Here’s a question for an economist.
We’ve been hearing a lot this week about how the middle class in India is 300 million strong. Why, that would make just the middle class there the size of the entire population of the US. But do people in the US assume that middle class in India is the same as middle class in the US? There was a study in the mid-90s I’ve seen referenced by the National Council of Applied Economic Research
on this site, for instance:
The first dilemma in looking at the Indian middle class is defining it. Simply converting living costs from Indian Rupees (RS) to dollars is one sure way to misunderstand the economics of life in India. One aid is the National Council of Applied Economic Researchs mid-1990s report on the growing Indian middle class. It was based on a national population that was estimated to be 900 million rather than todays 1.1 billion. The survey said the Very Rich consisted of about 6 million (or 67/100 of 1 %). Below them were three sub classes: The Consuming class, about 150 million people (17%,) the Climbers, about 275 million people (30 %); and the Aspirants, about 275 million (30 %). Beneath these were the Destitute, estimated to be 210 million (23%).
The Consuming class was reported to have an annual income between $1,300 and $6,000, and typically owned a TV, cassette recorder, pressure cooker, ceiling fan, bicycle, and wristwatch. Two-thirds of them own a scooter, color TV, electric iron, blender, and sewing machine, but less than half of them own a refrigerator. India is now the worlds largest market for blenders and the second largest for scooters (after China). Sixty percent of all urban homes have TV sets and 68 million of all Indian homes have TV sets. More than 32 million of those have cable, growing 8% a year. By comparison, only 22 million homes have telephones.
Just to be clear, the Consuming class is the rung just below the Rich. The Climbers and Aspirants are between them the Destitute.