Why did you cut out the starting salary part?

I know averages aren't the same as class, but, middle-class would be about half that, if middle-class=average salary, in the USA.

https://www.google.com/search?q=average+starting+salary+in+u...

> While there are a few outliers, the general average salary for college graduates comes to about $50,000

Class is defined based on lifestyle, not statistics. The average income in the US is nowhere near enough to sustain a middle class lifestyle.

Yes, this is exactly why I cut out the “starting” piece.

So then if it isn't middle class then which class do you think it is?

The whole of USA the median household wage is 65k. If you can earn 100k in your first year you're upper middle at minimum.

"The whole of the USA" isn't a good metric to use since wages vary a lot between areas. What matters to your "middle class-ness" is the median wage in your particular area. And it's quite a bit higher than $65k in some areas.

Consider that the US Dept. of Housing and Urban Development considers residents of San Francisco to be "low income" if they make under $82,200 as an individual or $117,400 as a family of four as of 2018[0]. Those numbers are 80% of median income, which means in SF for an individual the median income was about $103k. You said, "if you can earn 100k in your first year you're upper middle at minimum", but, alas, no: if you made $100k in 2018 in San Francisco, you were barely even middle-middle class.

Also consider that making the median wage in your area may still not allow you financial security. We're defining "middle class" here in relation to median wage, which may not be a universal definition. I would expect it has more to do with the median resident's purchasing power.

[0] https://sfgov.org/scorecards/safety-net/poverty-san-francisc...