7 ms·

> middle class: have a job, must work for a living This is not the way most people have traditionally thought of the middle class. The middle class were the h

> middle class: have a job, must work for a living This is not the way most people have traditionally thought of the middle class. The middle class were the highly-skilled white-collar professionals: doctors, lawyers, engineers. In contrast, the lower class were the poor or blue-collar workers: farmers, factory workers, and the unemployed. Whereas the upper class referred to business owners and financiers. With the decline of farming and manufacturing, blue-collar workers shifted to service industries. What is striking is most people think they have the living standard of skilled white-collar professionals, even though they are just service industry workers. This situation is only possible because of universal access to cheap credit.

dpark 10y ago
When was this ever the typical definition of lower/middle/upper class? That's not the historical definition nor is it the modern one. The idea that being a business owner makes you "upper class" is absurd. Most business owners have always been middle class. Most businesses aren't that lucrative and require large amounts of time relative to the amount of profit generated.
- blowski 10y ago
  Actually, as a Brit (and so an expert in these matters), it seemed a fairly good definition for me. It's similar to how class is represented in Downton Abbey and in books like "Watching the English" (Kate Fox). As far as I know, there are no formal and universal definitions of the class system. Certainly in Britain, class has almost nothing to do with your income or bank balance. A lot of the upper class are completely broke, while there are many "working class millionaires".
  - exstudent2 10y ago
    Americans don't have the baggage of nobility so don't have to wedge the class system into a historical (but no longer relevant) model. In the US all that matters is money. It might come from your parents, it might not.
    - xapata 10y ago
      > In the US all that matters is money. Not entirely. Perhaps more than in the UK, yet behavior and social circle are still a factor in the US.
  - om2 10y ago
    Isn't the notion of "upper class" in Britain usually based on peerage titles or being related to people who have them, as opposed to business ownership? A small business person is almost the epitome of middle class, to the point that impoverished aristocrats would never stoop to such an occupation.
    - internaut 10y ago
      Sort of. It is possible to buy yourself a title. Many Europeans are descended from people that potentially give them the right to nobility. Few invoke that in everyday life though. So you could become an aristocrat if you really wanted to be, by blue blood or by financial assistance. In the old days somebody successful in business would often transition to aristocracy by taking on a name and the associated trappings. It is something of a controversial area! In Japan it is still common for an unrelated successful young man to be adopted into the family tree of a business dynasty. I suspect the upper class alternates between being meritocratic and being hereditary, while claiming 'it ever twas'.
  - dpark 10y ago
    > Certainly in Britain, class has almost nothing to do with your income or bank balance. That's fine and indicates you're using a more historical definition, but doesn't make the parent comment accurate. A decidedly lower-middle class individual can start a business and this will in no way suddenly push them into the upper class. If they make millions, they still won't be upper class by your definition unless maybe they do so well they somehow get a lordship or at least a knighthood out of it.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      See another comment below: "I think infodroid was using 'business owner' in the sense of 'captains of industry', not 'local corner store proprietor'".
  - vonmoltke 10y ago
    I think, in general, that US and UK ideas of socioeconomic class are different. The UK puts much more emphasis on the "socio", and the US in the "economic".
  - tvanantwerp 10y ago
    Some of the biggest disagreements between my wife and I occurred as a result of her have this British definition of class and me having the American one. She told me early on, she wanted a "middle class" life. I thought, "Oh, that's easy!" But she really meant she wanted to live like a doctor or lawyer. I've been busting my ass ever since I figured out what she actually meant.
- vacri 10y ago
  I think infodroid was using 'business owner' in the sense of 'captains of industry', not 'local corner store proprietor'.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Obligatory Orwell on class in England: http://www.bradford-delong.com/2010/12/george-orwell-on-belonging-to-englands-lower-upper-middle-class-in-the-1920s.html http://www.bradford-delong.com/2010/12/george-orwell-on-belo...
- coldtea 10y ago
  >When was this ever the typical definition of lower/middle/upper class? That's not the historical definition nor is it the modern one. Nope, that is very much the historical definition. With the caveat that for "business owners" you should read big business owners (from Larry Elisson to the guy that owns a restaurant chain), not some person with his own hair saloon in Iowa, or some programmer who freelances as an LLC. From the dictionary: "the class traditionally intermediate between the aristocratic class and the laboring class." From Wikipedia: "In Weberian socio-economic terms, the middle class is the broad group of people in contemporary society who fall socio-economically between the working class and upper class." "The modern usage of the term "middle class", however, dates to the 1913 UK Registrar-General's report, in which the statistician T.H.C. Stevenson identified the middle class as that falling between the upper class and the working class. Included as belonging to the middle class are professionals, managers, and senior civil servants. The chief defining characteristic of membership in the middle class is possession of significant human capital." And generally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class#History_and_evolution_of_the_term https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class#History_and_evolu...

dpark 10y ago

When was this ever the typical definition of lower/middle/upper class? That's not the historical definition nor is it the modern one. The idea that being a business owner makes you "upper class" is absurd. Most business owners have always been middle class. Most businesses aren't that lucrative and require large amounts of time relative to the amount of profit generated.

blowski 10y ago
Actually, as a Brit (and so an expert in these matters), it seemed a fairly good definition for me. It's similar to how class is represented in Downton Abbey and in books like "Watching the English" (Kate Fox). As far as I know, there are no formal and universal definitions of the class system. Certainly in Britain, class has almost nothing to do with your income or bank balance. A lot of the upper class are completely broke, while there are many "working class millionaires".
- exstudent2 10y ago
  Americans don't have the baggage of nobility so don't have to wedge the class system into a historical (but no longer relevant) model. In the US all that matters is money. It might come from your parents, it might not.
  - xapata 10y ago
    > In the US all that matters is money. Not entirely. Perhaps more than in the UK, yet behavior and social circle are still a factor in the US.
- om2 10y ago
  Isn't the notion of "upper class" in Britain usually based on peerage titles or being related to people who have them, as opposed to business ownership? A small business person is almost the epitome of middle class, to the point that impoverished aristocrats would never stoop to such an occupation.
  - internaut 10y ago
    Sort of. It is possible to buy yourself a title. Many Europeans are descended from people that potentially give them the right to nobility. Few invoke that in everyday life though. So you could become an aristocrat if you really wanted to be, by blue blood or by financial assistance. In the old days somebody successful in business would often transition to aristocracy by taking on a name and the associated trappings. It is something of a controversial area! In Japan it is still common for an unrelated successful young man to be adopted into the family tree of a business dynasty. I suspect the upper class alternates between being meritocratic and being hereditary, while claiming 'it ever twas'.
- dpark 10y ago
  > Certainly in Britain, class has almost nothing to do with your income or bank balance. That's fine and indicates you're using a more historical definition, but doesn't make the parent comment accurate. A decidedly lower-middle class individual can start a business and this will in no way suddenly push them into the upper class. If they make millions, they still won't be upper class by your definition unless maybe they do so well they somehow get a lordship or at least a knighthood out of it.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    See another comment below: "I think infodroid was using 'business owner' in the sense of 'captains of industry', not 'local corner store proprietor'".
- vonmoltke 10y ago
  I think, in general, that US and UK ideas of socioeconomic class are different. The UK puts much more emphasis on the "socio", and the US in the "economic".
- tvanantwerp 10y ago
  Some of the biggest disagreements between my wife and I occurred as a result of her have this British definition of class and me having the American one. She told me early on, she wanted a "middle class" life. I thought, "Oh, that's easy!" But she really meant she wanted to live like a doctor or lawyer. I've been busting my ass ever since I figured out what she actually meant.
vacri 10y ago
I think infodroid was using 'business owner' in the sense of 'captains of industry', not 'local corner store proprietor'.
pjc50 10y ago
Obligatory Orwell on class in England: http://www.bradford-delong.com/2010/12/george-orwell-on-belonging-to-englands-lower-upper-middle-class-in-the-1920s.html http://www.bradford-delong.com/2010/12/george-orwell-on-belo...
coldtea 10y ago
>When was this ever the typical definition of lower/middle/upper class? That's not the historical definition nor is it the modern one. Nope, that is very much the historical definition. With the caveat that for "business owners" you should read big business owners (from Larry Elisson to the guy that owns a restaurant chain), not some person with his own hair saloon in Iowa, or some programmer who freelances as an LLC. From the dictionary: "the class traditionally intermediate between the aristocratic class and the laboring class." From Wikipedia: "In Weberian socio-economic terms, the middle class is the broad group of people in contemporary society who fall socio-economically between the working class and upper class." "The modern usage of the term "middle class", however, dates to the 1913 UK Registrar-General's report, in which the statistician T.H.C. Stevenson identified the middle class as that falling between the upper class and the working class. Included as belonging to the middle class are professionals, managers, and senior civil servants. The chief defining characteristic of membership in the middle class is possession of significant human capital." And generally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class#History_and_evolution_of_the_term https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class#History_and_evolu...