5 ms·

That sounds pretty middle class to me. Professional people - lawyers, bankers, management, etc. The US doesn't really have an upper class at all - just lots of

That sounds pretty middle class to me. Professional people - lawyers, bankers, management, etc. The US doesn't really have an upper class at all - just lots of rich middle class people. Maybe it's a British thing, but to me class is only minimally about money, so you can't just say the Gates family are rich so they're upper class. In Britain you can be penniless but still be upper class, or a billionaire but still working class. Take David Beckham - rich but working class. You can probably find some destitute Baronets somewhere who are definitely still upper class.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> That sounds pretty middle class to me. Professional people - lawyers, bankers, management, etc. Professional people (as people who are predominantly workers, but usually not on living paycheck-to-paycheck and often with small capital holdings that may suffice for a comfortable retirement) are general middle class, yes. > The US doesn't really have an upper class at all The US actually does have an upper class, people who are primarily capitalists rather than workers. > In Britain you can be penniless but still be upper class, or a billionaire but still working class. You seem to be describing a pre-capitalist, essentially feudal view of class (in a capitalist society, meaningful class distinctions still aren't exactly about money, per se, but more where that money comes from, though there's a relation between the two -- you can't be penniless and be maintaining a comfortable standard of living primarily from capital -- whereas in a feudal class system its more about station of birth independent of money, though, in societies where such a class distinction is meaningful rather than a mere historical artifact, there's a close association between that station and both money and how you get it.)
- johnpenton 12y ago
  Yeah I sort of see what you're saying. But then do you have a different term for what I'm talking about? What would you call someone who comes from a well known family lineage, speaks with a refined accent, was privately educated, went to Harvard, listens to classical music, collects french poetry first editions, but earns a pittance as faculty in the classics department at a college somewhere and has no savings or investments? They don't earn anything, but you can't lump them in with a poor fast food worker can you? What term do you use for this in the US, if you don't call it 'class'? If the UK they would absolutely be upper class. What would you call them? Here's an insight into the British class system for you: some Army regiments are essentially segregated by the class of their officers. A state school educated officer could join the Royal Tank Regiment but would probably never join the King's Royal Hussars. Of course this is unspoken.
  - nether 12y ago
    > But then do you have a different term for what I'm talking about? What would you call someone who comes from a well known family lineage, speaks with a refined accent, was privately educated, went to Harvard, listens to classical music, collects french poetry first editions, but earns a pittance as faculty in the classics department at a college somewhere and has no savings or investments? He'd be middle class in the US, mostly because of his income. He's got connections but still middle class. A fast food worker would be lower class. A fast food worker who went to Harvard, with all those connections and hobbies, would largely be the same. But that's an incredibly contrived example. Class distinctions work because of general income-hobby-family background correlations that generally exist. Also, there isn't much of a "refined accent" in the US that I'm aware of. At least nothing as marked as cockney vs british.
  - maxrann 12y ago
    > But then do you have a different term for what I'm talking about? In french I believe the upper class you are referring to would be called "aristocratie" or "noblesse", while the capitalist upper class would be called "bourgeoisie". I know there are similar words in English but I'm not sure if they carry the same meaning.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > They don't earn anything, but you can't lump them in with a poor fast food worker can you? There's a meaningful economic class distinction to be made, probably, between a tenured faculty member at a university and a fast food worker, even if somehow their income ends up similar (the former having greater economic security than the latter, likely). But I think the distinction you are making is more about subculture than economic class. This particular axis of subculture may sometimes be referred to as "class" (particularly by the people on the "higher" end of it) -- though its probably less common in the US to do so than it would be in Britain -- but its really a largely orthogonal concept to economic class distinctions. Not completely independent though, as -- as many axes of subcultural variations do -- it can have important relations to social networking opportunities that play a role in economic opportunities. This is clearly even more visible, and arguably more substantive, in the United Kingdom -- where, in addition to the kind of examples you cite, there are, for instance, still hereditary peers in the House of Lords, and, heck, still a House of Lords -- than the United States.
sfk 12y ago
Greenspun claims that Gates had a $1000000 trust fund. It does not sound like middle class at all: http://philip.greenspun.com/bg/ http://philip.greenspun.com/bg/

dragonwriter 12y ago

> That sounds pretty middle class to me. Professional people - lawyers, bankers, management, etc. Professional people (as people who are predominantly workers, but usually not on living paycheck-to-paycheck and often with small capital holdings that may suffice for a comfortable retirement) are general middle class, yes. > The US doesn't really have an upper class at all The US actually does have an upper class, people who are primarily capitalists rather than workers. > In Britain you can be penniless but still be upper class, or a billionaire but still working class. You seem to be describing a pre-capitalist, essentially feudal view of class (in a capitalist society, meaningful class distinctions still aren't exactly about money, per se, but more where that money comes from, though there's a relation between the two -- you can't be penniless and be maintaining a comfortable standard of living primarily from capital -- whereas in a feudal class system its more about station of birth independent of money, though, in societies where such a class distinction is meaningful rather than a mere historical artifact, there's a close association between that station and both money and how you get it.)

johnpenton 12y ago
Yeah I sort of see what you're saying. But then do you have a different term for what I'm talking about? What would you call someone who comes from a well known family lineage, speaks with a refined accent, was privately educated, went to Harvard, listens to classical music, collects french poetry first editions, but earns a pittance as faculty in the classics department at a college somewhere and has no savings or investments? They don't earn anything, but you can't lump them in with a poor fast food worker can you? What term do you use for this in the US, if you don't call it 'class'? If the UK they would absolutely be upper class. What would you call them? Here's an insight into the British class system for you: some Army regiments are essentially segregated by the class of their officers. A state school educated officer could join the Royal Tank Regiment but would probably never join the King's Royal Hussars. Of course this is unspoken.
- nether 12y ago
  > But then do you have a different term for what I'm talking about? What would you call someone who comes from a well known family lineage, speaks with a refined accent, was privately educated, went to Harvard, listens to classical music, collects french poetry first editions, but earns a pittance as faculty in the classics department at a college somewhere and has no savings or investments? He'd be middle class in the US, mostly because of his income. He's got connections but still middle class. A fast food worker would be lower class. A fast food worker who went to Harvard, with all those connections and hobbies, would largely be the same. But that's an incredibly contrived example. Class distinctions work because of general income-hobby-family background correlations that generally exist. Also, there isn't much of a "refined accent" in the US that I'm aware of. At least nothing as marked as cockney vs british.
- maxrann 12y ago
  > But then do you have a different term for what I'm talking about? In french I believe the upper class you are referring to would be called "aristocratie" or "noblesse", while the capitalist upper class would be called "bourgeoisie". I know there are similar words in English but I'm not sure if they carry the same meaning.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > They don't earn anything, but you can't lump them in with a poor fast food worker can you? There's a meaningful economic class distinction to be made, probably, between a tenured faculty member at a university and a fast food worker, even if somehow their income ends up similar (the former having greater economic security than the latter, likely). But I think the distinction you are making is more about subculture than economic class. This particular axis of subculture may sometimes be referred to as "class" (particularly by the people on the "higher" end of it) -- though its probably less common in the US to do so than it would be in Britain -- but its really a largely orthogonal concept to economic class distinctions. Not completely independent though, as -- as many axes of subcultural variations do -- it can have important relations to social networking opportunities that play a role in economic opportunities. This is clearly even more visible, and arguably more substantive, in the United Kingdom -- where, in addition to the kind of examples you cite, there are, for instance, still hereditary peers in the House of Lords, and, heck, still a House of Lords -- than the United States.

sfk 12y ago

Greenspun claims that Gates had a $1000000 trust fund. It does not sound like middle class at all: http://philip.greenspun.com/bg/ http://philip.greenspun.com/bg/