Working Class

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Here and in newspapers we hear about the working class, the middle class, the upper class, and the wealthy.

Does anyone know exactly what they means?

Do you have to be in a union to be a "working" American? Do people who work with their brains, not really work? Is it all income based? Does a poor education mean that you can only be a working American?

Exactly what is middle class anyway?

I work in a company that has 6,000 union employees doing various jobs including working in crafts, digging ditches, working underground and running some very high tech and dangerous equipment. The average salary without overtime is about $68,000 per year (the lowest is about $32,000) and with OT many are near $100,000. Are they working Americans or middle class? They sure as heck work hard and under very adverse conditions at times.

And if a person earns $45,000 and the spouse earns $45,000 are they two working Americans or a middle class (or perhaps upper class) family?

[YZGI]

Depends on where you live. Those figures on the east and west coast would probably be considered middle class. Here is middle America they would be considered upper middle I would think.

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

YZGI;938212 wrote: Depends on where you live. Those figures on the east and west coast would probably be considered middle class. Here is middle America they would be considered upper middle I would think.


Good point and that makes the answer even more complicated (and less likely that a politician can generalize).

[along-for-the-ride]

And, Uncle Quinn, the working class is divided into two catagories.......white collar and blue collar.



Sometimes, I feel like a white collar worker who gets blue collar pay and does blue collar work at times.

[Lon]

QUINNSCOMMENTARY;938180 wrote: Here and in newspapers we hear about the working class, the middle class, the upper class, and the wealthy.

Does anyone know exactly what they means?

Do you have to be in a union to be a "working" American? Do people who work with their brains, not really work? Is it all income based? Does a poor education mean that you can only be a working American?

Exactly what is middle class anyway?

I work in a company that has 6,000 union employees doing various jobs including working in crafts, digging ditches, working underground and running some very high tech and dangerous equipment. The average salary without overtime is about $68,000 per year (the lowest is about $32,000) and with OT many are near $100,000. Are they working Americans or middle class? They sure as heck work hard and under very adverse conditions at times.

And if a person earns $45,000 and the spouse earns $45,000 are they two working Americans or a middle class (or perhaps upper class) family?+



I hate that term (working class), but to me I always think of those that do assembly line work, non-technical, non-skilled, non credentialed folk. I have never thought of carpenters, mechanics, trades people as WORKING CLASS despite the fact that they certainly work.

I think of the middle class as trades people, carpenters, mechanics, plumbers, electricians, all bank employees and most office workers irrespective of incomes, sales people



Upper class I consider to be those with professional designations, not due to what their incomes actually are, but rather the potential for income in their respective fields. Also, owners and operators of medium to large businesses that create a income and life style above and beyond that of the working class and middle class.

There are some exceptions of course, like the entertainment and sports fields where incomes could certainly qualify them for being upper class despite their formal education.

I consider myself as Middle Class and yet I have had many think of me as Upper Class

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

along-for-the-ride;939685 wrote: And, Uncle Quinn, the working class is divided into two catagories.......white collar and blue collar.



Sometimes, I feel like a white collar worker who gets blue collar pay and does blue collar work at times.


You seem to assume that all blue collar pay is low pay. In fact, when you add in the value of benefits, many union workers are very (very) well paid indeed. State "workers" and most government workers are also well paid with generous benefits and pension that most Americans can't even dream of.

I can show you many blue collar, physical workers who work hard but manage to have two homes, boats, nice cars and the whole deal.

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Lon;939749 wrote: +



I hate that term (working class), but to me I always think of those that do assembly line work, non-technical, non-skilled, non credentialed folk. I have never thought of carpenters, mechanics, trades people as WORKING CLASS despite the fact that they certainly work.

I think of the middle class as trades people, carpenters, mechanics, plumbers, electricians, all bank employees and most office workers irrespective of incomes, sales people



Upper class I consider to be those with professional designations, not due to what their incomes actually are, but rather the potential for income in their respective fields. Also, owners and operators of medium to large businesses that create a income and life style above and beyond that of the working class and middle class.

There are some exceptions of course, like the entertainment and sports fields where incomes could certainly qualify them for being upper class despite their formal education.

I consider myself as Middle Class and yet I have had many think of me as Upper Class


Class seems to be in the eye of the beholder (to coin a phrase). Take a look at "Who is the Middle Class"

Some people define the middle class as households with income of $25,000 to $100,000, but that seems to be a ridiculas range. With the average American household income of about $50,000 plus or minus 15% of that could be considered middle class. Where I live the median household income is $74,284, but in Horatio, SC it is $12,188 and in Stillwater, OK it is $28,039.

If you were living on $28,030 a year with a family BEFORE any economic downturn, not sure a drop in the housing market or the stock market matters too much. On the other hand food and gasoline could be a very big deal.

I too hate the term "working American or working class" no doubt dreamed up by some politician. I "work" 60 plus hours a week and just because it is not with my hands or my back does that mean I am not working?

Then of course you have class based not on money but on character and anyone can have that kind of class.

[Accountable]

YZGI;938212 wrote: Depends on where you live. Those figures on the east and west coast would probably be considered middle class. Here is middle America they would be considered upper middle I would think.
Upper middle middle America or middle coastal America. Of course we're in the lower 48, so if you make lower than 48 in the lower 48 that would make you lower middle lower .... wait, something's tangled. :yh_think

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Accountable;939868 wrote: Upper middle middle America or middle coastal America. Of course we're in the lower 48, so if you make lower than 48 in the lower 48 that would make you lower middle lower .... wait, something's tangled. :yh_think


Close but no cigar, the median household income in Skagway Alaska is $49,375 so it appears that the middle is actually at the top.

[Galbally]

Its interesting that terms like that are used in all English-speaking countries, but really the class system is a very English (and specifically English) thing. So in the original terms of what these terms mean from their context in history.



The Working Class: People who worked as manual and casual labour in the new factories that sprung up in industrial towns in England in the 18th and 19th century. In previous times these people would have been small-holding peasants and manual agricultural labourers working for landowners etc. These people would have been generally illiterate, would have had their own oral culture and music passed down from time immemorial, deeply religious and superstituous, but most of the uniqueness was lost largely when industrialization occurred, and would have had few real legal rights other than the basic ones. They would have made up the bulk of the population, it was also largely from this class of people that most of the migrants to the new world and the antipodes would have come from. In Britain now, what was once the working class has shrunk dramatically, with most escaping to the lower middle classes, and with some have become a new mostly white underclass who do not work and live almost parrallel lives to other citizens, of violence and poverty, people in this last group are probably more disenfranchised than even the working poor were 100 years ago, relative to the rest of society. The general attitude of these people would be cheerful, but violent, they are generally to be avoided.

Middle Class: This would be the middle layer of people, the professional classes and small landholders, shopowners, merchants, etc. This class expanded rapidly following industrialization and urbanization (large middle classes are a very urban phenomena). They are now the dominant class entirely, and make up the bulk of the home-owning population. Its the segregations within the middle class that are important rather than the original three class distinctions. Upper middle classes would go right the way up to very wealthy business and professional people, as well as politicans, senior civil servants, military, legal etc etc. They run the country. The other lower orders staff the organs of the state, the trades, and the major clerical and service industries, as well as the traditional professional and technical jobs of society. This is the class that has come up with most of the problems, and solutions we have faced in the modern world, and is always worried and nervy about everything, added to this modern PC correctness and a massive guilt complex about essentially everything (this part is true whether you are C of E, Catholic, or other). The older ultimate goal of the middle class would be to somehow break into the lower orders of nobility, but since the advent of the Americans and their strange ideas, the ultimate goal of middle class people has become a confused one, with most just wanting to be rich, but also nice, kind to animals and those poor starving people in impoverished hell holes like...France..... and also well liked (a difficult trick). The general attitude of these people would be suppressed rage at everything. If you are British, you are probably one of these people.

Upper Class: In Britain, there is only one upper class really, and its the European and English nobility and aristocracy, having lots of money is really secondary to your breeding in this world, so even people who would be considered the cream of the crop in the US wouldn't even get a look in, no matter how much money they have, being colonials, and rebels to boot. The major assets in this world are bloodlines, titles, castles, lands, farms, tenants. The aspirational things you must have include horses, servants, safaris, lots of dead animals on the wall, ancient artifacts from the family history, etc etc, but you must never flaunt your wealth unless it appears that you completely don't care about status, which at the top of the tree you don't have to, because you will always be top, no matter what god awful peasant becomes Prime Minister, only your lot will ever really be the top of the social tree in your world. It doesn't matter whether the Americans run the world, or the Chinese own it, or the Muslims blow it up, the nobility know who really are at the top and who always will be. The general attitude to adopt is one of indifference to everything and everyone who isn't of good European breeding, and thats an unbreakable rule, you can play with the lower classes, but you can never allow them to think they can actually be you, that would be ridiculous. It may be acceptable to fratrinize with Sheiks and Emirs, as well as Asian Kings and Queens, Japanese Emperors etc, those also these people are not quite cricket either, but at least they know the business end of a Sword. Democratic politicians are right out, being vulgar representatives of a bunch of savages. The top of the tree would be the British Royal family, followed by the other major European monarchies, and then by the British nobility, (which is still there by the way, you can still see a lot of them in the House of Lords). Most of the important Aristocracies in Europe were of Norman or Germanic Stock and most go back many centuries, some to the time of Charlemange, and the Birth of medieval European civilization. You can never get into this club, you are born into it, and you can marry into it, (perhaps) but really you will always be one of the hoi poloi, but your children will aquire nobility I guess. The general attitude of these people is one of complete aloofness to everyone else, and right they are too. These people are also to be avoided, as you will only humiliate yourself trying to suck up to them.

[southern yankee]

YZGI;938212 wrote: Depends on where you live. Those figures on the east and west coast would probably be considered middle class. Here is middle America they would be considered upper middle I would think. I agree. that is like comparing apples to oranges. I think it would be rough in CA or NY. But places like MS or LA. Pretty good.

[Lon]

With Benjamin Franklin having been born in what was then the British Colonies, and as the son of a Candle Maker, I doubt he would have ever risen both intellectually and financially nor received the acclaim and acceptance

that he did from both the nobility of England and France had he been born in either of those countries. His English roots went back to peasantry. Oddly enough, George Washington never received (before the Revolution) the respect he so much wanted from England. He was continually refused a commission in the British Army, and his roots were far better than Franklin's.

Colonists, irrespective of their British ancestry just weren't on a par it seems.

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Galbally;940349 wrote: Its interesting that terms like that are used in all English-speaking countries, but really the class system is a very English (and specifically English) thing. So in the original terms of what these terms mean from their context in history.



The Working Class: People who worked as manual and casual labour in the new factories that sprung up in industrial towns in England in the 18th and 19th century. In previous times these people would have been small-holding peasants and manual agricultural labourers working for landowners etc. These people would have been generally illiterate, would have had their own oral culture and music passed down from time immemorial, deeply religious and superstituous, but most of the uniqueness was lost largely when industrialization occurred, and would have had few real legal rights other than the basic ones. They would have made up the bulk of the population, it was also largely from this class of people that most of the migrants to the new world and the antipodes would have come from. In Britain now, what was once the working class has shrunk dramatically, with most escaping to the lower middle classes, and with some have become a new mostly white underclass who do not work and live almost parrallel lives to other citizens, of violence and poverty, people in this last group are probably more disenfranchised than even the working poor were 100 years ago, relative to the rest of society. The general attitude of these people would be cheerful, but violent, they are generally to be avoided.

Middle Class: This would be the middle layer of people, the professional classes and small landholders, shopowners, merchants, etc. This class expanded rapidly following industrialization and urbanization (large middle classes are a very urban phenomena). They are now the dominant class entirely, and make up the bulk of the home-owning population. Its the segregations within the middle class that are important rather than the original three class distinctions. Upper middle classes would go right the way up to very wealthy business and professional people, as well as politicans, senior civil servants, military, legal etc etc. They run the country. The other lower orders staff the organs of the state, the trades, and the major clerical and service industries, as well as the traditional professional and technical jobs of society. This is the class that has come up with most of the problems, and solutions we have faced in the modern world, and is always worried and nervy about everything, added to this modern PC correctness and a massive guilt complex about essentially everything (this part is true whether you are C of E, Catholic, or other). The older ultimate goal of the middle class would be to somehow break into the lower orders of nobility, but since the advent of the Americans and their strange ideas, the ultimate goal of middle class people has become a confused one, with most just wanting to be rich, but also nice, kind to animals and those poor starving people in impoverished hell holes like...France..... and also well liked (a difficult trick). The general attitude of these people would be suppressed rage at everything. If you are British, you are probably one of these people.

Upper Class: In Britain, there is only one upper class really, and its the European and English nobility and aristocracy, having lots of money is really secondary to your breeding in this world, so even people who would be considered the cream of the crop in the US wouldn't even get a look in, no matter how much money they have, being colonials, and rebels to boot. The major assets in this world are bloodlines, titles, castles, lands, farms, tenants. The aspirational things you must have include horses, servants, safaris, lots of dead animals on the wall, ancient artifacts from the family history, etc etc, but you must never flaunt your wealth unless it appears that you completely don't care about status, which at the top of the tree you don't have to, because you will always be top, no matter what god awful peasant becomes Prime Minister, only your lot will ever really be the top of the social tree in your world. It doesn't matter whether the Americans run the world, or the Chinese own it, or the Muslims blow it up, the nobility know who really are at the top and who always will be. The general attitude to adopt is one of indifference to everything and everyone who isn't of good European breeding, and thats an unbreakable rule, you can play with the lower classes, but you can never allow them to think they can actually be you, that would be ridiculous. It may be acceptable to fratrinize with Sheiks and Emirs, as well as Asian Kings and Queens, Japanese Emperors etc, those also these people are not quite cricket either, but at least they know the business end of a Sword. Democratic politicians are right out, being vulgar representatives of a bunch of savages. The top of the tree would be the British Royal family, followed by the other major European monarchies, and then by the British nobility, (which is still there by the way, you can still see a lot of them in the House of Lords). Most of the important Aristocracies in Europe were of Norman or Germanic Stock and most go back many centuries, some to the time of Charlemange, and the Birth of medieval European civilization. You can never get into this club, you are born into it, and you can marry into it, (perhaps) but really you will always be one of the hoi poloi, but your children will aquire nobility I guess. The general attitude of these people is one of complete aloofness to everyone else, and right they are too. These people are also to be avoided, as you will only humiliate yourself trying to suck up to them.


A very interesting and accurate old world description of classes. The problem in America is that we assign little more than money to class and completely ignore any class in living ones life, dealing with other human beings, or things as mundane as manners and education. We have rich sports stars who are functionally illiterate, millionaires who don't know enough to take their hat off at a dinner table, and classy celebrities who can't finish a sentence without a four letter word. You can have real class and be poor and be a billionaire with no class whatsoever.

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Lon;940430 wrote: With Benjamin Franklin having been born in what was then the British Colonies, and as the son of a Candle Maker, I doubt he would have ever risen both intellectually and financially nor received the acclaim and acceptance

that he did from both the nobility of England and France had he been born in either of those countries. His English roots went back to peasantry. Oddly enough, George Washington never received (before the Revolution) the respect he so much wanted from England. He was continually refused a commission in the British Army, and his roots were far better than Franklin's.

Colonists, irrespective of their British ancestry just weren't on a par it seems.


Can you say Revolution! Some subjects of the British Empire were more equal than others and I suspect the most equal lived within 100 miles of London.

[Bryn Mawr]

QUINNSCOMMENTARY;940471 wrote: Can you say Revolution! Some subjects of the British Empire were more equal than others and I suspect the most equal lived within 100 miles of London.


Whilst most of the Upper class would have had a Town House in London (and come up to town for the season), many of them would have lived much further out than you imagine (even though "within 100 miles of London" covers a fair percentage of England).

Whilst Galbally's description is instructive, I think the old accepted definition was :-

Upper Class = Aristocracy (who might be as poor as church mice but who would still be upper class) - mainly old money, any income would come through the work of managers employed on their behalf.

Middle Class = Although they worked they were able to employ servants.

Working Class = Everyone else.