- cross-posted to:
- fire@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- fire@lemmy.ml
I found the graph at 10:55 to be especially interesting because it shows how someone with around the median income ($65k) can make it to the lower upper class by retirement through some discipline (10% saved per year).
As a quick TL;DW, here are the median incomes, net worth, and percent of population for each class:
- lower - $34k income, $3.4k net worth (many are negative) - 25%
- middle
- lower - $44k income, $71k net worth - 20%
- middle - $81k income, $159k net worth - 20%
- upper - $117k income, $307k net worth - 20%
- upper
- lower - $189k income, $747k net worth - 10%
- upper - $378k income, $2.5M net worth - 5%
Some questions to spark discussion:
- Do you agree with his breakdown of the economic classes? Why or why not?
- What strategies do you think someone in each category should take to improve their situation?
- If you don’t mind sharing, what class do you think you’re in, and does the breakdown match your experience?
You must log in or register to comment.
Classes are social relations to production, not arbitrary income levels. I’m a proletarian, but in the upper stratum of the labor aristocracy.
Exactly this.
The only meaningful class distinction is working class/wealthy class.
Working class is anyone who has to work for their income whereas wealthy class is anyone whose wealth generates enough income for them on its own.
It’s possible to move from working class to wealthy class, after all people do actually do that, but it’s exceptionally rare because it’s exceptionally difficult.
Discipline alone isn’t enough, as you also have to be lucky enough to avoid things like major medical issues, bad market timing, and other financial headwinds that are out of your control.
The only meaningful class distinction is working class/wealthy class.
It’s nice to recognize Labor Aristocracy, petite bourgeoisie, peasantry, small handicraftsman, and so forth, IMO.
That’s a fair point; my statement was probably too strong.
Finer grained distinctions absolutely do matter, I just think they are overshadowed by the difference between working class and wealthy class.
Not to be nitpicky, but it really depends on what you’re talking about. The Petite Bourgeoisie, for example, has a tendency to try to align with either the Bourgeoisie or the Anarchists as they are proletarianized by big competition. When they align with the Bourgeoisie, this usually is a factor in the rise in fascism, also known as Capitalism in decay.
The general Proletariat vs Bourgeoisie conflict is certainly one of the most important nationally, but internationally it is the Imperialist Bourgeoisie vs the Proletariat and Nationalist Bourgeoisie, as we live in the age of Imperialism, or “moribund Capitalism.”
If you like this video, check out Why Looking Poor is Important, which talks about the different ways each economic class views money.
