3 ms·
That's a very narrow definition which would even exclude people like Alan Sugar who has an actual lordship and knighthood as well piles of cash. It's not an es
by jiggy2011 14y ago
That's a very narrow definition which would even exclude people like Alan Sugar who has an actual lordship and knighthood as well piles of cash.
It's not an especially useful definition anyway, if your family has a lot of money it doesn't make much practical difference whether they got that via inheritance or via starting facebook you will get similar advantages either way.
- lotsofcows 14y agoWhat? There is no way that anyone could consider Alan Sugar to be upper class? Was that an attempt at a joke? There's some sort of deep cultural disconnect going on here. Are you English? "Practical difference" What are you talking about? Rich is rich. Upper class is upper class. Traditionally / historically being upper class has implied money. Having money has never implied upper class.
- rdouble 14y agoThat's a very narrow definition It's a very English definition.