Middle class indicators 2022 part 2

[Pullandpush]

Current thread has 1000 posts so restarting.. Was asked at the end of the last thread what I would identify as & I am solidly working class due to working hard to pay our mortgage, kids in state school & having a very modest lifestyle.

A WC class person who has becomes wealthier still grew up WC class though. WC childhood experiences are in a lot of ways v different to MC. They also probably have a lot of WC friends and family. It is where their roots are that is likely a big part of why they still consider themselves WC. Its also about cultural capital too though, which isn't purely linked to economic stuff.

I suspect this is true, their roots are working class so it’s part of their identity.

I guess I see class as being less about identity and more about social structures and power/social capital. Whether we like it or not, our class structure ensures that certain groups have more power and influence than others.

If you transition into a group that holds more (or less) power, that is what determines where you sit in the hierarchy, and affects your life chances and those of your children, not how you identify.

And the reason that I think those structures are important is precisely because they have so much influence over people's life chances.

How well off you are is directly correlated with how long you can expect to live, and how long you can expect to enjoy good health. Now that's partly about diet, alcohol/smoking, hazardous workplaces, the toll that manual work takes on the body etc., but it's also about access to private healthcare, how seriously doctors take you when you present with an illness, how confident you are in asking for a second opinion or chasing up alternative treatments - i.e. social capital, which the MC have more of.

Yes this is all very true when considering it from a societal point of view and not an individual one.

I worry that pretending that WC / MC can be defined by their hobbies, interests and how they identify risks obscuring the very real difference in power, which is what underpins it for me.

They aren't two equal groups, but one happens to like wild swimming more than the other. They are by definition unequal - one sits above the other in our current hierarchy, and enjoys all the privilege that comes with that status.

I grew up WC, and I know that people treated me differently back then. I know I will never be treated as being on a par with the established MC or UMC (wrong accent, wrong connections, wrong clothes etc.), but I also know that I am treated differently now to how I was when I was very obviously WC.

As an example, I've seen my dad (manual worker) be openly snubbed by MC people once he's responded to the question "And what do you do?"* He answers the question, and they basically turn away to go and talk to someone who they deem more worthy of their attention. They do it sort of politely, of course, but it's very blatant.

Whereas I work in a professional job - when I answer that question it doesn't lead to the asker turning their nose up at me and walking off. That's social capital in action.

(* This question probably is a MC signifier because WC people don't ask it unless it crops up in conversation!)

I knew someone (a friend of a friend) who had a first in Classics from Cambridge. He worked long-term as a postman. Go figure.

I really really agree with PP that by focusing on hobbies we ignore the biggest divide i.e. power imbalances. Because in the UK social mobility is so low hobbies, capital and power tend to need interconnected i.e. you can deduce from a person's hobbies what class they are i.e. how much power they hold. But clearly there is some disjuncture i.e. wc individuals who have transcended and acquired capital but also mc folk who have lost capital and often power with it e.g. public sector professionals such as teachers, civil servants and increasingly even doctors who do not earn enough. In practice, especially in London and often with the younger generation - proper mc i.e. who have all three capital, power and hobbies will look down on either of the other groups either those who have money but no hobbies but interestingly also those who have the mores but no cash. If I look at my younger relatives and how they smerk at anyone becoming a teacher, academic, civil servant or even a gp - i.e. jobs that now pay a lot less than in the city or IT prejudice is alive and kicking but its not only about wild swimming

I think a lot of the signifiers on here are the domain of the insecure MCs who need to make themselves seen to be seen to be MC, if that makes sense? Even the asking about a person's job is essentially a potential exercise in one upmanship. And someone MC with a less high-status job may just embellish it to sound more important than it really is?

Totally agree e asking about someone's job. It's all about trying to peg where that person is in the hierarchy so you can determine how to treat them (and also establishing whether they would make a useful connection for you).

If I look at my younger relatives and how they smerk at anyone becoming a teacher, academic, civil servant or even a gp - i.e. jobs that now pay a lot less than in the city

This is actually deeply depressing. It says a lot about what we value as a society, and what our young people are being taught to value.

If I look at my younger relatives and how they smerk at anyone becoming a teacher, academic, civil servant or even a gp - i.e. jobs that now pay a lot less than in the city That sounds like a whole generation(s) with materialism as a core value. It sucks! In the past lots of MC families were much more committed to public sector roles and they were nowhere near as much slaves to money and being super high earners.

I guess in the past, 'socially useful' jobs (such as a moderately senior cibil servant) paid enough to support a very comfortable MC lifestyle, send your kids to private school etc., and the status that went with that. Now they don't, so if you want to maintain your power and status, you need to target the careers that will support that.

E.g. affording private school now requires a higher salary. So if you want your children to have the privilege that comes with private school, you need to earn a certain amount.

Exactly - so they are in their 30s i.e. graduated from college during the last recession and when public sector jobs got into wage freezes. These are all people who would have considered public sector jobs in the past but not anymore. Rather many are working in the public sector but as consultants on 150k-200k and joke that why would anyone become a civil servant when they already earn the same as PM. And these are kids in their 30 in London. In practice, it means you have serious de-skilling in these sectors and it mean that has all of a sudden come to equate private sector like never before

@hilblaudh878 how much do IT professionals tend to earn?

and joke that why would anyone become a civil servant when they already earn the same as PM

And yet, so many MNers seem to think that it's the WC who are vulgar, brash and money obsessed! 😂😂

@Octomore exactly. When I was growing up in a naice part of leafy sw London, any doctor, civil servant, academic etc could send their kid to a private school and buy a three bed house in a naice area. Thats gone. When I graduated joining the fast stream was seen as prestigious, not anymore. Now you go and make money and often end up working in these same sectors as a consultant while looking down on anyone actually working in these sectors. so in a way I dont think that the current generation of mc have such a wide set of friends because if you go to the right university - i.e. London or Oxbridge - you only ever go into the city, pharma, consulting, law or IT. Thats it. I am an academic while DH is a civil servant and we are definitely definitely the poor relations in comparison despite being older and doing traditionally mc jobs. Nor can we inhabit their mc world because we simply cant afford as many holidays, hobbies or material trappings of mc life as they can. For all that I sound much posher than any of them and am fluent in four languages, it doesnt count for much when i cant simply jet off to the Maldives on a whim. My impression is that speaking nicely is still nice but no longer the prerequisite for operating in their mc London bubble - having a family income of 200-300k plus however is

i dont know - but my impression is that my friends are probably on 150-200k and they are not senior i.e. they are not leading a team or anything. so these are professionals in their late 30s but not managerial. However, they also think it totally normal to employ a nanny on 45k a year and paying 4k rent a month and never ever talk about having money issues. They certainly do often stay with their friends when travelling abroad and other trappings of mc lifestyle.

@Octomore my impression in London is that mc now means do you work in a profession in which you will hit 6 figure sums by the time you have a family i.e. 32-35 - which in practice means will you be able to get a three bed house and pay for nursery fees while having a comfortable lifestyle. Within the mc London areas, vast number of people genuinely dont think you can or have no idea how anyone would survive on a salary of less than 100k. I think the UK has really changed under Tories. For example, no wonder they've cancelled this year's fast stream round - they are no longer needed. If you want a bright young thing, you jut get a consultant. Young bright things from Oxbridge or London unis wont be applying anyway. In that way, when it comes to London, I wonder whether we now have a small group of UMC i.e. who work in the city; lower mc i.e. civil servants, teachers, gps, i.e. people on 40-80k in their 30s and the 'poor' earning less than 40k. I think thats the new strata - at least in london

Well that's a certain type of young person.

My impression is that speaking nicely is still nice but no longer the prerequisite for operating in their mc London bubble - having a family income of 200-300k plus however is

Definitely. Money = power/status, and our class system is all about power/status. The prerequisites for moving in high status circles tend to revolve around money.

I have worked in both public and private sectors (my specialism is valuable to both), and the colleagues I work with in the private sector tend to be more ambitious, more money orientated, and more MC (e.g. people who themselves went to private schools and who now send their children to private schools). I'm currently in the public sector and the difference in culture is noticeable.

So it's interesting that civil service careers are no longer seen as sufficiently high status because the low pay doesn't enable you to afford the trappings of MC life. I wonder how that will play out in future.

when it comes to London, I wonder whether we now have a small group of UMC i.e. who work in the city; lower mc i.e. civil servants, teachers, gps, i.e. people on 40-80k in their 30s and the 'poor' earning less than 40k. I think thats the new strata - at least in london

I live in the north - those figures can all be shifted downwards up here.

Not how much money you have but how you chose to spend it. Certain lifestyle indicators like the food you eat, what you read, what kind of designer goods you chose or not chose to wear, the holidays you go on, your interior decoration style, accent, area, etc. These aren't in isolation of course, but an overall projection.

Sorry, but this is bollocks.

My dad is solid WC, had been all his life. He has many hobbies that MNers might (deludedly) see as the preserve of the MC (e.g. playing musical instruments, growing veg, history, photography, country walks), but it's his financial position, and associated lack of status, that determines his class.