Class-related Questions 1-10

THE QUESTION:
C10: I know someone who is from a background of the “working poor” (I hope that term is all right). She has a regular job and works hard but is always struggling financially. She is about to buy a $15,000 car on credit. I am from a middle-class, educated background and have trouble understanding this decision. Why would she invest so much money in a car instead of, say, going back to school part time to become a nurse, which she says she wants to do? (P.S. She is the same race as me.)
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Jessica N., 26, female, white <jessica@pioneeris.net>, NY, NY

ANSWER 1:
You have to understand that most people in the lower-wage demographic want the same “nice things” in life as the rest of us. They see the same advertising, walk some of the same streets and visit some of the same shopping districts as those who have the big bucks. It is only reasonable to expect that the “working poor” will try to give themselves many of the same luxuries (i.e. autos, cable TV, designer clothing) that the rest of us might take for granted. Often, because of their background, they may not see the value of the sacrifice (and it is a sacrifice when you’re already living hand-to-mouth) of continuing education, or may not be in a position to make such a sacrifice. Having been in a similar position for a time, I can sympathize.
POSTED OCT. 13, 1998
Sam; 30; male, brown American <SamAlex67@aol.com>, Chicago, IL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C9: This question is almost the opposite of C1: With University of Michigan students returning for the fall, most of our stores have been deluged. I was in line at Target, behind a young woman wearing clothes that looked like they’d made several trips through the thrift store – thin, worn hooded sweatshirt, falling-apart sneakers, etc. In short, she was dressed like a lot of U of M students. If you haven’t heard, this ain’t exactly a cheap school, and it’s even less so for out-of-state students. I don’t know why I was surprised to see her paying with an Optima Gold card. Why do the poor try to make themselves look ostentatiously rich, and the rich try to make themselves look homeless?
POSTED SEPT. 7, 1998
White male, college town working stiff, Ann Arbor, MI

ANSWER 1:
I believe society values money and sees those who “have” as much more valuable/important than those who “have-not.” I believe that’s why people with little money try to appear as rich as possible, so that they will be respected and taken seriously. The reason many college kids with money try to appear poor could stem from a few notions. They might be trying to separate themselves and assert their independence from their parents (even though they are benefiting from mom and dad’s money). Another possibility is that they want to take on the persona of honesty and humbleness that is more often associated with the poor/working class than with the rich.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
Darbma, 44, white, middle class <darbymom@hotmail.com>, New York, NY

FURTHER NOTICE:
I believe we first must recognize that your assessment of the women in the store is mere assumption. Simply having a Gold card does not mean someone is rich. Basically, it identifies that they do not have a bad credit rating (yet) and that they got on the list of some company willing to give them an opportunity to produce debt. At face value, your question seems to have two sides: 1) Why would anyone with means go “slumming,” while 2) those with little resources would wish to flaunt themselves? I suggest it is ego in both cases. The latter is easy to interpret; the poor want to be thought of as “better” by wearing the best. The former case, in which the rich person wears rags, however unlikely, may stem from an arrogant feeling that they need not be concerned with what the “riff-raff” think. Whatever their rationale, I think I would worry more about those who overspend/overdress against their income than about those who do the opposite. Expensive clothes do not make us more healthy or nicer people, which I believe are genuinely more attractive elements than if the shoes come from Italy.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
Jim E., 40s, European American, Durham, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
From the description you give of this girl, she sounds like a perfect college student to me. She is frugal, intelligent and has good credit. You aren’t given Gold Cards for defaulting on your bills. She might have been moving, house-cleaning or just chilling out that day. I think most kids really get into being casual beyond belief just because it’s easier to roll out of bed and slap on some shorts and a T-shirt than it is to wake up an hour earlier to iron a shirt and pants to sit in a lecture class with 500 other people for two hours. I don’t think it’s a big anti-everything statement, but rather a matter of convenience and ease.
POSTED OCT. 15, 1998
S.P., 28, straight-up honkey, Los Angeles, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
In reponse to Jim E.’s suspicion that well-to-do college kids dress in rags because they “don’t care what the riff-raff think,” you’re mistaken. Riff-raff status is what the kids in question aspire to! They don’t want to be pegged as having it easy. That’s why most college kids will exaggerate how much they owe in student loans. Most kids who come from money try not to show it – they want the world to think they’re scraping to get by. Being poor (“from the streets”) has a lot more credibility than hanging out at your parents’ pool in Westchester. It’s only once you graduate and experience real poverty that you start to get sick of Ramen noodles and socks with holes in them.
POSTED DEC. 4, 1998
Chris, 25, so, so hungry <DJBackwash@aol.com>, New York , NY

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I find it telling that the responses to this thread fail to point out how deep the prejudice against someone from a relatively privileged background can be. “Poor little rich kids” are easy targets for people who try to develop their own legitmacy by criticizing an element of society almost everyone is envious of. Like race or arguably sexual orientation, the financial resources of one’s parents are an inherited trait. To find fault with how these kids live is automatic for some bigots and an easy step for many others. You can’t win by wearing sloppy clothes or “money” clothes, and you spend an inordinate amount of energy proving you are “worthy” of the advantages fate has bestowed upon you. Imagine not feeling able to disclose any information about your background without drawing the kind of negative judgments and petty jealousy that attach themselves so casually to privilege.
POSTED DEC. 9, 1998
C. H., 34, upper-middle class family, Washington, DC
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C8: Why do poorer regions of a state get less money for education (i.e. colleges and universities), highways, etc.? This seems to be the case in South Texas, where I live.
POSTED JULY 16, 1998
John T. <watchman98@hotmail.com>, San Antonio, Texas

ANSWER 1:
It is my understanding that counties receive money for schools by taxing local citizens. Counties with a large proportion of rich residents can justify a higher tax for better schools, while poorer areas cannot afford to pay such high school taxes. I live in a “good” school district and pay more than $100 a month for school taxes, even though I have no children. Residents of poorer neighborhoods have enough trouble just making their monthly rent or mortgage payments. This is one reason busing children to different school districts is frowned upon by some. You pay for what you get.
POSTED JULY 28, 1998
Mason, 27, male <wrmason3@mindspring.com>, Katy, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
Yes, local taxing is how school districts are funded, but taxes aren’t necessarily higher in richer communities. Even if the taxes are equal (15 percent for the sake of argument), 15 percent of $100,000 is a lot more than 15 percent of $30,000. Grants are available for poorer districts, but generally for poverty level districts.
POSTED SEPT. 4,1998
Joshua, 20, male <schnids@bigfoot.com>, Pittsburgh, PA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I’m originally from the Rio Grande Valley, so I understand where you’re coming from. I’ll give you my best guestimate: As the saying goes, “It takes money to make money.” In the poorer regions of the country (at one point Hidalgo County was rated the poorest in the nation), there is no strong economic base, i.e. industry, which helps generate taxes and jobs, which sustains the population, which sustains the votes. So our elected representatives do not have much to bargain with in bringing in more federal money to the region, and neither do they get much political clout from the constituency. Case in point: Newt Gingrich is from Georgia and has Martin Marietta Industries. Kika de la Garza is from the Rio Grande Valley and has agriculture to support him.
POSTED DEC. 28, 1998
David R. male, Smithfield, VA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C7: I am an emergency services worker, so I get to all parts of town. Can anyone tell me why, the poorer the neighborhood, more trash and broken bottles litter the streets?
POSTED JULY 2, 1998
Jon E., Hamilton, OH

ANSWER 1:
Most poorer areas are more densely populated than wealthy areas. More people produce more refuse in a smaller amount of space. However, most clean-up type public services (street cleaning, trash pick-up, park and public maintenance, etc.) are not distributed based on population density, but on tax revenue. The wealthy area usually recieves much more support per person than the poor area.
POSTED JULY 26, 1998
S.D., 23, black male, Oakland, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
Poor neighborhoods have little or no clout at city hall, so city hall doesn’t send trash trucks, street sweepers, etc., to those neighborhoods nearly as often as to other neighborhoods. If you live in an area where it snows, I’m sure you also noticed that poor neighborhoods generally get their streets plowed last, too.
POSTED AUG. 1, 1998
Andrew, 34 <ziptron@hotmail.com>, Huntington, NY

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
1) In the days of my youth, we threw trash out the car window simply because we didn’t want it cluttering up the car. I don’t have any memory of trash beside the road or in the neighborhood. The possibility exists that we simply didn’t see it. (Once I had a candy wrapper in one hand and $5 in the other. Guess which I found in my pocket later.) 2) When we have questioned people dropping trash on the ground, we have heard both from the top and the bottom ends of life that it doesn’t matter because “somebody’s paid to clean it up.” If we don’t want it cluttering up our personal space, aren’t particularly aware of it and assume it’s someone else’s problem anyway, count the options.
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Al, 59, middle-class <alarose@ncwc.edu>, Rocky Mount, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Being poor does not make someone a slob, drunk, drug user or anything else. Usually if a person has a tendancy to have bad judgment in life, they end up poor. What you are seeing is an area where people don’t care much about things. It only takes a few people to trash the place, and if no one cares, it just collects.
POSTED AUG. 18, 1998
B.C., 40-plus, white male, St. Louis, MO

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I’m the product of a working-class family born and raised in a poor neighborhood in New York City. There was trash everywhere, but growing up, my parents never allowed me to litter. They taught me how to be courteous, respectful, responsible and clean, while encouraging me to push toward a bigger and brighter future. I couldn’t say the same for everyone I knew growing up. Maybe our streets would have been cleaner if they had learned the same lessons. Maybe their parents didn’t have the same outlook on life, and this I believe is the reason poor neighborhoods are so littered with trash. It’s a matter of upbringing, values and expectations for the future.
POSTED SEPT. 9, 1998
M. Hernandez, 30, New York, NY

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
My wife and I made an intentional move into the poorest, highest-crime neighborhood in our town. While we are middle-class professionals, we have learned many things about our poorer neighbors. One thing is that most families are renting their living space. Another is the high number of children. Kids, as many parents know, can be very messy and even destructive. Especially if working parents aren’t home to supervise. In my experience, there also is a different sense of boundaries in these neighborhoods. Some people assume that everything is a rental, so you can park, sit or hang out wherever you want. Even the front porch of my own home. There are other socio-economic factors that are common to poorer neighborhoods. If a streetlight is out, the city won’t fix it as fast as they would in the richer parts. Same goes for street cleaning. I would recommend that if you still have questions, get involved with an inner-city youth program of some sort.
POSTED OCT. 14, 1998
Steve, 32, white, Christian, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
My opinion as to why poorer neighborhoods generate more trash than affluent areas is that most residents in the poorer areas do not own the property where they live, and there is also a lack of education. These individuals are accustomed to hanging out in the street where they socialize, eating all their meals. Since they do not own the property where they live, they believe city sanitation workers are paid to clean up after them. If they were homeowners, they would have to be primarily responsible for disposing their own trash. Unfortunately, many lower-income families don’t own their own homes and don’t understand the economics of property values. Property values go up based on how a community is kept. If they realize this, they would take pride in their neighborhood, whether they own their homes or not. If children are taught early how to respect their surroundings, then it would follow them through adulthood. The best example is my son. He was raised in a poor area, but I taught him to respect himself and his neighborhood.
POSTED NOV. 29, 1998
Elfreda D., Bronx NY

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I disagee. We had a national waterskiing championship last year in our town. The city manager requested that employees donate their time and do a cleanup in that part of town. We did, by hand brooms and trash bags. Just one week later, it was a complete mess again. By the way, the street sweeper comes every Saturday, so it will be somewhat clean for churchgoers on Sunday morning. The sweeper comes to our neighborhood about three times a year, and I don’t know why. There is not much litter in my neighborhood, what is here is thrown from cars coming to and from apartment buildings. And that does not stay long, because we have neighborhood pride and remove it promptly.
POSTED FEB. 4, 1999
Jon E., Hamilton, Ohio
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C6: Why do people at the supermarket insist so much upon dividing their articles on the conveyer belt at the cash register with the little black rubber bar? Is it really necessary?
POSTED JUNE 15, 1998
Eric W., <ercw@ipns.com>, Portland, OR

ANSWER 1:
Have you ever found things in your grocery sack you didn’t buy? Or thought you bought something, but when you got home, it wasn’t there after all? I use the little bar because I don’t want the checker to mistakenly ring up my items to the customer in front of me, and conversely, I don’t want to pay for any of the items belonging to the customer behind me. Also, if not for the bars, some of my chosen items might not be in my sack when I get home (i.e. the person in front got them), which would necessitate a trip back to the store, or I would have items I didn’t want or need (from the person behind me), which would necessitate a trip back to the store. Also, either the checker or other customers (including yourself) may be engaged in conversation with another or each other, or disciplining a child, or whatever, and are not paying attention to what is being rung up and to whom. Seems like such a simple task to place a bar between your stuff and your neighbor’s, and such a simple, common sense reason to do so.
POSTED JUNE 24, 1998
Crystal E., 44 <sunny@iglobal.net>, Ponder, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
After working as a cashier at a grocery store for nearly a year, I can tell you that the dividers help the cashier immensely. When people don’t use it, sometimes the cashier doesn’t know which items belong to whom, especially in an express line when people have so few items and the line is moving so much faster. I can’t tell you how many times someone has neglected to use the bar, and then when I accidentally ring their items onto someone else’s order, they snap “That’s mine!” as if I were trying to steal it from them.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Sarah, 18, <bubbles@texoma.net>, Sherman, TX

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
As a student working part-time at a supermarket as a cashier, I feel I have enough hands-on experience to state several valid reasons for using that little rubber bar. On the express lane, customers frequently are in a rush, and items often become mixed up. When I was trained as a cashier, I was informed I was going to be timed on how many items I rang per minute. I was not told I should ask a customer about every item they are purchasing, when all you have to do is put a piece of rubber (it’s not heavy, trust me) on the belt. Also, if a mis-scan does occur, the cashier has to deduct that item from the customer’s order, and potentially wait for a key to the register to authorize the transaction, holding up everyone in line. In short, if you use the express lane for your convinence, don’t forget to use the convient rubber bar.
19 <bunny1022@yahoo.com>, PA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C5: Do people who live in expensive houses on hills that overlook a city feel superior to those who live below? I often wonder when I look up at these houses whether people buy them because they like the view or because they feel superior to everyone else, or a combination of the two. Or are there other reasons?
POSTED JUNE 3, 1998
Tom, Fremont, CA

ANSWER 1:
The English language seems loaded with examples of phrases in which height or altitude has positive connotations. Examples include “King of the hill,” “upper class” or “rising above.” Some of this may date back to the Middle Ages, when castles (homes for the upper class) would be built on hills for defensive purposes. Those living off of the hill (the “low life”) would plainly be in the poorer social classes. So maybe this tendency is a legacy of our culture’s predominantly European heritage. Alternatively, perhaps this is biological. The ability to see danger farther away has an obvious survival advantage. Those who can afford it would buy houses on a hill because of the added feeling of safety the view gives them. Personally, I think aesthetics have value even without psychological underpinnings: The rich live on the hill simply because the view looks cool.
POSTED JUNE 17, 1998
Dave K., 34 <dkline@worldnet.att.net>, Caldwell, NJ

FURTHER NOTICE:
I believe this is a status symbol of wealth. I would also live further from the crowded city life if possible. But because of El Nino’s effects on many of the hillside homes in California, a lot of these homes are ending up at the bottom of the hill.
POSTED JUNE 25, 1998
Maureen, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I believe they feel they are superior to the rest of society. They feel they are “looking down” on the socioeconomic infrastructure that supports them, and that they see and understand things us “working stiffs” cannot grasp, and thus deserve to live above us, enjoying the wealth we working people produce.
POSTED JUNE 26, 1998
Dave, old, white, working-class Haole, Honolulu, Hi

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I grew up in one of those expensive hilltop houses overlooking a city. My parents bought it because they liked the view and it was in a very safe neighborhood. One interesting thing: Most of the people around us were in serious debt. We never cared how much money anyone else had. My first love was smart, talented and poor. The class difference made him uncomfortable at first but was never even an issue for me. We were much more alike than different.
POSTED JUNE 27, 1998
Anna, 33, single female, San Francisco, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
While never having owned or lived in a house overlooking a city, I have visited such places owned by friends and acquaintancs. I’m certain they would deny feeling superior. I suspect the truth runs deeper: Most people I know buy luxury items in an attempt to fill a void within themselves and often exhibit symptoms that expose their feelings of inadequacy. Whether they seek to feel superior or to appear to belong to certain social groups defined by their possessions are different questions, which I won’t presume to answer. While the view is pretty, it holds little to the inner sense of peace that comes with accepting one’s economic situation, provided you and your loved ones don’t go hungry.
POSTED JUNE 30, 1998
Paul F. <pf@webcom.com>, Santa Cruz, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
Not only rich people live in “high” places. It might interest you to know that many poor dwellings are located in hills with gorgeous views. I think height and class are not related, and the only reason for having a house on a hill for any class is that the view is nice and it’s “available.”
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Clara P., Bogotá, Colombia

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I live on a hill because I live in the mountains and like the view. I never thought I was better than anyone else.
POSTED AUG. 27, 1998
J.M.P., Otto, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I live on a high ridge that overlooks four cities. I bought my house for several reasons. First was the view. Second, the street is a cul de sac in a low crime area. I do not feel superior to anyone. In fact, I am a “working stiff” just like everyone else. Many of my neighbors are elderly and have owned the homes since they were built back in the mid -70’s. I have never heard any of them make comments that could be classified as feeling superior. I feel I am lucky to have been in the right place at the right time and had enough money saved to be able to get a loan for my house.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Sue, Thousand Oaks, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Did it ever occur to people that a pretty view is preferred over a less-pretty view? Most views from a hilltop are better than those from a flat area. Having nice things is universally desirable. Why do people who like nice things always have to be considered to have alternative reasons? The desire for nice things is what keeps some of us productive.
POSTED JAN. 19, 1999
65-year-old white male <flyanavajo@aol.com >, Centerville, OH

FURTHER NOTICE 9:
I bought my house on a hill because my first house was in a valley and had water problems, and I vowed I would never make that mistake again. Then I discovered all the wind there is up on a hill. Sheesh. At least the view is pretty.
POSTED APRIL 8, 1999
Marty K., 42, white male, MN
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C4: Why do some people want to live in a gated community, even in places where crime isn’t out of hand?
POSTED MAY 17, 1998
M.S.H., average income, Salt Lake City, UT

ANSWER 1:
I think the gated community is an attempt to get back to the security of a small town. The benefit of a small, closed community is that you can get to know all your neighbors, either in person or by reputation. There are still crooks and thugs in a closed society, but the advantage is that you know exactly who you have to watch out for, and who you can trust.
POSTED MAY 21, 1998
Colette <inkwolf@earthlink.net>, Seymour, WI

FURTHER NOTICE:
Another reason might be potentially less noise and traffic, which may give some parents more peace of mind when their children play outside. I was surprised to discover some gated communities do not allow motorcycles, even for visitors.
POSTED MAY 26, 1998
DykeOnByke, motorcycle mama <DykeOnByke@aol.com>, Southfield, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I think it’s simple paranoia. Studies showthat the wealthier, olde, and lighter-skinned you are, the more likely you are to have a greater fear of crime. However, the wealthier, older and lighter-skinned you are, the less likely you are to be a victim of crime. People who live in high-crime areas learn to deal with it like the weather, as something that can be horrible but coped with. The people in gated communities are trying to seal themselves off from a world they perceive as dangerous, though they usually haven’t experienced the danger firsthand; they only see it on TV.
POSTED JAN. 20, 1999
A.C.C., Latino and living in a “dangerous” barrio, San Antonio, TX
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C3: I have heard single friends and acquaintances (basically white-collar, middle-class people) say they would prefer not to date blue-collar, working-class people; that numerous differences in values and goals are just too difficult to overcome to try to make such a relationship successful. Moreover, an invisible boundary line seems to separate union workers from salaried employees, even if earning similar incomes. How common and valid is this attitude? I would like to hear from others about their experiences – good or bad – with dating or maintaining romantic relationships with people from different socioeconomic backgrounds.
POSTED MAY 6, 1998
DykeOnByke, engineer <DykeOnByke@aol.com>, Southfield, MI

ANSWER 1:
I was raised in a white-collar, middle-class family, but despite their expectations and my own, I was always more attracted to men who worked with their hands. I am now happily married to a blue-collar man, and we each value the very different strengths the other brings to our partnership. My female friends who are married to white-collar men almost universally envy me: My husband never stays late at the office; he flawlessly repairs and maintains our house, yard and car; and most important, he’s never too busy or too distracted to spend time with me. Having tried it both ways, I wouldn’t trade him for all the C.P.A.s in the world.
POSTED MAY 9, 1998
A. Morgan, Houston, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
The stereotype is that white-collar workers are greedy and self-serving and that blue-collar workers are hard workers with no formal education. Neither is true; I certainly consider going to school for five years as hard work as some of the things blue-collar workers do.
POSTED MAY 9, 1998
Rob, white <innvertigo@aol.com>, Southfield, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I don’t see why your friends need to put people into classes. We are all human; when two people fall in love, the color of the collar will not matter.
POSTED MAY 11, 1998
Darryll <dbrock6119@aol.com>, Hagerstown, MD

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
To A. Morgan: I have tried it both ways, having been a union factory worker for 14 years, then quitting after graduating from college and now working in a corporate headquarters. I think there is a definite line separating white-collar and blue-collar workers and their attitudes, as the original question asks. I find that my union acquaintances are obsessed with money, to a degree that the white-collar world could never approach. The unionists are never home, because they work seven days a week, often 12 a hours a day. You can’t make plans with them, because the overtime schedule rules their life. White-collar workers don’t understand the overtime thing, but then again, unionists don’t grasp the cause-and-effect relationship between working longer hours and getting raises and promotions. Union workers are given raises, white-collar people earn them. Quite a different viewpoint on the world. I’m not suggesting relationships between the two types are doomed, but the differences can and do cause friction that has to be dealt with.
POSTED MAY 14, 1998
B.B., 38, M.B.A., Temperance, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
My first husband was from a more financially “successful” family than mine. He wanted to go to law school and even had a vacation home in the mountains. His father was a judge. After three years, he said he was not ready for this kind of commitment and walked out. I’m a college-educated lady with a master’s degree, from a family in which all three children have gone to college, but of my parents, only my father has a degree, so I was probably predisposed to marry a college man – a fraternity man even – and appreciate the package he came with: Good white-collar job, money, etc. However, he also came with an overwhelming credit card debt, a habit of letting his parents pick up the tab and an inability to recognize the good in me or himself.

After the divorce, I dated various men – oddly, most had no college education – and finally married (happily for three years) a man with no advanced education who is smart and witty and who reads everything he can find. He is not in a trade, but manages a warehouse, so the idea that he is even remotely qualified to operate a power tool or fix a car is laughable, and he will be the first to agree. He is kind, generous, loving, honest and terribly funny – he is also not in debt or attached to his mother’s apron strings and is very comfortable with his lot. My parents love him because he makes me happy and because he values me. His parents thought I was an oddity because no one in their family had ever been to college, but when they found out I can shell peas, I was accepted.

Most people marry people from a similar background or who have shared experiences such as college, hobbies or church; or shared friends or professions. No matter where you find initial attraction, lasting love is based more on the individuals involved and their baggage and their ability to recognize joy and goodness and to love than on white-collar vs. blue-collar issues.
POSTED MAY 27, 1998
Sheila, 27, white, Tallahassee, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
There needs to be an adjustment made to our “blue- and white-collar” mentality. Bottom line: The more time in the office, at the construction site or at any work place, the less time with the loved ones. What are the person’s priorities?
POSTED JUNE 8, 1998
Jim P., Diegoman@AOL.com, San Diego, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I am a white collar worker who is married to a truck driver. My family was blue collar, and most of my friends are working-class people. What I notice the most is that goals are not the same in the two groups. Middle class blue collar folks seem to want to acquire things, TVs, stereos, boats, cars etc., and have a “live for today” attitude. White collar people also have a desire for things, but usually go for houses and bigger-ticket items. They have longer-term goals and want to retire earlier than blue collar folks. This basic difference in the style of how they live their lives causes friction. Neither way of living your life is bad; actually, a blend of both in moderation would be great, but each type wants to think their way is the best. I think the biggest difference is that many more blue collar type people live their lives with fewer dreams than their white collar counterparts. Privilege does bring a sense that you can accomplish anything, and working at jobs where you use your hands instead of your mind (blue collar) does limit the scope of your dreams. So a relationship with different goals and levels of hope for the future is difficult.
POSTED AUG. 21, 1998
S. Finch, 37, white female <SFinch4u@aol.com>, Ft. Worth, TX

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
We recently had a birthday party for my wife. We invited all of our friends. And we noticed something: They all huddled in the groups that we knew them from. The service people (hair stylists, manicurists, carpenters, etc), the professional people (attorneys and the like), the church people, etc. My wife and I and a few close friends made an extra effort at mingling with everyone. When the food and the games and the dessert came out, everyone came together and participated. My wife and I came to the conclusion that people are familiar with their own, whether it is rich with rich, religious with religious, white with white, simple with simple …but if you work at it even a little bit, (i.e. around food, games and, of course chocolate) we are all the same. And we love every single one of those people who came to the party. And I think they love us … they ate all the chocolate.
POSTED JAN. 15, 1999
Douglas, male, San Fernando Valley, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Most people are attracted to people who share their interests. For instance, if you like camping, you will probably be attracted to other people who like camping. If you are a devout Christian, you will probably not be attracted to a non-believer. I think money is less important than sharing interests with most people, though there are always exceptions.
POSTED JAN. 20, 1999
65-year-old white male <flyanavajo@aol.com >, Centerville, OH
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C2: It seems to be the “in” thing these days for someone to say they grew up poor. What is considered poor these days? What about middle class? What makes a person middle class vs. poor?
POSTED MARCH 31, 1998
Apryl P., black <apryl@mail-me.com>
Oak Park , MI

ANSWER 1:
In Britain (where we are class-obsessed), your class doesn’t have all that much to do with wealt, though it may once have. It has more to do with your expectations in life and the type of culture you belong to. At university where almost all classes of people are poor (I think our system is different from yours), it is still easy to spot the general background people have come from. Usually the scruffier people are, the higher class they are! And working-class students generally try to look neat and tidy. Obviously I’m generalizing. I’m not sure why it is popular to be poor – but I think often people want to be what they aren’t – the grass is always greener on the other side!
POSTED APRIL 3, 1998
Beth, white, middle class, 23, Edinburgh, UK

FURTHER NOTICE:
Poor has always been a relative term, unless, of course, one is talking about abject poverty as one would find in the slums of Third World countries. So growing up poor can be defined as having less than your peers. Children who grow up among those who are in the same state of “poorness” as they don’t generally preceive themselves as poor. This classification comes about only when their peer group becomes the larger, more economically diverse society.
POSTED APRIL 14, 1998
James Mc <Mcgrawman@aol.com>
Ypsilanti, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I bring up the fact that I grew up relatively poor from time to time. I’m a well-educated soccer mom with a good job, married to a Harvard guy, with bright kids, a house in the burbs, a mini-van and too many pets. I sometimes bring up my background because I feel people frequently make erroneous assumptions about me and what my life has been like. It hasn’t resembled its current state until recently. My family (of origin) was homeless from time to time and lived in substandard housing (no hot water, no phone) at times. My parents were young and went through a prolonged hippie phase. Our houses and apartments were crash pads, full of people and drugs; my parents divorced and my siblings and I were neglected off and on. I don’t think growing up poor is “in.” When I mention my childhood, it’s usually in an effort to be understood, and to avoid being judged solely on the basis of what my life looks like on a superficial level now.
POSTED APRIL 24, 1998
Carol A., 37, white <Noahlin@aol.com>
Lawrence, KS

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I’d say middle class is when you don’t have to work out what you’re going to put in your grocery cart. Poor is when you have a specific amount to spend on food and you’re worried it won’t last long enough. Middle class is when you buy asparagus out of season just because you feel like it. It sounds simplistic, but for me, it really comes down to one’s ability to not think about buying “normal” things like food.
POSTED MAY 3, 1998
Robyn, 27, middle class at the moment, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Being poor isn’t good or bad in itself, but it builds a person’s character. The experience of not knowing where your next meal is coming from is a humbling one and broadens your ability to understand the world. If you’ve never had this experience, or if your family is very well-off and you’ve never had to worry about how to afford the things you want/need, there’s a wider gap to be bridged if you want to understand the rest of us. On the other hand, I see lots of people who grew up in poverty and assume they have to live with the same dead-end jobs and inadequate housing their parents had. I’m living somewhat close to the poverty line myself, but I don’t necessarily see that as any reason I can’t have a life I enjoy, with lots of hope for improvement – the values I gained from my middle-class parents.
POSTED MAY 23, 1998
Liz B., 21, Des Moines, IA

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
A poor person is anyone who earns a dollar less than you, and a rich person is anyone who earns a dollar more than you. It’s all relative based on how you grew up, where you live and the people you associate (or wish to) with. It seems many people feel rich people never earned the money they have, and poor people always deserve more than they have. See what I mean?
POSTED JUNE 18, 1998
Kathy, Springfield, IL

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
Poor is knowing it’s election time because the county prosecutor is looking for easy prey to get his name in the paper. Poor is being smarter than everyone in the class but still getting Cs cause Buffy and Muffy need their scholarships and the teacher knows he just wouldn’t be socially accepted if they didn’t get the only As. Poor is not eating for three days and walking down the street to be panhandled by two college students too drugged up to know any difference. Poor is meeting your date at the matinee because neither of you has a car. Poor is using two months’ worth of saved pennies to buy Ramen noodles.
POSTED NOV. 21, 1998
Kevin, 28, white male <hotemet@aol.com>, AZ
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
C1: I was in a grocery store and noticed several people in the checkout lanes with thick gold jewelry and expensive Nike apparel. The thing that got me was that they were paying with food stamps. Even their small children were wearing expensive clothes. Why is this?
POSTED MARCH 23, 1998
Jessica G., Lake Orion , MI
(Similar question posted June 24, 1998, by Hard-working taxpayer, 26, white female, Springfield, VA)

ANSWER 1:
The food stamps could have come at any time. The expensive clothing and jewelry could have been theirs before they had the need for the food stamps. Or, they could have received these things as gifts. They may not have been as expensive as you think. Knock-offs, cheap imitations. If you believed the users of those Government-issued stamps were doing so under false pretenses, you should have reported them to the authorities. But what would you have reported? Remember: There is no way for you to know when, or how, they got their clothing or jewelry. Or under what grounds they were issued the coupons
POSTED MARCH 24, 1998
Apryl P., black <apryl@mail-me.com>
Oak Park, MI

FURTHER NOTICE:
While I understand Apryl’s answer, I know that I too have made similar judgments when I have seen people apparently misuse foodstamps. Most people making such judgments are not necessarily prejudiced and/or racist. It’s probably the jealousy that exists in all human beings, some more than in others. For those inclined to pre-judge people, it enables them to add a little piece of truthful evidence to their existing paradigm of people.
POSTED APRIL 9, 1998
Tim, 53, white male <timwise@dgs.net>, Arlington, VA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
It is a reflection of society’s emphasis on the acquisition for material and designer items. People on welfare or receiving food stamps are no different from those of us who work for our paychecks. Their visions of the American dream are no different. They want the nice house, clothes, cars and money, too. The accumulation of jewelry and designer clothes is a way of trying to realize those goals.
POSTED APRIL 13, 1998
Suzie, 26 <Ebonique@msn.com>
Queens, NY

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Using food stamps does not mean you don’t work – most of the time it means you are having hard times and need help. For example, I needed help for a while because my ex-husband does not pay child support, and I saw people looking at me negatively, even after a hard day’s work. We seem to judge our fellow Americans so much by what they have. We need to pay attention to what we can do to help more.
POSTED MAY 20, 1998
White female, 39, Jacksonville, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
All of the responses make a great deal of sense. I too found myself having negative thoughts at times when confronted with a similar situation – until my mother died. My mother was very petite, and no one else in the family could fit into her clothes, so they were given to Goodwill. These were all outfits with prices exceeding $200, and some still had price tags on them. I later saw a very good friend’s wife wearing one of the outfits (a $300 outfit). I asked my friend if he knew how much had been paid for the outfit and he said $15 at Goodwill. My wife also bought three outfits that retail for more than $200 each at a “Designer Sidewalk Sale” for $25 each. Just goes to show that expensive doesn’t mean it cost a lot of money.
POSTED MAY 23, 1998
Ace M., 49, white, Des Moines, IA

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I hope this is not still so, but for a while, U.S. enlisted men with families were paid so poorly that they qualified for food stamps in most states. That was one of the reasons for continuing the PX system after most military installations had cities nearby. A Marine Corps General once advised young Marines not to marry mostly for that reason. Judge not, that ye may not be judged.
POSTED JUNE 13, 1998
Claude P.,47, black, lower middle-class, Dallas

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I have to say, having received food stamps for a short time, that most of the responses on this board are wishful thinking. Just hang out at any food stamp issuing office and listen to the conversations – many people are hiding income to receive benefits and/or selling the stamps they receive. I believe the reason for this, besides the obvious greed, is that many of these people need immediate gratification, and that is why many of them will be “poor” for the rest of thier lives. They have no ambition, nor do they have the self-control to save what little they do have instead of spending it on luxury items that make them feel better for the moment. How many times have you seen someone walk out of a government project apartment with a cellphone in their hand? They obviously have some disposable income, but they choose to fritter it away on “fun” things and let the government pay for the necessary things. I have been there and have felt the temptation to do just that. It is my upbringing that would not allow me to, but many people receiving assistance have been brought up by parents who received it and are of the mind that “It’s there, why not take it?” If you doubt the truthfulness of this, just listen to some of the unguarded conversations of those who receive benefits.
POSTED AUG. 7, 1998
Karin, 32, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I am a single mother of one small child. I receive food stamps. We buy our clothes and toys and many other things at Goodwill and Salvation Army locations. Mine don’t look so good, but my son’s clothes look very nice because the donated kids’ clothing was outgrown before it was worn out. You will also see a beautiful diamond ring on my hand. It was my grandmother’s engagement ring. Believe me, before I got laid off, before I became a parent, before a lot of things, I sometimes felt resentful of people with food stamps who looked like they “had something.” Now I can tell it from the other side. To qualify for food stamps is painful. To use them hurts. To be recertified for them is humiliating. Appearances can be deceiving.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Humbled, 39, white female, Knoxville, TN

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
Don’t look at their clothes and jewelry, look in their shopping cart. I lived in Los Angeles all my life, and in my community, there was never a shortage of foodstamp customers before me in line. I have to eat frozen burritos and canned veggies, but they seem to always be able to afford the most expensive cuts of meat and lobster, etc. I once followed a lady out to her car and asked if I could have something from her bag that I paid for. Perhaps Uncle Sam should place restrictions on what can be purchased with “free money.”
POSTED DEC. 2, 1998
Cyd E., 34, white working male, Palmdale, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
I think there is quite a bit of confusion when it comes to deciding who is “rich” and who is not. I would not consider a family “upper class” unless they can hire a person or people to be a cook/maid/gardener without having it be a financial burden. All others are “middle” or “lower” class. Secondly, when someone who can choose what they wear decides to wear old clothes, it is an affectation. Affectations are built on a person’s insecurities and level of self-esteem, neither of which is dictated by personal wealth.
POSTED DEC. 16, 1998
B.T.B., 36, Twin Cities, MN

FURTHER NOTICE 9:
To Claude P.: Yes, the military still pays its enlisted so little that families are forced to apply for food stamps and/or WIC. I know because we had to. Now that my husband is out of active duty, he makes twice as much at a mill job and we don’t qualify for food stamps.
POSTED JAN. 22, 1999
M.S., female, Sand Springs , OK
To respond
BACK TO TOP