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?

Both readings highlight how deeply social class shapes American life, but they approach the topic in very different ways. Reading 4.1 (Gallup Poll) focuses on how Americans identify their own social class. It relies on self-perception, which is subjective and often influenced by cultural beliefs—for example, many people earning low wages still describe themselves as “middle class.” This reflects how ideology shapes how we see ourselves, even if it doesn’t match our material reality.

In contrast, Reading 4.2 (The New Yorker Subway Map) takes a more structural approach by showing how income inequality is literally mapped onto the city. It uses hard data to reveal how social class plays out in terms of where people live, how far they commute, and what resources are available to them. The visual format makes class differences more concrete and harder to ignore.

The key difference is this: Reading 4.1 is about perception—how people think about class. Reading 4.2 is about structure—how class actually shapes lived experiences. Both are important, but together they show the gap between what we believe about class and the realities of economic inequality.

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? D train station

Based on Reading 4.2 and the New Yorker’s subway-income map, a clear pattern in NYC emerges: as you travel farther from Manhattan along subway lines like the D train, income levels generally decrease. This is especially true at the 174–175th Street station in the Bronx, which is located in a predominantly working-class neighborhood.

According to the data, the income levels around this station are significantly lower than those near central Manhattan stops on the same line, like 59th Street or 7th Avenue. This reflects a larger city-wide trend where lower-income communities tend to be pushed to the outer boroughs, while wealthier individuals are more concentrated in Manhattan and select parts of Brooklyn.

I’m not surprised by this pattern because it’s something I see every day—long commutes, limited access to fresh groceries, underfunded schools, and rising rents. What Reading 4.2 helped me see more clearly is how these inequalities are mapped into our everyday transit systems. The subway isn’t just transportation—it’s a visual and physical map of economic inequality in the city.

The fact that a short train ride connects areas of such extreme economic contrast is powerful. It reminds me that class inequality in NYC is structural, not just personal. Where you live—like near 174–175th Street—can shape your opportunities, your commute, and even how you’re perceived.

In short, Reading 4.2 made me reflect on how the D train tells a deeper story: that geography, transportation, and class are tightly connected in NYC.

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

Reading 4.2 reveals a clear and striking pattern about social class in New York City: as subway lines move outward from Manhattan into the outer boroughs, income levels tend to drop. This suggests that wealth and poverty in NYC are geographically concentrated, with the highest-income neighborhoods clustered around central Manhattan (especially near stops like 59th Street–Columbus Circle or Lexington Ave/63rd), and the lowest incomes appearing further out along the same train lines—like the D train in the Bronx or southern Brooklyn.

This pattern shows that social class in NYC is not just about how much money people make—it’s also about where they live and how far they have to travel to access work, education, and opportunity. It also reveals that class inequality is built into the city’s geography and transportation system: wealthier people live closer to the city center (and often closer to major resources), while lower-income communities live further away and spend more time commuting.

I found this pattern both powerful and disturbing. It reinforces how economic inequality isn’t random—it’s systemic and visible, especially when mapped out using something as common as the subway. It also shows that social mobility may be limited by physical space, with certain areas consistently under-resourced and overlooked.

In short, Reading 4.2 made me think about how space, class, and inequality are all interconnected in NYC, and how the subway—something we all use—can tell a bigger story about who has access to power, wealth, and opportunity.

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?

Yes, both readings 4.1 and 4.2 talk about how social class is connected to things like money, education, and job type. They both show that people can be grouped by how much they earn or what kind of work they do. But there is a small difference. Reading 4.1 focuses more on how people see themselves in a certain class, even if they don’t really match that class. Reading 4.2 is more about facts and data, like where different classes live and how neighborhoods are divided by income. So 4.1 is more about personal identity, and 4.2 is more about real-world statistics.

1. Similarities: Both show a disconnect between people’s perceptions and the actual structure of the social class in the United States. Americans don’t really understand how social class works or how unfair the system actually is. Many Americans whether rich or poor, say they are middle class, even if it’s not true based on money.

Differences: The video” Wealth Inequality in America” focuses on reality vs. perception of wealth distribution in the U.S. It shows that social class is tied deeply to wealth and people don’t realize how unequal the country’s distribution really is. In the reading, “What Determines How Americans Perceive Their Social Class?” it is sited that social class in the U.S. is subjective-people define it not only by income but also by feelings, values and comparing themselves to others.

2. The closest station to where I live is Grant Avenue, by the A train. It is a working to lower -middle class community with steady but modest incomes, working families and significant single-parent households. There is a mix of renters and multi-family homeowners, with some new development aimed at keeping housing affordable.

Median household income is around $60,000 significantly below NYC’s citywide median of $70,000-$75,000. It’s a densely populated, working class area with a high proportion of single parents and residents in their late 20s and 40s.

Working and Lower-Middle Class: Income- Median: $60K – a lower-middle income by NYC standards.

4. 4.2 readings not seen

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? They both show that your pretty much born into your conditions. It’s shaped by a combination of things beyond your control your income, how much education and where in this world you live. Their ideas about what class is however differ greatly. Gallup takes a more subjective view it’s the way people think about themselves as members of different classes. People may say ” I am working class; I am middle class or even i on the other hand am neither rich or poor.” Based on their income or living standard. The New Yorker on the other hand, shows geographical differentials in class. By plotting income against subway lines, it teaches readers how much their neighborhood is a mirror image of widespread structural stratification.
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 near the Sutter ave L train in Brooklyn. Th map in the New Yorker tells us that this a predominantly a lower income or working-class neighborhood. It certainly seems to ring true a lot of people including myself are busting their chops just to make life run smoothly, and many families carry a heavy rent load on top of that. I think it portrays life in my community fairly well.
3. Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC? After looking at the city as a whole, i started to see a trend the richer parts of Manhattan or quickly changing neighborhoods of Brooklyn like BedStuy and park slope; poorer ones tend to be distant from Manhattan as in outer boroughs queens or Bronx. This goes to show how new york is divided by both economics and location when it comes to social class.

1.Similarities between Readings 4.1 and 4.2
Both readings talk about how social class in the U.S. is connected to income, jobs, education, and where people live. They also show that people often don’t see class the same way. Many Americans believe they are middle class, even when their income or situation may not match. So, both readings agree that social class is real and affects our lives, but people’s understanding of it is often unclear.

Differences between the readings
Reading 4.1 focuses on what people think about themselves — this is called subjective social class. It uses surveys where people say if they feel like they are lower class, working class, or middle class.
Reading 4.2 is about facts and real numbers — it shows how much money people make in different neighborhoods using the NYC subway map. This is objective class data.
The main difference is that one is about self-identity and feelings, and the other is based on actual income levels.

2.My neighborhood – Bay Ridge
I live near the Bay Ridge–95th Street station on the R train. According to the subway map, the average income here is between $55,000 and $70,000.
Based on Reading 4.1, people in this range usually see themselves as working class or middle class. In Bay Ridge, I see many people with regular jobs, living in apartments or small homes. A lot of families here are immigrants or longtime working people.
I’m not surprised by this. I think it’s a fair description. People here live normal lives — not rich, but not poor either. So yes, I think it’s an accurate picture of my neighborhood.

3.Patterns in NYC from Reading 4.2
Reading 4.2 shows that social class in NYC changes a lot from one subway stop to the next. You can go just a few stops and find huge differences in income. Some areas are very rich, with incomes over $200,000. Others are poor, with people making under $30,000.
This tells us that NYC has big class differences, even between places that are close together. The subway shows how divided the city can be, with rich and poor living near each other but in very different situations.

4.1

1. 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 the upper east side, where the social class tends to be that of higher income with a
median income of 165,000. According to the article and diagram included, this falls into the
upper-middle class. This is slightly surprising to me when I think about how the neighborhood is
portrayed in media and entertainment, as the show Gossip Girl takes place in the upper east side
and depicts the neighborhood to have the wealthiest families living there and paying the steepest
private school tuition. Additionally, when looking at housing, many of the most expensive
multimillion dollar apartments are located in the upper east side. However, when looking around
the neighborhood, many of the apartment buildings include less expensive studios amongst the
more expensive complexes that house many entire families. Thus, perhaps the upper class in the
neighborhood consists more of entire families.
4.2

1. What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees?
   Give an example of each.

According to the article, income is blurred amongst the two different categories, and the
distinction lies more in that owners live mainly off of investments-stocks, bonds, rents and
property income-while employees live mainly off of wages, salaries and fees. An example of a
wealthy owner would be a corporation stockholder, and a less wealthy owner would be an owner
of a small store. A lower/lower-middle class employee would be a factory worker or service
worker, while a middle/middle-upper class employee would be a manager.

2. How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying
   about labor?

I think Adam Smith is watering down the labor and the economy into the flow of resources that
make up goods and services, and that currency is only a tool in this system. I personally think
Smith is not accounting for the nuance of the economy.

3. What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an
   identity?

I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. I know many people identify culture and attitude
with their class, and I think when people actively choose not to it still reflects certain aspects of
their personality (whether that’s good or bad is subjective). I also think that, as the article breaks
down, because liberals, socialists, conservatives, libertarians and other ideological groups have
very different opinions about the meaning and functioning of class in society shows that those
who agree with how one group perceives their own personal class often correlates to them
agreeing with other aspect of that groups mindset-further revealing identity.

4. How do you understand the argument Reading 4.4. makes when stating that
   “class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? What is this
   close form of dependency, and can you think of an example?

My takeaway was that not only how you define your class depends on the other classes around
you, but the existence and continuation of your class also depends on the classes around you. As
the reading states, race is more dependent only on its definition, in that Whiteness depends on
Blackness for its meaning, but Whites do not need Blacks around them to stay that race in order
for them to stay Black. In other words, someone of lower class both depends on the higher
income of the upper class in order for them to be considered less wealthy and depends on them to
continue to fund certain parts of their life, such as the wealthier landlord continuing to take their
rent. This is reciprocal dependency, since if all of the lower income workers moved out of the
complex the wealthier landlord would stop making money. Many find that billionaires are
actually important to the economy as people depend on them for investments, many of which are
investments for independent expenditures that employ many middle and lower class workers.

1. The similarities in the way social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2 is that social class is determined by Wealth, income, education, occupation or social statues .The difference between these two is that readings 4.1 is about how people choose to identify with their social class even though they do not have the correct income or social status to be determined of that social class. Readings 4.2 have facts and data about which neighborhood is considered lower, middle or upper class

2. I live near the 2, and 5 train station in the Bronx. The social class that tends to live in my neighborhood is the lower-income demographic and the working class. No, I am not surprised by the answer because the area has residentials and low-income housing So, the people who do live here work every day and have families, but the area is also associated with a predominantly low income and economic disadvantage population.

3. Based on readings 4.2 social class in New York City is mixed, with a large percentage of the population residing in the lower and middle class, while a smaller percentage make up the wealthy class. When it comes to the subway people ride the subway everyday with people from mixed class and the distance to lower, middle, or upper class is not far.

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? 

This reading explores Americans’ views regarding their social class. Objective social classes such as income education and occupation as well as subjective social classes or how people perceive their own class are distinguished. The authors found that people identify their class in such ways that income predicts it strongly. People earning below $40,000 often see themselves as working class, while upper class identification may occur for those earning above $250,000. This situation needs education. Graduates of colleges tend to see themselves as middle class that is upper. Self-perception sees interesting influences from age, region, and jobs. It seems that political affiliation and also ideology together with marital status in addition to gender are not influential when variables are controlled. 

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? 

Reading 4.2: “Inequality and New York’s Subway” from The New Yorker 

This reading presents income inequality for all to see across New York City’s subway stations. Median household incomes differ greatly across neighborhoods. Manhattan Chambers Street stations, for instance, have a $205,192 median income as Brooklyn’s Sutter Avenue has only $12,288. According to the infographic, income levels can vary dramatically within the same city. This often happens on the same subway line. Urban areas have deep-rooted economic divides in this disparity. 

Concerning income as a key determinant of social class, similarities appear in both readings. They bring to light income disparities of different regions as well as neighborhoods. Reading 4.1 highlights subjective perceptions of social class but Reading 4.2 views income inequality with objective data. For the former, individual self-identification is the focus. The former examines disparities in geographical income. I personally live in New Jersey and I used to live in Sutter ave in Brooklyn in the past and I am not surprised by the answer. The representation feels accurate for now but I feel social class are changing in Brooklyn especially in the East New York area were gentrifications are changing there social class creating new disparities in income. in the past 5 years East New York investor had build more than a dozen high rise building with a rent that only median to high incomer people can afford. If u ask me again about the income in Sutter ave in years to come it will be differet.

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

 General Patterns of Social Class in NYC (Based on Reading 4.2) 

The infographic in Reading 4.2 reveals significant income disparities across New York City’s subway lines: 

Manhattan: Stations like Chambers Street and Park Place have median household incomes exceeding $200,000, indicating affluent neighborhoods. 

Brooklyn:  In contrast, stations such as Sutter Avenue in Brooklyn report median incomes around $12,000, highlighting areas with lower socioeconomic status. 

These big differences of income between subway stops show the close ties between where you live and your social class in NYC. The nearest train stop to your community feels quite intentional. They can say quite a lot about the kind of jobs people have, also the amount of money that they make, and even the kind of life that they live there. Class divisions are mapped out by the city’s layout in a way—its subway system and geography. Riding on the train through a variety of stops feels similar to moving through worlds so very different as well as next to each other inside one city. 

1. The similarities I noticed in both readings is how they both point out the distinct social classes we have within our societies and how we function in these social classes. The Difference is how each article is how they explain social classes. In reading 4.1, Gallup focuses on how people self identify their social classes depending on area, education, and work. Reading 4.2 is more objective because it paints a picture of income differences in the train stations.
2. The station closest to me has the A, C, B, and D lines. I think my area has more working/ middle class people and i am not surprised by that because i live in a community that has mostly elders, an educated area, and the average income that needs to be had to live in my neighborhood.

3.The social pattern in NYC are very different area to area and we can notice that when traveling in the city. neighborhoods with middle and upper class people tend to have all the new and clean stations compared to how in some stations known to be in lower class are left in horrible conditions.