Keep in mind our Online Discussion Guidelines:
https://openlab.bmcc.cuny.edu/pol-100-0504-spring-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?
Caridad Rodriguez
Disscussion 4.1
February 9, 2025
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?
Answer: Yes, I have noticed some similarities in the way social class is discussed in both 4.1 and 4.2 and they both show how social class shapes people’s lives. Both reading also show how social class is shaped by economic factors and how it affects their life experiences. In the first reading it talks about how people connect their social class based on income, education, and their jobs and how these factors influence in their place in society. The second reading was more on the effects of public transportation like the subways. It shows how higher income people avoid crowded stations while lower income replies on them more. I have also noticed the difference between both readings is that the first one focused on self-identification with social class while the second reading was more so external indicators of social 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?
Answer: The station closest to where I live would be the 2 line which run through a mix of neighborhoods, including parts of Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx, which is my neighborhood and often associated with both working and lower income communities. Although there are high proportion of renters and people with lower education and income. I am not surprised about this answer because it is very accurate representation of my neighborhood, and I say this because there are a lot of homelessness and drug usage.
3. Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?
Answer: Yes, I have noticed a general pattern about social class in NYC which is how access to public transportation and using of subways are different for higher income people tend to avoid crowds and use taxis or private cars while lower income people use them due to it being affordable. Also, in high income satiations its more clean and less crowded. This shows how different social classes experience public transportation in different ways.
Hi Caridad, I agree with your thoughts about readings 4.1 and 4.2. Together, these two readings reveal the complexity of social stratification and its influence on daily life. They emphasize that economic factors shape access to resources and opportunities, particularly through public transportation in NYC. It shows that wealthier individuals avoid crowded subway stations by using private transportation, while lower-income individuals rely on subways despite challenges.
Caridad I totally agree with your response to question two , the two train being the closest station to me as well . I definitely feel as though homelessness and drug use is one of the main reasons that the neighborhood is characterized as being towards the lower class. Adding on to your response to question three , considering the cleaner stations tend to be in higher income neighborhoods , kind of makes me realize how resources are distributed unequally. It reinforces the idea that public services , whether its sanitation, policing , or infrastructure tend to favor areas with more economic and political influence.
1. Social Class Similarities and Differences (Readings 4.1 & 4.2)
Similarities: They both refer to social class on the basis of income and economic status.
Differences: 4.1 focuses on class self-perception, while 4.2 depicts economic difference in practice as shown in NYC subway statistics.
2. My Neighborhood’s Social Class (St. Albans, Queens)
Middle class with $99,634 median family income and dense homeownership.
Not surprised, as the community has good wages and local firms, but rising costs erode affordability.
3. Social Class Trends in NYC (Reading 4.2)
Subway stations reflect differences in income—wealthy areas have better amenities.
Income dips sharply between stops, an economic segregation.
Higher-income communities enjoy better schools, stores, and amenities.
4. Liberal vs. Socialist Viewpoints on Social Class (Reading 4.4, p.1-2)
Liberals: Class is income and effort determined, and reforms (i.e., more taxes) can reduce inequality.
Socialists: Class is determined by control over production—capitalism creates structural inequality, not income differences.
5. Class vs. Social Hierarchies (Reading 4.4, p.5)
Class is economic, while social hierarchies (race/gender) exist in all societies.
Class determines control over wealth and resources, not just status.
6. Political Implications of Socialist Class Theory (Reading 4.4, p.7)
Capitalism fosters inequality—minor reforms will not end it.
Class is the basis of all oppression—race/gender issues are connected to wealth distribution.
7. Capitalists’ vs. Workers’ Interests (Reading 4.4)
Workers want stability, higher wages; capitalists want lower costs, higher profit.
Example: Outsourcing benefits owners but harms workers.
Since most depend on wages, capitalists wield economic power, shaping politics and inequality.
Final Takeaway
Class isn’t just about money—it’s about who controls wealth and makes decisions. The readings show that capitalism creates radical inequality, infecting all aspects of life.
1. Do you notice any similarities in how social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2? Do you notice any differences in how these two readings differ between social classes?
Both readings 4.1 and 4.2 explore the role of social class in shaping people’s lives, emphasizing how economic factors influence daily experiences and societal positioning. In both texts, social class is linked to income, education, and occupation, which collectively determine access to resources and opportunities. However, they approach the topic from different perspectives. The first reading examines social class through self-identification, explaining how individuals perceive their social standing based on personal achievements, financial stability, and professional status. It highlights how people’s understanding of their class position affects their sense of belonging and social mobility. The second reading, on the other hand, focuses on external markers of class, particularly through public transportation. It illustrates how wealthier individuals often have the means to avoid crowded and less efficient transit options. Meanwhile, lower-income individuals rely heavily on public transit, exposing them to longer commutes and additional daily challenges.
2-
3- Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC? Reading 4.2 highlights a clear pattern of social class differences in NYC, particularly in access to and experiences with public transportation. Higher-income individuals often avoid crowded subway stations, opting instead for taxis, private cars, or other expensive transportation options. Their financial stability allows them to prioritize comfort and convenience, minimizing their reliance on public transit. In contrast, lower-income individuals depend heavily on the subway due to its affordability, despite facing longer commutes, overcrowding, and less maintained conditions.
Additionally, subway stations in wealthier neighborhoods tend to be cleaner and less congested, while those in lower-income areas are often overcrowded and in need of maintenance. This pattern reflects broader social inequalities, where economic status determines the quality and accessibility of transportation. Wealthier individuals enjoy greater flexibility in mobility, whereas lower-income residents must navigate the challenges of an overburdened public transit system.
Greetings Ghufran,
The objective and subjective outlook enlightens me on how the working classes categorize social classes through self-identification and different social rankings, as well as what appears to be the objective of how social classes are divided within two structures. I have always heard the subjective terms of how one in society is defined based on one’s success value, measured through the lower to upper class as a child, in hearing adults talk about social politics. However, it was not until I could see the differences when learning a bit about real estate. I recalled taking a mini course, and that was the first time I was aware that anyone who had a lot of money but did not own anything was pretty much looked at as a rich person who was just able to have a more vast ability to spend more than someone who had lesser financial spending power. The wealthy owned land, agriculture, and businesses and could live off their surplus value. How or who was the first human that decided to collectively look at the world as the so-called “haves and have nots’? Who would choose to create a rigid stratification of society based on wealth? This is possibly the primary cause of the imbalance between true interconnectedness and world peace. Unfortunately, this separates us as a collective to see each other as equals. Either way, I see it. Looking at it from the objective or the subjective, it creates a competitive edge over one another. The result creates a sense of dehumanization and a mainframe to turn someone’s life to say, “I have more or more innovative than you. Without me, you can not obtain what you need”. In other words, Without me, there is no value in you. Hopefully, as humanity advances, we can see the self-defeating effects this imposes on our existence on the planet and build collectively as one.