Is 90k pay middle class

Fade and Die

Medal Winner
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Messages
4,371
Location
Hornchurch
Visit site
Money never had anything to do with class. As a tradesmen I will never be considered anything except working class. I have no problem with that.

I think If you went to a secondary comprehensive school you will be working class, if you went to an independent private school you will probably be middle class and if you went to any of the top public schools then you will be upper class. Only my opinion and there will be plenty of exceptions to the rule.
 

PJ87

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Apr 1, 2016
Messages
21,835
Location
Havering
Visit site
Money never had anything to do with class. As a tradesmen I will never be considered anything except working class. I have no problem with that.

I think If you went to a secondary comprehensive school you will be working class, if you went to an independent private school you will probably be middle class and if you went to any of the top public schools then you will be upper class. Only my opinion and there will be plenty of exceptions to the rule.

Your not wrong, I'll always be considering working class. As I have to work to exist.

I can't live on my assets for example
 

Bunkermagnet

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 14, 2014
Messages
8,541
Location
Kent
Visit site
Money never had anything to do with class. As a tradesmen I will never be considered anything except working class. I have no problem with that.

I think If you went to a secondary comprehensive school you will be working class, if you went to an independent private school you will probably be middle class and if you went to any of the top public schools then you will be upper class. Only my opinion and there will be plenty of exceptions to the rule.
Point of order sir.
I went to a State Technical High School ( they changed it's name to a "Grammer school" just as I entered the 5th year, which was my final year) Where do I fit in?.....I want to fit in:)
 

Mudball

Assistant Pro
Joined
Sep 21, 2017
Messages
4,745
Visit site
Did one of our leaders say 'i grew up in a middle class household, but i became working class when i went to work at McD at 16'..
 

Backache

Assistant Pro
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
2,617
Visit site
If they need to work to retirement then aren't they working class but just higher earning working class? I'm not sure there is a "middle class" as most people either need to work to live or have enough that they don't need to work.
Well they might be according to one definition given here but I would suggest that
a) It is not a very common definition
b)It probably has little utility.

Originally there was a difference between unskilled and manual labour versus professional/managerial style work as a definition this useage has probably grown slightly less common.

However people who have enough money to live in comfort without work probably accounts for less than 1% of the adult pre retirement population and dividing this group into upper and middle and putting the rest into working has little utility though there is no absolute reason why anyone can define it as they wish but few others probably share that definition thus making communication more difficult.
 

SwingsitlikeHogan

Major Champion
Joined
Jul 24, 2012
Messages
33,280
Visit site
Class is nothing more than a state of mind, a social construct that has nothing to do with wealth in this day and age.

Millionaire builders are not middle or upper class. I am not middle class but have decent income.
My income was a good bit short of £90k but my wife had a pretty well paid nurses job in the NHS. But in truth, though it was good that we had a decent combined income, that hasn't ever been what has really mattered to us.

The values that we learned from our parents (in both of our cases true old fashioned financially poor working class backgrounds of the 20s and early 30s); that we try to live to, and that we have looked to pass on to our children are, to us, more important than financial wealth and owning stuff.

We don't think of ourselves as any class, though others would no doubt call us middle class, we just aim to be useful and considerate members of society beyond our front door.

All that aside I'd consider £90k a year to be a very good income for a single person, an income that many, if not most across the uk, can only really dream of.
 
Last edited:

Voyager EMH

Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Joined
Mar 14, 2021
Messages
6,196
Location
Leicestershire
Visit site
Well they might be according to one definition given here but I would suggest that
a) It is not a very common definition
b)It probably has little utility.

Originally there was a difference between unskilled and manual labour versus professional/managerial style work as a definition this useage has probably grown slightly less common.

However people who have enough money to live in comfort without work probably accounts for less than 1% of the adult pre retirement population and dividing this group into upper and middle and putting the rest into working has little utility though there is no absolute reason why anyone can define it as they wish but few others probably share that definition thus making communication more difficult.
The total amount of stuff that can be owned in the UK and has a monetary value is about £12 trillion. (£12,000,000,000,000)

10% of households own 43% of this wealth.

I believe your estimate of less than 1% might be too low.

The net worth of wealth in the UK adult population puts all those in the top 10% with an average of £1.5 million.
Probably should be more like 3% are wealthy enough to not need to work.

The top 10% is skewed by the top 1% having an average net worth of over £5 million.
Only 3% have average net worth of £1.5 million or more.

The UK is a very wealthy country.
 
Last edited:

Backache

Assistant Pro
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
2,617
Visit site
The total amount of stuff that can be owned in the UK and has a monetary value is about £12 trillion. (£12,000,000,000,000)

10% of households own 43% of this wealth.

I believe your estimate of less than 1% might be too low.

The net worth of wealth in the UK adult population puts all those in the top 10% with an average of £1.5 million.
Probably should be more like 3% are wealthy enough to not need to work.

The top 10% is skewed by the top 1% having an average net worth of over £5 million.
Only 3% have average net worth of £1.5 million or more.

The UK is a very wealthy country.
Wealth includes equity in property which saves on rent but provides no income. This is where a lot of UK wealth is.
£1.5 M sounds impressive but does not generate a large inflation adjusted income for a family to live off.
 

cliveb

Head Pro
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Messages
2,728
Visit site
I think what CliveB is saying is that 2 people should have been doing the job, not killing 1 person by lumbering them with everything
Yes, that's precisely what I was getting at. Re-reading the way I phrased it, I see how it could be interpreted another way so apologies for not being crystal clear.

PS. Sorry for the delay in following up, have been on a plane today coming back from Turkey. (Golf in warm sunshine 😁)
 

Voyager EMH

Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Joined
Mar 14, 2021
Messages
6,196
Location
Leicestershire
Visit site
Wealth includes equity in property which saves on rent but provides no income. This is where a lot of UK wealth is.
£1.5 M sounds impressive but does not generate a large inflation adjusted income for a family to live off.
Remember that the £1.5 million figure is per adult.

This is enough for an adult to not have to work. Choice of modest abode and other properties to rent out to provide an income is obviously feasible.
We are looking for a type of wealth threshold that makes not working a distinct possibility.
In reality many such people will be working and earning to accumulate more wealth at the same time as enjoying a much more enjoyable lifestyle for a family than not working would provide.

But for the vast vast majority of adults, swapping their years of work ahead and all their current savings and assets for £1.5 million now and no work, would be a sensible choice.
 

Backache

Assistant Pro
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
2,617
Visit site
Remember that the £1.5 million figure is per adult.

This is enough for an adult to not have to work. Choice of modest abode and other properties to rent out to provide an income is obviously feasible.
We are looking for a type of wealth threshold that makes not working a distinct possibility.
In reality many such people will be working and earning to accumulate more wealth at the same time as enjoying a much more enjoyable lifestyle for a family than not working would provide.

But for the vast vast majority of adults, swapping their years of work ahead and all their current savings and assets for £1.5 million now and no work, would be a sensible choice.
Most adults with that kind of wealth will have accumulated it through property inflation plus savings made whilst working. So they have been working most of their lives. They may be able to retire slightly earlier than the age for collecting the state pension but it has hardly relieved them of the need to work for most of their lives and certainly not whilst raising a family.
 

Voyager EMH

Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Joined
Mar 14, 2021
Messages
6,196
Location
Leicestershire
Visit site
Most adults with that kind of wealth will have accumulated it through property inflation plus savings made whilst working. So they have been working most of their lives. They may be able to retire slightly earlier than the age for collecting the state pension but it has hardly relieved them of the need to work for most of their lives and certainly not whilst raising a family.
Yes, another true to life scenario.
But £1.5 million is still a good roundabout figure to make not working feasible for an individual. Some would find it possible with less than that.
 
Top