« Beware of Rapacious Whole Foods | Main | After Marriage: The Future of LGBT Activism »

24 March 2015

Comments

Walter Broner

Do your seething in small portions.

sue katz

That's great advice, Walter.

Marj

The meanness of the wealthy never ceases to amaze me. The value of their time vs recouping thirty bucks? No cost-benefit analysis there.

Marj

PS I hope he drops it on his foot.

sue katz

Marj - just to let USA readers know: In this context, "mean" means "cheap." Thanks, Marj.

Mike Evans

Mean means cheap? Hmm, what does cheap mean then?

I suspect that your definition of 'class' is also different from Marj's and Nicola's. (And mine come to that.) We don't necessarily equate class and wealth.

I solve this problem by not having either a TV or an i-anything, and certainly not in my kitchen. This probably says more about my class or my aspirations of class than it does about my wealth.

sue katz

Mike, there's a big heap of difference between this language in these two countries, but class boils down to the relationship to the means of production, if I might quote a close friend. Nicola and I always understood each other on this issue. And the reason I need a TV in my kitchen is that it motivates me to cook and cut up (ie salads) and do the dishes. My kitchen's the tidiest room in the house as a result!

Mike Evans

Whilst I'm neither a social geographer nor an economist, I think I would say that in the USA 'class' is a division of society based on mostly economic status (i.e wealth, or possibly the means of production) whereas in the UK, and much of Europe, class is a division of society based mostly on social status. Of course there is some relationship between the two but if you are upper class then becoming poor doesn't make you working class. It's something I can never quite get my head round but I suspect it has also something to do with tribalism.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Blog powered by Typepad