How does ‘class-passing’ actually work? • Hacker News Board

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#301

Post by coldtea » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 10:58 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #243

coldtea wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the upper class, oftentimes one person will pay for the check and it's awkward to object. That's how it's in my country for all classes, poor or rich. When friends go out, someone and pays for all the others (and someone might ask to chip in or pay themselves, but the first one doesn't take no for an answer). Next time you see each other, the other person can pay, but no one keeps any very specific tally ("I pai…

That only makes sense if you're consuming roughly the same amount. If you have people who don't drink alcohol in your group, or don't eat meat/seafood/poultry, that's easily 15% to 30% difference in cost. I try to make sure those aren't sharing in alcohol or meat don't end up paying for it. It wouldn't be a problem if the difference was $5, but nowadays, in many cities this ends up being $10 per drink and an extra $1…

>That only makes sense if you're consuming roughly the same amount.

In our culture's case, in general the amount each one ate doesn't matter -- whether one had steak and the other just a salad, the salad person can very well still go on and insist on paying for everybody else. Nobody would care about "a 15% to 30% difference in cost" (the person paying for everybody wont feel it's a burden, and the persons having their meal paid, wont feel like imposing).

It's not about achieving some perfect balance or fairness in any particular meal -- people genuinely want to treat others, and enjoy taking turns doing so.

It's only longer term one would care for patterns of behavior (the person who after so many meals with others never volunteers to pay etc).

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#302

Post by coldtea » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:01 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #218

coldtea wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the upper class, oftentimes one person will pay for the check and it's awkward to object. That's how it's in my country for all classes, poor or rich. When friends go out, someone and pays for all the others (and someone might ask to chip in or pay themselves, but the first one doesn't take no for an answer). Next time you see each other, the other person can pay, but no one keeps any very specific tally ("I pai…

> Anybody insisting on splitting the bill, or obsessing over who ordered what, is also seen as a cheapskate. If we're splitting a bill, I insist on this, because some of my friends don't drink alcohol, and some do. (I drink.)

They wouldn't care about that. In fact when someone volunteers to pay for everybody, and someone else asks to chip in because e.g. they drank alcohol or they ordered a more expensive dish than the others, the person volunteering to pay just dismisses them (and jokingly feigns being insulted that they'd think he'd care for such a thing).

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#303

Post by Helmet » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:07 PM UTC

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #291

Helmet wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now now relax. We can have a sensible discussion without condescension. > You're in a thread about class and you're saying that class distinctions are good......You don't think those people who have experienced the bottom are going to have a reaction to that? I've "experienced bottom" and I don't really find what I said to be inflammatory or offensive, if we're willing to be honest with ourselves, it's rather quite…

>We can have a sensible discussion without condescension. Fair. >I've "experienced bottom" and I don't really find what I said to be inflammatory or offensive, if we're willing to be honest with ourselves, it's rather quite self-evident. Well no. It may be self-evident when you're honest with yourself but when "we're" honest with "ourselves" it's not at all, hence the downvotes and disagreement in the replies. >I'm f…

>This is the success sequence stuff? Look it's just not very true. Almost the entirety of various 'success sequence' poverty figures can be explained by one thing: maintaining full-time work

This isn't true, and a random blog post where the author has difficulty replicating the studies results does not prove it so. There is a mile high pile of literature that shows marriage and high school graduation to be vitally important. It would not surprise me in the least that these two are strongly correlated with full-time employment. The "Success Sequence" has lifted more people from poverty than any social welfare program has to date.

Here is some compiled literature:

https://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/report/marri...

http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IFS-Millennial...

>You didn't need a social scientist or sociologist to declare that class distinctions are natural and helpful. Why the trepidation on race?

I genuinely still have absolutely no idea what you are asking me to clarify, and I'm taking offense at your insinuation that I'm being coy about some matter regarding race. I will gladly answer your question, but what is it that you are asking or need clarification on? Are you asking me if racial distinctions are natural? Yes, race is hereditary, is this not self-evident?

> Are many mobile in an effortful sense though?

I don't know what you mean by effortful, so the best I can answer you is to say that socially mobility is a very real and recognized phenomena in the United States of America.

>This society would demonstrate perfect intergenerational mobility yet there would be no way to exert effort and change your circumstance

As far as I understand you, your underlying premise here is that social mobility is, like a dice roll, pure luck. I think this premise is completely baseless.

>'luck' component to mobility? It's the same deal

It absolutely isn't the same deal. I don't doubt that race makes it more difficult for some people to succeed, but this is completely tangential and I'm finding it difficult to see what, if anything, this has to do with my original statement.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#304

Post by brandonmenc » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:10 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #129

brandonmenc wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Talking specifically about money (how much high-ticket items specifically cost, how much anyone specifically makes) is gauche. This is not just a rich people rule. I grew up solidly middle class, and you could hear a pin drop if you asked someone in the room how much they were paid or how much that engagement ring cost.

That would be upper middle class. (Not to mention in the US even coal miners would describe themselves as "middle class" these days, nobody is "working class" anymore).

> That would be upper middle class.

My father poured molten metal in a foundry as a married 19 year old.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#305

Post by ericd » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:11 PM UTC

afterburner wrote: post #106

ericd wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way to become wealthy is to spend less than you make. The only way to stay wealthy is to spend less than you make (and have your investments outpace inflation). One of the best ways to do that is to not inflate your lifestyle, like starting to think you're too good for things like putting together your furniture from Ikea.

> The only way to become wealthy is to spend less than you make. This is hilariously wrong.

Feel free to elaborate on why it's wrong. I don't mean spending less than you make at all times, and I don't mean "make" as in "earn at a wage-earning job", there are many more ways to make money than that. In the long term, your wealth is the money you've made (including capital gains), minus what you've spent.

You might say that's completely obvious, but it helps some people to be reminded of it.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#306

Post by hkmurakami » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:14 PM UTC

tetromino_ wrote: post #293

hkmurakami wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think my most memorable passage from that book is that cats are higher class than dogs because they are (mostly) useless. :P The upper class hobbies are definitely a thing. Equestrian > sailing > skiing > golf probably. Golf only being this low because it was "democratized" by muni courses and popularized first by Arnold Palmer, then by Tiger Woods. Skiing is probably the most approachable of the activities for the…

> a $300/day activity that necessitates travel A $50/day activity at a local hill + a $150 initial investment (one that will last you multiple winters) in some decade-old used equipment at a local swap event. Skiing is not cheap. But it's extremely expensive only if you have extremely expensive demands - such was wanting to ski while living in an area without hills or snow.

I mean sure, for some of us beach vacations are free bc we live in LA or Florida, but for most of the country it'll cost in the thousands.

Ditto skiing with lift passes, travel, and lodging. Having a local hill is the exception rather than the rule tbh.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#307

Post by ericd » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:16 PM UTC

saget wrote: post #123

ericd wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way to become wealthy is to spend less than you make. The only way to stay wealthy is to spend less than you make (and have your investments outpace inflation). One of the best ways to do that is to not inflate your lifestyle, like starting to think you're too good for things like putting together your furniture from Ikea.

Some of the wealthiest people I know are also the cheapest. The other week my gf's parents (very well off) refused to go to a clinic that their insurance didn't work at after their son cut off the tip of his finger. Took them and hour to find a place to go. It seemed absurd from my perspective to put a few hundred dollars in front of a medical emergency when you can afford a private plane, but I guess that's part of…

Heh at that point, I'd say they're being cheap to the point of not being practical. A slightly greater chance of restoring that finger to full use is worth a lot more than a few hundred bucks if you're not seriously low on money. But yeah, their cheapness probably has something to do with why they have so much money stored up.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#308

Post by aje403 » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:31 PM UTC

charlesdm wrote: post #299

aje403 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in my mid 20s. I don't really know any of the ultra-wealthy, but I have some friends who are low execs in IB, Management Consulting, lawyers, have been to virtually every club in the city by now. How to dress when you enter a top club or SoHo House, who to go with, where to go on vacation with what friends to present an image of your wealth, "who did YOU go to the Hamptons with last weekend?" - people present an…

Those people are most likely also up to their eyes in debt, just trying to show off and keeping up with the "true" upper class. Most people in their 20s working jobs won't have substantial wealth, unless they were born into money.

Some of what you’re saying does occur but that’s just a part of it. Come to nyc, there’s no shortage of IB associates, lawyer associates, and MC principals making 300k+ in their late 20s with a straight path upward

Edit: Not talking about the guy who rents a $10k apartment he can't afford to trick people into thinking he's rich. Talking more about people buying into social strata they can reasonably or paying fealty to those in higher strata to benefit their career. It is a thing out here.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#309

Post by hammock » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:34 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #28

As someone who's navigated their way from poor->middle class->upper middle class I can give a bit of perspective that I rarely see mentioned in these articles... One of the biggest barriers to moving up in class is the people in your starter class. Family, friends, neighbors... almost all of them will start to get very aggressive with you if you seriously try to better yourself. I remember being accused of using too…

>Now I find myself at the glass ceiling and this time there's very real pressure from above to stay where I'm at. Rich people may let you in the door occasionally but it will be on their terms. It's up to you as a person to decide if you're willing to contort yourself to their demands.

Can you expand on this? Interested in what examples you can provide.

Re: How does ‘class-passing’ actually work?

#310

Post by jstarfish » Thu, Feb 01, 2018, 11:35 PM UTC

saget wrote: post #239

jstarfish wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can, but it doesn't. If anything it drives divisiveness on a scale we've never seen before. Before the internet it used to take 10-20 years to foment discord against a particular group. Now we have a new boogeyman every 18 months and it's always other plebes or pariahs-- never the ruling elite.

Martin Shkreli, Harvey Weinstein, Wall Street protests, and probably others that I forget were aided by the Internet. Hopefully it will become a bigger trend in the future.

That's my point though-- throw the occasional unsympathetic high-profile lamb under the bus so the bourgies act like they police their own.

These individuals are distractions, nothing more. Shkreli literally launched a sortie against the plebes by means of his obscene price gouging (which isn't even what put him in jail-- if not for his crimes against the elite, he'd be a free man!), and prolific sex offenders like Weinstein simply cannot be defended-- like Roman Polanski and Bill Cosby, he's just beyond redemption.

Meanwhile:

* All the internet attention in the world (or the Wall Street protests) didn't result in anyone responsible for the 2008 economic meltdowns seeing the inside of a courtroom for anything more than a deposition.

* The Wells Fargo C-level who encouraged half the company to commit fraud walked away with a severance package.

* The Equifax CEO walked away with a severance package after the largest consumer data breach in US history.

* Mitt Romney made a personal fortune bankrupting companies and decimating the retirement plans of their associated employees. Then he ran for president.

* Snowden released a bunch of documents confirming what a lot of us already believed, which caused some commotion and pit half the country against itself in a philosophical war over whether his actions were heroic or traitorous. Meanwhile while that pointless debate raged, life at the NSA continued under new project names and tighter controls.

Of all of the damage these individuals caused, only Snowden, a commoner, has a warrant out for his arrest. Of all of these, only Snowden's actions had no impact on the average American. We squabble on Facebook about his pointless actions while we're actively being fleeced by the other four guys.

Plenty of attention has been drawn to these matters. But nothing changes. Internet outrage is cheap and divisive.