Q #1: Do you notice any differences in the way these two readings DIFFERENTIATE between social classes?

Within the United States, social class refers to the amount of factors that are used for the purpose of categorizing individuals into distinctive groups. A few factors include but are not limited to wealth, education, vocations, financial income. Define sorts of social classes include upper, upper middle, middle, working, and lower class. Both 4.1 and 4.2 paragraphs fixate on financial income, with higher income Americans being categorized as middle upper class and those with lower incomes are categorized as lower classes; those with better potential are categorized as middle class. The distinction I noticed is during analyzing 4.1 paragraph, education lead to be another characteristic that is used to define social class and it displays that the extremely wealthy tend to have advanced learning versus those who don’t have higher education certificates are typically lower middle class.

Q 2: 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

I live in kips Bay, on thirtieth street and third Avenue. The closest train to me runs on the green line on Park Avenue and is the four, five, and six trains. My area is classified as a middle-class region, according to the 4.1 paragraph. Since I live in an area where people live in apartment building and use the train to commute to leisure activities as well as work, it’s not surprising and it is an accurate representation of the people that occupy my neighborhood. There is also an increasingly frequent creation of city bikes on every other block and Avenue. The population of my neighborhood is also a melting pot with many different ethnicities and cultures.

Q #3: Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?

The pattern that I have noticed is that many individuals in the city are either upper or upper middle class. However, if you branch out to the more north parts such as Harlem, Washington Heights, Riverdale, or the Bronx, you’ll send a bearing in class since neighborhoods are primarily medium to low income families.

1- In America, social class refers to a number of factors that are used to categorize individuals into various groups. These factors include family income, wealth, education, and vocations. There are five sorts of social classes: upper, upper-middle, middle, working, and lower class. Both paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 focus on family income, with higher-income Americans being classified as a middle-upper class. and those with lower incomes are classified as lower classes, while those with better potential are classified as middle class. The difference that I discovered is that reading 4.1 shows another characteristic that can be used to define social class, which is education, and it shows that individuals who have advanced learning are extremely wealthy, while those who do not have a higher education certificate are lower middle class.

2- I reside on the LIC, and the nearest train line is 7, which I use to Chamber station. My neighborhood is classified as a working and middle-class region, according to reading 4.1. Because I live in an area where people live in an apartment building and use the train to go to work and ability to perform daily routines, I’m not shocked, and it’s a true depiction of the people in my neighborhood. The population of the area is quite diverse.

3- The tendency I’ve noticed is that most individuals in Manhattan are upper- or upper-middle-class, but if you travel out to Washington Heights or Harlem, you’ll notice a change in class since those neighborhoods are primarily medium- to low-income homes.

1. 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? I think both readings deconstruct the notion that we have different classes in our society.  The idea of how the system divides us is pretty much an imagination rather than a reality.  We tend to see the city as lower, working, middle and upper class.  When the reality according to both readings -in my opinion- is that a capitalist society only has two classes, you either own a means of production or you either sell your labor to that capitalist.  I believe the reading Wealth and Want in the United States, goes into classifications of that working class, while the other just puts us all in one big pile.  With this, I mean that Parenti, deconstructs a little bit more the relationship there is between the executives (who are still workers, not owners) and the regular employee.  While the other reading works on make the precision that we are all workers and cannot be capitalist unless you own a means of production with workers that generates wealth for you. Both would agree on the reality of owner-worker dependency and as the only two classes, however, Parenti acknowledges the different tiers that exist within the working class and how the owners have always used these “professional”-ranking workers to basically extract more value-producing performance from other employees.  It makes just sense to me that the system then has created this imagination of different social classes because it will give the sense to workers they are going up, getting close to being the owner, and creates a segregating idea that we are not in the same boat, all enslaved people owned by the same slave master. 
2. 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?

I live in StuyTown in 14 and first, using the concepts of the reading and looking the income around the L train station in 14th and 1st Ave, it looks like the social class living around this neighborhood is workers, but professional workers.  This does not surprise me to a point.  In the one hand, this is numbers from nine years, and I believe this neighborhood has been changing a lot in the last years alone.  Gentrification here is still an ongoing process here.  If you walk down Ave A, you will find what used to be a Puerto Rican neighborhood that still has members of the Latinx community living around.  Also StuyTown, which happens to be a very expensive rent property, used to be a massive project, that became this private living area, that now is super expensive to live in.  However, there are still people living in this complex that have their apartments since 1960s and have managed to fight against or assimilate to the gentrification process.  It surprised me because knowing the prices of rent around this area, you would think the income would’ve been greater than what it shows in the graphic. It does not surprise me that it also shows that the people living around this area are what the reading calls professionals and managers: teachers, doctors, nurses, executives, etc. 

1. Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC? I would agree there is a general pattern that increases as gentrification keeps moving and pushing people out.  It seems that the professional or manager working class, and the owners tend to live in the city or closest to the city.  All while they keep pushing the rest of the workers outside of the city because their salaries would never allow them to afford to live in Soho for example. This is just another way -in my opinion- to feed the imagination that there are different classes other than workers and capitalist, giving a sense of power, exclusivity, realization, and success to those responsible to extra more value-producing performance from other employees, to secure the capitalist keep making profit out of all them.

1. Generally, I find this reading to be fascinating. I have lived in many countries, and I have seen the difference in social classes. But it was not until I came to the US that I started to pay attention to the gap between the poor, rich, and wealthy people. Going downtown manhattan always rings a bell in my ears that here is where the most affluent people reside, and as I get on the train heading further uptown or even into Brooklyn, queens, or the Bronx, you notice the change in class and wealth through the neighborhoods you transit. Reading 4.2 makes it clear one’s geographical position determines his social class while reading 4.1 talks about how a specific group of variables makes up a person’s social class. These variables are mainly a combination of wealth, income, education, and occupation. In the first reading, one can easily identify the class of people living in a particular locale according to their stop on the train.

2. Washington Heights, considered to be a neighborhood in Manhattan, holds a poverty rate of 15.5 % (furmancenter.org) as compared to the city’s overall 16.0%. The numbers speak for themselves as to which type of people live in the area. Even though gentrification is starting to happen in this area, most of the population is still in the lower class regarding wealth and income. I wouldn’t say the survey accurately represents the people because many people who earn about the median income just want to save. Hence, they choose to live around this area. For example, my roommate is an accountant and works in the financial district, yet he chooses to live in Washington Heights.

3. Yes, it is easy to notice the pattern throughout the subway line with Manhattan been the center of wealth. Once you start going out of Manhattan, you can easily identify how quickly social class changes based on the stops the train makes. Typical New Yorkers can easily tell what the median income of a person is by their train stop. Notice, those that live in the center of Manhattan are primarily upper class, while those living in Norwood or Coney Island are low-income households.

1. 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? Between both readings I was able to see similarities when describing social classes. The structure to understanding the separation of individuals by labeling them by a specific social class depending on the individual’s income. Distinguishing measurements of lower, working middle class, along with upper class determining further details the cause for the categories. However I would say, 4.1 was more in depth when determining the differences throughout their data analysis of individuals, since their social class identification reflects on the collected data resulting from self-perspective, self-placement . 4.1 reading describes the factors that may be going into being a part of an individual’s categorization, such as wealth, education, while 4.2 subway analysis discussed more about location. 

2. 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?

  After reviewing the readings, I did my own analysis on my neighborhood, where I grew up, and where I’m currently dorming. I live in Flushing, however I grew up in Spanish Harlem, so I’m fairly still new to my community. Considering the nearest subway station by my dormitory is Main Street/Flushing, I wasn’t surprised by what I came across in terms of income statistics, when knowing my area is not really a mainstream compared to areas like 34th street and 42nd street. However, I was concerned knowing that the area is also known as “Flushing Chinatown”. I assumed otherwise knowing the income levels are very much higher in Lower Manhattan’s Chinatown, therefore I expected the income performance to be a tad bit higher than what I reviewed. Knowing that Manhattan is the highest income performing borough in NYC emphasizes my understanding of not being surprised on what was being presented through the readings. 

3. Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?

There’s an obvious pattern going on throughout the differences of income along each subway line. Since I live in NYC and have lived here all my life, alongside traveling from young, I’m familiar with the majority of these lines and what the neighborhood consists of. Therefore, it’s very noticeable to notice the areas that are considered low income/poverty compared to the upper-middle class/middle-working class. Realizing neighborhoods in areas of The Bronx are at the bottom of the graph, however when you forward towards downtown Manhattan, you see the graph increasing. Which is common to know, however very distasteful to realize the areas with most money are mostly areas of business and shopping areas. 

1. One of the main similarities between both readings is the comparison between social classes, allowing us to see the different grades of classes. While both readings show us data about this, they are both just as different in that way. Writers Robert Bird and Frank Newport tell us how we place ourselves in the social classes depending on our education, occupation, race, age, and settings. Where in ‘The New Yorker’, we are shown how we place ourselves in a way of social class by deciding where we can afford to live. This is what represents us, where are with Bird and Newport it is based on different data that was acquired. The New Yorker makes it easier to identify individuals social economic class by where they live, the Gallup article takes in many other things in perspective.
2. I am off the Q like in Brooklyn, being between Park Slope and Flatbush. Although I am not surprised by the medium income shown, I can say that it represents the demographic before the neighborhood became gentrified, this being in the past 2-5 years. The social class in my neighborhood is a variety of working, middle and middle-upper. This changes depending on different blocks in the neighborhood, the atmosphere changes drastically. I believe the medium salary now is higher, based on the new tenants, new constructions, and the new shops popping up.
3. Based on the data from reading 4.2, I can see that incomes are higher if there’s some sort of attraction near by, central park, times square, citi field, barclay center and so on. There is a lot more wealth in Manhattan than there is in any other borough, which is not surprising, although it ranges. Income in any situation changes the setting of any location. The further some live from Manhattan the less the income is, aside from the 7 line at the Citi field stop, that has a drastic increase.

1. Both readings speaks of income. How income distribution is use to determine the social class structure by separating the public into classes: lower, working, upper, and upper-middle class. Reading 4.1 goes into more details about how wealth, power and culture are all aspects of our lives.
2. I live in Long Island and work in Brooklyn, the closest Subway station to my home is the E and J to Jamaica Center-Parson/Archer avenue and according to the article the social class that lives in my neighborhood are working class making $37.184 which doesn’t surprise me at all because going to work and coming home no matter the time I mostly see working class citizens on the train.
3. The pattern I see is that most people that lives in the Manhattan area are either upper class or upper- middle class but if you venture out around Washington heights or Harlem you will see a difference in class, those areas are mostly medium to low income households.

1.Reading 4.1 describes social class more in the details of society’s stratification into a hierarchy position. The word “class” is broken down into 4 different terms which are working, ruling, lower, and upper. They placed emphasis on how the household income can affect the level of education someone gets. The lower the household income, the lower educational levels which would then correlate to social mobility. While reading 4.2 people’s living and incomes are calculated by different train lines. They really focus on different neighborhoods and the income based on the area someone lives. Living in a lower ranked neighborhood can also affect social mobility. Both reading 4.1 and 4.2 have similarities that show people are automatically placed in social classes based on their current areas or based on income.

2. I live on the B & Q-train line, where I get off at the Church Ave station. According to reading 4.1, my neighborhood is considered a working and middle class area. I’m not surprised and it is an accurate representation of the people living in my neighborhood  because I live in an area where people live in apartment buildings and use the train to go to work and carry out their activities. The area has a very diverse population. 

3. Based on reading 4.2, I notice that the general pattern is that NYC social classes are divided within the 4 boroughs shown on the train line map. Majority of working middle classes live in Brooklyn and Queens, whereas  the upper class live in Manhattan  and the lower class live in the Bronx. 

1. 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?

Social class in America refers to different variables to determine different categories of people in the society those variables are family income, wealth, education, and occupations. The social classes are revealed in 5 types including upper, upper middle, middle, working and lower class. Both articles 4.1 and 4.2 focuses on family income in which American who have higher income are considered middle upper class and who have the lower income are considered lower classes and the rest which is the higher potential are considered the middle class. The difference that I found is that the reading 4.1 illustrates another variable to categorize social class which is education and it demonstrate that people who obtain a higher education are upper class while people who did no obtain higher education diploma are lower class.  

2. 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?

The closest station to where I live is 18^th and 20^th avenue for D train. Since the number incomes illustrated in these two stations are $39.524 and $30.051 it is seemingly that the social class living in my neighborhood according to the concepts in reading 4.1 is the working class because the reading states that people who have income between $30,000 and $40,000 are more likely to be classified as working class. In my opinion this classification is not accurate because it is probably true that people who mostly live in this area are working class. However, I could not assume that people who own business or any other properties who are considered upper class does not live in this neighborhood.    

3. Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?

According to the reading 4.2 the pattern that have been emerged is the intensity of people who have higher income in Manhattan rather than the other borough which reveals that the upper class is concentered in this borough through almost all the train stations. While the other class are dispersed to the other boroughs in varying proportion.

1. The writers of Gallup and The New Yorker both discuss social class based on socioeconomic variables. Gallup writers Robert Bird and Frank Newport demonstrated what determines how Americans perceived their social class discussing income as a powerful determinant of the social class into which people place themselves. Drawing reference to education to a lesser degree and age making a deference as does region, race, employment status, and one’s urban, suburban, or rural residence. The writer of the New Yorker discusses similar points showing dramatic changes between boroughs of NYC and neighborhoods focusing on the shifts along the city’s subway. The writer demonstrated the swing from station to station of median household income from highest of $205K to lowest 12.2K. In contrast the Gallup writers took an similar approach showing social class by identification with income levels from lower bracket 0-$19K, to $250K +. Whereas Gallup writers differentiated social class by individual identification of household income, The New Yorker writer zero in on median household income showing a census tract with specific detail pointing to the lower Manhattan subways, such as Chambers Street, Park Place, and WTC, neighborhood as the highest verses Sutter Avenue in Brooklyn as lowest. 

2. Jamaica Center/Parsons is the closest subway station to my current place of resident.

Base on the concept outline in our reading materials the interactive infographic points to the lowest median household income of 12K to the largest gap in median household ranging to $191K. This is not astonishing base on the socioeconomic variables.

 I strongly believe that based on this concept and neighborhood demography it is accurate to say the representation of the people fits just right with the concept.

3. Absolutely! Income is a powerful factor in which many people identifies themselves, and as one experiences increase in income so goes a change in social class and status. The more upward movement in terms of the income range one experience the higher up in the social class one moves. A change of house, car, prestige and behavior, further pushes to the hierarchy stage in society.