Where is the line though? Many people that could be considered middle class are realistically rich enough to never have to work again if they didn’t want to. But they want their flash cars and private school for the kids so they do need to work to keep that level of luxury. Even if they could still live comfortably without working.
If I was to start van living (hard as I can’t drive) and rented out my house I wouldn’t have to work another day in my life. Does that make me part of the wealth class, despite having always been at/close to minimum wage? Getting enough rent to pay for my mortgage and leave me with many hundreds extra would not be difficult. Go for a HMO and turn the living space into more bedrooms like a standard scumlord would possibly even leave me with over £1000 a month. The only work I would have to do is paint over some mould occasionally.
I don’t know why everyone is avoiding the Marxist terms, as they are far more accurate than low/middle/upper or whatever people are talking about in this thread.
Those wealthy workers are petit-bourgeoisie. They own enough capital so that they no longer have to struggle in the rat race of capitalism, but not enough to be controlling entire industries or multibillion dollar companies like the bourgeoisie.
Initially wanted to say petit bourgeoisie isn’t the right term here but now the more I think about it, yeah?
It doesn’t really fit the normal examples of petit bourgeoisie but economically I think they are in the same place even if they are not small business owners or sole traders.
I thought petit-bourgeois made their money through assets? So they aren’t workers. High earners are still proletariat if they are selling their labor.
Where is the line though
The line is “do you need to work ever to maintain at least the current living standard”. That’s the division between working class and wealthy class.
If I was to start van living (hard as I can’t drive) and rented out my house I wouldn’t have to work another day in my life
Not maintaining at least current living standard.
The line is “do you need to work ever to maintain at least the current living standard”
The answer would be “no” for most europeans. Cost of living in asia is around 400EUR a month, with a higher living standard.
A retiree couple that scrounged up enough to have ~$50k yearly budget for the remainder of their days falls into your definition of wealthy, and I would argue that doesn’t line up. They are not, in fact, wealthy.
Yup. Our family grew 5 years ago so we needed a bigger house. Well, didn’t “need” but would have to remodel the old to accommodate. We were within our means before moving. Still are in the new house but budget is a lot tighter than it was in the bigger house. Didn’t realize until hindsight that “bigger house, bigger (more expensive) problems” would occur.
We could move again and make a good profit on the house now, but I see it as an asset for future income down the road, although as my parents and aquantisces parents age, I’m learning more and more that at least in the USA, they take everything you’ve worked for away from you once you can slave no more. I’m going to do my best to protect my assets for my family before it comes to that.
Hopefully you at least have a will, but I would urge you to look at establishing a living trust as well.
Yeah, both are on the list but kids take a lot of time away! We have a hefty life insurance policy right now at least. I know trust needs established for at least 5 years to be considered enforceable.
So if I was already living in a van I would be wealthy?
When compared to other people living in vans? Absolutely.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 months ago
pretty easy. if you had a million in the bank at 4% return you’d have a income of 40K a year. if you could live on that income you’d be all set and not have to work.
so scale that up a bit, say 5 million in the bank at 5% return, that would be an income of 250,000K a year.
hayvan@feddit.nl 4 months ago
That’s only part of the story. Seeking more wealth to spend more is not healthy in my opinion but humanly understandable.
There is an inflection point, I don’t know what level of wealth brings it, but after that it is not about earning more to spend more, it’s just growing your wealth for the sake of growing it. It becomes a game of increasing some numbers at the expense of everybody else.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 months ago
Right, but someone living comfortably on the interest of £1m, are we really calling them part of the wealthy class, but not someone who works for a 6 figure salary and has more wealth than the first guy while living in more luxury?
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 4 months ago
it’s relative to where you live.
where i live people make 300K a year and feel impoverished. if you go three hours away, making 30K a year is a total good salary.