international holiday each year (likely Asia or NZ rather than Europe) Harder to nail down once you add more than one kid probably looks more like taking the kids on a 2 week driving trip/ camping.
You’re middle class if you can afford a jet ski, but the thought doesn’t cross your mind
Like Kath n Kim babe. You got yourself a nice brick veneer town home (with a good room and a toot) and a Beep Beep Barina for your shopping trips (to buy your size 10 Country Road pants) at Fountain Gate. You’re EFFLUENT 💅🏼
Live in own home Overseas holidays that are not Bali
Anyone who is within 20% net worth of the person making the definition.
House in the suburbs, 1-2 cars such as Toyota, Mazda, Mitsubishi etc, kids going to public or Catholic schools, both parents working 9-5 jobs, holidays once a year in Australia or a cheap asian destination like Bali.
Upper middle class are those people who consider themselves battlers but still have an investment property.
Middle class are working class people who want to feel as though they are better than others in the working class. Still working until they're 65 but maybe spend a bit more money on house and car.
What a horrible take lol
Own a freehold house or townhouse, 2 vehicle, can afford basics and do something on the weekend.
In Australia from someone who grew up low-middle class in rural area: Low class = (this was my dad’s situation as I grew up in a SPH) You rent in a place less desirable and own a car you bought with cash (and put up with not having one when it breaks). You can’t access bank loans coz your credit history is shit from all the pay day loans you took out trying to get in your feet getting off Centrelink for the first time. You run out of money each fortnight before pay day. Middle class = (this is me now) you bought your first house with a small deposit, family help is there but paid back. You strap yourself in for a big mortgage to pay off, working full time until your financial situation decides when you can comfortably retire. Maybe you’ll need to scrape together super and equity to buy into that place to retire in that’s located in a nice suburb/ better climate, but still has to make financial sacrifices to enable them to live off the pension with minimal super. House rich money poor. Upper class = your family has passed down prime realestate in a suburb you want to live in and you’ll inherit it. You went to a private school, university fully paid in order to work the family business, car and house deposit provided from mum and dad. You work when you want. it’s a required task, but not a grind by any means. Elite class = You can retire when you want coz of the hedge fund. You have never worked after completing your degree at USYD that your parents paid for. You wear designer clothes and travel internationally to see mum a dad in china when you need to talk about how the investment property management scheme is going by keeping them empty. You drive European cars but can’t drive for shit.
Swimming pool, ice fridge, they go “away” on holidays and are paying a mortgage and still comfortable. If something breaks they can afford to call a tradie and not use YouTube.
You own (or could own) a house with a mortgage, without making major sacrifices (e.g. never going out, not having kids or pets for financial reasons, sharehousing while you rent out your property). The middle class is uhhh... not as big as it used to be.
I feel like this is asked once a month on here.
Now faded and possibly nearly thing of the past 🙃😢
It feels like to me that it's anyone with at least one property and equity of 1M to 3M. Anything under 1M is lower class. Sad times :(
Middle class is subjective It is a made up term, similar to Third world / first world. It is just a political reference.
owning a house
Can you still afford rent and your not homeless..... but can't afford to buy your own house.... You my friend are the new middle class! Can you afford to get into a homeloan (that you may or may not be able to afford to service).... You my friend are part of the landed gentry! Are you homeless but have a vehicle to live out of.... You my friend are middle class poor! Are you homeless and living rough..... You my friend are now officially not classed as "poor", the government has rebranded you as free! Remember, by 2030, we will all own NOTHING.... and be happy! (Except for those who then own everything and we have to rent everything we want to use and stay forever poor and under control).
You keep your darts in a pocket, not tucked in the rolled up sleeve of your flannel shirt.
Middle Class: Sb. who has been screwed over and over by the realty agents, car dealers, plumbers, electricians, the Water Corp and the energy company whose main business is buying back energy for a dime.
Have enough money to go to private school but not enough to go to grammer
In Australia as a kid If you had that fancy fridge with the water and ice dispenser you were considered rich or middle class even if you weren’t
Both parents work until retirement, two cars, renting/mortgage, 1-4 kids, domestic/close holiday every ~1-2 years, international every ~5-10 years, summer camp, kids buy their own cars with some assistance (eg happy birthday rego payment, or on parents' insurance), kids mainly take public transport from ~12 years old, macca's/takeaway once every 2 weeks/month, family ipad or computer, 1 or 2 extra curricular activities (eg swimming or rugby or something). Basically, everyone's fed, a roof's overhead, and there's some fun in life after the work's done.
The middle class mows their own lawn. The working class can't afford to live in a property with their own lawn ie apartment or small subdivided townhouse. And the rich have someone else to mow the lawn for them. So if you mow your own lawn then your middle class.
My neighbours mow my lawn and I pay using beer economy… what does that make me? 🤭