4 ms·

> 1,750-square-foot, three-bedroom Who the hell thinks having a 1750sqft home inside a city is “being middle class”

dragonwriter 8y ago
> Who the hell thinks having a 1750sqft home inside a city is “being middle class” Someone who understands the difference between middle class in a capitalist economy and middle income (the latter of which is deep within he working class in most cases, though income and economic class don't perfectly correlate.) Though, really, the article doesn't seem to be using middle class to mean either middle income or petit bourgeois, but instead “meets a status checklist that was broadly promoted as a suburban ideal in the height of White working class prosperity in the 1950s-1970s.” (A status ideal which included denying being in the working class, which certainly was just a coincidence with no connection to the fear of Communist activity focussing on developing a common class consciousness across the working class.)
closeparen 8y ago
Most people who own such houses have mundane occupations and average paychecks. They only got expensive recently.
- reallydude 8y ago
  Most middle class don't have them, so still not average in context.
  - closeparen 8y ago
    Middle class is often defined by homeownership; this seems like an argument about definitions.
    - wutbrodo 8y ago
      The definition you're using has heavy suburban connotations though, and ignoring location doesn't make any sense when talking about real estate. Living in the urban core has never been a marker of the middle-class, and the fact that the political entity of the City of San Francisco happens to be mostly urban core doesn't change that at all. These people could easily have dramatically reduced housing costs if they weren't making the consumption decision to live in the suburbs of said urban core.
      - closeparen 8y ago
        Typical middle class suburbs come with ~30 minute commute times. From downtown SF, that still puts you well within the urban core. Maybe Oakland's urban core when BART works. Living in the Bay Area's suburbs is more like living in the next metro area over from your job, i.e. Milwaukee to Chicago.
        wutbrodo 8y ago
        That's a very good point. I'll have to think about it

> Who the hell thinks having a 1750sqft home inside a city is “being middle class” Someone who understands the difference between middle class in a capitalist economy and middle income (the latter of which is deep within he working class in most cases, though income and economic class don't perfectly correlate.) Though, really, the article doesn't seem to be using middle class to mean either middle income or petit bourgeois, but instead “meets a status checklist that was broadly promoted as a suburban ideal in the height of White working class prosperity in the 1950s-1970s.” (A status ideal which included denying being in the working class, which certainly was just a coincidence with no connection to the fear of Communist activity focussing on developing a common class consciousness across the working class.)

closeparen 8y ago

Most people who own such houses have mundane occupations and average paychecks. They only got expensive recently.

reallydude 8y ago
Most middle class don't have them, so still not average in context.
- closeparen 8y ago
  Middle class is often defined by homeownership; this seems like an argument about definitions.
  - wutbrodo 8y ago
    The definition you're using has heavy suburban connotations though, and ignoring location doesn't make any sense when talking about real estate. Living in the urban core has never been a marker of the middle-class, and the fact that the political entity of the City of San Francisco happens to be mostly urban core doesn't change that at all. These people could easily have dramatically reduced housing costs if they weren't making the consumption decision to live in the suburbs of said urban core.
    - closeparen 8y ago
      Typical middle class suburbs come with ~30 minute commute times. From downtown SF, that still puts you well within the urban core. Maybe Oakland's urban core when BART works. Living in the Bay Area's suburbs is more like living in the next metro area over from your job, i.e. Milwaukee to Chicago.
      - wutbrodo 8y ago
        That's a very good point. I'll have to think about it