[ClosureChain]

Good point. Actually I think the strict definition of "middle class" should be simply the average in a certain country.

However, for a lot of people including myself, "middle class" means people who own at least a little bit of wealth in the form of savings, enough to be able to survive for six months or a year without a job while not needing to cut costs on anything.

This of course is not the reality for maybe 95% of Mexican Citizens who live in perpetual debt with the banks and would go completely bankrupt if they ever stop working for as little as one month or maybe two.

I live here and believe me, there is not such a thing as a "burgeoning middle class" in Mexico; in fact, such claims sound like the typical BS politicians try to sell to the people.

[true_religion]

> Good point. Actually I think the strict definition of "middle class" should be simply the average in a certain country.

That assumes a normal distribution of wealth. In an authoritarian aristocracy or another similar government structure, you'd see pareto distribution wherein the leadership has 99% of the wealth and the average person is sharing 1%.

Therein by the 'average', there is no middle class.

I think... economically, this is quite true: there is no middle class. Yet we still call people who look like the classical middle class of yesteryear, middle class: professionals, white-collar workers, freelancers, small business owners. It's more of a social class now, than an economic one.