Class discussion and dissection. It never stops fascinating me as the ultimate truth in understanding the world we live in and why it is the way it is.
Upper class:
-Concerned about Security
-Concerned about the quality of the Security
-Concerned about Lawyers and other professionals outsmarting their less than worthy childrens future inheritances (Let's face it, just because dad's a capitalist doesn't mean you are)
-Concerned about instilling in their children fiscal responsibility to manage their future inheritance properly (Few do, demonstrating again the upper class hatred of rising professionals. Going to whittle away my son/daughters wealth? Probably, Yes.)
Well - you could have started a real discussion, but instead you opted for the jump-to-conclusions approach and are trying to make those who apparently opted for a career which required extensive education look like they're foul individuals with horrendous motives.
Yet, that group being populated with doctors, lawyers, and other much-relied on individuals in society: you still need them.
What makes a politician upper class? Cuz, there's a lot of politicians I consider to be bottom of the barrel. Is it their wealth or their college degree.......or who they know? Because it sure isn't their intelligence.
Anyone who cares about inheritance and not making their rent or mortgage, or paying their bills... that person lives an entirely different life from the rest (majority) of this country.
Also, what's the point of labeling social classes? We already know this. What's the discussion here? I already knew that I wasn't upper class, and that being a lawyer with a graduate degree isn't going to change that.
What on earth are you spewing from your brain?
Lawyers, Doctors and other professionals are not even the upper class. They are Upper Middle class.
Don't come into a thread ignorant.
I was merely pointing out that upper class people tend to dislike lawyers and lawsuits because they know their children aren't capable of managing their inheritances. Lawyers are not of the upper class.
Get your classes and basic understandings correct.
it's very difficult to use those numbers.
In America there are many 50+ year olds in some Industries making $80 because they worked some 20+ years at some job and never left. They are barely educated beyond high school but after 20 years ...they know to do a few things good at their company. For these people ..if they get let go their lives change drastically because realistically they have no qualification beyond that one job.
A doctor making under $100K/year ...is poor. If he lives in a major urban area ...he's really poor.
If you're in your 20's ...no college loans ...no kids or wife to support ....$50K ...in some region of the country may place you in the middle class.
But dude ...$50K/year in NY/NJ for example ...no matter what your situation is ......is not middle class!!
$32K a year ...is middle class where? Who breaks out the bubbly feeling like ...THEY'VE ARRIVED ...making $32K/yr? :lamo
Because you arbitrarily say so? Your own graphic puts the blue (upper class) layer at $200,000 and describes them as "CEOs and politicians." Yet probably hundreds of thousands of doctors, lawyers, engineers, superintendents, tenured professors, business executives, accountants, health facility administrators, superintendents, upper level government department directors, small to medium sized business owners, etc. etc., earn at least that much. It's not just corporate CEOs and politicians making that ballpark. Maybe you simply chose an ill-conceived graphic as a discussion starter?
So far it appears the thread was created from ignorance. Aunt Spiker was spot on in her response.
And yet you've provided nothing whatsoever, outside of your own juvenile opinion, to support this claim. And further, according to your own silly little graphic, you're easily wrong. There are thousands upon thousands of partners in law firms all over the country making well over the upper limit of your graphic.
Further, you've provided nothing to support your original claim that people teach their children fiscal responsibility only in order to protect their inheritances. Perhaps no, perhaps they want to instill fiscal responsibility because that's the intelligent thing to do. Ever consider that?
Are you implying that upper middle, middle, and working class people do not want to instill fiscal responsibility in their children? Why would THAT be?
What?
You better hone your game quickly if you want to hold your own around here chap. Even moderates like Aunt Spiker will eviscerate you for such foolishness.
"Upper Class" is the top class. It isn't anyone making 200-400k a year, so yes, the graph is probably somewhat misleading in that respect but I believe any smart individual grasps that, I'm not sure what that says about you.
300k a year in the US is not anywhere near the top class. It is merely at the high end of the middle upper class in US society.
Most upper class children aren't actually very good with their inheritances which allows rising professionals to whittle their parents fortunes away
They end up losing it to smarter people but therein lies just another aspect of capitalism, all wealth eventually is repatriated to new, more cunning individuals and the decaying, decadent offspring of the upper class get knocked down to the class they truly belonged in after their father passed away.
And no I'm implying most middle and lower class people will not instill these values in their children. They can't for so many reasons. Education, lack of anything to save, the list goes on.
Most? Can you cite any evidence for this, or did you just make it up off the top of your head?
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?