ROTHENBURGER: What, exactly, is this ‘middle class’ everyone’s talking about?

Justin Trudeau is all about “fairness for the middle class.” John Horgan’s prime objective is “a break for the middle class” and “affordability” for the middle class. The media judge provincial and federal budgets on what they do for “the middle class.”

So I started thinking about the middle class a couple of days before federal finance minister Bill Morneau delivered his budget this week. You know, the one the Conservatives think is a “cover-up” and some sort of plot to “change the channel.”

I figured it was a pretty sure thing he’d make sure the middle class was looked after. I was not disappointed. It’s right there in the title: “Investing in the Middle Class.” Morneau’s Facebook page talks about “Growing the Middle Class.” A short video clip shows him coming out of a coffee shop and handing somebody a coffee in a disposable cup; others show him talking to (presumably middle class) folks on the street.

Setting aside the issue of disposable cups for another day, I assume by this that he wants the middle class to be bigger than it already is.

I admit I struggle with figuring out what, exactly, the middle class is. Turns out I’m not alone. We always think of it as those who aren’t poor but aren’t rich, either. There are subsections of the middle class, from lower (or working) middle class to upper middle class.

Those who haven’t yet made it into the middle class yearn for the day they can get there. That doesn’t just include the unemployed and the working poor but those who are new to the workforce and still becoming established in the economy.

But the middle class isn’t defined by age, either. It can range from millennials to seniors.

In truth, the middle class takes in a very broad swath of Canadians, or a very narrow one, depending on whose definition you like. It could range from a quarter to most of us, but the aspirations are pretty much the same — a nice house in the burbs, a white picket fence, and two cars in the garage.

Most importantly, Canadians want discretionary income — generous annual vacations, good seats at the theatre, and an SUV.

Me, I live in a rural area without a picket fence and drive a 14-year-old truck. Regardless, I think of myself as comfortably in the middle of the middle class. Or, at least, comfortably above the cut-off. And yet, another definition of middle class is “the social group between the upper and working classes, including professional and business workers and their families.”

I’m not a professional like a doctor or lawyer, and I’ve been a working person all my life, so maybe I’m not as well off as I thought. A 2014 Maclean’s magazine article did what I think is a pretty good job of tackling the question of what makes the middle class. It suggested that if the middle class includes those who earn

between 75 per cent and 125 per cent of the median income, in Canada it would cover families earning between $35,000 and $70,000 a year.

By that definition, only a quarter of Canadians would fall into the middle class. Using a range of $32,000 to $95,000 a year, the middle class would expand to 40 per cent.

Yet another way of looking at the middle class is to include families who have at least a third of their income left over after paying for food, shelter and clothing. And, of course, taxes. This left-over cash is the “discretionary income” I mentioned earlier.

That seems like a pretty good way of defining the middle class. It means those who aren’t just working to survive, but have a life after work. That’s where having a nicer car and clothes, and going to the movies comes in.

But, clearly, the middle class is a movable target. An article just a couple of weeks ago in thebalance.com described middle class not as 75 to 125 per cent of median income but 67 to 200 per cent. That’s the range used by the Pew Research Center in the U.S.

Yet another analysis bases its definition on whether or not we own a car, send our kids to university, take a family vacation, and have a good retirement plan. And another, newer Maclean’s article says, “Most Canadians think of themselves as middle class. In fact, the term is so elastic that politicians know they have just about everybody’s ear when they talk about ‘middle class’ goals and aspirations. We think they are talking to us.”

Public opinion surveys show this to be true. Which explains why politicians are so damn determined to do what’s right for the middle class.

The question arises, of course, if government is so focused on taxpayers with disposable income, what about those who are just scraping by — the renters, the ones making do with an old beater and living on Kraft dinner and soup.

The middle class is, it turns out, a meaningless label better suited to politics than everyday life. Basically, we consider ourselves to be over-taxed compared to everyone else. We think we should be taxed less and they should be taxed more.

Politicians know this. They know full well “middle class” has no more meaning than “working class,” “making life affordable” or “tough choices” and other slogans governments come up with to convince us they’re doing it all for us.

They know what’s important is that, whatever the middle class is, we all want to be part of it.

Mel Rothenburger is a former mayor of Kamloops and newspaper editor. He publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, and is a director on the Thompson-Nicola Regional District board. He can be reached at mrothenburger@armchairmayor.ca.

—

Editor’s Note: This opinion piece reflects the views of its author, and does not necessarily represent the views of CFJC Today or the Jim Pattison Broadcast Group.

by Armchair Mayor

ROTHENBURGER: What, exactly, is this ‘middle class’ everyone’s talking about?

Our Community