Economic status and friends and acquaintances

[Gaze]

Is there even a "class" classification in America now?
Where I come from it's the haves and the have nots.

What does that mean?

Agree. You don't have to be rich to be seen as a have, and you don't have to be poor to been seen as a have-not. It's often a matter of perspective. If people perceive or believe you have something they want that you seem to have more of, then you're a "have" in their eyes, and if you don't have what others perceive you should, then you're a "have not". I think income, class, status, occupation, education, and position all factor into the have/have-not distinctions, and complicate the terms.

You may be seen as a have not because you don't have a particular education or background, yet do well financially, having worked hard to achieve what you have, although the typical have is someone who is seen as having unfairly earned or undeservedly given what they have.

You can be seen as a have because you possess education, status, or position others want, but not necessarily have the income to back it up. For example, educators are often seen as haves because of their status, educational backgrounds, academics, etc. but they're not a high percentage of the haves. They are good amount in the have not category in terms of income although they're perceived as privileged.

So, really depends on perspective.

 

[the]

Agree. You don't have to be rich to be seen as a have, and you don't have to be poor to been seen as a have-not. It's often a matter of perspective. If people perceive or believe you have something they want that you seem to have more of, then you're a "have" in their eyes, and if you don't have what others perceive you should, then you're a "have not". I think income, class, status, occupation, education, and position all factor into the have/have-not distinctions, and complicate the terms.

You can seen as a have not because you don't have a particular education or background, yet do well financially, having worked hard to achieve what you have, although the typical have is someone who is seen as having unfairly earning what they have.

You can be seen as a have because you possess education, status, or position others want, but not necessarily have the income to back it up. For examples, educators are often seen as haves because of their status, educational backgrounds, academics, etc. but they're not a high percentage of the haves. They are good amount in the have not category although they're perceived as privileged.

So, really depends on perspective.

I totally agree. Some have-nots are jealous of people who get disability so they decided to become trans-disabled. Its a weird world now.

 

[Gaze]

One of my colleagues still believes that as a millennial (which I'm not, just a few years too old), my age has afforded me opportunities or considerations I've never had. This view is so far beyond the pale, as he is a mid 60s white middle aged American male who's been in the profession for 30 years, and I'm a late 30s black woman from the Caribbean, who came here as a college student, whose been in the profession for almost 15 years. He knows nothing about my personal circumstances, nor is there anything in my experience to indicate I've had life easier simply because of age. My parents gave me the chance to get a good education so I could be where I am. Age had nothing to do with anything I've achieved until now. This educator of course, had more privilege and consideration than I ever will, so it amazes me that he believes I've had so many considerations based on age alone, that I've never had.

 

[Sandie33]

What does that mean?

@Gist has a fairly good summation in her post of what have and have not means in her perspective.
It is just that, "perspective".
You see, for me I have been 'classified' as working class poor most of my life. I am a business owner now and would still be considered as working class poor. Since I personally don't rely on monetary and materialistic measurement I always loose in these types of conversations. I simply have "enough". I've always paid my way on time. I have enough warmth, shelter, food, clothing and medicine to be personally comfortable. When I have more than my enough I give to others. By my standards I do quite well and have a rich life. To another, who's standard of living is personally higher...I lack material wealth therefore I am poor. I don't feel poor because of my richness in character. You see worldly things hold little value to me personally. Sure, I like to look at, and visit, and touch shiny things but they hold little value to me personally...in other words I don't need to possess them to appreciate them. I've had folks pick fights, and I can only laugh, when they show me a newly acquired shiny bauble and I say, often with glee, oh wonderfu! Yay for you! Congratulations!...they think I'm acting in jealously and they call me out in that false label. I'm then left to defend my stance of no really I'm happy that your aquisition of said bauble has brought you happiness. I'm left to defend my "have not" status which basically only exists in the others eyes because of their perspective that because they have said shiny new bauble they "have" more than me...I'm left to defend that I didn't want the damn thing to begin with so I didn't waste time or energy in pursuit of "it". Yay for them because they did want it, worked to get it and now they have it.

Personal mindset and perspective are what sets the stage for have or have not. The only "class" I want is in my tact and grace not my wallet and posessions. It is in the opposite thought that society sets the standard that...lets say if you do not make $100,000 a year you are beneath middle class...if you do not make $35,000 a year you are in poverty class...and if you make $1M a year you are in the wealthy class. These "classes" are set by Economists as a tool of measurement the same as Educators set a 4.0 as perfect yet a 2.0 is subpar making you uneducated.
With the cost of living rising and wage increase not rising to meet it the crevice between poor and weathly continues to grow, and in America anyway, the label of "middle- class" does not exist except in the Economist's report because for some (recall the personal view of wealth) they are barely making it because their income does not fit their sense of need. Bottomline...they want what the rich guy making $1M a year has while trying to buy it with their $35T a year salary. Practicality says it just ain't going to happen. With that mindset they will continually "have not". I've been known to tell a person outright while they are flaunting their money around . . . "Please don't let your money make you poor in character." Of which many just say huh?

 

[hush]

I don't give a f*** about this and it's not something I ever consider or which comes to mind in regards to my "friends and acquaintances."

 

[the]

I don't give a f*** about this and it's not something I ever consider or which comes to mind in regards to my "friends and acquaintances."

That's pretty rude.

 

[hn87c901]

@Gist has a fairly good summation in her post of what have and have not means in her perspective.
It is just that, "perspective".
You see, for me I have been 'classified' as working class poor most of my life. I am a business owner now and would still be considered as working class poor. Since I personally don't rely on monetary and materialistic measurement I always loose in these types of conversations. I simply have "enough". I've always paid my way on time. I have enough warmth, shelter, food, clothing and medicine to be personally comfortable. When I have more than my enough I give to others. By my standards I do quite well and have a rich life. To another, who's standard of living is personally higher...I lack material wealth therefore I am poor. I don't feel poor because of my richness in character. You see worldly things hold little value to me personally. Sure, I like to look at, and visit, and touch shiny things but they hold little value to me personally...in other words I don't need to possess them to appreciate them. I've had folks pick fights, and I can only laugh, when they show me a newly acquired shiny bauble and I say, often with glee, oh wonderfu! Yay for you! Congratulations!...they think I'm acting in jealously and they call me out in that false label. I'm then left to defend my stance of no really I'm happy that your aquisition of said bauble has brought you happiness. I'm left to defend my "have not" status which basically only exists in the others eyes because of their perspective that because they have said shiny new bauble they "have" more than me...I'm left to defend that I didn't want the damn thing to begin with so I didn't waste time or energy in pursuit of "it". Yay for them because they did want it, worked to get it and now they have it.

Personal mindset and perspective are what sets the stage for have or have not. The only "class" I want is in my tact and grace not my wallet and posessions. It is in the opposite thought that society sets the standard that...lets say if you do not make $100,000 a year you are beneath middle class...if you do not make $35,000 a year you are in poverty class...and if you make $1M a year you are in the wealthy class. These "classes" are set by Economists as a tool of measurement the same as Educators set a 4.0 as perfect yet a 2.0 is subpar making you uneducated.
With the cost of living rising and wage increase not rising to meet it the crevice between poor and weathly continues to grow, and in America anyway, the label of "middle- class" does not exist except in the Economist's report because for some (recall the personal view of wealth) they are barely making it because their income does not fit their sense of need. Bottomline...they want what the rich guy making $1M a year has while trying to buy it with their $35T a year salary. Practicality says it just ain't going to happen. With that mindset they will continually "have not". I've been known to tell a person outright while they are flaunting their money around . . . "Please don't let your money make you poor in character." Of which many just say huh?

..and this my friend is why I love you.

Class - it doesn't exist in Australia like it does in the UK.
Incomes are not dependent on job type necessarily either as tradesmen typically get paid over $100k a year if they have their own business.
Having said that the divide between rich and poor is growing wider unfortunately and the 'middle class' has become 'lower middle class' of yesteryear.

There is a group of elite billionaires however that seem to live a life of their own.

I have had friends from all walks of life. Typically I am drawn to people who have similar ethics and values as myself. These can be from any income bracket. Although the higher income bracket people I see more as self serving and greedy so I find it hard to be friends with them in general. Unless they work in the helping profession or are immigrants - then it's easy.

My immediate family spans the great divide. So in response to the question income or 'class' is not a factor at all.

 

[Sandie33]

..and this my friend is why I love you.

Class - it doesn't exist in Australia like it does in the UK.
Incomes are not dependent on job type necessarily either as tradesmen typically get paid over $100k a year if they have their own business.
Having said that the divide between rich and poor is growing wider unfortunately and the 'middle class' has become 'lower middle class' of yesteryear.

There is a group of elite billionaires however that seem to live a life of their own.

I have had friends from all walks of life. Typically I am drawn to people who have similar ethics and values as myself. These can be from any income bracket. Although the higher income bracket people I see more as self serving and greedy so I find it hard to be friends with them in general. Unless they work in the helping profession or are immigrants - then it's easy.

My immediate family spans the great divide. So in response to the question income or 'class' is not a factor at all.