Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Who or what is the middle class?
Topic Started: Apr 7 2008, 09:51 AM (560 Views)
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
In many cases, the more you help people the more help they need. Didn't Oprah learn this the hard way in her little social experiment?

When in the entire history of social programs has throwing money at a problem NOT made the problem worse?

Wasn't it San Francisco or Seattle that experimented with giving a monthly stipend to the homeless and only ended up with a much larger homeless problem?

Poor schools vs rich schools ... the differences have more to do with the community attitude than the money. It all still comes down to the effort of the student.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Franko
Apr 7 2008, 06:33 PM
Just as a side issue, I've noticed that many of my friends starting families are trying to exploit the tremendous credit available these days so that they can live like "middle class" or even "upper middle classers" when in fact their combined incomes don't quite justify it.

Overwhelming mortgages and car payments....wow. And on top of that, they want bi-annual trips to Hawaii, and other perks which almost rival the ablities of what would have been considered affluent upper class people just a decade or two ago.

Whew.... I fear this constant reaching for the top shelf cookie jar is going to lead to a tragic fall for some, if not many in the coming years ahead.

Quit being so intolerant. I'm pretty sure huge homes, fancy cars and exotic vacations are a God-given right.

Tragic fall? No way man! That's the beauty of it. If enough of us do it then the government will feel sorry for us and bail us out. If not, just declare bankruptcy and leave our creditors high and dry. It's not as easy as it used to be but it's still doable.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
whitestar
Member Avatar
Captain
Why use the term "class"? It smacks of aristocrat and peasant, of Lords and Serfs. Sometime ago I suggested the US has a class culture just one step behind the now receding British class system, which upset a few American members. When speaking of financial standing have you considered substituting the term "class" with "income" or maybe adding the word "income" to the phrase "low class", "high class" or "middle class" becoming "low income class", "middle income class" or "high income class"
To me, the term "low class" comes across as labeling someone low grade, of poor character, inferior to those in "higher classes". The term " high class" depicting those superior to all classes below. "Middle class" neither here nor there, disdainful of the "low class" masses and envious of those above in the "high class"
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
whitestar
Apr 8 2008, 07:28 AM
Why use the term "class"? It smacks of aristocrat and peasant, of Lords and Serfs. Sometime ago I suggested the US has a class culture just one step behind the now receding British class system, which upset a few American members. When speaking of financial standing have you considered substituting the term "class" with "income" or maybe adding the word "income" to the phrase "low class", "high class" or "middle class" becoming "low income class", "middle income class" or "high income class"
To me, the term "low class" comes across as labeling someone low grade, of poor character, inferior to those in "higher classes". The term " high class" depicting those superior to all classes below. "Middle class" neither here nor there, disdainful of the "low class" masses and envious of those above in the "high class"

We use the term working class here rather than lower class.

RTW
 
When in the entire history of social programs has throwing money at a problem NOT made the problem worse?

Let me just give you some examples from the UK...

1. Spending public money on a public education system has improved the education levels of people from the days before it existed
2. Spending public money on universities and student finance has meant that instead of just a small percentage of people being able to enjoy some form of higher education now many can do so
3. Spending public money on social housing has meant many more people now enjoy the benefits of a decent, warm house with security of tenure.
4. The introduction of Tax Credits has resulted in 700,000 families being lifted out of poverty
5. The foundation of the NHS in 1948 has meant that for 60 years the people of the UK have been able to recieve healthcare regardless of their ability to pay. Recent big spending increases have seen new hospitals built, old hospitals refurbished, new equipment purchased, more doctors, more nurses and shorter waiting times for patients. Heart disease deaths are down by 150,000 since 1997 and cancer deaths down by 50,000 in the same period of extra funding.
6. Spending more money on policing in the last 10 years has resulted in 14,000 more police officers and a 32% fall in overall crime.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
RTW
Apr 8 2008, 01:43 AM
In many cases, the more you help people the more help they need. Didn't Oprah learn this the hard way in her little social experiment?

When in the entire history of social programs has throwing money at a problem NOT made the problem worse?

Wasn't it San Francisco or Seattle that experimented with giving a monthly stipend to the homeless and only ended up with a much larger homeless problem?

Poor schools vs rich schools ... the differences have more to do with the community attitude than the money. It all still comes down to the effort of the student.

You have refered multiple times on this board to Oprah's "experiment". I have asked a number of times for you to elaborate because I haven't got a clue of what you are refering to. Not everyone has access to the same information.

I would really appreciate it if you would provide some information, maybe even a link with an explanation of your POV so that I can understand where you are coming from and decide for myself if I agree. Refering to something that no one understands only leads to confusion and abruptly ends discussion because people cannot respond.

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
whitestar
Apr 8 2008, 03:28 AM
Why use the term "class"? It smacks of aristocrat and peasant, of Lords and Serfs. Sometime ago I suggested the US has a class culture just one step behind the now receding British class system, which upset a few American members. When speaking of financial standing have you considered substituting the term "class" with "income" or maybe adding the word "income" to the phrase "low class", "high class" or "middle class" becoming "low income class", "middle income class" or "high income class"
To me, the term "low class" comes across as labeling someone low grade, of poor character, inferior to those in "higher classes". The term " high class" depicting those superior to all classes below. "Middle class" neither here nor there, disdainful of the "low class" masses and envious of those above in the "high class"


whitestar,

For me at lest the word income is implied when talking about upper, middle and lower class. I see no other way to judge it in the US and so the words are synonymous. We don’t have a social class system as far as I can tell (although some people would like to think we do, so I will give you that on their account).

Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
ds9074
Apr 8 2008, 05:05 AM
whitestar
Apr 8 2008, 07:28 AM
Why use the term "class"? It smacks of aristocrat and peasant, of Lords and Serfs. Sometime ago I suggested the US has a class culture just one step behind the now receding British class system, which upset a few American members. When speaking of financial standing have you considered substituting the term "class" with "income" or maybe adding the word "income" to the phrase "low class", "high class" or "middle class" becoming "low income class", "middle income class" or "high income class"
To me, the term "low class" comes across as labeling someone low grade, of poor character, inferior to those in "higher classes". The term " high class" depicting those superior to all classes below. "Middle class" neither here nor there, disdainful of the "low class" masses and envious of those above in the "high class"

We use the term working class here rather than lower class.

RTW
 
When in the entire history of social programs has throwing money at a problem NOT made the problem worse?

Let me just give you some examples from the UK...

1. Spending public money on a public education system has improved the education levels of people from the days before it existed
2. Spending public money on universities and student finance has meant that instead of just a small percentage of people being able to enjoy some form of higher education now many can do so
3. Spending public money on social housing has meant many more people now enjoy the benefits of a decent, warm house with security of tenure.
4. The introduction of Tax Credits has resulted in 700,000 families being lifted out of poverty
5. The foundation of the NHS in 1948 has meant that for 60 years the people of the UK have been able to recieve healthcare regardless of their ability to pay. Recent big spending increases have seen new hospitals built, old hospitals refurbished, new equipment purchased, more doctors, more nurses and shorter waiting times for patients. Heart disease deaths are down by 150,000 since 1997 and cancer deaths down by 50,000 in the same period of extra funding.
6. Spending more money on policing in the last 10 years has resulted in 14,000 more police officers and a 32% fall in overall crime.

Depends on your vantage point. The UK IS NOT THE US!

1. Not in this country. Our public school system (what you'd call "private schools") are a disaster. The focus of schools is now on self-esteem and multiculturalism, not on education. Hell, most schools teach calculators instead of addition and subtraction. There's a reason I pay the equivalent of 10,000 pounds a year on my kids' education.

2. Why does it have to be tax money? What percentage of Britons goes to university? Higher education is not for everyone. I wish that companies here would offer apprenticeships again.

3. Not in this country. Public housing, by and large, means slums. These programs have been a disaster.

4. How is tax credits "public spending?" We call this "keeping your money."

5. Was that you or Mikey who wrote last year about the wait you went through for medical treatment for (forgot the ailment) illness? Your wait times are outrageous.

6. Our police spending comes from local governments, not the federal government. That doesn't sound very efficient to me. In this country, local taxes fund local fire, EMS, and police staffing.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
ds9074
Apr 7 2008, 07:29 PM
^^^
I'm afraid the pace of that change is too glacial for my liking. It also makes a kind of underlying assumption that if people work hard they can achieve whatever they want without any help. I dont think thats actually true.

Also why should a kid born into a poor area have to make do with a bad school. The deserve to get an excellent education regardless of their background and if they get one then I believe they will have a much greater chance of improving their lives and the lives of further generations of their family.


I guess this is where we disagree, I don't find this pace to be too glacial, I find it to be the natural pace of life and as it should be.

I also believe that families can achieve whatever they want without any help. And so help is not a mandatory part of life. I do however agree that help is a good thing, but when it is given it should be given voluntarily not by mandate.

Well, first my opinion does not state that a pore child has to make due with a "bad" school. To me a bad school is one that is let down by its community and has nothing to do with money.

For example one that has to put up with gang land violence, you can put all the modern technology into a gang run school that money can buy and its still going to be a bad school.

But there are differences between good resource rich schools and good resource pore schools that do impact learning speed and accuracy. In this regard I do not see the mandate to make sure all schools have the same level of resource. I do not see it as a punishment or something that has to be made do with. It is just a fact of life, one that for a family will change in time if they make good life decisions. Like before helping resource pore schools is a good and noble thing, but it is not something to be mandated and it is not a mandatory requirement in order for people to better them selves.


Quote:
 
On the last point whether someone has lived up to their potential is not necessarily something measurable and tangible.

Its usually only clear when someone has not been able to have the chance to live up to their potential. For example in this country we have student finance schemes which means anyone, no matter how poor, can go to the top Universities like Oxford or Cambridge if they qualify to get in. If we didnt have that scheme and people werent going there, despite qualifying, on the basis of price I think you could say they havent had the chance to live up to their potential.


I don't think that is a given at all and do not agree with your measure of potential.


Despite being a bright person my grandfather did not receive the same level of education that other bright people have had the opportunity to receive in their lives. By your definition this would mean that by grandfather did not live up to his potential. However My Grandfather moved from a level of poverty in his old home country that is below what we consider poverty here in his new home country. When he made that move he had nothing and in the forty five years pulse since that time he has been able to accomplish many things. He has been able to build him self a house, he has supported children who live outside of poverty despite going to resource pore schools and have their own homes, and supported grandchildren who have entered the professional work force who can now have the luxury to contemplate such issues as we are talking about. If you compare that to my life, where I got to go to college, I have to say my grandfather lived up to a much higher potential then I have or ever could.

Living up to ones "Potential" is relative.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
This being said, what is middle class? Is it a pre-defined income, or is it a lifestyle?

While my wife and I are high income earners, we don't jetset off to exotic locations (okay, Mexico two years ago) or buy sports cars. By American standards, my house is modest. We like to go camping and rent movies. We live what I call a middle-class lifestyle. I don't need to compete with the neighbors, or keep up to a standard set by someone else. We max out our savings and retirement plans, and our house is paid for. I want to retire in under a decade if possible (or at least when the kids are out of college, which is about ten years away).


Let me tell you the story of a friend of mine. He's in a similar position (he's a project manager, like me, but he works directly for a company), but he's one of those conspicuous consumers. He and his wife have new cars (Ford Mustang GT and Acura SUV, respectively), and he gave his daughter his old Suburban (2002 or 2003) as her own car. His daughter has never had a job (can't interfere with her school work, or her tutors, or her classes, or other resume padders to get her into Rice) so he pays all her bills. They have jetskis and a lake house and their home is in one of the new upscale developments (the new part of Greatwood, for Jag). Rob is in debt up to his eyeballs. He's 50, and confided in me recently that he only has about 40,000 in his 401k retirement. He makes nearly a quarter mil a year, but has nearly zero savngs. He's praying his daughter gets a scholarship to Rice next year (fall '09). He's fortunate that his youngest daughter is only 11, so he won't have two kids in college at once. He also owns ten acres out in Fredericksburg, but hasn't built on it yet. That's paid for. I told him he should unload the lakehouse and the jetskis, as that house is a money pit. He spends every other week there from April to September... that's what, 26 days? Why doesn't he sell? He blames the housing market. So what. He has some equity in it. He'd get some bucks for the skis and he isn't stuck with a second house payment.

He's using as many deductions as he can, and he usually gets money back from the IRS, but that one "boost" usually drives another spending spree. Believe it or not, it is him, not his wife, driving this. Of course she does nothing to stop it.

Crazy, isn't it?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
Admiralbill_gomec
Apr 8 2008, 04:13 PM
This being said, what is middle class? Is it a pre-defined income, or is it a lifestyle?

While my wife and I are high income earners, we don't jetset off to exotic locations (okay, Mexico two years ago) or buy sports cars. By American standards, my house is modest. We like to go camping and rent movies. We live what I call a middle-class lifestyle. I don't need to compete with the neighbors, or keep up to a standard set by someone else. We max out our savings and retirement plans, and our house is paid for. I want to retire in under a decade if possible (or at least when the kids are out of college, which is about ten years away).


Let me tell you the story of a friend of mine. He's in a similar position (he's a project manager, like me, but he works directly for a company), but he's one of those conspicuous consumers. He and his wife have new cars (Ford Mustang GT and Acura SUV, respectively), and he gave his daughter his old Suburban (2002 or 2003) as her own car. His daughter has never had a job (can't interfere with her school work, or her tutors, or her classes, or other resume padders to get her into Rice) so he pays all her bills. They have jetskis and a lake house and their home is in one of the new upscale developments (the new part of Greatwood, for Jag). Rob is in debt up to his eyeballs. He's 50, and confided in me recently that he only has about 40,000 in his 401k retirement. He makes nearly a quarter mil a year, but has nearly zero savngs. He's praying his daughter gets a scholarship to Rice next year (fall '09). He's fortunate that his youngest daughter is only 11, so he won't have two kids in college at once. He also owns ten acres out in Fredericksburg, but hasn't built on it yet. That's paid for. I told him he should unload the lakehouse and the jetskis, as that house is a money pit. He spends every other week there from April to September... that's what, 26 days? Why doesn't he sell? He blames the housing market. So what. He has some equity in it. He'd get some bucks for the skis and he isn't stuck with a second house payment.

He's using as many deductions as he can, and he usually gets money back from the IRS, but that one "boost" usually drives another spending spree. Believe it or not, it is him, not his wife, driving this. Of course she does nothing to stop it.

Crazy, isn't it?

Yes I think it is crazy but people are constantly given the message that more consumption now will increase your happiness. Some people choose that immediate consumption over their long term financial stability. Maybe in the future its going to come back and bite them.

Admiralbill_gomec
 
1. Not in this country. Our public school system (what you'd call "private schools") are a disaster. The focus of schools is now on self-esteem and multiculturalism, not on education. Hell, most schools teach calculators instead of addition and subtraction. There's a reason I pay the equivalent of 10,000 pounds a year on my kids' education.

We'd actually call them state schools. Its a pitty if standards of teaching are low in the US state school system because that is going to help reinforce poverty and low skills.

Admiralbill_gomec
 
2. Why does it have to be tax money? What percentage of Britons goes to university? Higher education is not for everyone. I wish that companies here would offer apprenticeships again.

It needs to be tax money because the State is the only insitution willing to make this guarantee - if you are bright enough to qualify to go to a particular university we make sure you can afford to go.

In the UK about a third of people leaving school go into higher education.

Admiralbill_gomec
 
3. Not in this country. Public housing, by and large, means slums. These programs have been a disaster.

I'm not saying UK social housing has been a total success in all places but its a lot better than say a Victorian working class slum. I'd like to get a social house myself if I could as compared to renting privately you have more security of tenure and a lot of the stock, at least around here, is actually better.

Admiralbill_gomec
 
4. How is tax credits "public spending?" We call this "keeping your money."

In the UK you can get back more via a tax credit than your total tax bill, particularly if you have children and work or are disabled and work. What I get in tax credits is about 5 times what I pay out in tax.

Admiralbill_gomec
 
5. Was that you or Mikey who wrote last year about the wait you went through for medical treatment for (forgot the ailment) illness? Your wait times are outrageous.

My point is this - those wait times were worse 10 years ago and since then we have seen a lot of extra money spent and a big reduction in wait times. Extra public spending has made a difference. Though we still spend far less than the US on healthcare which is, I believe, a big reason for the difference in wait times between the NHS and those with good coverage in the US.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Of course you don't have 20 million illegal aliens clogging up your hospitals and eating healthcare budgets in many states (Texas and California) spend tens of billions. Oh, and they aren't counted in the averages.

The point I was making before was, we don't have wait times to see the doctor (a few hours if in an emergency room). If your doctor is booked go to another one. A lot are partnered with other doctors. We have a surplus (for now), although I do see that changing due to the costs of malpractice/liability insurance and the costs of medical schools.

As for tax rebates, that's interesting. THe only time I've seen that done here is for this year's income tax rebate "stimulus" (which I forgot about because I don't qualify).

Yes, our public housing is a disgrace.

I agree about our education system. We've long since surrendered the education system to teacher's union bureaucrats and forgot the basics. It isn't unusual for a child to read before age 4. I did it, my son did it, and others can too. Believe it or not, the education system wants kids to read by age 8, maximum. Eight? I was reading Jack London and Robert Heinlein when I was 8. This is why I sent my son (and later my step-daughter) to private (religious) school.

I agree also that we're told to consume. It reminds me of my childhood. Back when I was nine and my brother was 8, Christmas was coming in a month or so (this was just before I turned 10). Every commercial that came on (it seemed) was toy-related. My brother and I would see a commercial and add that toy to our list. I remember specifically one commercial for Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots that came on. My brother and I started watching the commercial, looked at each other, and tore up to our parents' bedroom and yelled "I want Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots for Christmas" in unison, so we'd get it on our lists. (Neither one of us got it.) We didn't know better when we were kids, and some people still haven't learned as adults.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it was. Within a week we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

Then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.

Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table ... everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket.

And others birds were boisterous and loud. They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food. They fought over nesting spots closest to the feeder.

Birds seemed to be coming from everywhere. What started out as just a handful of song birds in my backyard turned into hundreds of birds of all types. Not all the birds got along. Some of the larger birds tried to prey on the nests/babies of the others. Others would just knock the eggs out and take over the nests.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch anymore. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio.

Soon, the back yard was like it used to be.... quiet, serene. No demands for food. No more endless territorial disputes around where the feeder used to be. All the birds are doing fine fending for themselves.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
Sorry to hear you had such bad luck RTW.

We have a bird feeder as well but our birds have been a delight. Polite, well mannered. And clean.

I wonder what it is about your backyard that has created such problems. ;)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Minuet
Apr 11 2008, 02:39 PM
Sorry to hear you had such bad luck RTW.

We have a bird feeder as well but our birds have been a delight. Polite, well mannered. And clean.

I wonder what it is about your backyard that has created such problems.  ;)

Maybe he has a lot more birds in his area then you do :P
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Minuet
Apr 8 2008, 06:05 AM
I would really appreciate it if you would provide some information, maybe even a link...

I've only heard this talked about on the radio. Apparently Oprah tried to help some struggling families get on their feet. The more she helped the more help they needed. Instead of becoming self-sufficient they were becoming dependent on her. She eventually gave up.

I was able to find a similar story that was featured on Oprah: (link)

I think the point is that often times what we might think of as helpful can actually be making the situation worse.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus