Great post DWCAP re the definition of “middle class”. In addition to what I believe are changes in the parameters of the defined “class” over generations, I think you could ask 10 different people today how they define middle class and probably get 10 different parameters.

It goes without saying (but i’ll say it anyway) that class definitions seem to be tied by many observers to visible material possessions and lifestyle actions as opposed to stock portfolio balances and personal net worth. Back in the day of more limited credit availability, people were essentially forced to live within parameters set by their income. With the advent of the age of easy credit, it became increasingly easier to magically transform oneself up a level or two in class, in terms of visible class indicators, that is.

So now we have these huge numbers of people who have been using credit to raise their visible class standing, which for many has acted as a detriment to their actual net worth. Ironically, the inevitable ‘come to Jesus’ moments facing many of these folks will come to pass and may deposit them back at a class lower than where they started. What a journey.

Which leaves me with the question that dove tails into DWCAP’s commentary – what is “middle class”? Is a family with two newer cars, with a 42″ flat screen, eat out once a week, one two week vacation a year involving air travel, blah blah blah – is that middle class? What if the same family has a negative net worth? Can they still be middle class?

I think class definitions are almost irrecovably tainted, especially when viewed through the eyes of the younger generation, due to the over-consumption of the typical American, the Age of Entitlement effect, the keeping up with the Jones mentality, etc. In this instance, perception is most certainly not reality.