Here is the key paragraph that should have been quoted:
“Bottom line: For a household with three people, being middle class means making between about $42,000 and $126,000. If your family of three makes less than $42,000, then you are in the lower class. If your family brings in more than $126,000, you are in the upper class.”
A household income of $64K is therefore the median.
But there are many flaws in this methodology. It doesn’t take taxes or living expenses into account, or regional variations, and doesn’t account for wealth. If you earn $60K but own your house outright, you are much better off than the guy paying a huge mortgage.
Furthermore, many people have other money coming in that is not listed as income on their tax returns for various reasons.
It is really hard to say. Everybody knows their own dodges to minimize their official income while living well, but the economists are blind to them.
Yeah, I saw that too.
Correct me if I’m wrong here on so something else I see: that the graphs show the lower class remaing somewhat constant while middle and upper class together have expanded as population has grown. That would seem to be evidence of upward mobility, showing middle class moving to the lower end of upper class, while lower class is moving into the lower end of middle class.
But at a quick glance the graph doesn’t appear to show that, since it juxtaposes middle class on one side against combined upper and lower class on the other.