this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
520 points (98.9% liked)
Work Reform
14552 readers
2 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Over $100K ain't chump change, but that also isn't the line where "upper income" starts.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/heres-minimum-salary-required-be-considered-upper-class-2025
And the difference between that level of “upper class” vs the truly wealthy is insane.
Unless you’re in places like CA or NYC, $170k allows for a very comfortable life. It’s nothing to scoff at and it is absolutely beyond what most people in this country have.
But when thinking of the “upper class,” I think most people picture lush lives. Mansions, yachts, foreign vacations, private schools, house staff, etc.
I don’t think most people imagine someone who lives in a nice suburban neighborhood, saves enough money for retirement that they actually expect to retire in their 60s, and takes a modest vacation every year. But that’s closer to what $170k gets you. It’s comfortable and it’s a life most people would kill to have. But it’s a whole lot closer to a stereotyped “middle class” experience than it is to what most people imagine “upper class” to look like.
I was curious how many U.S. households earn at least $170k, and this website responded to asking about 170k by saying that the 80th percentile is $165,068.
You lost me at "vacation", like that's a real thing? (/s)
uh there are still loads of people living on like 30k/yr. you 100k people will fucking live
I never suggested otherwise. I was pointing out how disconnected from reality the really “upper income” CEO is.
The only people you should be concerned about are the ones in the 270k/yr and up tax bracket.
100k/yr isn't enough in a lot of places.
This has gotta be some AI drivel. It even tried to say upper class in San Francisco starts at $69k so unless they’re talking about 1930 this is nonsense.