身家三百万才算入门中产？资产分层的真相，多数人都想错了

Core Viewpoint - The classification of social classes based solely on asset numbers is overly simplistic and does not consider other critical factors such as income stability, debt, and living quality [1][8]. Group 1: Asset Evaluation - A net worth of three million is not a small amount, but its significance varies greatly depending on the region; in major cities, it may only cover a down payment for a home, while in smaller towns, it can afford a comfortable lifestyle [3][4]. - The quality of assets matters; some individuals may count non-liquid or depreciating assets, leading to an inflated perception of their financial status [3][6]. - True wealth should be assessed as net assets after deducting liabilities, as many individuals may appear affluent but are burdened by significant debts [6][8]. Group 2: Income and Stability - The notion that individuals with less than one million in assets are part of a disadvantaged group is flawed; young professionals with high earning potential may have low savings but are not necessarily weak [4][6]. - A stable income is essential for defining the middle class; it allows for covering expenses and saving for future investments [6][8]. - The ability to withstand financial shocks, such as job loss or health issues, is a crucial aspect of being considered middle class, rather than just asset accumulation [6][8]. Group 3: Lifestyle Quality - The true middle class is characterized by a stable and dignified lifestyle, which includes the ability to afford education, healthcare, and leisure activities without financial strain [6][8]. - Living quality and the ability to manage daily expenses are more indicative of one's social class than mere asset figures [8]. - The focus should be on improving income capabilities and building financial resilience rather than fixating on reaching a specific asset threshold [8].