Class, Privilege, and Social Markers

[Melissa]

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

How do you define Social Class?

It is very difficult to put a finger in it in the US.

Well, social class, I default back to English definitions which aren't related to income. Plus the English class system has no meaning or equivalent in the US. This is why many people emigrated here, to free themselves from a rigid class system.

For me, in the US, there are no social classes, just income brackets. An individual can move through various income brackets in the course of his or her lifetime. I think people in the US make assumptions and create stereotypes about other people based on what they perceive they own or earn. In England I'm working class because that was the class I was born into. In the US I think I am considered middle class because of my income bracket and education level. I default back to working class because I don't know of any other way to think of myself. However, I guess people would look at me strangely in the US because by US definitions I am middle class. But since I work 60+hours a week I call that "working" class lol. But I do get confused when I see people saying they hate it when the middle classes approripate the identity of the working class. I can't wrap my brain around this statement. What does that mean? I think I am coming at this thread from a totally different angle so I am just going to keep reading.



Melissa

[Waldo]

While I agree that talking about how much money one has, spends or earns is often tacky - particularly so outside of one's closest friends. I also think that this "we mustn't discuss" attitude is part of the problem that lead to this most recent financial downturn.

Our inability to say "I don't have the money to do X" is often fueled by a misunderstanding about what other people really have.

My experience of those who have money is spot on with the adage that they rarely talk about it. Due to the industry I work in I would venture to say that I am on a first name basis with more millionaires than the average person and with most of them you would never know it. Not just because they don't talk about it, but they don't spend like it. They don't drive the latest cars, wear the flashiest clothes, take the most expensive trips.

Their wealth will likely last their lifetime and they'll have a nice large estate to pass down to their heirs.

I also know a good number of very rich folks who will likely wind up with nothing in relatively short order because of bad decisions and a lack of restraint. They DO drive the latest, and often multiple, cars. They wear designer clothing and exensive jewelry and they travel first class all the time. They consume constantly.

How interesting a world it would be if one's salary and net worth were publicly available. I wonder if that would change how we view money, things, wealth. Just a thought.

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by Melissa

Well, social class, I default back to English definitions which aren't related to income. Plus the English class system has no meaning or equivalent in the US. This is why many people emigrated here, to free themselves from a rigid class system.

For me, in the US, there are no social classes, just income brackets. An individual can move through various income brackets in the course of his or her lifetime. I think people in the US make assumptions and create stereotypes about other people based on what they perceive they own or earn. In England I'm working class because that was the class I was born into. In the US I think I am considered middle class because of my income bracket and education level. I default back to working class because I don't know of any other way to think of myself. However, I guess people would look at me strangely in the US because by US definitions I am middle class. But since I work 60+hours a week I call that "working" class lol. But I do get confused when I see people saying they hate it when the middle classes approripate the identity of the working class. I can't wrap my brain around this statement. What does that mean? I think I am coming at this thread from a totally different angle so I am just going to keep reading.



Melissa

Makes sense

I think in the US they wanted to be different from England in the beginning and not have the whole "Nobility" thing. So class is more based on money, education and what one does for a living, than on one's ancestral heritage. The US wanted to be a nation where anyone could make it rich and be "accepted" and a part of the "Upper Class".

I agree that it is very confusing and the more I read and study about it, the more I do not get where the lines are.

I do think it is insane that the poverty line in the US is less than $15,000 for a family of 4. I think one person would have severe difficulty with that amount, let alone four.

[Waldo]

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

Makes sense

I think in the US they wanted to be different from England in the beginning and not have the whole "Nobility" thing. So class is more based on money, education and what one does for a living, than on one's ancestral heritage. The US wanted to be a nation where anyone could make it rich and be "accepted" and a part of the "Upper Class".

I agree that it is very confusing and the more I read and study about it, the more I do not get where the lines are.

I do think it is insane that the poverty line in the US is less than $15,000 for a family of 4. I think one person would have severe difficulty with that amount, let alone four.

It's now a whopping $22k, as of 2009: http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml

[Melissa]

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

Makes sense

I think in the US they wanted to be different from England in the beginning and not have the whole "Nobility" thing. So class is more based on money, education and what one does for a living, than on one's ancestral heritage. The US wanted to be a nation where anyone could make it rich and be "accepted" and a part of the "Upper Class".

I agree that it is very confusing and the more I read and study about it, the more I do not get where the lines are.

I do think it is insane that the poverty line in the US is less than $15,000 for a family of 4. I think one person would have severe difficulty with that amount, let alone four.

It's an insanely low amount. I keep thinking about some Senator who did this experiment to show that it was possible to live off minimum wage. He, his wife and two teenagers decided they were going to live on minimum wage for one month to prove it was doable. Urgh. I wish I could remember his name.

I think this notion of class comes into play when we start to lay meanings on top of the income bracket. We start to interpret what that income level says about a person. And this is where the danger lies and where all the assumptions and stereotypes start to accumulate. eg. the assumption that if you are poor you must be lazy. We start to layer income brackets with more and more meanings. Sometimes those meanings are romaticized as Dylan was saying (poor but happy, the noble poor etc) and sometimes they just villify (poor due to laziness, poor therefore uneducated, ignorant). But the meanings and assumptions, for me, don't equal class. I think we tend to lump anything related to income level together and call it class when we need to start separating out some of the issues related to the assumptions and stereotypes.

Anyway, hope I'm making sense

Melissa