In reading "Class: A Guide through the American Status System" by Paul Fussell, I began to wonder how people define the difference between the classes. There is even a disagreement when it comes to the number of classes. Some people define it as either rich or poor and that it. Then some have gone as far as saying there are nine: Top out-of-sight, upper, upper middle, middle, high proletarian, mid-proletarian, low proletarian, destitue and bottom out-of-sight. I'm curious to see what the W's have to say on the subject. Also I'd like to pass on a few quotes that I thought were interesting.
"The rewards...in this life are esteem and admiration of others--the punishments are neglect and contempt...The desire of the esteem of others is as real a want of nature as hunger--and the neglect and contempt of the world as severe a pain as the gout or stone... John Adams
In describing the citizens of Washington D.C., "Born to be slaves, and struggling to be lords." Irish poet Thomas Moore
"Nowhere do citizens appear so insignificant as in a democratic nation. Nowhere, consequently, is there more strenuous effort to achieve--earn would probably not be the right word--significance." Alexis de Tocqueville
I would say that there are five, rich, upper, middle, lower, and poor. Poor is when you do not have adequate money to live on, little education, and no style. Middle is when you have money(either a lot or a little) but some education and style. Rich is when you have money(either a more than you could ever use or ten bucks), but more education and a respect in the way you carry yourself. I believe that it is hard to move up, but once you get there it's easier to stay there. But those are just my ideas as to what makes up class.
I was just going to say that Class is defined as Christopher Robin Zimmerman - He is Class!
But to your question:
I would say there are 5.
Underclass - the people in our society who live on purpose ourside of society's norms. They might be criminals or just those who intend not to be part of any kind of productive society. Unfortuntely, I see this class of society increasing all the time.
Edge of poverty class. They are trying to make it, but stuff hold them back. Bad choices they have made, like dropping out or doing crime or having kids at a young age don't allow them the luxury of being able to more easily get ahead and they end up being mostly trapped at this low level.
Middle class. They live mostly paycheck to paycheck but with some comfort. They are the ones who have the best chance of moving up. Some in this group are very comfortable at the upper end. I am in this class, BTW.
Comfortable. While they are working at regular jobs of some sort (often, their own businesses), they make plenty of bucks. I'd define this in the USA as, say 150K or more.
Rich. Either made or inherited a lot of money. They might work, but it's because they want to. I figure these are people with networth of an excess of about 3 million. Below that, you have to work, at least a little.
We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.
AWArulz has what I would consider to be a pretty good strata. The problem for distinguishing classes in American society is that there is a very high degree of class permiability in the United States. It's almost impossible to move all the way from one end to the other, but hard work, education, and a little luck can move you a long way (and I'm the proof). When classes aren't strictly segregated, it can be pretty hard to figure out exactly where the lines are.
AWA's definitions are fine but as we move forward into the 21st Century my personal definition has changed.
To me there are only rich and poor but not money. There are information (education) rich and poor. This does not necessarily nean formal education but the access and ability to obtain, process, and use information. That leads to the classes that AWA was apeaking of in terms of money/opportunity.
Originally posted by AWArulzI was just going to say that Class is defined as Christopher Robin Zimmerman - He is Class!
But to your question:
I would say there are 5.
Underclass - the people in our society who live on purpose ourside of society's norms. They might be criminals or just those who intend not to be part of any kind of productive society. Unfortuntely, I see this class of society increasing all the time.
I would say that this is lumping together groups of people who are in very different places and who have very different effects on society. A guy who decides to live as a beach bum in California and makes a few bucks selling hemp bracelets to tourists is vastly different than a crack dealer. The other classes you define seem to be based on wealth, while this one seems based on a value judgment, which muddies the waters in my opinion. Where does someone who ranks in the middle of an organized crime enterprise sit? Someone who cooked the books at Enron? Kids who make 2 million playing online poker? I agree pretty much with the rest of your definitions, but this one seems out of place. If you wish to define a group of people who choose to live outside of the basic economy as much as possible, that is understandable. But the flow of money in this country goes in a lot of directions, some less reputable than others, and trying to divide out who should be removed from the other classes could be a messy enterprise.
Originally posted by spfI would say that this is lumping together groups of people who are in very different places and who have very different effects on society. A guy who decides to live as a beach bum in California and makes a few bucks selling hemp bracelets to tourists is vastly different than a crack dealer. The other classes you define seem to be based on wealth, while this one seems based on a value judgment, which muddies the waters in my opinion. Where does someone who ranks in the middle of an organized crime enterprise sit? Someone who cooked the books at Enron? Kids who make 2 million playing online poker? I agree pretty much with the rest of your definitions, but this one seems out of place. If you wish to define a group of people who choose to live outside of the basic economy as much as possible, that is understandable. But the flow of money in this country goes in a lot of directions, some less reputable than others, and trying to divide out who should be removed from the other classes could be a messy enterprise.
Ex-cop, so very black and white for me. An SOB who embezzles a billion from a company and crack dealer are the same. Does your Hemp Bracelet man serve a useful part of society in a legal way? I dunno if Hemp Bracelets are legal, but let's say they are. The guy's not a leech on society, he buys his food and hangs out and serves a useful purpose. Probably poor, but nut an underclass. Now, let's oropose an urban man-person who dropped out of high school, and now gets welfare, lives with a series of women, often fathering children with them, and doesn't work. Perhaps not a criminal like Mr Crack Dealer, but I would say still the underclass.
Are there underclass members who are "rich?" sure. "Poor?" sure. Inbetween? Yep. But all could fall in a second if their underclass status is recognized and somehow resolved (Jail, or cut-off). I say yes. They can never be part of the normal classes of people until whatever is preventing them from being a part of normal society is resolved.
Example: at one point, Bobby Seale was a member of the underclass as a criminal and Black Panther. Now, as a legislater, he's probably a member of the middle or even comfortable class.
Of course, OJ Simpson was once a member of the comfortable class and is now nearly (really?) a member of the underclass, because of crimes he committed or at the very least because of crimes the great majority of people belive he comitted.
We'll be back right after order has been restored here in the Omni Center.
Tomorrow, lunch with the father's side of the family. Monday, Mom's side, and for the first time I can remember, nothin' on Christmas Day proper. StaggerLee: SSDD? (confused)