- In 4.1 they talk about how social class has flexibility when it comes to the determination of a persons social status. The flexibility comes from the subjective idea of social status. A person making 75k a year considers themselves middle class. A person making 100k a year considers themselves middle class as well thus creating blurred standards of each class. It also compares it to a hierarchy that’s based on wealth, income, education, and occupation. In reading 4.3 they talk about social class based on owning of wealth. Owning a company or owning property. They talk about social class determined on income, but for the higher class its the income they make off of other people(employees) work. Biggest difference I see in 4.1 and 4.3 is who and how they determine social class. In 4.1 they speak on how a person see themselves in 4.3 they speak based on a corporate view. Its less of an idea and more structured
2. I live on Long Island, I don’t use the subways but I would have to say in my area I am surrounded by middle class families. I feel like its an accurate yet mislead representation. We are considered middle class because of income but the income doesn’t align with cost of living.
3. There is a very distinct social class pattern when it comes to NYC. The poor get pushed into one area in every borough. The resource “available” to them don’t really give them a solution to proverty it just gives them a band aid. While the wealthiest people have a surplus of resources
