Hacker News Reader

Chart which nicely shows this at http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2016/06/the...

According to that chart's definitions, a San Francisco household where there is one child and in which the husband makes $65k, and the wife makes $35k, is upper middle class. This is not upper middle class as traditionally defined.

Their range for upper middle class of $100k to $350k doesn't make any sense.

That's a huge disparity of incomes and, based on the locale, it means an even larger gap in discretionary income. In fact looking at the numbers without looking at the discretionary income makes no sense whatsoever, as that is the main factor of economic mobility in the first place.

I think that their approach is to define "upper middle class" as "double the median household income". The problem is that they defined the median household income nationally, not locally.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com