Janet Collins
Billy MIn 2008, what exactly is "Middle Class"?
May 22nd 2008 12:49
The anticipation in the lead up to the Federal Budget generated so much tension it could surely only have been outdone by Big Brother and Idol. Who was going to win? Who was going to lose? Were some of the bonuses handed out by the previous government going to remain or even be means tested?
All the commentary speculating of what the budget might have in it triggered countless references to “middle class”. Many of the articles I read used the term in a derogatory way. “Middle class welfare” was one that I read in countless articles, suggesting those who could afford services should not expect the government to pay for them. But what exactly is “middle class”?
The Macquarie Dictionary describes “middle class” as “a social class intermediate between the upper and lower classes, as a fluid socio-economic grouping comprising especially business and professional people and public servants of middle income, who do not have an upper-class or establishment background”.
That description alone invites many more questions. In Australia, what does it sit in the middle of? In days gone by, there was a “working class” and a “middle class” and everyone above that was labelled as just plain wealthy, unlike in Britain for example where there is a clear aristocracy. Australia mostly focussed attention on the “working class” and the “middle class” where lines were drawn between professions and income.
Now things are different. Many people move through various jobs and professions throughout their working life. Many of the traditional working class jobs have been reduced or eliminated through technological advances. Income for many can now come from very different sources such as shares and investments rather than a wage. And while anyone can escalate from a position of disadvantage to one of privilege, so can vast wealth be lost.
The class terms never really sat well with me but if we were to ask these commentators where “middle class” started and finished in terms of salary, how would they respond? Say we used the recent cut off point for the baby bonus – a combined income of $150,000 - as the starting point for the “middle class starting point, at what level of salary does it stop? Maybe it could stop at households with a combined income of half a million or a million dollars? That’s a fairly big range and a big difference from the start to the finish. Then of course, what would we label those who have income more than this?
Australia has always prided itself on being egalitarian – completely classless. It has always seemed a little bit of a false boast to me. Our socio-economic groups, as many social demographers call them today, are now much further apart. Just as we have always been reluctant to refer to any group as the “upper class”, we now no longer refer to any group in society as the “working class”. So why hold on to the “middle class”?
It’s about time some of our commentators moved along with the times. “Middle class” was never really that valid in Australia but it is a term that is even less relevant now.
All the commentary speculating of what the budget might have in it triggered countless references to “middle class”. Many of the articles I read used the term in a derogatory way. “Middle class welfare” was one that I read in countless articles, suggesting those who could afford services should not expect the government to pay for them. But what exactly is “middle class”?
The Macquarie Dictionary describes “middle class” as “a social class intermediate between the upper and lower classes, as a fluid socio-economic grouping comprising especially business and professional people and public servants of middle income, who do not have an upper-class or establishment background”.
That description alone invites many more questions. In Australia, what does it sit in the middle of? In days gone by, there was a “working class” and a “middle class” and everyone above that was labelled as just plain wealthy, unlike in Britain for example where there is a clear aristocracy. Australia mostly focussed attention on the “working class” and the “middle class” where lines were drawn between professions and income.
Now things are different. Many people move through various jobs and professions throughout their working life. Many of the traditional working class jobs have been reduced or eliminated through technological advances. Income for many can now come from very different sources such as shares and investments rather than a wage. And while anyone can escalate from a position of disadvantage to one of privilege, so can vast wealth be lost.
The class terms never really sat well with me but if we were to ask these commentators where “middle class” started and finished in terms of salary, how would they respond? Say we used the recent cut off point for the baby bonus – a combined income of $150,000 - as the starting point for the “middle class starting point, at what level of salary does it stop? Maybe it could stop at households with a combined income of half a million or a million dollars? That’s a fairly big range and a big difference from the start to the finish. Then of course, what would we label those who have income more than this?
Australia has always prided itself on being egalitarian – completely classless. It has always seemed a little bit of a false boast to me. Our socio-economic groups, as many social demographers call them today, are now much further apart. Just as we have always been reluctant to refer to any group as the “upper class”, we now no longer refer to any group in society as the “working class”. So why hold on to the “middle class”?
It’s about time some of our commentators moved along with the times. “Middle class” was never really that valid in Australia but it is a term that is even less relevant now.
| 43 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
