What is middle class in Calgary?

[GP_Matt]

I think class is stickier than just your current salary. I do like the measure of having a certain percentage of your earnings available for discretionary spending.
I think that middle class should be financially comfortable. Not secure forever but not constantly on the verge of collapse. In that sense, wealth can play a huge factor as can having in demand job skills.

[Oling_Roachinen]

100% quadrant based.

Upper - SW
Middle - NW
Lower - NE
Mix N' Match Fun Bag - SE

[Knalus]

Trying to start by defining the middle is difficult. Start by defining the Lower, and the Upper. The middle class is everyone else. Literally everyone else.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Knalus

Trying to start by defining the middle is difficult. Start by defining the Lower, and the Upper. The middle class is everyone else. Literally everyone else.

^This.

Using the median income to determine what is middle class is pretty pointless when you compare the spectrum of disparity for the people who fall below the median to those who are above it.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by gasman

Best definition I have come across is the point where a family has more than 1/3 of their income available for discretionary spending.

Canada wide that number is statistically about $59,000/year household income (assuming shelter/food/transportation are the essentials). In Alberta that would translate to about $71,000/year

Upper class would be those that make more than double the median income. So Canada overall would be $140,000 and in Alberta $190,000

so to put bounds on the middle class in Alberta

Household Income between $71,000 and $190,000

I would say that the upper threshold for being outside middle class is higher than $190,000.

A two teacher household can make $200,000.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I would say that the upper threshold for being outside middle class is higher than $190,000.

A two teacher household can make $200,000.

I wouldn't.
that's a heck of a lot of money.

two people making more than $100,000 each to me doesn't qualify as middle class.

plus your two teacher example can add about $45,000 value in their benefits, too.

that's a pretty darn good lifestyle.

[Looch City]

$100k salary, $45k benefits, tenured, summers off.

wtf I wanna be a teacher now, right??

[blankall]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I wouldn't.
that's a heck of a lot of money.

two people making more than $100,000 each to me doesn't qualify as middle class.

plus your two teacher example can add about $45,000 value in their benefits, too.

that's a pretty darn good lifestyle.

A lot of it depends on how they've got their financials set up. Two teachers each earning $100k, might only walk away with $140k after taxes. While that's a very comfortable lifestyle, it's not going to allow you to live a truly upper class lifestyle.

Comparatively, a home with two people making $50k/year, might end up with a take home of $80k after taxes.

So you've got a spread between $80k-$140k for the middle class, which seems totally fair.

Now, someone who makes $300k, but runs a corporation, might walk away with $260k post tax, for a single salary. That kind of situation is much more in line with an upper class lifestyle, and it will allow the person to save significantly more and then invest that.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

$100k salary, $45k benefits, tenured, summers off.

wtf I wanna be a teacher now, right??

The entry level salary and the time it takes to get to $100k might deter you.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

The entry level salary and the time it takes to get to $100k might deter you.

$100k is about the max, and that takes 10 years to get, and this is for post-secondary teachers.

You're also looking at a minimum of 5 years of education, plus a struggle to find a permanent job. Realistically, though most post-secondary teachers have a full four year bachelor's plus a two year teacher's college degree. Many have a master's on top of that.

So about 17 years total to get to that $100k/year. The program's themselves are competitive to get into and take quite a bit of work. If you're that driven and consistent of a worker, you could probably make $100k/year with benefits in most fields after 17 years.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

$100k salary, $45k benefits, tenured, summers off.

wtf I wanna be a teacher now, right??

Incoming...

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blankall

You're also looking at a minimum of 5 years of education, plus a struggle to find a permanent job. Realistically, though most post-secondary teachers have a full four year bachelor's plus a two year teacher's college degree. Many have a master's on top of that.

Most teachers have bachelor's in subjects like Sociology, History, and English. Compare the salary of someone with a master's in Sociology, 10 years out of school, with a teacher. I'm liking the teacher's odds of coming out ahead. And unless you work in the public sector, you're unlikely to have benefits - especially a pension - anywhere close to as good as what teachers have.

There's a reason there's no shortage at all of people taking up teaching as a profession. It's a very secure, comfortable, middle-class career, especially compared with anything else you're likely to end up with if you come out of the humanites, social sciences, or fine arts.

[burn_this_city]

Hilarious how these threads always devolve into a discussion about teachers. Anyone else really want to herd 30 coughing, wheezing, human petri-dishes around for 10 months a year? I don't.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I wouldn't.
that's a heck of a lot of money.

two people making more than $100,000 each to me doesn't qualify as middle class.

plus your two teacher example can add about $45,000 value in their benefits, too.

that's a pretty darn good lifestyle.

It's Alberta. Most people are afforded a pretty good lifestyle.

Teachers can make $100,000, Nurses, Police Officers. All of the trades.

I would say basically any family with a working, bachelor educated female in it has a good chance of being around the $200,000 per year mark.

https://www.moneysense.ca/save/finan...lth-test-2015/

This article from 2005 says that the richest 20% in Alberta make over $290,000 per year.

When at least one quarter of the working population in Alberta are pulling in $200K a year in household income, that has to be a middle class earner.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Hilarious how these threads always devolve into a discussion about teachers. Anyone else really want to herd 30 coughing, wheezing, human petri-dishes around for 10 months a year? I don't.

I could list 40 well-paying jobs I'd never want to do. Being difficult or unpleasant is what makes them well-paying in the first place. I'd hate to be a doctor. That doesn't mean I forfeit any right to comment that it's a good job.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

https://www.moneysense.ca/save/finan...lth-test-2015/

This article from 2005 says that the richest 20% in Alberta make over $290,000 per year.

When at least one quarter of the working population in Alberta are pulling in $200K a year in household income, that has to be a middle class earner.

I think you're confused.

In one chart for Canadians it says:

Unattached individuals making $55,499 and up places you in the highest 20%.
Families of two or more making $125,010 and up places you in the highest 20%.

This is the bracket to be in the top 20%. (I.E. At least 80% of people/families earn less than you)

The same chart that has Alberta's top 20% making $290,000 also has the top 20% of all of Canada making $226,792. A huge departure from the other numbers because it's averaging. So the richest 20% would be averaged with billionaires. You could still be in the top 20% making a lot less. That's the only feasible way that the Richest 20% of Calgarians make $363,760 a year.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I think you're confused.

In one chart for Canadians it says:

Unattached individuals making $55,499 and up places you in the highest 20%.
Families of two or more making $125,010 and up places you in the highest 20%.

This is the bracket to be in the top 20%. (I.E. At least 80% of people/families earn less than you)

The same chart that has Alberta's top 20% making $290,000 also has the top 20% of all of Canada making $226,792. A huge departure from the other numbers because it's averaging. So the richest 20% would be averaged with billionaires. You could still be in the top 20% making a lot less. That's the only feasible way that the Richest 20% of Calgarians make $363,760 a year.

This is all a function of Canada's (Also the USA's) broken tax system. Personal corporations allow someone to avoid paying taxes and put aside massive amounts savings, that then generate earnings of their own.

You end up with this wide gap between those able to exploit the tax system and the regular upper middle class employees, who pay the marginal rate of close to 50% taxes.

You're basically lumping in a "consultant" making $400k plus/year and hording that money, most of which is tax free, away with a working middle class family earning just above $200k.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

When at least one quarter of the working population in Alberta are pulling in $200K a year in household income, that has to be a middle class earner.

According to Statscan (2016 census), median total income of couple economic families with children is $137k. There are 90k households in Calgary (out of 559k) with a $200k or higher before tax income. So fair enough, 2x median is still in the middle class range. But it's definitely the upper end.


http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-re...Income&TABID=1

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I think you're confused.

In one chart for Canadians it says:

Unattached individuals making $55,499 and up places you in the highest 20%.
Families of two or more making $125,010 and up places you in the highest 20%.

This is the bracket to be in the top 20%. (I.E. At least 80% of people/families earn less than you)

The same chart that has Alberta's top 20% making $290,000 also has the top 20% of all of Canada making $226,792. A huge departure from the other numbers because it's averaging. So the richest 20% would be averaged with billionaires. You could still be in the top 20% making a lot less. That's the only feasible way that the Richest 20% of Calgarians make $363,760 a year.

Sure, but a two income family pulling in $200,000+ (pretax) is not something that is out of reach for the common man in Alberta.

I would say its relatively common.

The median after tax income is around $100,000. So pretax median is maybe 140,000-150,000.

That's for an average joe family.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Sure, but a two income family pulling in $200,000+ (pretax) is not something that is out of reach for the common man in Alberta.

I would say its relatively common.

The median after tax income is around $100,000. So pretax median is maybe 140,000-150,000.

That's for an average joe family.

200K for a two income family isn't out of reach, but can be difficult, especially if you did not or were not able to get any post secondary schooling.
I would call it the fringes of being in the middle class.

I don't know many people at all where the couple makes combined over $200,000.
those people don't mingle with mine, I guess.

maybe there isn't enough classes.

by some of the responses here my family is living in poverty. I'd like to think I'm middle class, but maybe I'm worse off than I thought.