Keep in mind our Online Discussion Guidelines:
https://openlab.bmcc.cuny.edu/pol-100-0502-fall-2025-introduction-to-american-government/online-discussion-guidelines/
Instructions for completing this discussion board assignment:
a) Identify which discussion question you are answering in your comment by placing the relevant number at the start of your answer. For example:
2. Crime has often been used as a form of social control by…
4. Michelle Alexander’s argument about segregation…
b) Respond to one other student’s comments.
NOTE: As usual, follow the guidelines from previous discussion board assignments, in answering by creating a new post…
- Do you notice any similarities in the way social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2? Do you notice any differences in the way these two readings DIFFERENTIATE between social classes?
- Pick the station closest to where you live. Using the concepts from Reading 4.1, what social class tends to live in your neighborhood? Are you surprised (or not) by the answer? Do you feel it is an accurate representation of the people living in your neighborhood?
- Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?
1. Both readings talk about social class, but in different ways. 4.1 is more about how people see themselves and what they think determines their class while 4.2 shows how inequality plays out in NYC through the subway. One is about perception the other about reality.
2. The station closest to me reflects more of a working class, middle class vibe You can see it in the jobs people have and the housing around here. I’m not surprised it feels pretty accurate for my neighborhood.
3. In 4.2 the pattern in NYC is clear: wealthier areas have better subway stops and access, while poorer areas deal with more challenges. It really shows how class divides are built into the city.
I like how you compare perception vs. reality between the two readings, that’s a smart way to put it. I also agree with you about the subway pattern in NYC, it really does highlight how divided the city is by class.
Hi Dwayne,
I really like how you compared 4.1 and 4.2. You made it clear that one focuses on how people see themselves and the other shows the reality of inequality. I also agree with your point about neighborhoods reflecting class through jobs and housing. It feels very true in NYC. The way you described the subway differences in 4.2 really shows how class divisions are built into everyday life. Great insights!
I feel the same way about my station and neighborhood. However, outside of Manhattan, I believe that you begin to see people of all classes mixing, making it a challenge to differentiate neighborhoods in this manner, or you get neighborhoods where everyone thinks they’re middle class when they’re not, so in a way, you’re unable to see any prime examples of New York when viewing it through this lens.
Shawana Kyser
Professor Arto Artinian
POL 100: Introduction to American Government
September 13, 2025
Crime as a Tool of Social Control
2. Crime has often been used as a form of social control by…
Crime has often been used as a form of social control by targeting certain groups more than others. Laws and enforcement practices don’t always fall evenly, and a lot of times they hit racial and economic minorities harder. For example, constant car stops in certain neighborhoods create pressure and fear, almost like people are being watched and controlled just for living there. It shows how the justice system can be less about keeping everyone safe and more about keeping certain communities in check.
Response to Dwayne Jones
Dwayne, I like how you explained the difference between perception and reality when it comes to social class. Your point about how subway patterns show class divides really stood out to me. I’ve noticed the same thing—stations in wealthier neighborhoods feel safer and more modern, while in working-class areas the stations are often older and less cared for. It connects to what you said about jobs and housing too, because the way people move around the city reflects the resources they have access to. Your post made me think more about how the subway isn’t just transportation, but also a picture of inequality in New York.
1. Both readings show that society is divided into classes and that inequality is built into the system. Reading 4.1 explains class through income, education, jobs, and how people see themselves (objective vs. subjective class), breaking it down into working, middle, and upper classes. Reading 4.2 instead looks at class through ownership, dividing people into capital (owners) and labor (workers). while 4.1 is more about status and identity. 4.2 Points out exploitation, showing how owners profit from worker’s labor.
2. My neighborhood looks mostly upper middle class, with a median household income of $89,000, high levels of education, and very expensive homes (median value nearly $1 million). While some families earn less and about 15% live in poverty, the overall picture points to a wealthier population. I think this is an accurate representation of the people living here, since the income and housing costs line up with an upper middle class lifestyle. Most residents rely on cars for transportation, and with only four subway stops none of them perfect but not the worst either, the area seems built more for people who can afford to drive.
3. Yes, there’s a clear pattern in how social class is distributed across NYC. Wealth and poverty are often concentrated very closely to each other but separated by just a few subways stops. Manhattan, especially Lower Manhattan, has the highest incomes, while parts of Brooklyn and the Bronx show some of the lowest. Lines that pass through Manhattan tend to have the biggest income gaps, while the G line (which doesn’t go through Manhattan) shows much smaller differences. Overall, this shows how income inequality in New York is tied to geography, rich and poor neighborhoods are tightly packed together, but the subway highlights just how extreme the divides are.
Hi Ekaterine,
I really like how you broke down the difference between 4.1 and 4.2. The way you explained objective vs. subjective class compared to ownership and labor made it very clear. Your description of your neighborhood as upper middle class with high income and expensive homes also connects well to the readings—it shows how income and housing reflect class.
I also agree with your point about how NYC neighborhoods are so close together but still very divided by wealth and poverty. The subway example you mentioned really highlights how visible those inequalities are. Great job!
In both Readings 4.1 and 4.2, social class is explained as a way people are divided in society by things like money, jobs, and education. Both readings agree that class is more than just income it also shapes how people live and what chances they have. The difference is that Reading 4.1 looks at how people see themselves and decide what class they belong to, while Reading 4.2 looks at class in a more scientific way using numbers like income, housing, and education. Looking at the train station closest to where I live, most people in my area would probably be seen as middle or working class, since many have regular jobs and the cost of living is not the highest but not the lowest either. I’m not surprised by this because it feels true to what I see around me. From Reading 4.2, the overall pattern in New York City is that rich people are more likely to live in certain parts of Manhattan, while working-class and poorer families often live in the Bronx, Queens, or Brooklyn. This shows how class in NYC is also linked to where people live.