It's really not strange nor contradictory. Most people probably think of "middle class" like this:
- lower class: on welfare & food stamps
- middle class: have a job, must work for a living
- upper class: not having to work and living off interest payments of wealth investments
Therefore, the middle class covers the wide spectrum of $9/hr Starbucks baristas and $500k white shoe lawyers. For "lower class", most people use the label "poor". For "upper class", most people use the label "rich".
(I'm guessing Bloomberg was attempting to give an insight similar to the mathematical contradiction of "everybody thinks they're an above-average driver". However, they misunderstood how people self-identify themselves as "middle class".)
- lower class: on welfare & food stamps
- middle class: have a job, must work for a living
- upper class: not having to work and living off interest payments of wealth investments
Therefore, the middle class covers the wide spectrum of $9/hr Starbucks baristas and $500k white shoe lawyers. For "lower class", most people use the label "poor". For "upper class", most people use the label "rich".
(I'm guessing Bloomberg was attempting to give an insight similar to the mathematical contradiction of "everybody thinks they're an above-average driver". However, they misunderstood how people self-identify themselves as "middle class".)