This is interesting.

mrsconn23

http://twocents.lifehacker.com/the-salary-required-to-be-middle-class-in-every-state-1695393156

*Barbie*

it's interesting to understand their definition of "middle class" based solely on income level. (especially gross income)

PMeg819

I have thoughts on this but mostly that I need to be a little more grateful.

KatWAG

Why are Utah and Wyoming so high on the list?

Heffalump

That cannot be right.  No freaking way.  For NC, the upper bound is $91k and change--household, not individual.  So if you have two people earning $46k annually, you're then above upper middle class?  No way.  It's nowhere near poor, to be sure, but that's, say, a couple of teachers with a few years experience, a decent house in a decent area, etc.  (Nothing special, but solidly middle class.)  Nowhere near what I would consider to be upper middle class, let alone above.

I may be skewed being in a major metro area, since a lot of the state is still rural--maybe for $92k, you could live like kings in some mountain holler.  But I'm skeptical. 

*Barbie*

@Heffalump - agreed re: metro area vs rural. Looking at the PA numbers, they're much more realistic (i.e. you'd be more "comfortable" in the $52-104K range - $34k seems really low) for Pittsburgh metro area (fairly low COL) vs. Philly metro area. 

I'm curious about their definition of "middle class" based solely on a percentage of mean gross household income.