On first blush, those seem like fair definitions.

Poor has been well (and overly) defined by Mr. Scalzi on his blog.

Rich means never *having* to worry about being able to pay for the basics of life. I’m sure rich people worry about money just like the rest of us, but food, shelter, security and some level of personal enrichment are always within their grasp.

Middle class is everyone else. You’ve always got food, but sometimes you wonder if you will next time. The basic necessities of modern life, transportation to work, clothing that meets a dress code, etc. are all things you can count on… Mostly.

Me? As a military member, I’ve always got options. My family never has to go unfed. We’ve got full medical and dental coverage. If I’m not rich, I’m close. We stress about money regularly, but we don’t worry about whether we can pay rent, pay for groceries, or whether I’ll have a job next month. We worry about car payments and luxury bills (like internet and cable TV).

Yes to all that as well.

Josh,

Short, punchy answer: The government is organized force; therefore, its actions are coercive. Instead, I am envisioning the actions of free men freely offering charity to each other.

Yes, this is somewhat utopian. However, my Christianity compels me both to state that this is the model and that it will be attained as Jesus changes the hearts of the people.

Huh. Apparently for me, “short”=two paragraphs. I’ll have to keep that in mind.

Total can of worms, but I gotta ask: why not? Why can’t government function as a means for the more-capable to assist the less-capable?

I also view this as a little more optimistic. Improving yourself tends to improve your capacity, but that improvement need not be financial. Sure, it is often hard, sometimes impossible, but as yardsticks go it’s one that keeps me pretty happy.

-Rob D.

“All of which is to say, it’s not just some knee-jerk denial or blind spot that keeps people from viewing themselves as rich. Over and above the tendency to view ourselves as the norm, there’s a large problem that this is simply an expression of.”

Oh sure. I totally agree with this. Sorry if that wasn’t clearer in the post.

I’ve struggled to answer that question myself. As I mentioned in a previous post, my family was on food stamps for a while. At the same time, we owned a computer and had Internet access. (Dial-up, to be sure, but it was access.) So, were we poor? I mean, we never starved, right?

So, I don’t want to downplay the fact that this is a hard question to answer. I do want to emphasize that we don’t have to attain some (difficult-to-determine) “rich” status before you have this responsibility that I’m talking about.

Oh, Income vs. Wealth? That’s a tricky one, too, but it definitely applies.

All of which is to say, it’s not just some knee-jerk denial or blind spot that keeps people from viewing themselves as rich. Over and above the tendency to view ourselves as the norm, there’s a large problem that this is simply an expression of.

None of which undercuts the core idea that there are usually people with less than you, but I just want to point out it’s far from unreasonable to not perceive ourselves as rich, even though we may be by some yardsticks.

-Rob D.

PS – This also ignores Income vs Wealth and all that other Millionaire Next Door stuff, but I suspect that’s unnecessary complication.