"Depends. There's a "sociological" definition, that depends on one's occupation. Professionals, the self-employed, small businesspersons, etc. There's a more "economic" one that's based on income; a common version of that is a household with an income between 63% and 150% of the median. Mostly, middle class is a pretty mushy concept that serves to mystify one's social position."
Funny. He seemed to be less "mystified" a month and a half ago when he wrote on 7/26:
"You're just wrong to say there's no demographically significant middle class in the U.S. It's about a third of the working population and probably half the electorate."
and then again on the same day:
"The professional-managerial class is not small - a bit over a third of the workforce, and probably half the current electorate. Here's the breakdown from the June employment report, table A-7 (apologies for the graceless Excel-induced truncations). There are probably some "managers" who have fairly working-class jobs, but still, these numbers are not demographically insignificant."
Hopefully this signifies a retreat from an adherence to the notion of a middle class altogether. And I will give him credit for at least standing firm on upholding income figures and job position as indicators of class. Now perhaps he can explain, outside of strictly bourgeois economic pretexts, how one could possibly do so?
--adx
--------------------------------- Yahoo! for Good
Click here to donate to the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20051005/9d30cfb1/attachment.htm>