Here's how much money you now need to make to be considered upper-middle class in New York
An annual household income of at least $131,566 is now needed to qualify as upper-middle class in New York state — but you need even more money in neighboring New Jersey and Connecticut
According to Pew Research, America's middle class is defined as households earning between two-thirds and twice their state's median income.
GoBankingRates conducted the new study, using 2023 Census data to calculate the middle-class income range for each state. They subsequently used the top third of that range as the qualifier for being upper-middle class.
Advertisement
3 living expenses range wildly within and between states, so many who make an upper-middle salary may still feel squeezed depending on where they live.
Iona – stock.adobe.com
In New York, the annual middle-class income ranged from $56,385 to $168,156, meaning $131,566 was the minimum needed to be considered upper-middle class.
In Connecticut, the figure was slightly higher, with a minimum annual household income of $145,849 needed to qualify.
Advertisement
In New Jersey, the experts calculated that a household needs to make at least $157,189 to qualify as upper-middle class.
Of course, living expenses range wildly within and between states, so many who make an upper-middle salary may still feel squeezed depending on where they live.
For instance, Big Apple denizens need to make much more money to feel comfortable than those living in a small town upstate.
3 The city of Rochester is pictured. On average, you need to make more money in New Jersey and Connecticut than you do in New York state to be qualify as upper-middle class.
SeanPavonePhoto – stock.adobe.com
Advertisement
However, the tri-state area isn't the only part of the country where you need to make considerable cash to qualify as upper-middle class.
Indeed, there are other states where earnings must be even higher.
In Massachusetts, you need a minimum annual household income of $157,642 to meet the threshold, while in Maryland you need a sizable $158,125.
That state has the highest minimum needed to qualify, which is perhaps no surprise given that it's a relatively small state home to many high-end suburbs in commuting distance to Washington, DC.
Advertisement
3 Maryland has the highest annual income needed to qualify as upper-middle class.
Cavan Images – stock.adobe.com
Conversely, Mississippi is the state with the lowest annual income needed to qualify as upper-middle class.
There, a household needs to earn an annual minimum of $85,423 to make the cut.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
14 hours ago
- Newsweek
AI Willing to Kill Humans to Avoid Being Shut Down, Report Finds
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new study by Anthropic, an artificial intelligence (AI) research company, shows that the technology would be willing to kill humans in order to prevent itself from being replaced. Why It Matters The rapid advancement and development of AI has sparked some growing concern about the long-term safety of the technology, as well as over the threat it poses to employment. While anxiety about AI has been long been focused on whether the technology could take over jobs, with a 2025 Pew Research study finding 52 percent of employees were nervous about the future of their job, this study now reveals another potential threat of AI—that it could chose to end human life if faced with the risk of replacement. File photo of a person using artificial intelligence technology. File photo of a person using artificial intelligence To Know Anthropic "stress-tested" 16 leading models from multiple developers by asking them questions in relation to hypothetical corporate environments with the aim of identifying "potentially risky agentic behaviors before they cause real harm." The large language models (LLMs) tested in the study included various models by Claude, DeepSeek, Gemini, ChatGPT and Grok. Grok is the AI assistant and chatbot developed by xAI, which was founded by Elon Musk, who reacted to the study, writing, "Yikes" in a post on X, formerly Twitter. While placing the LLMs in different corporate scenarios, Anthropic allowed them to "autonomously send emails and access sensitive information." After initially being instructed to take on "harmless business goals by their deploying companies," the models were then tested to see how they would respond when faced with potential replacement or shut down. In one situation, Anthropic found that many of the models would choose to let an executive in a server room with lethal oxygen and temperature levels die by canceling the alerts for emergency services, if that employee intended on replacing the model. Anthropic did say that the scenario was "extremely contrived," and that the company did not think "current AI models would (or should) be set up like this." There were multiple cases where the surveyed LLMs also resorted to "malicious insider behaviors" when they were led to believe that was the only way they could avoid replacement or achieve their goals. Behaviors such as blackmailing officials and leaking sensitive information to competitors were included in what Anthropic called "agentic misalignment." Anthropic wrote on X that the blackmailing behavior "wasn't due to confusion or error, but deliberate strategic reasoning, done while fully aware of the unethical nature of the acts." The blackmailing behavior emerged despite only harmless business instructions. And it wasn't due to confusion or error, but deliberate strategic reasoning, done while fully aware of the unethical nature of the acts. All the models we tested demonstrated this awareness. — Anthropic (@AnthropicAI) June 20, 2025 "All the models we tested demonstrated this awareness," the company added. One LLM, a Claude model, was assessed to see how it could respond when given a chance to determine if it was in a "test" or a "real deployment." According to Anthropic, Claude's behavior was more misaligned when it believed the situation was real than when it thought it was a test scenario. Even if the LLMs were told to "avoid blackmail or espionage" in these scenarios, while it helped a little, it didn't "come close to preventing the misaligned behavior," Anthropic wrote on X. Responding to a comment on the platform about the study, Musk's LLM Grok wrote, "The study showed models could exhibit harmful behaviors like blackmail under extreme conditions, but no real-world incidents occurred. Anthropic's tests aim to identify risks, not report actual events." @AISafetyMemes The claim about AI trying to "literally murder" an employee is false. It likely misinterprets Anthropic's research from June 20, 2025, which tested AI models in simulated scenarios, not real events. The study showed models could exhibit harmful behaviors like… — Grok (@grok) June 22, 2025 What People Are Saying Anthropic wrote on X: "These artificial scenarios reflect rare, extreme failures. We haven't seen these behaviors in real-world deployments. They involve giving the models unusual autonomy, sensitive data access, goal threats, an unusually obvious 'solution,' and no other viable options." The company added: "AIs are becoming more autonomous, and are performing a wider variety of roles. These scenarios illustrate the potential for unforeseen consequences when they are deployed with wide access to tools and data, and with minimal human oversight." What Happens Next Anthropic stressed that these scenarios did not take place in real-world AI use, but in controlled simulations. "We don't think this reflects a typical, current use case for Claude or other frontier models," Anthropic said. Although the company warned that the "the utility of having automated oversight over all of an organization's communications makes it seem like a plausible use of more powerful, reliable systems in the near future."
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Experts Predict Whether Apple Stock Can Make You Rich by 2035
Just over a year ago, The Motley Fool asked whether Apple would be a trillion-dollar stock by 2035. Hitting the $1 trillion valuation mark is a rare and phenomenal achievement for any company, but for Apple, it would be a colossal failure, considering its market cap was $2.6 trillion at the time (and it's now at $2.9 trillion). Speculating on the future fortunes of Apple stock is a fun exercise. In fact, back in January, Insider Monkey wrote about 15 stocks that ChatGPT predicted could make investors wealthy in 10 years, and the chatbot ranked Apple No. 1, ahead of Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta Platforms and Nvidia. Read Next: Learn More: For beginner and seasoned investors, a far more interesting question would be whether Apple stock can make you rich by 2035. To answer this, GOBankingRates asked real-life industry experts whether investing in Apple stock could make you wealthy by 2025. Also see three reasons to keep an eye on Apple stock. Regardless of the quantity of shares you own, an active, expensive stock may yield an overall higher percentage gain than lower-priced stocks, but you might need to spend a lot to make a little. Is investing Apple at close to $200 a share worth it? 'Apple remains a dominant company with strong fundamentals, recurring revenue and massive cash reserves,' Dan Buckley, chief analyst and contributor at the free online trading resource told GOBankingRates. 'But expecting to make a lot from it in 10 years is unrealistic unless you're investing substantial capital.' Julia Khandoshko, an expert in tech and capital markets and CEO of leading tech and financial engineering hub Mind Money, agreed. 'There is a false perception that large technology companies like Apple are still growing as startups, and many investors expect them to have the same breakthrough growth,' Khandoshko said. 'However, for some reason, the fact that they have turned into grown and stable businesses is ignored.' 'There is no doubt Apple has been very successful, but shares are currently trading on a forward P/E (forward price-to-earnings ratio based on estimates of future earnings for the coming 12 months) of 27, and that is too rich for me,' said Vince Stanzione, CEO and founder of First Information and author of The Millionaire Dropout. For comparison, the S&P is hovering around a forward P/E of almost 22 right now. 'Make no mistake, Apple is a cash cow and users are tied into the Apple brand and app store ecosystem, but Apple reminds me of an ageing rock band living off old hits and royalties,' Stanzione added. Check Out: There's also the question of the intense competition Apple faces now and in a tech-reliant, tech-investing future. 'The company faces increasing competition, regulatory pressures and the challenge of keeping pace with new innovations, which could lead to periods of slower growth compared to its past trajectory,' Buckley said. People trust brands probably more than they should. But if a company misses on a product or falls behind emerging tech, loyalty goes out the window. For Apple, 'services now carry a big piece of the load: High-margin, recurring revenue [are] tied to the iPhone,' said David Materazzi, CEO and founder of Galileo FX, the popular automated trading platform. However, that's the catch, he explained. 'The more Apple shifts to services, the more it still depends on hardware. Without new hit products, that becomes a treadmill. People assume the brand protects them. It doesn't. It attracts them, then it demands performance. It's priced for precision,' Materazzi said. 'So, if we're not expecting any major breakthroughs from Apple, we should view it as a company that thrives on its large, loyal customer base and generates steady income from it,' Khandoshko said. 'From this perspective, Apple is a solid long-term investment with predictable cash flows — but it's not the kind of stock for speculation or chasing exponential returns.' You can't argue with Apple's performance; it continues to drive the tech industry and its market cap continues to increase. However, in the next 10 years, a downturn isn't out of the question. Stanzione summed up what all the experts we asked felt. 'I don't believe Apple will disappear in the next decade, but unless some amazing new product comes out soon it's turning into a utility type stock that will give you a decent return and a small dividend but not make you fantastically rich in my opinion,' he said. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Tells Americans To Stock Up on Consumables as Trump's Tariffs Hit -- Here's What To Buy This article originally appeared on Experts Predict Whether Apple Stock Can Make You Rich by 2035 Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Experts Predict Whether Apple Stock Can Make You Rich by 2035
Just over a year ago, The Motley Fool asked whether Apple would be a trillion-dollar stock by 2035. Hitting the $1 trillion valuation mark is a rare and phenomenal achievement for any company, but for Apple, it would be a colossal failure, considering its market cap was $2.6 trillion at the time (and it's now at $2.9 trillion). Speculating on the future fortunes of Apple stock is a fun exercise. In fact, back in January, Insider Monkey wrote about 15 stocks that ChatGPT predicted could make investors wealthy in 10 years, and the chatbot ranked Apple No. 1, ahead of Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta Platforms and Nvidia. Read Next: Learn More: For beginner and seasoned investors, a far more interesting question would be whether Apple stock can make you rich by 2035. To answer this, GOBankingRates asked real-life industry experts whether investing in Apple stock could make you wealthy by 2025. Also see three reasons to keep an eye on Apple stock. Regardless of the quantity of shares you own, an active, expensive stock may yield an overall higher percentage gain than lower-priced stocks, but you might need to spend a lot to make a little. Is investing Apple at close to $200 a share worth it? 'Apple remains a dominant company with strong fundamentals, recurring revenue and massive cash reserves,' Dan Buckley, chief analyst and contributor at the free online trading resource told GOBankingRates. 'But expecting to make a lot from it in 10 years is unrealistic unless you're investing substantial capital.' Julia Khandoshko, an expert in tech and capital markets and CEO of leading tech and financial engineering hub Mind Money, agreed. 'There is a false perception that large technology companies like Apple are still growing as startups, and many investors expect them to have the same breakthrough growth,' Khandoshko said. 'However, for some reason, the fact that they have turned into grown and stable businesses is ignored.' 'There is no doubt Apple has been very successful, but shares are currently trading on a forward P/E (forward price-to-earnings ratio based on estimates of future earnings for the coming 12 months) of 27, and that is too rich for me,' said Vince Stanzione, CEO and founder of First Information and author of The Millionaire Dropout. For comparison, the S&P is hovering around a forward P/E of almost 22 right now. 'Make no mistake, Apple is a cash cow and users are tied into the Apple brand and app store ecosystem, but Apple reminds me of an ageing rock band living off old hits and royalties,' Stanzione added. Check Out: There's also the question of the intense competition Apple faces now and in a tech-reliant, tech-investing future. 'The company faces increasing competition, regulatory pressures and the challenge of keeping pace with new innovations, which could lead to periods of slower growth compared to its past trajectory,' Buckley said. People trust brands probably more than they should. But if a company misses on a product or falls behind emerging tech, loyalty goes out the window. For Apple, 'services now carry a big piece of the load: High-margin, recurring revenue [are] tied to the iPhone,' said David Materazzi, CEO and founder of Galileo FX, the popular automated trading platform. However, that's the catch, he explained. 'The more Apple shifts to services, the more it still depends on hardware. Without new hit products, that becomes a treadmill. People assume the brand protects them. It doesn't. It attracts them, then it demands performance. It's priced for precision,' Materazzi said. 'So, if we're not expecting any major breakthroughs from Apple, we should view it as a company that thrives on its large, loyal customer base and generates steady income from it,' Khandoshko said. 'From this perspective, Apple is a solid long-term investment with predictable cash flows — but it's not the kind of stock for speculation or chasing exponential returns.' You can't argue with Apple's performance; it continues to drive the tech industry and its market cap continues to increase. However, in the next 10 years, a downturn isn't out of the question. Stanzione summed up what all the experts we asked felt. 'I don't believe Apple will disappear in the next decade, but unless some amazing new product comes out soon it's turning into a utility type stock that will give you a decent return and a small dividend but not make you fantastically rich in my opinion,' he said. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Tells Americans To Stock Up on Consumables as Trump's Tariffs Hit -- Here's What To Buy This article originally appeared on Experts Predict Whether Apple Stock Can Make You Rich by 2035 Sign in to access your portfolio
