&gt;<i>I hear this a lot but I really don&#x27;t understand the logic. Because the middle class is a subjective and proportionate categorization, your target is always going to be moving.</i><p>Of course the target its moving. That means society is progressing in the aggregate. So why keep &quot;desired standards of living&quot; stuck in the past? In 1840 having no electricity and running water was considered acceptable. Today we think even internet is a kind of necessary good.<p>So, with progress the definition of rich &#x2F; middle class &#x2F; poverty etc should move too. Who said poverty is some absolute measurable state? Obviously you shouldn&#x27;t consider yourself &quot;rich&quot; or even middle class, if you live in a trailer park with $100&#x2F;month, just because you have housing, electricity and lots of available food in Walmart, whereas 1200 A.D peasants and 10000 B.C cavemen had neither...<p>What was the case &quot;in the past&quot; doesn&#x27;t come into play when people compare their status to other contemporaries -- and the level of the society they live in.