Who Are the Working Class?

[Neanderthaland]

I'd say anyone who works is the working class, regardless of salary.

Although, most of the time, the working class is hourly.

[Irish Socialist Union]

My family of five makes around $120,000 a year. We live in a four bed, two bath home in an Iowan city. I'd say my family is a middle class family. Not working class, no, but lower middle class, maybe. My parents say that we always "get by".

We also might have rights to a property in France, and a motel in Florida, due to events of my great-grandparents, and generations past.

[Plzen]

Anyone who's income is based on what they do, rather than what they have.

Basically this. Someone who pays for their lifestyle by being compensated for their labour is working class, in my opinion. It isn’t relevant how much that compensation is.

I don’t consider the middle class to be fully distinct from the working class.

[Saiwania]

Most of the Vanderbilts apparently aren't rich anymore. At their peak they were America's richest family but railroads over time, became obsolete or plummeted in importance and the future generations amongst them spent more money than their ability to earn it and the fortune declined until by the 1970s, not a single one from that lineage was a millionaire.

There might just be something to the Chinese proverb that family wealth doesn't survive beyond 3 generations.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Most of the Vanderbilts apparently aren't rich anymore. At their peak they were America's richest family but railroads over time, became obsolete or plummeted in importance and the future generations amongst them spent more money than their ability to earn it and the fortune declined until by the 1970s, not a single one from that lineage was a millionaire.

There might just be something to the Chinese proverb that family wealth doesn't survive beyond 3 generations.

Gonna bet that Anderson Cooper is a millionaire, and Gloria Vanderbilt certainly was.

[Purgatio]

The notion of the 'working class', the 'middle class' and the 'upper class' are all vacuous terms with unclear, constantly-shifting definitions. It's impossible to create class distinctions with any permanent and definable meaning and to even discuss such concepts is a form of destructive and divisive discourse

[Purgatio]

Most of the Vanderbilts apparently aren't rich anymore. At their peak they were America's richest family but railroads over time, became obsolete or plummeted in importance and the future generations amongst them spent more money than their ability to earn it and the fortune declined until by the 1970s, not a single one from that lineage was a millionaire.

There might just be something to the Chinese proverb that family wealth doesn't survive beyond 3 generations.

Gonna bet that Anderson Cooper is a millionaire, and Gloria Vanderbilt certainly was.

Anderson Cooper earns 11 million USD a year. Him being a millionaire doesn't mean the Vanderbilt fortune's still around. Gloria inherited about $33m (after accounting for inflation).

https://cnaluxury.channelnewsasia.com/people/gloria-vanderbilt-dead-at-95-11635434
https://www.thewealthadvisor.com/article/cnns-anderson-cooper-disinherited-200-million-vanderbilt-estate

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Gonna bet that Anderson Cooper is a millionaire, and Gloria Vanderbilt certainly was.

Anderson Cooper earns 11 million USD a year. Him being a millionaire doesn't mean the Vanderbilt fortune's still around. Gloria inherited about $33m (after accounting for inflation).

https://cnaluxury.channelnewsasia.com/people/gloria-vanderbilt-dead-at-95-11635434
https://www.thewealthadvisor.com/article/cnns-anderson-cooper-disinherited-200-million-vanderbilt-estate

Still disproves his point.

[Purgatio]

Anderson Cooper earns 11 million USD a year. Him being a millionaire doesn't mean the Vanderbilt fortune's still around. Gloria inherited about $33m (after accounting for inflation).

https://cnaluxury.channelnewsasia.com/people/gloria-vanderbilt-dead-at-95-11635434
https://www.thewealthadvisor.com/article/cnns-anderson-cooper-disinherited-200-million-vanderbilt-estate

Still disproves his point.

Well his argument was just that the Vanderbilt fortune's not around anymore. I have no clue if that's true because wealthy families tend to be pretty private about their family estate and its size (the Trumps are like an exception to this but most wealthy families aren't as openly-extravagant as them), but I'm just saying Anderson Cooper being rich has no relevance to whether the Vanderbilt fortune has or has not been expended. It's all individually-earned money by Anderson Cooper who only inherited $1.5 million if I remember correctly, which isn't very much.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Still disproves his point.

Well his argument was just that the Vanderbilt fortune's not around anymore. I have no clue if that's true because wealthy families tend to be pretty private about their family estate and its size (the Trumps are like an exception to this but most wealthy families aren't as openly-extravagant as them), but I'm just saying Anderson Cooper being rich has no relevance to whether the Vanderbilt fortune has or has not been expended. It's all individually-earned money by Anderson Cooper who only inherited $1.5 million if I remember correctly, which isn't very much.

If he did inherit 1.5 mil, that still makes him a millionaire, and that’s more than 90% of Americans can hope to inherit.

[Purgatio]

Well his argument was just that the Vanderbilt fortune's not around anymore. I have no clue if that's true because wealthy families tend to be pretty private about their family estate and its size (the Trumps are like an exception to this but most wealthy families aren't as openly-extravagant as them), but I'm just saying Anderson Cooper being rich has no relevance to whether the Vanderbilt fortune has or has not been expended. It's all individually-earned money by Anderson Cooper who only inherited $1.5 million if I remember correctly, which isn't very much.

If he did inherit 1.5 mil, that still makes him a millionaire, and that’s more than 90% of Americans can hope to inherit.

But it also doesn't make him or the Vanderbilt family part of the super-rich with a huge family fortune to be passed down from generation to generation. There are people in the upper-middle class who inherit that much, but no one (except crazy Marxists I guess) calls them plutocrats. $1.5 million inheritance definitely isn't enough to describe it as a 'family fortune'.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

If he did inherit 1.5 mil, that still makes him a millionaire, and that’s more than 90% of Americans can hope to inherit.

But it also doesn't make him or the Vanderbilt family part of the super-rich with a huge family fortune to be passed down from generation to generation. There are people in the upper-middle class who inherit that much, but no one (except crazy Marxists I guess) calls them plutocrats. $1.5 million inheritance definitely isn't enough to describe it as a 'family fortune'.

Invested well, you could make more than the average income in interest with that.

[Purgatio]

But it also doesn't make him or the Vanderbilt family part of the super-rich with a huge family fortune to be passed down from generation to generation. There are people in the upper-middle class who inherit that much, but no one (except crazy Marxists I guess) calls them plutocrats. $1.5 million inheritance definitely isn't enough to describe it as a 'family fortune'.

Invested well, you could make more than the average income in interest with that.

I agree, but its not a family fortune. When we speak of 'family fortunes' we're talking about families with huge estates and inheritances like the Waltons, the Kochs, the Mercers.

A $1.5 million inheritance makes you rich, sure, but it's not a 'family fortune' in the typical sense we understand it.

[A Cornstar]

By my understanding there are two answers:
The Old/European- where the middle class was what Marx called bourgeoisie; the upper being landed aristocracy, and working class being simply a euphemism for lower class (thus including the unemployed et al).
The Modern/American- the old working class is divided between the unemployed et al, the working poor, and lower middle class. The bourgeoisie is the new upper class and has absorbed the remaining nobles/royals as well as politicians, celebs etc. The upper middle class is caught in a mesh between the two. This a metric not only of wealth but also values and prestige.
As for me I work retail but am still supported by upper middle class parents, incidentally I believe in an extended family level of social organization.

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

I come from an affluent family, and my family's good fortune began with my great-grandfather, a self made man who worked his way from "immigrant who toiled in the mines" to "veteran of WWI" to "small business owner", and from there it's been a climb upwards into affluence, with my father being a recently retired... well, his job description was rather complicated, but let's just say that the nuclear industry makes "bank" so to speak, ultimately culminating in my older brother and I, unbearably posh twits with no significant responsibilities and more dollars than sense, so to speak. So I suppose that, when determining the working class, one merely needs to find my opposite.

[Rojava Free State]

If he did inherit 1.5 mil, that still makes him a millionaire, and that’s more than 90% of Americans can hope to inherit.

But it also doesn't make him or the Vanderbilt family part of the super-rich with a huge family fortune to be passed down from generation to generation. There are people in the upper-middle class who inherit that much, but no one (except crazy Marxists I guess) calls them plutocrats. $1.5 million inheritance definitely isn't enough to describe it as a 'family fortune'.

It's a case of new rich as opposed to old rich. 1.5 million is a lot but it isn't really that much anymore in America when you consider both inflation and the existence of the 1%

[Thermodolia]

I’m working class. Always have been and most likely will remain so

[Chestaan]

I tend to go with the original Marxist definition. Anyone who doesn't own capital (the means of production).

[Forsher]

The Working Class, to my mind. evokes pay cheque to pay cheque existence and associated concerns.

The Middle Class, in contrast, is a wealth class. It possesses a level of economic security and behaves aspirationally... whether materially or culturally.

The Upper Class is distinguished from the middle class in that it's wealthier, more secure in its wealth (it can tank being unemployed), more secure in its social status and, to an extent, performs consumption rather than consuming it.

These are probably bad definitions.

Now... the lower middle class is poor but wealthy. So, guess, we'd ft there. We owned the house (via intergenerational support) and did middle class things, e.g. museums and botanic gardens (note: these are free, often... and I suspect that's an important point). On the other hand, we also used the welfare system as a sustained practice.

Owning a house that doesn't beggar you probably precludes one from being working class...

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Just seems like a way of classifying people that no longer has any value.

[Thermodolia]

I tend to go with the original Marxist definition. Anyone who doesn't own capital (the means of production).

In that case I’m definitely working class

[Rojava Free State]

I tend to go with the original Marxist definition. Anyone who doesn't own capital (the means of production).

In that case I’m definitely working class

almost everyone is working class under that definition

[Purgatio]

I tend to go with the original Marxist definition. Anyone who doesn't own capital (the means of production).

This is a ridiculous definition because lots of people, like my parents, own capital (like shares, bonds and securities) but are also workers who sell their labour in the labour market. Not to mention the question of who 'owns' capital is complicated - are you including beneficiaries of discretionary trusts who by definition might never receive any of the capital in question? What about people with bank accounts since in the eyes of the law a bank account is a chose in action against the bank and therefore a capital asset? What about homeowners since homeowners own land which is a potential means of production, even if unused for that purpose? What about people who have money in retirement accounts, which are then re-invested by account-managers into stocks and shares without the account-holder or retiree's day-to-day supervision?

The Marxist capitalist/proletariat distinction is stupid, absurd, ridiculous, archaic and outdated in a modern, complicated economy. This is more than enough reason to reject the Marxist distinction and the entire Marxist philosophy as totally idiotic and intellectually-meritless.

[Purgatio]

But it also doesn't make him or the Vanderbilt family part of the super-rich with a huge family fortune to be passed down from generation to generation. There are people in the upper-middle class who inherit that much, but no one (except crazy Marxists I guess) calls them plutocrats. $1.5 million inheritance definitely isn't enough to describe it as a 'family fortune'.

It's a case of new rich as opposed to old rich. 1.5 million is a lot but it isn't really that much anymore in America when you consider both inflation and the existence of the 1%

A 1.5 million USD inheritance really isn't a lot. I mean, its higher than average, sure, but its not a family fortune or family estate, its just a sizeable amount, but definitely not one of those 'well-preserved' family estates that gets handed down from one generation to the next, with each never needing to work a day in their life.

In that sense, a $1.5 million inheritance is a pretty small amount to inherit.

[Bear Stearns]

lmao not me