The article would have you believe that class is a result of wages. It's not... it's the outcome of social structures. There's a corellation between money and c

The article would have you believe that class is a result of wages. It's not... it's the outcome of social structures. There's a corellation between money and class... but money is not the only factor. > None of this is to say the Times' "middle class" are the real victims; the 95 percent of Americans below them are doing even worse. No, please... tell me who the _real_ victims are. </snide> Not to get too far off the rails here, but i think this article is too wrapped up in conversations about Lower/Middle/Upper wage-bands. That's a distraction from the more serious conversation we could be having about Class, which is distinct from wage-earning. Class is about control: Ruling Class --> Management Class --> Working Class If the terms of your lifestyle are dictated to you by a boss, you are working class. If you can't stop working forever, today, you are working class. If you're not powerful, you are working class. There's a very slim chance that anybody reading this isn't working class... When we think about other people "below" us, we're not recognizing that these are our brothers and sisters in a continuing struggle for freedom from oppressive social structures. Wages come from bosses. If you have a wage, you're probably working class. We would all do well to remember that most of us are on the same page. We shouldn't let the Managing Class tell us we're different from each other, because we get different wages.