3 ms·

I thought of the same thing. I do not think, that you buy status symbols to move to an upper class, I think they are uniforms to identify yourself within your o

I thought of the same thing. I do not think, that you buy status symbols to move to an upper class, I think they are uniforms to identify yourself within your own class and move to the top of it. Excessive manicure, hair extensions etc. are expensive but seem like a stupid investment. They (in my mind, subjectively) lower your social status, because they are uniforms of the lower class. Moving one class up, a big car is expensive, but you still will not be accepted in the (upper) middle class if you do not have a proper job or you wear a uniform of the lower class. The question arises whether your house is paid of or not and why you bought that car if it is not The farther up you rise in the Bildungsbürgertum [0], the more subtle the indicators get: Do you use foreign words, that indicate your French/Latin language education? Which instruments do your children play? Do your children play football (soccer) or tennis? The point of these status indicators is, that you can not fake them easily. You can not pay of your house if you do not have a proper paying job. You have to get a certain education to show of certain skills. If you have these things you already belong to the respective class. Edit: Wanted to add one more thing: My most favourite social status indicator is the number of children. It seems to me, that having more than 3 children is an indicator of either the lower class, because the marginal costs of an additional child are mostly paid by the state, or the upper class, because you they can handle the marginal costs on their own again. The middle class often does not want to pay these costs. [0]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildungsb%C3%BCrgertum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildungsb%C3%BCrgertum

busyant 11y ago
> My most favourite social status indicator is the number of children. It seems to me, that having more than 3 children is an indicator of either the lower class, because the marginal costs of an additional child are mostly paid by the state, or the upper class, because you they can handle the marginal costs on their own again. The middle class often does not want to pay these costs. I don't get this. How good of an indicator can it be if >3 is both upper and lower? And is the middle class really pinned at 3?
- allendoerfer 11y ago
  I do not know, if it is really true, it is just how I perceive it here in Germany. Seems plausible taking into account, that Germany both has the second lowest birth rate worldwide and a relatively large middle class. You can see the social status as a vector of social indicators that together define which class you belong to. The "> 3 kids" indicator assigns or strengthens your assignment to a class, depending on which other indicators you have.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >I don't get this. How good of an indicator can it be if >3 is both upper and lower? The same as any other indicator that has the same boundaries meaning different things on different "modes". 100% cpu is bad if it's from stalled program, but great if it's from a number-crunching app you created to utilize all cores.
marincounty 11y ago
In most of America, we don't have a ridid class system. At least where I grew up, how much money you had, and what clothes you wore meant absolutely nothing. In fact, it often worked against you if you happened to have rich parents--the whole spolied rich kid thing. As adults, I guess Americans start to stereotype, but we don't have hard and fast demarcations between low class and upper class. I'm not saying Americans aren't racists, but the whole class thing was never a big deal where I grew up, or I didn't notice it? I have noticed a bit of a change lately, but it's still not a ridid system. I have never heard a guy talk about the economic class a women fits into--Never! They find that special person and will do anything to win them over. In other words, they find that person they find Perfect, and want a relationship--period. (The're usually rejected, but that's another topic.) I have seen women judge people on how much money they come from, but it's not as strong as in other countries, and it usually/always comes from jealousy. Yes, looks do matter. It's a commodity, especially when you are younger. How much money you have doesn't come into the picture until later in life, but that's for men. A pretty, caring female is not judged on how much money she makes. In a lot of circles, it might even work against her? Some of you will call me a sexist over that statement, but it's just something I have noticed. A rich guy who looks/acts like Donald Trump will get his pick. A rich women does not get the same perks. Yes--it's wrong, but I can care less over the happiness of the wealthy. (There I go, I am using wealthy as a demarcation of class? Yes, in American we do talk about the wealthy, and 1 percenter's, but we don't associated it with class, morals, manners, or intelligence. (Donald Trump is a perfect example of a "upper class" person in America. It just doesn't work?) Over the years, I have sat watched movies/series about the upper classes(usually in Great Britain), and always found them hilarious. I know it's because we don't have a monarchy--thank goodness--personally I couldn't stomach all that pomposity, and family lineage b.s.. (This is coming from a 40 someting, who's always lived in liberal communities.) I don't want to argue--I never even come back to posts. I hope I didn't offend anyone concerning their perceived class?)
- allendoerfer 11y ago
  Even if you will not answer me, I want to state, that I think your points a highly subjective and I find all of them questionable. The inherent optimism to rise up by your own does not make a society classless. I can not think of a western country that is as extremely divided as America. No limit at the top, no limit at the bottom. People do not talk about the class of people they meet, because the mostly meet people of their own class in the first place. You go to similar schools, attend similar colleges and live in similar neighbourhoods. Europe has its nouveau rich, that do not really belong to the 1%, too, the same way, that America has its aristocrats, too. I mean, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Bush vs. Clinton again?!?

busyant 11y ago

> My most favourite social status indicator is the number of children. It seems to me, that having more than 3 children is an indicator of either the lower class, because the marginal costs of an additional child are mostly paid by the state, or the upper class, because you they can handle the marginal costs on their own again. The middle class often does not want to pay these costs. I don't get this. How good of an indicator can it be if >3 is both upper and lower? And is the middle class really pinned at 3?

allendoerfer 11y ago
I do not know, if it is really true, it is just how I perceive it here in Germany. Seems plausible taking into account, that Germany both has the second lowest birth rate worldwide and a relatively large middle class. You can see the social status as a vector of social indicators that together define which class you belong to. The "> 3 kids" indicator assigns or strengthens your assignment to a class, depending on which other indicators you have.
coldtea 11y ago
>I don't get this. How good of an indicator can it be if >3 is both upper and lower? The same as any other indicator that has the same boundaries meaning different things on different "modes". 100% cpu is bad if it's from stalled program, but great if it's from a number-crunching app you created to utilize all cores.

marincounty 11y ago

In most of America, we don't have a ridid class system. At least where I grew up, how much money you had, and what clothes you wore meant absolutely nothing. In fact, it often worked against you if you happened to have rich parents--the whole spolied rich kid thing. As adults, I guess Americans start to stereotype, but we don't have hard and fast demarcations between low class and upper class. I'm not saying Americans aren't racists, but the whole class thing was never a big deal where I grew up, or I didn't notice it? I have noticed a bit of a change lately, but it's still not a ridid system. I have never heard a guy talk about the economic class a women fits into--Never! They find that special person and will do anything to win them over. In other words, they find that person they find Perfect, and want a relationship--period. (The're usually rejected, but that's another topic.) I have seen women judge people on how much money they come from, but it's not as strong as in other countries, and it usually/always comes from jealousy. Yes, looks do matter. It's a commodity, especially when you are younger. How much money you have doesn't come into the picture until later in life, but that's for men. A pretty, caring female is not judged on how much money she makes. In a lot of circles, it might even work against her? Some of you will call me a sexist over that statement, but it's just something I have noticed. A rich guy who looks/acts like Donald Trump will get his pick. A rich women does not get the same perks. Yes--it's wrong, but I can care less over the happiness of the wealthy. (There I go, I am using wealthy as a demarcation of class? Yes, in American we do talk about the wealthy, and 1 percenter's, but we don't associated it with class, morals, manners, or intelligence. (Donald Trump is a perfect example of a "upper class" person in America. It just doesn't work?) Over the years, I have sat watched movies/series about the upper classes(usually in Great Britain), and always found them hilarious. I know it's because we don't have a monarchy--thank goodness--personally I couldn't stomach all that pomposity, and family lineage b.s.. (This is coming from a 40 someting, who's always lived in liberal communities.) I don't want to argue--I never even come back to posts. I hope I didn't offend anyone concerning their perceived class?)

allendoerfer 11y ago
Even if you will not answer me, I want to state, that I think your points a highly subjective and I find all of them questionable. The inherent optimism to rise up by your own does not make a society classless. I can not think of a western country that is as extremely divided as America. No limit at the top, no limit at the bottom. People do not talk about the class of people they meet, because the mostly meet people of their own class in the first place. You go to similar schools, attend similar colleges and live in similar neighbourhoods. Europe has its nouveau rich, that do not really belong to the 1%, too, the same way, that America has its aristocrats, too. I mean, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama and now Bush vs. Clinton again?!?