- The two readings discuss social class from different perspectives but share similarities in
their exploration of how the class is differentiated.
Similarities:
Focus on Socioeconomic Factors: Both readings highlight income as a significant determinant of
social class. Reading 4.1 emphasizes income, wealth, education, and occupation as critical variables
for defining social class. Similarly, Reading 4.2 shows the extreme income inequality in New
York City, illustrating how income shifts between neighborhoods.
Hierarchical Structure: Both readings acknowledge the existence of a class hierarchy. Reading
4.1 discusses how Americans self-identify across various classes (lower, working, middle, and
upper) while Reading 4.2 highlights income gaps that naturally create societal hierarchies.
Differences:
Subjective vs. Objective Approach: Reading 4.1 primarily discusses social class regarding
subjective self-identification—how people perceive and categorize themselves. In contrast,
Reading 4.2 takes a more objective approach by using statistical data (such as median household
income along subway stations) to describe income inequality.
Geographical Context: Reading 4.2 focuses specifically on New York City and how income
inequality varies across its boroughs and neighborhoods, using subway lines as a reference. Conversely, Reading 4.1 looks at the broader national perspective of social class identification
in the U.S. without focusing on specific locations.
In essence, both readings reflect how social class is shaped by income, but they diverge in their
methods—subjective perception in Reading 4.1 versus concrete data in Reading 4.2.
- Living near Crown Heights station in Brooklyn, I’ve observed a diverse range of people,
which mirrors the social class complexity discussed in Reading 4.1. Based on subjective and objective social class concepts, I would say that Crown Heights likely
includes a mix of working-class, lower-middle-class, and some middle-class residents.
While I’m not surprised by this, especially given the gentrification happening in parts of the
neighborhood, I do feel that this accurately represents the area. Long-time residents,
many of whom are working-class, coexist with newer, middle-class individuals moving in due to
increasing rents and housing development. This reflects the fluidity of social class in urban areas,
where socioeconomic status can vary widely, even within a few blocks.
It’s fascinating to see how subjective class self-identification can differ based on factors like
income, education, and even perceptions of social standing. My neighborhood showcases that
diversity well.
- Based on Reading 4.2, a clear pattern of stark income inequality emerges across New
York City, particularly as highlighted through the data on subway stations. The disparity
between the wealthiest areas, like those around Chambers Street in Lower Manhattan,
and the poorest, such as Sutter Avenue in Brooklyn, is striking. This massive income gap
shows how social classes in NYC are often determined by geographic location and are
influenced by neighborhood development, access to resources, and the
proximity to economic hubs.
What stands out is that the distribution of social classes in NYC is not random; it follows a
pattern of wealth segregation. Wealthier residents live near financial
centers and elite institutions, while lower-income residents are pushed further into outer
boroughs or less developed neighborhoods. The city’s infrastructure, such as the subway
system, reflects this pattern as it connects vastly different economic worlds within a short
distance. This confirms that New York City is a place where the lines between social classes
are visible and heavily influenced by location and income, creating a city of extreme.
