3 ms·
> Class is about things like background, education, tastes, social status and connections. Not cash. This is an archaic definition that doesn’t really even wor
by dahart 7y ago
> Class is about things like background, education, tastes, social status and connections. Not cash.
This is an archaic definition that doesn’t really even work anymore (see tech billionaires, for example). In economic discussions, class means ‘socioeconomic status’ which is defined as net financial worth, e.g., income plus savings. It is not just common for class to be defined by cash, I guess it’s probably the most commonly used definition now. In any case, it’s very common and perfectly acceptable to draw the line between classes using income brackets.
- Spritle 7y agoAlthough this definition is not in use as much as it used to be for those in the American middle and lower classes, it is very very much alive and well in the American upper classes. If you don't live in the "good" neighborhoods and you went to public school and you've never been to Europe then you're going to get looked down upon. Yes, there are people that made their money in one generation. These are the Nouveau riche. They may find that they are not as accepted as the guy that drives an old Mercedes and wears second-hand clothes. It's about how your were raised. And accessorizing. :-)
- dahart 7y agoIn that sense, the archaic definition of upper class exists and is being as a mechanism for social prejudice and exclusivity; as a way to keep new money out. I don’t disagree it exists, but I’d argue it’s socially harmful and that we should actively strive to replace that definition with the one that’s actually measurable, rather than arguing against socio-economic status as a synonym for social class like the GP’s comment did.