Originally Posted by AustinChief
While his number is high, at best it would apply to UPPER middle class.. the rest of you need to get you figures straight. His number was for HOUSEHOLD income.
We discussed this in another thread... there is NO solid definition of middle class, so we are all going to have different ideas.
Personally my range for household income would be ~$75k to ~$250k for the entire range of "middle class."
Romney's range is far too narrow for the entirety of middle class, It is also at the extreme top end BUT it certainly isn't UPPER class.
If he had simply stated "upper middle class" there would be nothing to complain about... of course I doubt that would stop some of you anyway.
EDIT: to be clear.. the entire concept is flawed in today's world.. go back to 1950 if you want to focus on this dumb ass rhetoric (this goes for all politicians and pundits) and if you want to try to be slightly more accurate, you'd need to add in some type of "credit" for stay at home moms. Otherwise you could have two parents that work and spend an assload on daycare and it skews the figures.
Dude, $75k a year for a family is the top end of middle class.
If you're pulling down more than a $100k a year for a family of four, in most cities, you're living very comfortably in a $325-$400k home in a nice neighborhood. You're not struggling and living paycheck to paycheck, which IMO, is the definition of the middle class.