Interesting discussion. I don't know if I have ever read a serious definition for segregating the income streams. There are people who are 'oor', people who are 'not poor', and people who are 'rich'. I've always assumed the people who were 'not poor' and 'not rich' were the folks being referred to as 'middle class'. If you read pg's essay on money he discusses "wealth" versus "money".
That difference, for me, explains why you need a bigger salary in the Bay Area to cover basic expenses rather than say El Paso, so a $150K salary in the Bay Area might make you exactly as "wealthy" as a $50K salary in El Paso.
So then the question for me is, does wealth define rich/middle/poor ? Someone with two houses rich? one house middle? no houses poor? transportation? food?
>so a $150K salary in the Bay Area might make you exactly as "wealthy" as a $50K salary in El Paso.
So, kind of an aside, the Bay Area example can work out much better for you, if you're a property owner. Since, while you're paying a lot, you're also getting a lot of equity compared to most other places and that equity (assuming a bubble doesn't burst) is the same anywhere you take it. I've met many CA/NY transplants who have brought a lot of equity with them and driven up housing prices because not only are they used to paying a higher % of salary, they also have CA housing equity, I guess what I'm saying is the inflated cost of housing isn't necessarily a sunk cost/equalizer in the long run if you can plan accordingly.
It's making lower and middle class areas into upper and middle class areas rather quickly (not the only reason of course).
That difference, for me, explains why you need a bigger salary in the Bay Area to cover basic expenses rather than say El Paso, so a $150K salary in the Bay Area might make you exactly as "wealthy" as a $50K salary in El Paso.
So then the question for me is, does wealth define rich/middle/poor ? Someone with two houses rich? one house middle? no houses poor? transportation? food?