Class-related
Questions 1-10
Feel free to browse the following questions, some of which may
still await answers. You can then post an answer or counter an answer
that has already been posted. Please read the
guidelines for answering questions
before making a posting.
Next 10 this topic
area
THE QUESTION:
C10: I know someone who is from a background of the "working
poor" (I hope that term is all right). She has a regular job and
works hard but is always struggling financially. She is about to buy
a $15,000 car on credit. I am from a middle-class, educated
background and have trouble understanding this decision. Why would
she invest so much money in a car instead of, say, going back to
school part time to become a nurse, which she says she wants to do?
(P.S. She is the same race as me.)
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Jessica N., 26, female, white
<jessica@pioneeris.net>,
NY, NY
ANSWER 1:
You have to understand that most people in the lower-wage
demographic want the same "nice things" in life as the rest of us.
They see the same advertising, walk some of the same streets and
visit some of the same shopping districts as those who have the big
bucks. It is only reasonable to expect that the "working poor" will
try to give themselves many of the same luxuries (i.e. autos, cable
TV, designer clothing) that the rest of us might take for granted.
Often, because of their background, they may not see the value of the
sacrifice (and it is a sacrifice when you're already living
hand-to-mouth) of continuing education, or may not be in a position
to make such a sacrifice. Having been in a similar position for a
time, I can sympathize.
POSTED OCT. 13, 1998
Sam; 30; male, brown American
<SamAlex67@aol.com>,
Chicago, IL
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C9: This question is almost the opposite of C1: With
University of Michigan students returning for the fall, most of our
stores have been deluged. I was in line at Target, behind a young
woman wearing clothes that looked like they'd made several trips
through the thrift store - thin, worn hooded sweatshirt,
falling-apart sneakers, etc. In short, she was dressed like a lot of
U of M students. If you haven't heard, this ain't exactly a cheap
school, and it's even less so for out-of-state students. I don't know
why I was surprised to see her paying with an Optima Gold card. Why
do the poor try to make themselves look ostentatiously rich, and the
rich try to make themselves look homeless?
POSTED SEPT. 7, 1998
White male, college town working stiff, Ann Arbor, MI
ANSWER 1:
I believe society values money and sees those who "have"
as much more valuable/important than those who "have-not." I believe
that's why people with little money try to appear as rich as
possible, so that they will be respected and taken seriously. The
reason many college kids with money try to appear poor could stem
from a few notions. They might be trying to separate themselves and
assert their independence from their parents (even though they are
benefiting from mom and dad's money). Another possibility is that
they want to take on the persona of honesty and humbleness that is
more often associated with the poor/working class than with the
rich.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
Darbma, 44, white, middle class
<darbymom@hotmail.com>,
New York, NY
FURTHER NOTICE:
I believe we first must recognize that your assessment of
the women in the store is mere assumption. Simply having a Gold card
does not mean someone is rich. Basically, it identifies that they do
not have a bad credit rating (yet) and that they got on the list of
some company willing to give them an opportunity to produce debt. At
face value, your question seems to have two sides: 1) Why would
anyone with means go "slumming," while 2) those with little resources
would wish to flaunt themselves? I suggest it is ego in both cases.
The latter is easy to interpret; the poor want to be thought of as
"better" by wearing the best. The former case, in which the rich
person wears rags, however unlikely, may stem from an arrogant
feeling that they need not be concerned with what the "riff-raff"
think. Whatever their rationale, I think I would worry more about
those who overspend/overdress against their income than about those
who do the opposite. Expensive clothes do not make us more healthy or
nicer people, which I believe are genuinely more attractive elements
than if the shoes come from Italy.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
Jim E., 40s, European American, Durham, NC
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
From the description you give of this girl, she sounds
like a perfect college student to me. She is frugal, intelligent and
has good credit. You aren't given Gold Cards for defaulting on your
bills. She might have been moving, house-cleaning or just chilling
out that day. I think most kids really get into being casual beyond
belief just because it's easier to roll out of bed and slap on some
shorts and a T-shirt than it is to wake up an hour earlier to iron a
shirt and pants to sit in a lecture class with 500 other people for
two hours. I don't think it's a big anti-everything statement, but
rather a matter of convenience and ease.
POSTED OCT. 15, 1998
S.P., 28, straight-up honkey, Los Angeles, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
In reponse to Jim E.'s suspicion that well-to-do college
kids dress in rags because they "don't care what the riff-raff
think," you're mistaken. Riff-raff status is what the kids in
question aspire to! They don't want to be pegged as having it easy.
That's why most college kids will exaggerate how much they owe in
student loans. Most kids who come from money try not to show it -
they want the world to think they're scraping to get by. Being poor
("from the streets") has a lot more credibility than hanging out at
your parents' pool in Westchester. It's only once you graduate and
experience real poverty that you start to get sick of Ramen noodles
and socks with holes in them.
POSTED DEC. 4, 1998
Chris, 25, so, so hungry
<DJBackwash@aol.com>,
New York , NY
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I find it telling that the responses to this thread fail
to point out how deep the prejudice against someone from a relatively
privileged background can be. "Poor little rich kids" are easy
targets for people who try to develop their own legitmacy by
criticizing an element of society almost everyone is envious of. Like
race or arguably sexual orientation, the financial resources of one's
parents are an inherited trait. To find fault with how these kids
live is automatic for some bigots and an easy step for many others.
You can't win by wearing sloppy clothes or "money" clothes, and you
spend an inordinate amount of energy proving you are "worthy" of the
advantages fate has bestowed upon you. Imagine not feeling able to
disclose any information about your background without drawing the
kind of negative judgments and petty jealousy that attach themselves
so casually to privilege.
POSTED DEC. 9, 1998
C. H., 34, upper-middle class family, Washington, DC
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C8: Why do poorer regions of a state get less money for
education (i.e. colleges and universities), highways, etc.? This
seems to be the case in South Texas, where I live.
POSTED JULY 16, 1998
John T.
<watchman98@hotmail.com>,
San Antonio, Texas
ANSWER 1:
It is my understanding that counties receive money for
schools by taxing local citizens. Counties with a large proportion of
rich residents can justify a higher tax for better schools, while
poorer areas cannot afford to pay such high school taxes. I live in a
"good" school district and pay more than $100 a month for school
taxes, even though I have no children. Residents of poorer
neighborhoods have enough trouble just making their monthly rent or
mortgage payments. This is one reason busing children to different
school districts is frowned upon by some. You pay for what you
get.
POSTED JULY 28, 1998
Mason, 27, male
<wrmason3@mindspring.com>,
Katy, TX
FURTHER NOTICE:
Yes, local taxing is how school districts are funded, but
taxes aren't necessarily higher in richer communities. Even if the
taxes are equal (15 percent for the sake of argument), 15 percent of
$100,000 is a lot more than 15 percent of $30,000. Grants are
available for poorer districts, but generally for poverty level
districts.
POSTED SEPT. 4,1998
Joshua, 20, male
<schnids@bigfoot.com>,
Pittsburgh, PA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I'm originally from the Rio Grande Valley, so I understand
where you're coming from. I'll give you my best guestimate: As the
saying goes, "It takes money to make money." In the poorer regions of
the country (at one point Hidalgo County was rated the poorest in the
nation), there is no strong economic base, i.e. industry, which helps
generate taxes and jobs, which sustains the population, which
sustains the votes. So our elected representatives do not have much
to bargain with in bringing in more federal money to the region, and
neither do they get much political clout from the constituency. Case
in point: Newt Gingrich is from Georgia and has Martin Marietta
Industries. Kika de la Garza is from the Rio Grande Valley and has
agriculture to support him.
POSTED DEC. 28, 1998
David R. male, Smithfield, VA
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C7: I am an emergency services worker, so I get to all parts
of town. Can anyone tell me why, the poorer the neighborhood, more
trash and broken bottles litter the streets?
POSTED JULY 2, 1998
Jon E., Hamilton, OH
ANSWER 1:
Most poorer areas are more densely populated than wealthy
areas. More people produce more refuse in a smaller amount of space.
However, most clean-up type public services (street cleaning, trash
pick-up, park and public maintenance, etc.) are not distributed based
on population density, but on tax revenue. The wealthy area usually
recieves much more support per person than the poor area.
POSTED JULY 26, 1998
S.D., 23, black male, Oakland, CA
FURTHER NOTICE:
Poor neighborhoods have little or no clout at city hall,
so city hall doesn't send trash trucks, street sweepers, etc., to
those neighborhoods nearly as often as to other neighborhoods. If you
live in an area where it snows, I'm sure you also noticed that poor
neighborhoods generally get their streets plowed last, too.
POSTED AUG. 1, 1998
Andrew, 34
<ziptron@hotmail.com>,
Huntington, NY
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
1) In the days of my youth, we threw trash out the car
window simply because we didn't want it cluttering up the car. I
don't have any memory of trash beside the road or in the
neighborhood. The possibility exists that we simply didn't see it.
(Once I had a candy wrapper in one hand and $5 in the other. Guess
which I found in my pocket later.) 2) When we have questioned people
dropping trash on the ground, we have heard both from the top and the
bottom ends of life that it doesn't matter because "somebody's paid
to clean it up." If we don't want it cluttering up our personal
space, aren't particularly aware of it and assume it's someone else's
problem anyway, count the options.
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Al, 59, middle-class
<alarose@ncwc.edu>, Rocky
Mount, NC
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Being poor does not make someone a slob, drunk, drug user
or anything else. Usually if a person has a tendancy to have bad
judgment in life, they end up poor. What you are seeing is an area
where people don't care much about things. It only takes a few people
to trash the place, and if no one cares, it just collects.
POSTED AUG. 18, 1998
B.C., 40-plus, white male, St. Louis, MO
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I'm the product of a working-class family born and raised
in a poor neighborhood in New York City. There was trash everywhere,
but growing up, my parents never allowed me to litter. They taught me
how to be courteous, respectful, responsible and clean, while
encouraging me to push toward a bigger and brighter future. I
couldn't say the same for everyone I knew growing up. Maybe our
streets would have been cleaner if they had learned the same lessons.
Maybe their parents didn't have the same outlook on life, and this I
believe is the reason poor neighborhoods are so littered with trash.
It's a matter of upbringing, values and expectations for the
future.
POSTED SEPT. 9, 1998
M. Hernandez, 30, New York, NY
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
My wife and I made an intentional move into the poorest,
highest-crime neighborhood in our town. While we are middle-class
professionals, we have learned many things about our poorer
neighbors. One thing is that most families are renting their living
space. Another is the high number of children. Kids, as many parents
know, can be very messy and even destructive. Especially if working
parents aren't home to supervise. In my experience, there also is a
different sense of boundaries in these neighborhoods. Some people
assume that everything is a rental, so you can park, sit or hang out
wherever you want. Even the front porch of my own home. There are
other socio-economic factors that are common to poorer neighborhoods.
If a streetlight is out, the city won't fix it as fast as they would
in the richer parts. Same goes for street cleaning. I would recommend
that if you still have questions, get involved with an inner-city
youth program of some sort.
POSTED OCT. 14, 1998
Steve, 32, white, Christian, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
My opinion as to why poorer neighborhoods generate more
trash than affluent areas is that most residents in the poorer areas
do not own the property where they live, and there is also a lack of
education. These individuals are accustomed to hanging out in the
street where they socialize, eating all their meals. Since they do
not own the property where they live, they believe city sanitation
workers are paid to clean up after them. If they were homeowners,
they would have to be primarily responsible for disposing their own
trash. Unfortunately, many lower-income families don't own their own
homes and don't understand the economics of property values. Property
values go up based on how a community is kept. If they realize this,
they would take pride in their neighborhood, whether they own their
homes or not. If children are taught early how to respect their
surroundings, then it would follow them through adulthood. The best
example is my son. He was raised in a poor area, but I taught him to
respect himself and his neighborhood.
POSTED NOV. 29, 1998
Elfreda D., Bronx NY
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I disagee. We had a national waterskiing championship last
year in our town. The city manager requested that employees donate
their time and do a cleanup in that part of town. We did, by hand
brooms and trash bags. Just one week later, it was a complete mess
again. By the way, the street sweeper comes every Saturday, so it
will be somewhat clean for churchgoers on Sunday morning. The sweeper
comes to our neighborhood about three times a year, and I don't know
why. There is not much litter in my neighborhood, what is here is
thrown from cars coming to and from apartment buildings. And that
does not stay long, because we have neighborhood pride and remove it
promptly.
POSTED FEB. 4, 1999
Jon E., Hamilton, Ohio
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C6: Why do people at the supermarket insist so much upon
dividing their articles on the conveyer belt at the cash register
with the little black rubber bar? Is it really necessary?
POSTED JUNE 15, 1998
Eric W., <ercw@ipns.com>,
Portland, OR
ANSWER 1:
Have you ever found things in your grocery sack you didn't
buy? Or thought you bought something, but when you got home, it
wasn't there after all? I use the little bar because I don't want the
checker to mistakenly ring up my items to the customer in front of
me, and conversely, I don't want to pay for any of the items
belonging to the customer behind me. Also, if not for the bars, some
of my chosen items might not be in my sack when I get home (i.e. the
person in front got them), which would necessitate a trip back to the
store, or I would have items I didn't want or need (from the person
behind me), which would necessitate a trip back to the store. Also,
either the checker or other customers (including yourself) may be
engaged in conversation with another or each other, or disciplining a
child, or whatever, and are not paying attention to what is being
rung up and to whom. Seems like such a simple task to place a bar
between your stuff and your neighbor's, and such a simple, common
sense reason to do so.
POSTED JUNE 24, 1998
Crystal E., 44
<sunny@iglobal.net>,
Ponder, TX
FURTHER NOTICE:
After working as a cashier at a grocery store for nearly a
year, I can tell you that the dividers help the cashier immensely.
When people don't use it, sometimes the cashier doesn't know which
items belong to whom, especially in an express line when people have
so few items and the line is moving so much faster. I can't tell you
how many times someone has neglected to use the bar, and then when I
accidentally ring their items onto someone else's order, they snap
"That's mine!" as if I were trying to steal it from them.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Sarah, 18,
<bubbles@texoma.net>,
Sherman, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
As a student working part-time at a supermarket as a
cashier, I feel I have enough hands-on experience to state several
valid reasons for using that little rubber bar. On the express lane,
customers frequently are in a rush, and items often become mixed up.
When I was trained as a cashier, I was informed I was going to be
timed on how many items I rang per minute. I was not told I should
ask a customer about every item they are purchasing, when all you
have to do is put a piece of rubber (it's not heavy, trust me) on the
belt. Also, if a mis-scan does occur, the cashier has to deduct that
item from the customer's order, and potentially wait for a key to the
register to authorize the transaction, holding up everyone in line.
In short, if you use the express lane for your convinence, don't
forget to use the convient rubber bar.
19
<bunny1022@yahoo.com>,
PA
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C5: Do people who live in expensive houses on hills that
overlook a city feel superior to those who live below? I often wonder
when I look up at these houses whether people buy them because they
like the view or because they feel superior to everyone else, or a
combination of the two. Or are there other reasons?
POSTED JUNE 3, 1998
Tom, Fremont, CA
ANSWER 1:
The English language seems loaded with examples of phrases
in which height or altitude has positive connotations. Examples
include "King of the hill," "upper class" or "rising above." Some of
this may date back to the Middle Ages, when castles (homes for the
upper class) would be built on hills for defensive purposes. Those
living off of the hill (the "low life") would plainly be in the
poorer social classes. So maybe this tendency is a legacy of our
culture's predominantly European heritage. Alternatively, perhaps
this is biological. The ability to see danger farther away has an
obvious survival advantage. Those who can afford it would buy houses
on a hill because of the added feeling of safety the view gives them.
Personally, I think aesthetics have value even without psychological
underpinnings: The rich live on the hill simply because the view
looks cool.
POSTED JUNE 17, 1998
Dave K., 34
<dkline@worldnet.att.net>,
Caldwell, NJ
FURTHER NOTICE:
I believe this is a status symbol of wealth. I would also
live further from the crowded city life if possible. But because of
El Nino's effects on many of the hillside homes in California, a lot
of these homes are ending up at the bottom of the hill.
POSTED JUNE 25, 1998
Maureen, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I believe they feel they are superior to the rest of
society. They feel they are "looking down" on the socioeconomic
infrastructure that supports them, and that they see and understand
things us "working stiffs" cannot grasp, and thus deserve to live
above us, enjoying the wealth we working people produce.
POSTED JUNE 26, 1998
Dave, old, white, working-class Haole, Honolulu, Hi
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I grew up in one of those expensive hilltop houses
overlooking a city. My parents bought it because they liked the view
and it was in a very safe neighborhood. One interesting thing: Most
of the people around us were in serious debt. We never cared how much
money anyone else had. My first love was smart, talented and poor.
The class difference made him uncomfortable at first but was never
even an issue for me. We were much more alike than different.
POSTED JUNE 27, 1998
Anna, 33, single female, San Francisco, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
While never having owned or lived in a house overlooking a
city, I have visited such places owned by friends and acquaintancs.
I'm certain they would deny feeling superior. I suspect the truth
runs deeper: Most people I know buy luxury items in an attempt to
fill a void within themselves and often exhibit symptoms that expose
their feelings of inadequacy. Whether they seek to feel superior or
to appear to belong to certain social groups defined by their
possessions are different questions, which I won't presume to answer.
While the view is pretty, it holds little to the inner sense of peace
that comes with accepting one's economic situation, provided you and
your loved ones don't go hungry.
POSTED JUNE 30, 1998
Paul F. <pf@webcom.com>,
Santa Cruz, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
Not only rich people live in "high" places. It might
interest you to know that many poor dwellings are located in hills
with gorgeous views. I think height and class are not related, and
the only reason for having a house on a hill for any class is that
the view is nice and it's "available."
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Clara P., Bogotá, Colombia
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I live on a hill because I live in the mountains and like
the view. I never thought I was better than anyone else.
POSTED AUG. 27, 1998
J.M.P., Otto, NC
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I live on a high ridge that overlooks four cities. I
bought my house for several reasons. First was the view. Second, the
street is a cul de sac in a low crime area. I do not feel superior to
anyone. In fact, I am a "working stiff" just like everyone else. Many
of my neighbors are elderly and have owned the homes since they were
built back in the mid -70's. I have never heard any of them make
comments that could be classified as feeling superior. I feel I am
lucky to have been in the right place at the right time and had
enough money saved to be able to get a loan for my house.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Sue, Thousand Oaks, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Did it ever occur to people that a pretty view is
preferred over a less-pretty view? Most views from a hilltop are
better than those from a flat area. Having nice things is universally
desirable. Why do people who like nice things always have to be
considered to have alternative reasons? The desire for nice things is
what keeps some of us productive.
POSTED JAN. 19, 1999
65-year-old white male
<flyanavajo@aol.com >,
Centerville, OH
FURTHER NOTICE 9:
I bought my house on a hill because my first house was in
a valley and had water problems, and I vowed I would never make that
mistake again. Then I discovered all the wind there is up on a hill.
Sheesh. At least the view is pretty.
POSTED APRIL 8, 1999
Marty K., 42, white male, MN
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C4: Why do some people want to live in a gated community, even
in places where crime isn't out of hand?
POSTED MAY 17, 1998
M.S.H., average income, Salt Lake City, UT
ANSWER 1:
I think the gated community is an attempt to get back to
the security of a small town. The benefit of a small, closed
community is that you can get to know all your neighbors, either in
person or by reputation. There are still crooks and thugs in a closed
society, but the advantage is that you know exactly who you have to
watch out for, and who you can trust.
POSTED MAY 21, 1998
Colette
<inkwolf@earthlink.net>,
Seymour, WI
FURTHER NOTICE:
Another reason might be potentially less noise and
traffic, which may give some parents more peace of mind when their
children play outside. I was surprised to discover some gated
communities do not allow motorcycles, even for visitors.
POSTED MAY 26, 1998
DykeOnByke, motorcycle mama
<DykeOnByke@aol.com>,
Southfield, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I think it's simple paranoia. Studies showthat the
wealthier, olde, and lighter-skinned you are, the more likely you are
to have a greater fear of crime. However, the wealthier, older and
lighter-skinned you are, the less likely you are to be a victim of
crime. People who live in high-crime areas learn to deal with it like
the weather, as something that can be horrible but coped with. The
people in gated communities are trying to seal themselves off from a
world they perceive as dangerous, though they usually haven't
experienced the danger firsthand; they only see it on TV.
POSTED JAN. 20, 1999
A.C.C., Latino and living in a "dangerous" barrio, San Antonio,
TX
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C3: I have heard single friends and acquaintances (basically
white-collar, middle-class people) say they would prefer not to date
blue-collar, working-class people; that numerous differences in
values and goals are just too difficult to overcome to try to make
such a relationship successful. Moreover, an invisible boundary line
seems to separate union workers from salaried employees, even if
earning similar incomes. How common and valid is this attitude? I
would like to hear from others about their experiences - good or bad
- with dating or maintaining romantic relationships with people from
different socioeconomic backgrounds.
POSTED MAY 6, 1998
DykeOnByke, engineer
<DykeOnByke@aol.com>,
Southfield, MI
ANSWER 1:
I was raised in a white-collar, middle-class family, but
despite their expectations and my own, I was always more attracted to
men who worked with their hands. I am now happily married to a
blue-collar man, and we each value the very different strengths the
other brings to our partnership. My female friends who are married to
white-collar men almost universally envy me: My husband never stays
late at the office; he flawlessly repairs and maintains our house,
yard and car; and most important, he's never too busy or too
distracted to spend time with me. Having tried it both ways, I
wouldn't trade him for all the C.P.A.s in the world.
POSTED MAY 9, 1998
A. Morgan, Houston, TX
FURTHER NOTICE:
The stereotype is that white-collar workers are greedy and
self-serving and that blue-collar workers are hard workers with no
formal education. Neither is true; I certainly consider going to
school for five years as hard work as some of the things blue-collar
workers do.
POSTED MAY 9, 1998
Rob, white
<innvertigo@aol.com>,
Southfield, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I don't see why your friends need to put people into
classes. We are all human; when two people fall in love, the color of
the collar will not matter.
POSTED MAY 11, 1998
Darryll
<dbrock6119@aol.com>,
Hagerstown, MD
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
To A. Morgan: I have tried it both ways, having been a
union factory worker for 14 years, then quitting after graduating
from college and now working in a corporate headquarters. I think
there is a definite line separating white-collar and blue-collar
workers and their attitudes, as the original question asks. I find
that my union acquaintances are obsessed with money, to a degree that
the white-collar world could never approach. The unionists are never
home, because they work seven days a week, often 12 a hours a day.
You can't make plans with them, because the overtime schedule rules
their life. White-collar workers don't understand the overtime thing,
but then again, unionists don't grasp the cause-and-effect
relationship between working longer hours and getting raises and
promotions. Union workers are given raises, white-collar people earn
them. Quite a different viewpoint on the world. I'm not suggesting
relationships between the two types are doomed, but the differences
can and do cause friction that has to be dealt with.
POSTED MAY 14, 1998
B.B., 38, M.B.A., Temperance, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
My first husband was from a more financially "successful"
family than mine. He wanted to go to law school and even had a
vacation home in the mountains. His father was a judge. After three
years, he said he was not ready for this kind of commitment and
walked out. I'm a college-educated lady with a master's degree, from
a family in which all three children have gone to college, but of my
parents, only my father has a degree, so I was probably predisposed
to marry a college man - a fraternity man even - and appreciate the
package he came with: Good white-collar job, money, etc. However, he
also came with an overwhelming credit card debt, a habit of letting
his parents pick up the tab and an inability to recognize the good in
me or himself.
After the divorce, I dated various men - oddly, most had no
college education - and finally married (happily for three years) a
man with no advanced education who is smart and witty and who reads
everything he can find. He is not in a trade, but manages a
warehouse, so the idea that he is even remotely qualified to operate
a power tool or fix a car is laughable, and he will be the first to
agree. He is kind, generous, loving, honest and terribly funny - he
is also not in debt or attached to his mother's apron strings and is
very comfortable with his lot. My parents love him because he makes
me happy and because he values me. His parents thought I was an
oddity because no one in their family had ever been to college, but
when they found out I can shell peas, I was accepted.
Most people marry people from a similar background or who have
shared experiences such as college, hobbies or church; or shared
friends or professions. No matter where you find initial attraction,
lasting love is based more on the individuals involved and their
baggage and their ability to recognize joy and goodness and to love
than on white-collar vs. blue-collar issues.
POSTED MAY 27, 1998
Sheila, 27, white, Tallahassee, FL
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
There needs to be an adjustment made to our "blue- and
white-collar" mentality. Bottom line: The more time in the office, at
the construction site or at any work place, the less time with the
loved ones. What are the person's priorities?
POSTED JUNE 8, 1998
Jim P., Diegoman@AOL.com, San Diego, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I am a white collar worker who is married to a truck
driver. My family was blue collar, and most of my friends are
working-class people. What I notice the most is that goals are not
the same in the two groups. Middle class blue collar folks seem to
want to acquire things, TVs, stereos, boats, cars etc., and have a
"live for today" attitude. White collar people also have a desire for
things, but usually go for houses and bigger-ticket items. They have
longer-term goals and want to retire earlier than blue collar folks.
This basic difference in the style of how they live their lives
causes friction. Neither way of living your life is bad; actually, a
blend of both in moderation would be great, but each type wants to
think their way is the best. I think the biggest difference is that
many more blue collar type people live their lives with fewer dreams
than their white collar counterparts. Privilege does bring a sense
that you can accomplish anything, and working at jobs where you use
your hands instead of your mind (blue collar) does limit the scope of
your dreams. So a relationship with different goals and levels of
hope for the future is difficult.
POSTED AUG. 21, 1998
S. Finch, 37, white female
<SFinch4u@aol.com>, Ft.
Worth, TX
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
We recently had a birthday party for my wife. We invited
all of our friends. And we noticed something: They all huddled in the
groups that we knew them from. The service people (hair stylists,
manicurists, carpenters, etc), the professional people (attorneys and
the like), the church people, etc. My wife and I and a few close
friends made an extra effort at mingling with everyone. When the food
and the games and the dessert came out, everyone came together and
participated. My wife and I came to the conclusion that people are
familiar with their own, whether it is rich with rich, religious with
religious, white with white, simple with simple ...but if you work at
it even a little bit, (i.e. around food, games and, of course
chocolate) we are all the same. And we love every single one of those
people who came to the party. And I think they love us ... they ate
all the chocolate.
POSTED JAN. 15, 1999
Douglas, male, San Fernando Valley, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Most people are attracted to people who share their
interests. For instance, if you like camping, you will probably be
attracted to other people who like camping. If you are a devout
Christian, you will probably not be attracted to a non-believer. I
think money is less important than sharing interests with most
people, though there are always exceptions.
POSTED JAN. 20, 1999
65-year-old white male
<flyanavajo@aol.com >,
Centerville, OH
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C2: It seems to be the "in" thing these days for someone to
say they grew up poor. What is considered poor these days? What about
middle class? What makes a person middle class vs. poor?
POSTED MARCH 31, 1998
Apryl P., black
<apryl@mail-me.com>
Oak Park , MI
ANSWER 1:
In Britain (where we are class-obsessed), your class
doesn't have all that much to do with wealt, though it may once have.
It has more to do with your expectations in life and the type of
culture you belong to. At university where almost all classes of
people are poor (I think our system is different from yours), it is
still easy to spot the general background people have come from.
Usually the scruffier people are, the higher class they are! And
working-class students generally try to look neat and tidy. Obviously
I'm generalizing. I'm not sure why it is popular to be poor - but I
think often people want to be what they aren't - the grass is always
greener on the other side!
POSTED APRIL 3, 1998
Beth, white, middle class, 23, Edinburgh, UK
FURTHER NOTICE:
Poor has always been a relative term, unless, of course,
one is talking about abject poverty as one would find in the slums of
Third World countries. So growing up poor can be defined as having
less than your peers. Children who grow up among those who are in the
same state of "poorness" as they don't generally preceive themselves
as poor. This classification comes about only when their peer group
becomes the larger, more economically diverse society.
POSTED APRIL 14, 1998
James Mc
<Mcgrawman@aol.com>
Ypsilanti, MI
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I bring up the fact that I grew up relatively poor from
time to time. I'm a well-educated soccer mom with a good job, married
to a Harvard guy, with bright kids, a house in the burbs, a mini-van
and too many pets. I sometimes bring up my background because I feel
people frequently make erroneous assumptions about me and what my
life has been like. It hasn't resembled its current state until
recently. My family (of origin) was homeless from time to time and
lived in substandard housing (no hot water, no phone) at times. My
parents were young and went through a prolonged hippie phase. Our
houses and apartments were crash pads, full of people and drugs; my
parents divorced and my siblings and I were neglected off and on. I
don't think growing up poor is "in." When I mention my childhood,
it's usually in an effort to be understood, and to avoid being judged
solely on the basis of what my life looks like on a superficial level
now.
POSTED APRIL 24, 1998
Carol A., 37, white
<Noahlin@aol.com>
Lawrence, KS
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I'd say middle class is when you don't have to work out
what you're going to put in your grocery cart. Poor is when you have
a specific amount to spend on food and you're worried it won't last
long enough. Middle class is when you buy asparagus out of season
just because you feel like it. It sounds simplistic, but for me, it
really comes down to one's ability to not think about buying "normal"
things like food.
POSTED MAY 3, 1998
Robyn, 27, middle class at the moment, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Being poor isn't good or bad in itself, but it builds a
person's character. The experience of not knowing where your next
meal is coming from is a humbling one and broadens your ability to
understand the world. If you've never had this experience, or if your
family is very well-off and you've never had to worry about how to
afford the things you want/need, there's a wider gap to be bridged if
you want to understand the rest of us. On the other hand, I see lots
of people who grew up in poverty and assume they have to live with
the same dead-end jobs and inadequate housing their parents had. I'm
living somewhat close to the poverty line myself, but I don't
necessarily see that as any reason I can't have a life I enjoy, with
lots of hope for improvement - the values I gained from my
middle-class parents.
POSTED MAY 23, 1998
Liz B., 21, Des Moines, IA
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
A poor person is anyone who earns a dollar less than you,
and a rich person is anyone who earns a dollar more than you. It's
all relative based on how you grew up, where you live and the people
you associate (or wish to) with. It seems many people feel rich
people never earned the money they have, and poor people always
deserve more than they have. See what I mean?
POSTED JUNE 18, 1998
Kathy, Springfield, IL
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
Poor is knowing it's election time because the county
prosecutor is looking for easy prey to get his name in the paper.
Poor is being smarter than everyone in the class but still getting Cs
cause Buffy and Muffy need their scholarships and the teacher knows
he just wouldn't be socially accepted if they didn't get the only As.
Poor is not eating for three days and walking down the street to be
panhandled by two college students too drugged up to know any
difference. Poor is meeting your date at the matinee because neither
of you has a car. Poor is using two months' worth of saved pennies to
buy Ramen noodles.
POSTED NOV. 21, 1998
Kevin, 28, white male
<hotemet@aol.com>, AZ
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
THE QUESTION:
C1: I was in a grocery store and noticed several people in the
checkout lanes with thick gold jewelry and expensive Nike apparel.
The thing that got me was that they were paying with food stamps.
Even their small children were wearing expensive clothes. Why is
this?
POSTED MARCH 23, 1998
Jessica G., Lake Orion , MI
(Similar question posted June 24, 1998, by Hard-working taxpayer, 26,
white female, Springfield, VA)
ANSWER 1:
The food stamps could have come at any time. The expensive
clothing and jewelry could have been theirs before they had the need
for the food stamps. Or, they could have received these things as
gifts. They may not have been as expensive as you think. Knock-offs,
cheap imitations. If you believed the users of those
Government-issued stamps were doing so under false pretenses, you
should have reported them to the authorities. But what would you have
reported? Remember: There is no way for you to know when, or how,
they got their clothing or jewelry. Or under what grounds they were
issued the coupons
POSTED MARCH 24, 1998
Apryl P., black
<apryl@mail-me.com>
Oak Park, MI
FURTHER NOTICE:
While I understand Apryl's answer, I know that I too have
made similar judgments when I have seen people apparently misuse
foodstamps. Most people making such judgments are not necessarily
prejudiced and/or racist. It's probably the jealousy that exists in
all human beings, some more than in others. For those inclined to
pre-judge people, it enables them to add a little piece of truthful
evidence to their existing paradigm of people.
POSTED APRIL 9, 1998
Tim, 53, white male
<timwise@dgs.net>,
Arlington, VA
FURTHER NOTICE 2:
It is a reflection of society's emphasis on the
acquisition for material and designer items. People on welfare or
receiving food stamps are no different from those of us who work for
our paychecks. Their visions of the American dream are no different.
They want the nice house, clothes, cars and money, too. The
accumulation of jewelry and designer clothes is a way of trying to
realize those goals.
POSTED APRIL 13, 1998
Suzie, 26
<Ebonique@msn.com>
Queens, NY
FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Using food stamps does not mean you don't work - most of
the time it means you are having hard times and need help. For
example, I needed help for a while because my ex-husband does not pay
child support, and I saw people looking at me negatively, even after
a hard day's work. We seem to judge our fellow Americans so much by
what they have. We need to pay attention to what we can do to help
more.
POSTED MAY 20, 1998
White female, 39, Jacksonville, FL
FURTHER NOTICE 4:
All of the responses make a great deal of sense. I too
found myself having negative thoughts at times when confronted with a
similar situation - until my mother died. My mother was very petite,
and no one else in the family could fit into her clothes, so they
were given to Goodwill. These were all outfits with prices exceeding
$200, and some still had price tags on them. I later saw a very good
friend's wife wearing one of the outfits (a $300 outfit). I asked my
friend if he knew how much had been paid for the outfit and he said
$15 at Goodwill. My wife also bought three outfits that retail for
more than $200 each at a "Designer Sidewalk Sale" for $25 each. Just
goes to show that expensive doesn't mean it cost a lot of money.
POSTED MAY 23, 1998
Ace M., 49, white, Des Moines, IA
FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I hope this is not still so, but for a while, U.S.
enlisted men with families were paid so poorly that they qualified
for food stamps in most states. That was one of the reasons for
continuing the PX system after most military installations had cities
nearby. A Marine Corps General once advised young Marines not to
marry mostly for that reason. Judge not, that ye may not be
judged.
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
Claude P.,47, black, lower middle-class, Dallas
FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I have to say, having received food stamps for a short
time, that most of the responses on this board are wishful thinking.
Just hang out at any food stamp issuing office and listen to the
conversations - many people are hiding income to receive benefits
and/or selling the stamps they receive. I believe the reason for
this, besides the obvious greed, is that many of these people need
immediate gratification, and that is why many of them will be "poor"
for the rest of thier lives. They have no ambition, nor do they have
the self-control to save what little they do have instead of spending
it on luxury items that make them feel better for the moment. How
many times have you seen someone walk out of a government project
apartment with a cellphone in their hand? They obviously have some
disposable income, but they choose to fritter it away on "fun" things
and let the government pay for the necessary things. I have been
there and have felt the temptation to do just that. It is my
upbringing that would not allow me to, but many people receiving
assistance have been brought up by parents who received it and are of
the mind that "It's there, why not take it?" If you doubt the
truthfulness of this, just listen to some of the unguarded
conversations of those who receive benefits.
POSTED AUG. 7, 1998
Karin, 32, FL
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I am a single mother of one small child. I receive food
stamps. We buy our clothes and toys and many other things at Goodwill
and Salvation Army locations. Mine don't look so good, but my son's
clothes look very nice because the donated kids' clothing was
outgrown before it was worn out. You will also see a beautiful
diamond ring on my hand. It was my grandmother's engagement ring.
Believe me, before I got laid off, before I became a parent, before a
lot of things, I sometimes felt resentful of people with food stamps
who looked like they "had something." Now I can tell it from the
other side. To qualify for food stamps is painful. To use them hurts.
To be recertified for them is humiliating. Appearances can be
deceiving.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Humbled, 39, white female, Knoxville, TN
FURTHER NOTICE 7:
Don't look at their clothes and jewelry, look in their
shopping cart. I lived in Los Angeles all my life, and in my
community, there was never a shortage of foodstamp customers before
me in line. I have to eat frozen burritos and canned veggies, but
they seem to always be able to afford the most expensive cuts of meat
and lobster, etc. I once followed a lady out to her car and asked if
I could have something from her bag that I paid for. Perhaps Uncle
Sam should place restrictions on what can be purchased with "free
money."
POSTED DEC. 2, 1998
Cyd E., 34, white working male, Palmdale, CA
FURTHER NOTICE 8:
I think there is quite a bit of confusion when it comes to
deciding who is "rich" and who is not. I would not consider a family
"upper class" unless they can hire a person or people to be a
cook/maid/gardener without having it be a financial burden. All
others are "middle" or "lower" class. Secondly, when someone who can
choose what they wear decides to wear old clothes, it is an
affectation. Affectations are built on a person's insecurities and
level of self-esteem, neither of which is dictated by personal
wealth.
POSTED DEC. 16, 1998
B.T.B., 36, Twin Cities, MN
FURTHER NOTICE 9:
To Claude P.: Yes, the military still pays its enlisted so
little that families are forced to apply for food stamps and/or WIC.
I know because we had to. Now that my husband is out of active duty,
he makes twice as much at a mill job and we don't qualify for food
stamps.
POSTED JAN. 22, 1999
M.S., female, Sand Springs , OK
To
respond
BACK TO TOP