3 ms·

It’s not tiring at all, it’s just becoming acutely aware of the day-to-day socio-economic realities. Yes, a good friend of mine can afford to be a (rather poor

It’s not tiring at all, it’s just becoming acutely aware of the day-to-day socio-economic realities. Yes, a good friend of mine can afford to be a (rather poorly paid) journalist because said friend is in fact a millionaire when it comes to his inherited real-estate assets, but someone like me (my parents had to rely on subsistence agriculture until not that long ago) has to always have a decent-paying job available or else. Again, for people on the other side of the fence is not tiring at all, we’re very much aware of it each and every day. It’s not a new thing either, reading Balzac means reading about people on each side of the has real money/has no real money fence.

sanderjd 4y ago
Your examples are not "signaling". A rich person being a poorly paid journalist because they want to and can afford to isn't signaling, they're just doing something they want to do and which they can afford to do. Very very few people do such things simply for the sake of appearances. You (and me, for what it's worth) always having to have a decent-paying job available or else is also not "signaling", it just is what it is, we have to work jobs because we have to work jobs, there isn't a status meta-game to it, it's just how we afford life. It's the mindset of looking at things like your poorly paid journalist example, and thinking "that person is signaling" rather than "that person wants to be a journalist" that I find tedious and unrelatable.
- paganel 4y ago
  I don’t think the author writes about the “in your face” signaling, because nobody does that anymore once a certain high socio-economic status is reached (mostly by birth-related accidents), but about the “implicit”, for lack of a better term, signaling. Which most of the people the OP talks about certainly do in abundance. In other words I think the author talks mostly about that “implicit” signaling.
  - sanderjd 4y ago
    This "implicit signaling" sounds indistinguishable from people just doing the things they choose to do on the direct merits of those things. My whole point is that this whole meta game of signaling status is way overblown. I just don't think the vast majority of people live this way at all.

sanderjd 4y ago

Your examples are not "signaling". A rich person being a poorly paid journalist because they want to and can afford to isn't signaling, they're just doing something they want to do and which they can afford to do. Very very few people do such things simply for the sake of appearances. You (and me, for what it's worth) always having to have a decent-paying job available or else is also not "signaling", it just is what it is, we have to work jobs because we have to work jobs, there isn't a status meta-game to it, it's just how we afford life. It's the mindset of looking at things like your poorly paid journalist example, and thinking "that person is signaling" rather than "that person wants to be a journalist" that I find tedious and unrelatable.

paganel 4y ago
I don’t think the author writes about the “in your face” signaling, because nobody does that anymore once a certain high socio-economic status is reached (mostly by birth-related accidents), but about the “implicit”, for lack of a better term, signaling. Which most of the people the OP talks about certainly do in abundance. In other words I think the author talks mostly about that “implicit” signaling.
- sanderjd 4y ago
  This "implicit signaling" sounds indistinguishable from people just doing the things they choose to do on the direct merits of those things. My whole point is that this whole meta game of signaling status is way overblown. I just don't think the vast majority of people live this way at all.