<p>“I actually dont think anyone of the upper class has an obligation to treat others with courtesy. Aristocrats are people too. They can do dam well how they please.”</p>
<p>I’m using the term 'aristocrat" loosely, of course. We don’t have a real aristocracy in this country. Actually, real aristocrats do have social obligations to their inferiors. It’s called noblesse oblige. Many within the current elite of America honestly believe that they deserve all their privileges and earned them, so they have no sense of obligation to anyone else. That is, in fact, one of their least attractive traits as a class and makes them unfit for real leadership. (This point was made by the late Christopher Lasch in The Revolt of the Elites).</p>
<p>I think Jason is confusing aristocrats with a sense of entitlement, wealth, and attitude.
Wealthy people are not all aristocrats. Not all arisocrats are wealthy. Social class? whatever and who cares. Old money people seem to be gracious and know how to treat people. Nouveau rich, who think they are aristocrats tend to be more pompous, entitled and rude, ill bred. Can sniff them out of a crowd.<br>
Not sure what he is really looking for.
.</p>
<p>Speaking as someone who married into “old money”. sorry but old money does not equal class nor aristocracy. I have heard more bigotry and witnessed more nasty behavior from some of these people than from the nouveau riche that you can “smell out”.</p>
<p>When controlled for variables, the CEO’s true earning potential can be determined. Economic-Statistic tools have been implemented like this before. The problem with your argument is that if you fire the CEO, you company loses $70 million a year. If you fire the mid level manager, you lose marginal amounts of money. You’d have to fire many many many worker bee’s to equal the effect of firing the CEO. Thus, the CEO is worth more to society.</p>
<p>“What you do not wish done to yourself, do not do to others.”</p>
<p>So you are saying that if others treat me badly, i have a blank check to slug them on the face? They clearly “wish [that] done to [themselves].”</p>
<p>@Ellebud. Thank you. That’s my point. Being in the upper class is a membership, not some quality. Rich people are exactly that, PEOPLE with money. They can do whatever they want (so can poor people and the bourgeosie); they can kick puppy dogs; they can beat their kids; they can raid corporations. But in the end, they are still upper class (lower class, or middle class).</p>
<p>I think with media what it is today everyone from every strata of society would know that it’s dumb to chew gum and wear a tube top to an interview - unless it’s to work at Hooters.</p>
<p>There is “class” and there is also intelligence and motivation. It all matters. Class doesn’t explain it all.</p>
<p>We don’t have an aristocracy in this country- this is true although I have met visiting heads of state through my environmental volunteer work- which would fit into many peoples definition of " upper class", and very cordial and friendly they were too.
It is an axiom that the better bred, are more gracious than the rest of us.</p>
<p>I am not wealthy, but have met many people and have close acquaintances of some that I daresay even Jasoninny would consider " upperclass". </p>
<p>A true test of your character, is how you treat those that you do not have anything to gain from, as well as those that you disagree with ( in business or politically for example), but can be quite friendly to other wise.</p>
<p>Manners are about making other people comfortable.</p>
<p>Money makes you part of the top 1% of the tax payers. Money lets you into “the rich.” Money determines your social status.</p>
<p>Emeraldkity4, are you saying that a minority who earns $10,000 a year but is very polite and mannerly is a member of the upper class? The lady who serves me at McDonalds is “very cordial and friendly.” Lets even call her “amiable and gregarious.” Does that make her upper class? I’d think not.</p>
<p>Jason you have no clue, your class is showing now.
I guess you are saying that mobsters who have money are in your class of upperclass? You are a contradiction.</p>
<p>You will fail at any class. Good luck on your journey.</p>
<p>Do I think that having money is a component in class? To a degree…yes. But then how does one explain walkers? (Generally gay man, generally not wealthy but from a good family which gives them entree into high society as escorts to older single ladies.) These men are able to comport themselves in a civilized and amusing manner that will give them entree into fashionable parties as a “plus one.”</p>
<p>Someone in the “aristocracy” likes/plays polo, golf, lacrosse, tennis, sport hunting/fishing and yes, other sports, including basketball, baseball and perhaps bowling. The latter, a poorer man or woman might play the latter, but rarely the former. Perhaps because of accessibility and cost someone with less disposable income will play a less expensive sport.</p>
<p>Does the New York Times cover the weddings of John Joe, the truck driver and his manicurist wife? No. But do people love them and treasure the invitation? Yes.</p>
<p>Perhaps it is education, perhaps it is confidence or ease with oneself, perhaps it is charity work, or daily acts of kindness: but to me the busboy at a restaurant who ran and got my girlfriend extra water because she was choking has the same “class” as the oncologist who called me at 3 a.m. because I was in pain. They are both, in my view, aristocrats of the world.</p>
<p>Why? Because a “class” refers to a whole social class in society.</p>
<p>No one has “class.” They can be “classy” but they cannot have class. Class = social status for our purposes on this thread.</p>
<p>@milkandsugars</p>
<p>Why arent the rich mobsters upper class? Are they any different from the aristocrats who exploit workers and commit white collared crimes? A crime is a crime. I just want to point out that only the top top top mobster will earn any kind of money. The mid and lower tiered guys get paid less than minimal wage. The average drug dealer earns about $5 dollars an hour.</p>
<p>These mobsters are upper class because they pay more taxes than you ideal polite man who earns below poverty line. They support many many many poor people who mooch off their income and state taxes. They support government jobs. They prime the global economy by spending the money- the whole point of laundering money is so you can spend it…</p>
<p>class:
people having the same social, economic, or educational status; “the working class”; “an emerging professional class”
…
elegance in dress or behavior; “she has a lot of class”</p>
<p>Both sides are right, but it’s a pointless argument.</p>