What is your class status?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Just thought I would make a poll to see how the the Backroom membership fit in along class lines. Maybe it will also generate some discussion on the relevance the old 3-class system has in today's world. From what I remember, in school you now are not supposed to write about working/middle/upper class, but instead they have some sort of rating system from A-E I think it might be, with different bands inbetween (eg A1, A2, A3, B1 etc), although I can't remember the details.

Anyway, what does class mean to people nowadays? Is it still a boundary to social mobility? If so, is it because of people's attitudes and perceived inequalities, as opposed to actual barriers in 'the system'? Is it a cultural thing, or purely concerned with material status? Is is still an active force in society, or is what we see today the dying remnants left over from the days of big industry?

As for me, I am middle class, as I think most people here will be. One side of my family is very much working class though they don't seem to identify with it, whereas my dad's side are farmers, so I'm not sure where they fit it. But I was raised as any middle class person in a nice middle class level house, well at least from the age of 6 or so, and so I say I am middle class.

It will take a minute to put it up, but I will be adding a multi-choice poll. My bet is the most common answer will be simply middle class, with a large number of people having risen in class, though I'm not sure how they will identify, its especially hard to tell with an international audience. Here, a lot of people who move up from working to middle class still identify as working class, I guess because Scotland has such a strong tradition of heavy industries, and the whole Red Clydeside thing etc. It will be interesting to get a look at things on a wider scale here...

[Ser Clegane]

In my early childhood I would say that we were a working class family - neither my father nor my mother had "Abitur" and during my first years both had typical working class jobs.
Through stable earnings and through my mother's job development (from part-timer in a small supermarket to manager of a rather large one) we moved towards Middle class during my highschool time.
As both my wife and myself have a university degree now and considering my current job I think Middle Class would best decribe my current status.

Naturally (through friends of the past 30 years, job, neighbourhood etc.) I would also rather identify with the Middle Class nowadays (but not "forgetting" or - even worse - rejecting my roots)

[Louis VI the Fat]

I'd like to have some sort of class too. :cry:

[TinCow]

The 3 class system doesn't work for most Americans. Most Americans categorize themselves as Middle Class, with a further three levels of division within Middle Class. A true American class scale looks like this:

Lower Class
Lower Middle Class
Middle Class
Upper Middle Class
Upper Class

With the above categories, almost all Americans will fit themselves within the three Middle Class variations, with very few picking Lower Class or Upper Class. You also cannot analogize Upper Middle Class to Upper Class, and Lower Middle Class to Lower Class, because if you forced most Americans who self-identified as those classes to pick on of the traditional three, they would almost all pick Middle Class instead of their Lower or Upper subdivisions.

This is the result of a nation with no historical background for aristocracy.

[Hooahguy]

middle class for me. but i was confused between the working class and the middle class. i alsways assumed that the middle class also included people who worked, thus making it part of the working class. maybe you meant "lower class"?

[rory_20_uk]

Upper-middle (doctor) from middle-middle (teacher) parents. Grandparents were lower-middle (plumber) / middle-middle (teacher).

~:smoking:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Division by class is an outdated concept, like thinking martians live on mars.

CR

[TinCow]

Division by class is an outdated concept, like thinking martians live on mars.

Only lower class Martians live on Mars. Those with the means to do so have long since moved to Phobos.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Division by class is an outdated concept, like thinking martians live on mars.

CR

Commie!

[Fragony]

My parents are typical working class I guess, neither had an education, but my dad's library would be the envy of many a scholar. I am well of, better then most people of my age. I don't really think in classes.

[Samurai Waki]

Started out dirt poor as a Kid, three siblings, two bedroom apartment. Dad worked endlessly, hardly ever saw the guy, little did I realize at the time that what he was doing was building himself up a miniature empire. Eventually bought a bunch of dirt cheap property, turned it into subdivisions, had a nice little sum of cash, bought some more, rinse and repeat. When Property Value hit it's peak, he sold out, and walked away. Unfortunately, he had only a couple of years to enjoy his wealth, and then us four kids equally divided the estate. So I've gone up considerably in class since my conception, and will hopefully remain financially secure throughout my lifetime, but I still mostly identify with my blue collar pals, I grew up with.

My kids... maybe not so much.

[Beskar]

Everyone says they are middle class, because they don't want to be at the "bottom". There is always the underclass too, which isn't mentioned on the charts which is the non-working classes. Only real classes are the people and the elites, the rest and there just to divide people.

https://img99.imageshack.us/img99/8003/theimaginaryclasses.png

[Viking]

I've never ever felt like I, or anyone else, belonged to a certain class. Take for instance a friend I had at primary school; dad was a plumber, mother a physical therapist. I am sorry, but the concept of class does not make any sense to me..

[Ja'chyra]

Might be easier if we all wrote a description ala Wakizashi above?

I come from a single parent family where my mum didn't work, definately working class if not downright poor.

Now I am a government employee, the first of my extended family to own my own house, more do since then, currently living in a large 4 bedroom end terrace in Wales and earn £32k + a year without overtime or long hours. I am a middle manager and after coming through an engineering apprenticeship I rarely get my hands dirty or work outside anymore, mores the pity.

[TinCow]

Beskar's table has $200k+ listed as the top of the rung. This seems like a low salary at which to set that bar, but it's a trend I've seen before in similar discussions. I have a general question for anyone who's willing to answer: How much money does someone need to have/make before they are classified as 'rich'? Feel free to define this based on annual income, total assets, or any other method you want.

[Strike For The South]

Both my parents where working class born into large families

Mums dad was a fireman/fisherman and her mum was a teacher. There where 11 kids in her family.

Dads dad was a janitor/electrtian/tanner and his mum was a waitress. There were 7 kids in his family

My family is probably middle class.

[Beskar]

Just for reference, it isn't my list, it is from Wikipedia and the sources of that is in the bottom corner.

[Strike For The South]

According to this I'm woring class. But I don't even have a high-school diploma--that suggests I would have "some college."

Your list is a little skewed. Someone making 20k in New York, for example, is a lot worse off than someone making 20k in South Dakota.

Location:Ft.Sam Houston

How do you like the heart of TEXAS?????

[Megas Methuselah]

Bottom of society. Always have been since the 1870's when Canada came and took over. Before then, my family was composed of hereditary chiefs, of which I am exceedingly proud.

Anyways, I'm going to university right now, so I think I'll be be rising in status in the future. It's a shame I'm the only young person of my generation in my family (including my numerous 2nd and 3rd degree cousins) to have actually graduated from high school. :no:

[Papewaio]

If you make all/majority your money from salary you ain't upper class. If you have to work to survive you ain't upper class no matter how much money you take in.

I think what is more telling is how many weeks you can go without work before you have to make drastic lifestyle changes to get along.

Also where you live. I have to say although Sydney is very expensive by Aussie standards, virtually all Aussies can go to the beach on the weekend in summer. So not just how much you make, but lifestyle is more important. No point making $100k and staring at cubicles all day long.

[Furunculus]

Everyone says they are middle class, because they don't want to be at the "bottom". There is always the underclass too, which isn't mentioned on the charts which is the non-working classes. Only real classes are the people and the elites, the rest and there just to divide people.

https://img99.imageshack.us/img99/8003/theimaginaryclasses.png

upper middle i guess, though i'm not earning that kind of moiney atm.

[Lemur]

Division by class is an outdated concept, like thinking martians live on mars.
Well if the martians don't live on Mars, where do they live? Huh?


How much money does someone need to have/make before they are classified as 'rich'? Feel free to define this based on annual income, total assets, or any other method you want.
I think it's heavily dependent on where you live. San Francisco is the most expensive city in America, and I've heard reports of people making $60k being homeless. On the other hand, if you live in a little town like mine, you can feel like the king of the world for less than $100k per year. Highly variable.

However, if you have liquid assets in excess of $10m, you don't actually have to work anymore. That's rich enough.

[Sarmatian]

Just so you know, I'm writing all this down so that there's no surprises when I launch a worldwide communist revolution.

[miotas]

I think that I would be middle class.

I'm curious as to what you mean by working class. Do you mean counstruction labourers, mechanics and other jobs like that? Because most that I know are quite well paid. Sure the first 4 or 5 years they get low pay while they're working as an apprentice, but after that is done then they start making some good dollars. And I know many who quite rich with multiple, paid-off, very nice houses and cars and 6 figures year.

[Ice]

Born into a middle class family... stayed there for a while... moved to upper class for a few years... now I'm back in the upper middle

[Justiciar]

Born in a council estate in York. Raised in a fairly cushy semi-detatched in subrural Cheshire. Bugger all prospects. Will probably either end up in another council estate, or on the street. Hurrah!

[KukriKhan]

Somewhere in that nebulous american grey area of "lower/working/middle" class. I'm about 6 paychecks (i.e. 3 months) away from homelessness, but with good job prospects, and an adequate, if not comfortable retirement looming (though I realize things could change in an instant).

I can only go back 2 generations: Gramps, a farmer, could read slowly, sign his name and 'figger' (no formal ed.). Pops, a welder/car worker, read the daily newspaper front-to-back (4th grade), could write if pushed, and do simple arithmetic. I, civil servant (11th grade, with some uni thrown in during army days), can often understand Louis', Banquo's & Adrian's posts, can construct a grammatically-correct paragraph or two, and have a nodding aquaintence with quadratic equations.

My kids (in their late 20's/30's) are a mixed bunch, all with high school and some uni. All literate and mathematically functional . I'm secretly saving up for the 2 grandsons and 1 nephew (ages 7,7, and 10), hoping any one of them shows interest in higher education. The first one who tells me: "Grampa, I wanna make a battery that saves and delivers energy on-demand, and lasts 20 years before recharging." Or "I think I've got a handle on cancer"... gets the Kukri-cache cash, miserable though it be.

So: Lower-class educationally, working class economically, with delusions and hopes of grandeur. :laugh4::laugh4:

-edit-

I am a hobo and am only here because I stole a laptop from Curries

I think I wanna pick that one, but do not understand "Curries". A store?

[Whacker]

I would put myself squarely in the middle of middle class, same with my sister. I would put mom and dad in the upper-middle class though.

Given Beskar's chart, I fall into upper-middle class, and my parents are upper class. That's cool with me, seeing how they both started out as working class and by the time I came into the picture they were still working class. They busted their asses hard to get themselves where they are today and to give me and sis the education and opportunities we have now.

As much as we try to ignore it, classes/castes/stratification of society can and will always happen. There will always be the haves and have-nots and the inbetweeners.

Really though, it's about what makes you happy in life. Work toward what you want to do and where you want to be, and it shall be so. (I don't buy the 'I'm not smart enough' argument at all, that's BS and a huge cop out for 99.99999% of the people who use it)

:balloon2:

[seireikhaan]

I'd say my family was solidly middle class until until I hit third grade. Parents divorced, and financial implications were pretty bad. I ended up with my dad, and roped around from apartment to apartment until I graduated high school. Those years, I'd say I was lower-middle class, but only because my dad is such a workaholic and can seemingly just keep chugging along irrespective of how many hours he works. I got more benefit out of his pay than he did, and for that, I'll always be grateful. I hope to one day work myself into something resembling upper middle class where I can lead a fairly comfortable lifestyle without having to work an excruciating number of hours.

[TinCow]

Might be easier if we all wrote a description ala Wakizashi above?

I started to respond to this, then stopped out of embarrassment. Then I started again, and stopped again for the same reason. Why? Well, frankly, for a lot of my formative years I've had what some would refer to as a silver spoon up my :daisy:. It's not something I usually discuss. I feel like whenever this becomes known, people think I don't deserve to be where I am, despite the fact that I had nothing to do with my background and I've worked hard at every job I've ever had. It's strange, but I've always been embarrassed of being well-off when I'm not with others who are as well.

When I was born, my parents were solidly middle class (even with the split American definition), though I would call my father's parents working class (his father built bombs for a defense contractor) and my mother's parents middle class (ranchers and cotton farmers, but prosperous and both husband and wife had college degrees). Both of my parents had college degrees, though during college I would classify my father as poor (shot a deer just to eat for a month) and my mother as 'well-off' (her 'clothing allowance' per semester was larger than my father's entire semesterly budget). My father worked as a floor manager at an oil refinery after he graduated from college (chemical engineering degree) and my mother worked as a legal secretary (english degree). Nothing glamorous.

My mother stopped working after I was born and never returned to work in any way that mattered financially. However, my father was extremely successful and quickly left the refinery floor for a desk job. By the time I was 13, he was working for BP and our entire family was transferred to London so that he could work at the headquarters. His salary grew exponentially and the perks provided to expat families soon resulted in a drastic change in our lifestyle.

I graduated first from college and then from law school (first in my family with a professional degree) without any debts of any kind, thanks to their generosity. My wife and I are both attorneys and she also had no debt of any kind, though her father was career military and simply managed his money very well (us both being only children has helped a lot in this aspect). I have not taken a single dime of my parents' money since I graduated from law school, barring $1500 for the first month's rent after graduation which I paid back in full within two months. That said, my parents are what most people would consider 'rich' (though I disagree with that assessment) and my wife and I have incomes well above the national average without any debts of any kind, barring a mortgage. We also both have trust funds, though they are relatively small and come from my maternal grandmother, not my parents, and were created to avoid inheritance tax when she passes away (my maternal grandfather invested very well in the stock market).

[CountArach]

My family is probably upper-middle class. Obviously I don't really identify with this and indeed my parents don't either. My grandfather on my father's side was a working class builder who dragged himself up to middle class, so that could perhaps explain why my father doesn't identify along this class line. I'm (hopefully) going to end up in much the same place if I can pull off my plans to get a PhD in history.

[Caius]

I can't identificate my family and my economical situation. The analisys of our lifes here is constructed in the basis that "can live well", or not. My father is engineer, and I will be engineer too. My mother was teacher of P.D., but when she had me, she left her job. And never returned. We had bad and good times. It is not a commie capricho, it is life.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I am intrigued by the apparently common acceptance that class is inextricably linked to income (not even to capital). It must be the influence of the meritocratic aspiration of the United States, as is the idea that class is flexible - in that a single person, let alone a single generation, may easily transfer between classes.

Fascinating. I might submit for discussion that a gentleman is not measured by his wallet.

[Cute Wolf]

Meh... dividing people by class is a good way to get another revolution... better keeping the peace... class aren't important, that's important is contribution...

[Fragony]

I am intrigued by the apparently common acceptance that class is inextricably linked to income (not even to capital). It must be the influence of the meritocratic aspiration of the United States, as is the idea that class is flexible - in that a single person, let alone a single generation, may easily transfer between classes.

Fascinating. I might submit for discussion that a gentleman is not measured by his wallet.

Got a point there. My sister's husband is dirt-poor but he comes from a very wealthy family. He considers himself to be upper class, the arrogant little prick.

[Megas Methuselah]

Got a point there. My sister's husband is dirt-poor but he comes from a very wealthy family. He considers himself to be upper class, the arrogant little prick.

I don't think that's exactly what he meant, but a good point nonetheless. :laugh4:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I am intrigued by the apparently common acceptance that class is inextricably linked to income (not even to capital). It must be the influence of the meritocratic aspiration of the United States, as is the idea that class is flexible - in that a single person, let alone a single generation, may easily transfer between classes.

Fascinating. I might submit for discussion that a gentleman is not measured by his wallet.

I'm rather inclined to agree, money has nothing to do with Class, merely the ability to affect the trappings of it. I was discussing this on Saturday with a friend of mine in rural Hampshire while we ruminating on the severe lack of English tennis players. What he said was this:

In the Working Class you are expected to earn money with your hands.

In the Middle Class you earn with your brain.

In the Upper Class you suceed by virtue of your inheritence and inate talent.

I think this is true, though I would add that ownership is a mark of the Middle Class and up. A wealthy farmer will amass land not only by hard work, but also by good management, placing him above the Working Class.

Interestingly, this also places most artisans (builders, Carpenters, Plumbers) in the Wrking Class, unless they are what we used to call a Master, in which case they would be Middle Class, I suppose.

I think this works even in the US, where you have Blue Collar, White Collar and Old Money. Even here the consistant picture is that although you can, with difficulty, move between Working and Middle Class, you can only be born into the Upper Class; or perhaps marry into it.

[CountArach]

Meh... dividing people by class is a good way to get another revolution... better keeping the peace... class aren't important, that's important is contribution...
On the contrary, class is crucially important. In fact you acknowledge this in your post in the bolded section. That someone can see that class would lead to revolution is as good a reason as any to remove class distinctions. In order to remove the class distinctions we must first acknowledge that class distinctions exist.

And if we are judging by contribution then I think we can say our current system is rather poor...

[Meneldil]

My dad is teacher, my mum is nurse. Both are coming from upper middle class, though my mother would now be considered lower middle-class on a purely money-making basis.

Personally, I think this whole topic is useless as long as nobody defines what is a class. Are we using Marx's classification system? The oversimplistic anglo-saxon three classes one? Is class only defined by income? Are education and family to be taken into account as well?
I find Marx's theory to be at least as valuable as the lower/middle/upper class system. The french classification also has its flaws, as it only takes job into account. I'd be defined as a student. Is a student part of the lower/middle/upper class? Does he belong to the petty bourgeoisie? Obviously it depends on his education and social background, and those are apparently not even considered in the lower/middle/upper class idea.

In short, I don't even know what class I do belong to. I don't make any money most of the time (I only work during summer), my education level is - I'd say - higher than it is for most of the population. My familly has both upper class and working class roots. And there I am.

[miotas]

Upper class may be less physical work for more money, but they tend to do longer hours. Middle class would probably have more free time than upper or lower.

[Furunculus]

My dad is teacher, my mum is nurse.

same here.

one side of the family was catholic working class scouser, whose father worked in the docks, and was the first of their family to go to university.

the other side was anglican, home counties, well-to-do army officers who drifted between india, japan and hong-kong, and are connected to the 19th century hong-kong banking magnates.

bit of a mix.

[Andres]

Just like Meneldil's parents, my father was a teacher (primary school) and my mother a nurse (both are retired now).

As for myself, I finished law school and now find myself in the middle class, according to the standards of this thread. My wife has a master degree in history. Our incomes are decent. No debts, except a mortgage.

In our family, I was the first to go to university.

[pevergreen]

Educationally, both parents top out at Working Class, Dad having gone straight from school to two jobs, mum..I'm not sure.

Dad's tale through life inspires me. He went from working two jobs, of which his main one was sitting at the expo's at a booth all day, to working in a servo, to managing, to an office job for Caltex, to regional, to state, to state managerial, to owning 3 servo's, to General Manager of a chain of stores to the military, then acting CEO, then CEO and now Dealer Principle of a communications store to the small business market. He has put work first his entire life, barely being involved in his kids (mine and others) lives, but he has never given the illusion of being stressed or on the edge, even though I now know how close we have come to having nothing many times, including quite recently. However, we seem (to me) to function as middle class, with my older brother getting a degree and being offered a discount to keep studying at the uni (accepted as the 3rd best in Australia, best in our state) myself and my sister both on academic scholarships at private schools (however mine cost about half of hers, and I'm finished now...and I didnt do too well)

Where am I going...I'ma shut up now, I got work in the morning.

[TinCow]

I am intrigued by the apparently common acceptance that class is inextricably linked to income (not even to capital). It must be the influence of the meritocratic aspiration of the United States, as is the idea that class is flexible - in that a single person, let alone a single generation, may easily transfer between classes.

Fascinating. I might submit for discussion that a gentleman is not measured by his wallet.

Ah, Europe. I submit for discussion the the measurement of class based on anything other than wealth is an artificial notion generated over several hundred years by the aristocratic class as they began losing power due to political and social evolution. The modern idea of social class (in the typical European sense) is a largely feudal construct. In early feudal society, class was defined by wealth and power and little else. There were few connotations to education or culture, as the behavior of middle ages nobility was often little better than the behavior of middle ages peasantry, and education was non-existent outside of the Church. However, the rise of the merchant class presented the old feudal nobility with a dilemma: if class were judged purely based on wealth and influence, they would be forced to share power with the upstart merchants. This was unacceptable, so the idea of class based on something more than wealth was slowly adopted. As the middle class continued to grow and the power of the nobility continued to wane (mainly due changing economic power of both groups), this shift in class identification became more pronounced, often with the result that those who were born into nobility were considered upper class even if they were completely destitute, while some of the wealthiest and best educated men in the world were simply one step above peasants.

Over time, this has, in Europe, turned the notion of class into something that is partially innate, and partially social. With peerage essentially dead everywhere, the innate portion is in its last gasps, leaving only the social aspect of the old system intact. This dictates that 'proper' behavior is what defines a gentleman, and little else. While this current emphasis on manners can be admirable when it is divorced from the traditional notion of class superiority, it goes against the entire basis for the social construct we call class. Class was developed as a means of identifying those with power and those without. In the modern world (and frankly throughout most of history), power is in the hands of those with money. Thus, the proper means of evaluating social class in the modern world is by wealth.

This does not mean that this means of evaluation is itself proper or useful in any manner. Indeed, I believe that every person should be judged on their own abilities and accomplishments, not those of their parents. However, if social class must be determined, the proper and historically accurate method of measurement is pure wealth. All else is the residuals left over by a slow shift from aristocratic to democratic governance.

"He who boasts of his ancestry is praising the deeds of another."
-Seneca

[rory_20_uk]

I think you're probably right there, and as a hard and fast rule it makes little sense; as a guide it does have some uses: although there are many exceptions, there are things one would expect from a person in the upper middle (professional) class to do that one would not expect from the lower middle; this does often correlate with money, but not always. Footballers earn in a week more than I do in a year but I'd not describe them as upper class or upper middle.

Other rules of thumb based upon this are stating that it is best to aim to go up one class per generation. Further is possible but likely to be extremely difficult for all sorts of reasons. I have met far more people who struggled at medical school for non-academic reasons who'se parents basically did not understand the realities of the support medical students require financially. This was not the parents did not have the money, merely the "I was working at 14, and you're still wasting time at uni at 20" attitude. My parents were much worse off financially but they still managed to help.

~:smoking:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm not so sure. Think about what the Upper Class really is, a closed network of wealthy people who are connected by social and famillial ties. I think the American monatory model of Class is a rejection of the reality that such a group exists even in America among the "Old Money" elite.

Such groups affect particular traditions and customs in order to freeze-out outsiders and preserve their power.

[TinCow]

I'm not so sure. Think about what the Upper Class really is, a closed network of wealthy people who are connected by social and famillial ties. I think the American monatory model of Class is a rejection of the reality that such a group exists even in America among the "Old Money" elite.

Such groups affect particular traditions and customs in order to freeze-out outsiders and preserve their power.

I do not think it is a rejection of reality, it is simply a preference for one aspect of wealth over another. Just as the term 'New Money' was derogatory in Europe for quite a while, so too is 'Old Money' derogatory in the United States today (and, I believe, in many western nations as well, even in Europe). Americans praise New Money as the pinnacle of success because New Money is usually obtained by personal achievement. In contrast, money obtained by inheritance carries no connotations of individual ability or worth of any kind. The former, as embodied by people like Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Buffet, are considered to have earned their great wealth and (usually) to have brought great benefits to the rest of society. It is not that we ignore the existence of Old Money, but more that it is regularly shunned and considered inferior to New Money, and even much of the normal middle and working classes. For proof of this, you only need to look at politics. Sure, Old Money will beat No Money any day in an election, but New Money almost always beats Old Money.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I do not think it is a rejection of reality, it is simply a preference for one aspect of wealth over another. Just as the term 'New Money' was derogatory in Europe for quite a while, so too is 'Old Money' derogatory in the United States today (and, I believe, in many western nations as well, even in Europe). Americans praise New Money as the pinnacle of success because New Money is usually obtained by personal achievement. In contrast, money obtained by inheritance carries no connotations of individual ability or worth of any kind. The former, as embodied by people like Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Buffet, are considered to have earned their great wealth and (usually) to have brought great benefits to the rest of society. It is not that we ignore the existence of Old Money, but more that it is regularly shunned and considered inferior to New Money, and even much of the normal middle and working classes. For proof of this, you only need to look at politics. Sure, Old Money will beat No Money any day in an election, but New Money almost always beats Old Money.

Dislike for the man born with the sliver sppon is universal among the lower classes, and comes ultimately from jealousy.

Ok, so New Money beats Old in an election, what about buisness and, more importantly, funding elections? Surely "Old Money" throws it's weight around there?

[Fragony]

Dislike for the man born with the sliver sppon is universal among the lower classes, and comes ultimately from jealousy.

Nope. Born with a silver spoon fine, feel good about it, why.

[SwordsMaster]

Fascinating. I might submit for discussion that a gentleman is not measured by his wallet.

Exactly. I would base the differenciation more on education, general culture, interests, and lifestyle.

My parents are difficult to define: They were both brought up in the USSR (my dad an engineer, my mom a computer programmer) and moved to Europe in 92. My dad, through evolutions and lots of hardship (even I remember weeks we had to eat beans and bread, literally, because that's all there was) has managed to climb up the ladder into middle class. My mom, with 3 kids, stayed at home with us.

My dad was college educated, my mom I suppose had what you'd call an associate's degree these days. In terms of education, culture, and interests, i'd say my mom is upper-middle class, and my dad middle class.

Myself I have a masters degree from a good university, have no debts (thanks to my own hard work, and my parents' generosity) and I consider myself upper-middle class with aristocratic tendencies even though i don't really fit into the salary bracket. My lifestyle is financed mainly through gambling and living in countries where 1 Euro/USD goes much further than it does in the home country.

After all, wasn't it Oscar Wilde who said "A gentleman who lives within his means suffers from lack of imagination"?

[TinCow]

Ok, so New Money beats Old in an election, what about buisness and, more importantly, funding elections? Surely "Old Money" throws it's weight around there?

I'm not exactly an expert on this since I have nothing to do with politics, but from my general perspective as an American, I don't feel like Old Money controls business or politics in any way. If I had to point a finger at a group that did, I would point the finger at corporations and syndicates. There is a general perception in the US that companies and 'special interests' (which means individuals acting on behalf of entire industries or other large groups) are the ones that influence the results the most. The evil of wealth in the US tends to be seen as the greed and corruption of faceless men heading large businesses, not heirs or trust-fund kids.

I actually don't think most Americans could even name many of their fellow citizens who would qualify as Old Money. Most would probably cite Paris Hilton, who frankly doesn't qualify in any way as her family hasn't been wealthy for long enough and she's actually earned most of her personal wealth herself. You'd probably have some people list the Kennedys and the Rockefellers, both of which are valid choice. However, while the former certainly qualify as Old Money (and are as close to nobility as it's possible to get in the US), that didn't help Caroline Kennedy too much in her attempt to get the NY Senate Seat a few months ago and the Rockefellers are today synonymous with philanthropy. Being married to Teresa Heinz was actually considered a negative thing for John Kerry during his presidential bid, and she wasn't even born into the Heinz family. There are certainly many anonymous American heirs of old fortunes out there somewhere, but if no one knows them or pays attention to them, presumably that's proof enough of how little influence they wield.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I think I wanna pick that one, but do not understand "Curries". A store?

Yeah, it's a store that sells general electric appliances etc... I think I went and spelled it wrong... it should be "Currys". :oops:

[drone]

My mother's father was from working class, who brought himself into middle class thanks to the US Army Air Corps pilot training during WWII. My mother's mother was from upper middle class (dentist). My father's parents were middle class, descended from upper class "dispossessed" from the Civil War. I grew up middle class, and would probably be upper middle class by now if I had any real ambition. Instead, I prefer to post here and slack. :beam:

[Vladimir]

Everyone says they are middle class, because they don't want to be at the "bottom". There is always the underclass too, which isn't mentioned on the charts which is the non-working classes. Only real classes are the people and the elites, the rest and there just to divide people.

https://img99.imageshack.us/img99/8003/theimaginaryclasses.png

Hah! Thanks for the chart but it doesn't factor cost of living. According to that chart I'm upper-middle but I live near DC so deduct about 30k from my worth.

[Samurai Waki]

my view on "class" makes absolutely no distinction as to the worth of a person's character. Obviously classes based on wealth do exist, but purely on a materialistic basis, which should not, but unfortunately does, dictate the temperament of far too many people.

[Romanus]

Measuring class based on wealth, how vulgar. Class is about culture, good manners, education.

[TinCow]

Measuring class based on wealth, how vulgar. Class is about culture, good manners, education.

Ironically, measuring someone's class based on those criteria strikes me as far more elitist than measuring based on wealth. It is entirely possible for a poor person from an inner city or a rural area to become successful, contribute a great deal to society, and yet never have a formal education or travel enough to become 'cultured.' While good manners are perfectly accessible to even the poorest people, the whole concept of manners is defined by what the upper class finds acceptable. The poorer you are, the less likely you are to have been raised in a manner that will be deemed acceptable by upper class standards.

The end result of this is that by using these criteria for class, there is a perpetuation of the class divide purely based on one's ancestry. Those who were born into upper class families remain upper class, even if they are lazy louts who accomplish nothing. Those who are born into poor families continue to be regard as 'vulgar' even if they have become icons of industry and gained great political power. This is exactly what I described before: a method for the increasingly obsolete hereditary aristocracy to maintain their elitism despite becoming increasingly less useful to society as a whole.

[rory_20_uk]

If they are thought of as "vulgar" more fool the dolts that think that way:

Coming from poor / ill-educated roots be a massive success is very rare. Vulgar is Latin for common...

~:smoking:

[SwordsMaster]

Ironically, measuring someone's class based on those criteria strikes me as far more elitist than measuring based on wealth. It is entirely possible for a poor person from an inner city or a rural area to become successful, contribute a great deal to society, and yet never have a formal education or travel enough to become 'cultured.' While good manners are perfectly accessible to even the poorest people, the whole concept of manners is defined by what the upper class finds acceptable. The poorer you are, the less likely you are to have been raised in a manner that will be deemed acceptable by upper class standards.


It is exactly why class is a different concept from wealth. Anyone can be wealthy. Just because someone won the lottery doesn't make them upper class. It is culture, education, tastes and manners that distinguish between classes.

From the relevant definition: Class:
a. A social stratum whose members share certain economic, social, or cultural characteristics.
b. Social rank or caste, especially high rank.
c. Elegance of style, taste, and manner.

As you can see, economic situation is only one of the criteria.

[TinCow]

It is exactly why class is a different concept from wealth. Anyone can be wealthy. Just because someone won the lottery doesn't make them upper class. It is culture, education, tastes and manners that distinguish between classes.

From the relevant definition: Class:
a. A social stratum whose members share certain economic, social, or cultural characteristics.
b. Social rank or caste, especially high rank.
c. Elegance of style, taste, and manner.

As you can see, economic situation is only one of the criteria.

I don't disagree that that is the current basis on which class is determined. It certainly is. However, I do believe this has not always been the case, and I believe that the decreasing emphasis on wealth is the result of the loss of wealth and power by nobility across the globe, not because of the inherent attributes of 'class' itself. As I see it, the current definition of class is artificial and has been distorted from the much older version of 'class' which placed greater emphasis on money and power and less on individual behavior. There are many people who would have been considered 'upper class' 2000 years ago who would not have been upper class in Victorian Britain, and vice versa.

[Prodigal]

Once upon a time, I was a class less waif, downtrodden, cast adrift in the sea of commuterism, while remaining oppressed by de'man. But since I got an internet connection I've been pleased to learn that I am infact gifted, erodite, the possessor of a rapier like wit, logical, wise, and in almost all ways vastly superior to almost the entire planet!












*present company accepted*

[King Henry V]

Ironically, measuring someone's class based on those criteria strikes me as far more elitist than measuring based on wealth. It is entirely possible for a poor person from an inner city or a rural area to become successful, contribute a great deal to society, and yet never have a formal education or travel enough to become 'cultured.' While good manners are perfectly accessible to even the poorest people, the whole concept of manners is defined by what the upper class finds acceptable. The poorer you are, the less likely you are to have been raised in a manner that will be deemed acceptable by upper class standards.


I somewhat disagree. Whilst it requires a lot of luck and hard work to make a fortune from scratch, any person with a bit of ingenuity and free time can affect the habits of the traditional upper classes, just look at some of the famous con men of history. Those qualities which Romanus mentioned are not so difficult to attain; indeed I believe that everyone, rich or poor, should be well-mannered and display an interest in culture.


Middle class is I suppose the category into which I fit most accurately. However, I am interested in high-brow culture and display quite a snobbish view, I admit, of the more popular forms of entertainment. I speak in a manner which in England is decidedly "upper class" (I sound similar to Trevor Howard), probably much more "upper-class" than those of the English upper classes of my generation from what little I have seen or heard of them, but this is not an affectation of mine, merely due to being brought up abroad and having attended a French-speaking school, only receiving the influence of my mother's Received Pronunciation English, which has lead to a kind of fossilised variety of it, unaffected by the increasingly rounded-vowels of modern English, or, Heaven forbid, mongrel International School English, which is what a good deal of my friends speak. I also have a taste for smart clothes of a vintage cut, not to mention the finer things in life, a trait which my forebears have amply had. From a cultural point of view, I would fit into the upper-class bracket.

Nevertheless, from an economic perspective, my present situation is definitely middle class, and lower middle class at that. My mother's living is precarious, depending as it does on rented property; my father has a very good job, but for a myriad of reasons which I shall not go into here, he only gives me what the law dictates and no more (parents are divorced). Money has been tight quite frequently; we almost always have a lodger in the flat. Yet despite this, we (my mother and I) have lived quite well, even perhaps quite beyond our means, which probably does not help financial matters.

As to my socio-economic ancestry, it's a bit of a mixed bag, like many people. My mother's maternal grandmother as well as my paternal grandmother were of the German aristocracy, the latter's family owned a bit of land in Silesia. My mother's maternal grandfather was a German Jew who had worked his way up to own several shoe shops in Berlin before the war, and my paternal grandfather came from a family of career soldiers who had risen to officers only in the first world war. Needless to say, neither my great-grandmother's or my grandmother's family particularly liked these respective unions.
Over on the slim portion of my family that is actually English, they were lower-middle class clerks living in St John's Wood, London. However, my maternal grandmother happened to be rather good at cricket and played professionally for the Marylebone Cricket Club, which back in the day would also tour the great houses, universities and schools of the land. Immersed in the world of the English aristocracy, he quickly copied their speech and habits.

All in all a rather prosperous set-up, one would think. However, in 1933 a little man called Mr Hitler came to power in Germany, and did two things which affected me personally. First of all he made it a bit unpleasant for the Jews, so my maternal grandmother and her parents had to hop it to Blighty in 1938, leaving all that they had behind, of course. Secondly he went off and did a silly thing like starting a second world war, which, though it started off quite swimmingly for Germany, didn't quite work out as well as he had planned, with the result that it came second. The Allies decided to amputate a rather large chunk of its territory, which unfortunately for my family included Silesia, handed to Poland, who, blasted commies that they were, even if they hadn't expelled my father's side of the family along with all the other Germans, would have disposessed them for being aristocrats. The ancestral abode was dynamited as testimony to the glory of the triumphant proletariat.

So, as well as packing my grandmother off to England, thus indirectly making me English (by temperament if not entirely by blood), old Adolf robbed me of my rightful place as a heel-clicking Prussian Junker. I hope the bastard is burning in hell as we speak (that and of course for all the other nasty things that he did which haven't effected me directly).

So there you go, the social class of King Henry V explained.

[Rhyfelwyr]

In the end, it all comes down to Hitler.

[King Henry V]

In the end, it all comes down to Hitler.

Indeed. :laugh4: I suppose that's a generalised version of Godwin's Law, no?

[edyzmedieval]

In the tone of my dear friend King Henry V, based on the wealth criteria, I kind of find it hard to judge because my father is the CEO of his own business and the profits acquired go beyond upper middle class. But considering every aspect, my family is upper middle class. From the manner-criteria, I prefer to think of myself as aristocratic. I have always been an elitist but I prefer to detach myself from the immaturity that governs within the people of my age (18-19). I am not generalising, but extensive reading and cultural activity differs me from the others. Regarding the parents, my dad finished computer studies in 1978 ( :dizzy2: ), mom finished petrochemical engineering or something like that.

Looking back in my family's generations, grandfather was from the working class but grandmother was from the landed aristocracy. Communism confiscated my grandmother's lands and they resumed to a house in the city where my grandfather was born.

In the end, it all comes down to Hitler.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I don't disagree that that is the current basis on which class is determined. It certainly is. However, I do believe this has not always been the case, and I believe that the decreasing emphasis on wealth is the result of the loss of wealth and power by nobility across the globe, not because of the inherent attributes of 'class' itself. As I see it, the current definition of class is artificial and has been distorted from the much older version of 'class' which placed greater emphasis on money and power and less on individual behavior. There are many people who would have been considered 'upper class' 2000 years ago who would not have been upper class in Victorian Britain, and vice versa.

2,000 years ago the "Upper Class" were either Patricians, as in Rome, or royalty and their extended family. In either case the only way in would be marriage or adoption. I don't think it's that different, sorry to say.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I speak in a manner which in England is decidedly "upper class" (I sound similar to Trevor Howard), probably much more "upper-class" than those of the English upper classes of my generation from what little I have seen or heard of them, but this is not an affectation of mine, merely due to being brought up abroad and having attended a French-speaking school, only receiving the influence of my mother's Received Pronunciation English, which has lead to a kind of fossilised variety of it, unaffected by the increasingly rounded-vowels of modern English, or, Heaven forbid, mongrel International School English, which is what a good deal of my friends speak. Please allow me to congratulate you on your excellent command of syntax - serving as an example to all, which clearly is the product not just of the world's finest schools, as I am tempted to provocatively argue, but won't for the stark contrast it is in to what will be the closing words of this sentence, but of a mind given to learning, a desire to properly express oneself - not to snobbishly distinguish oneself from the masses through immodesty, but, on the contrary, out of respect for the reader - and an understanding of language as a carrier of culture and artistic means of expression, all three of which are virtues which betray their owner as a bearer of true class.


And curse Hitler, that most vulgar of men. A plague on him and his internets henchmen.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Only lower class Martians live on Mars. Those with the means to do so have long since moved to Phobos.

I resent that.

[King Henry V]

Please allow me to congratulate you on your excellent command of syntax - serving as an example to all, which clearly is the product not just of the world's finest schools, as I am tempted to provocatively argue, but won't for the stark contrast it is in to what will be the closing words of this sentence, but of a mind given to learning, a desire to properly express oneself - not to snobbishly distinguish oneself from the masses through immodesty, but, on the contrary, out of respect for the reader - and an understanding of language as a carrier of culture and artistic means of expression, all three of which are virtues which betray their owner as a bearer of true class.


And curse Hitler, that most vulgar of men. A plague on him and his internets henchmen.

:laugh4: Oh dear, oh dear, that was a rather long-winded sentence of mine. My English teacher would have chided me greatly.

[KukriKhan]

:laugh4: Oh dear, oh dear, that was a rather long-winded sentence of mine. My English teacher would have chided me greatly.

Nonsense.

Full-stops and paragraphing are for those with attention def... uh, atten... er, where was I?

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
With family roots in military aristocracy, we've been of the middle class since my grandfather (paternal) and agrarian-working/middle class on my mother's side.

As for identification, I'm of the Mouzafphaerrian class. :crown:
.

[drone]

In the end, it all comes down to Hitler.

That's not necessarily true. In my case, those damn Yankees absconded with my upper class potential. :embarassed:

[Rhyfelwyr]

That's not necessarily true. In my case, those damn Yankees absconded with my upper class potential. :embarassed:

Maybe so, but where Hitler is involved you can be sure he will have attacked the upper classes... he was a socialist after all.

:beam: