# Upper & Upper Middle-Class Parents - Essential Knowledge?



## VisionaryMom

My question is specifically for families with higher incomes - low 6-figures in and average COL area. What do you consider essential skills for your children to learn that are likely class-related? DH & I were talking today about wines. Our children are way too young to drink, but I want them to know the difference between types of wines, food complements, etc. I am from a working class family, and I've had to kind of figure it all out on my own. I guess I'm just thinking about a more systematic approach with DC.

I was telling my husband about going into a restaurant that someone else suggested. The entire menu was in Italian. I don't really remember anything about the restaurant except that I kept praying that I could guess well enough from Italian (which I don't speak) to French to English to like what I ordered. I want my children to be better prepared. I'm curious as to what other parents in this income bracket feel are essential bits of knowledge.


----------



## Imakcerka

That they shouldn't care and that life is about experiences. Nobody should be concerned about class. Sorry I'm in that income bracket and that's how I feel. Also if you go somewhere and you don't understand the menu, then ask. That's how you learn about something anyway. Wine tastings are there to learn about different wines. My friend in Berkley runs his own wine tasting house and he likes people to come in not know about the wines... in fact he hates the pretentious attitude of those who think they know all there is to know. Then again that's Berkley and I doubt I'll ever see that income bracket.

So what I'm passing onto my kids is you're no better than anyone. Feel comfortable in a Jalisco and feel comfortable in an establishment where the plates are over 70 and the entrees are hidden under a tiny leaf. Just don't waste your money there. Honestly, the tacos are better at the Jalisco. Oh and a taste for wine is not a requirement in a life of happiness.


----------



## JollyGG

I'm middle middle class but I'm actually more worried about my kids learning things they might miss from living a comfortable lifestyle then in wanting them to learn the social niceties of being an upper income earner.

I worry that if I pay for my kids college they won't value it as much and work as hard (I payed my own way and am still working on the loans, but I knew the cost and value of what I was paying for each semester as I payed my tuition).

My kids don't see us making a lot of sacrifices to meet our budget and I wonder if they appreciate the value of an economical menu, few extras, ect. and if they ever do need to cut back to make ends meet will they know how to do it having never seen it.

I guess I worry more about them learning the value of hard work, how to make frugal decisions, how to live on a budget and those sorts of things.


----------



## VisionaryMom

Wow. I have no idea why you seem so angry and offended.

As I said, I grew up in a working-class family and neighborhood. I am comfortable there. My husband grew up in an upper middle-class family, and while he's wonderfully open to friends from all walks of life, there are parts of that working-class world that are incredibly foreign to him. He has sometimes felt left out because he didn't get whatever reference or cultural norm that the other men were discussing. Those situations are what I'm considering when I think about my children's lives.

I think that you took my question to mean that one should go only to high-end places, but I'm thinking more of work-related situations. Yes, knowing the right wine to order does matter in some professions. It goes beyond food, though. I'm expected to understand references to classic literature and be able to discuss philosophers. I often have questions about what's acceptable and expected in certain groups.

I would not ask for someone to translate a menu because that just doesn't mesh with my style. That's not the way to learn for me - a single word, yes, but not an entire menu. I would never ask for someone to translate for me when I'm out with a client, for example. In the instance I mentioned, I was with an older person in my profession, and she would have been mortified if I'd asked for a translation. My answer after that situation was to pick up pocket tourist guides in a range of languages and learn the basics. That doesn't mean it's the only or best way to handle the situation, but it's how I opted to do it. I will make sure that my kids know how to order and ask for the bathroom and do those basics in a number of common languages.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> That they shouldn't care and that life is about experiences. Nobody should be concerned about class. .... Honestly, the tacos are better at the Jalisco.


We are upper middle class, kids attend private school, etc.

And I agree with this statement.

However, above a certain income level, there are certain experiences that most children have -- such as skiing. And swimming with dolphins. And going on at least one cruise. (not wanting to debate this -- just saying what I see)

Studying a language is a good idea for many, many reason, but I only know a handful of people who are proficient in more than one. Presented with a menu that is a mystery, ask. My DH works in industry where he works with (and eats out with) millionaires. No body know everything, and generally the more money people have and the more comfortable they are in their own skin, the easier time they have admitting where that line stops for them. Your cut off of a 100K really isn't that much money when we are talking about MONEY. It's not enough, even in a moderate COL area, to eat at snotty restaurants all the time and raise family.

I think that when you find yourself out of your depth, it shows something about yourself to then go and learn more about it. My language at school was German, but I'm suddenly in some new situations where a lot of people speak Spanish. So I went to the book store and bought some listen-and-learn tapes for my drive time and I'm working on it. If they Italian restaurant was an issue, then learn a little Italian. Sounds like fun.









I feel it is essential that my kids know that how much money someone's parents make is NOT an indication of anything. Nothing.

I want them to be able to handle social situations, such as questions about what they did on vacation, in such a way that they won't make someone who took a less expensive vacation feel bad. I want them to be able to enjoy simple pleasures, such as having friends around and grilling. I want them to know how to make their own fun.

(My kids have been on a cruise and will swim with Belugas over memorial day. We skip skiing due to one of my DD's special needs. They both study a foreign language of their own choosing. We don't enjoy snotty restaurants, but we love ethnic food and value our children having favorite dishes at the Thai and Indian restaurants near us as well as the Mexican and Chinese. )


----------



## VisionaryMom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JollyGG*
> I worry that if I pay for my kids college they won't value it as much and work as hard (I payed my own way and am still working on the loans, but I knew the cost and value of what I was paying for each semester as I payed my tuition).
> 
> My kids don't see us making a lot of sacrifices to meet our budget and I wonder if they appreciate the value of an economical menu, few extras, ect. and if they ever do need to cut back to make ends meet will they know how to do it having never seen it.


We have those discussions. My college was paid by a combination of scholarships & loans. My parents didn't pay for any of it. I'm not sure that I "appreciate it more" the way that a lot of people claim. We will pay for our children's college & post-graduate/professional schools if at all possible. We draw that line more at expenses that aren't needs. We won't buy them a car outright, as an example. They will have to pay half and keep up their insurance, etc. For me, too, there are things that I couldn't afford to do, and I want my kids to get to do them. I looked at a number of internships that I couldn't accept because I couldn't work 30 or 40 hours a week in an unpaid internship. I had no way to pay my bills during that time. I want my kids to be able to take those opportunities.


----------



## VisionaryMom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> Your cut off of a 100K really isn't that much money when we are talking about MONEY. It's not enough, even in a moderate COL area, to eat at snotty restaurants all the time and raise family.


That was the minimum money I was talking about - not the max. I guess that we're really talking about the top 1-2 percent of income earners. My best guess is that our active income probably won't ever exceed $250K, but we're building a real estate portfolio that gives our children built-in residual income that will make the chance of them making more money higher. In terms of personality, my kids are very different. My daughter is more artsy, and I imagine that she will live much more frugally than my son, who definitely has champagne tastes. I would like to provide them with the information and experiences to be comfortable wherever they decide to be in life.

-- Yes, when I had that Italian restaurant experience, I was way out of my depth. I was 22 and just out of graduate school. I was petrified! Now, I would handle things differently. It was really just an example of an out of my element kind of experience. There are intellectual and economic issues at play for me. Though I have a very high IQ, I didn't grow up in an educated family. They're smart, capable people, but they're not formally educated. I've played a lot of catch-up as an adult to know what others around me know. Of course, no one knows everything, but there is a body of knowledge that I believe it's anticipated that people in certain fields have.


----------



## swd12422

I'm not sure who is angry and offended. I think you got good answers (and I hope mine will help, too).

I'm not clear on what you're asking though... In the OP, you focused on things like language and wine and food complementing -- cultural things that people who travel and can afford high-end dining know. But then you refer to your husband not "getting" the working-class culture. Well, which is it? Do you want to know what high-class stuff you should be teaching your kids, like wine pairing, or do you want them to be able to talk to people with a lower income than theirs without sounding/feeling like they're from a different planet?

I agree that class isn't something they need to worry about. Behaving nicely wherever they are, and enjoying experiences are what's important. It's not rude to ask a waiter/waitress to translate part of a menu that is written in a language other than the primary language spoken in whatever country you're in. No, I wouldn't want to sit with someone who asked for a translation of every menu item, but you could ask about which pasta dish they recommend, or say that you'd like help choosing a chicken dish since you don't eat beef or pork. There's nothing wrong with that, and if the person you are with is going to be mortified that you don't speak the foreign language there, then they should have asked you to begin with. Otherwise, that's their lack of manners, not yours. Snobby and pretentious is not what you're going for with your kids, is it?

I think that basic manners are important, formal table manners can't hurt. One thing that stuck with me from summer camp ages ago -- we were taught the "difference" between women and ladies. This was an old-fashioned camp in the southern US, so I don't know how well it translates to the rest of the world, but I liked it. Women know when to be ladies, and when to be women. Ladies only know how to be "LADIES." IOW, know when to let your hair down and not worry if your napkin is in your lap. Know that sometimes (like at a crawdad boil) it's okay not to use a fork, nevermind to worry that you don't have a proper seafood fork in front of you. It's okay to get dirty sometimes. It's not okay to be rude. EVER. And that means saying "please" and "thank you" regardless of who is serving (Mom, stranger, someone's servant), and "thank you" includes thank-you notes and host/hostess gifts.


----------



## Alenushka

This is one of the most classicist posts I have seen in a long time.

Why do you assume that people with lower income do not know anything about wine? Or that they can't order food in Italian?

You should teach your kids that just because your family is upper class right now, nothing is forever. That anything can happens and one might drop down form one station on life....all the way down.

Teach your kids how to be polite, how to work hard, encourage them to get job, to learn how to cook, to to their own laundry, etc etc etc. Life skills.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom*
> 
> we're building a real estate portfolio that gives our children built-in residual income that will make the chance of them making much more higher. In terms of personality, my kids are very different. My daughter is more artsy, and I imagine that she will live much more frugally than my son, who definitely has champagne tastes. I would like to provide them with the information and experiences to be comfortable wherever they decide to be in life.


I recommend reading The Millionaire Next Door.

It's a study of self-made millionaires and how they do things, and there is some VERY interesting stuff in there on parenting and money. I think the information to be comfortable in a snotty life style is far, far less important than teaching kids financial skills. Right now, your plan could easily make your children bottomless financial pits.

It's not setting them up to Have Money, but rather to Spend Money. Very different things.


----------



## marsupial-mom

To me, the benefits of raising children whist having financial security are these:

- consistently having basic needs met

(I remember running out of hot water, gas for the stove, etc. when I was a kid and there's a feeling of worry and desperation that I don't want my children to ever have to feel while they are still children)

- growing up with a minimal sense of entitlement

(poor people often don't feel entitled to anything, not even fair treatment or protection of their human rights because sadly, even if they're entitled to it they don't always get it)

- better education

(by that I mean the type of education where a child is encouraged to learn how to learn and learn how to think; they're not just given a bunch of worksheets)

- access to the more expensive sports

(tennis, skiing, golf, etc.)

- travel

(to appreciate other cultures and learn how most differences don't matter)


----------



## swd12422

Oh yeah. Life skills. Like basic car maintenance so when something goes wrong, they can tell that the car is completely out of oil AND know not to drive it any further. Or not to drive on a flat tire. And how to cook/clean for themselves (and essentially run a household, b/c no matter what gender they are, what their marital status is, they should know how to maintain their living space without a maid).


----------



## Imakcerka

You posted after mine and I'm not angry. I just disagree that those are important things. And I think Linda said it, the lower end of the 100k spectrum doesn't mean going out to highend restaraunts. Means that I have more money to put away for important things like Awesome experiences for my kids. Of course I save and I don't use credit. So my income... is all my own. Well close to it. And I grew up on government cheese and powdered milk. My grandparents are Millionaires and they did not believe in hand outs. Which I agree with. I worked hard to get here and this is my single income. YEAH WOMEN... Also in IT.


----------



## mamazee

I don't think my kids need to know about wine pairings and options until they're drinking age. But maybe table manners? Though really, everyone needs to know those regardless of income. I guess like what various less common implements are and how to use them maybe?

This isn't something I really worry about because I think it's less about them being taught then that they'll naturally come into contact with this stuff.


----------



## Tjej

Interesting question and interesting thoughts.

I think I grew up in what you are talking about, and my parents did a decent job. They taught me the value of money and hard work. They let me experience things that I couldn't have if I had needed to work those full-time summer jobs every year. I was able to do a lot of volunteering and service work.

I think the comfort you are talking about is pretty evasive. It really depends on which circle you end up in. I mean, teaching table manners for a nice restaurant, so your kid isn't rude is probably about the only thing I can think of that is universal. Things like italian and skiing and cruises, etc. really depend on where you live and what interests there are socially. I suppose teaching a child to listen before they speak would be helpful. Then you can understand where the other person is coming from before you spout off ignorantly about something. Perhaps the art of being subtle? It's always classier to be less ostentatious. And I suppose the idea that everyone pursues higher education is class related.

I went to a high school where 50-75% of the families were quite rich. Our upper-middle-class lifestyle was lower end for the school, and I do remember being surprised by and learning a lot about money when I started. But that was high school stuff too. It was what brands of clothes were cool with that crowd. What types of sports were cool. What hobbies were cool. I suppose going to the theatre as a hobby is probably upper class... but with student rush tickets it wouldn't have to be... Learning about IRAs in math class... The choices of what was liked were influenced by the money available to these kids, but it was still a bunch of teens somewhere picking what they wanted to be "in" and "out". I remember feeling bad for the kids where the families had so much money they didn't have time for the kids. I remember realizing how important it was that my parents were interested in us as people and what we cared about - that they weren't too wrapped up in their careers or busy to take time to watch my ball games.

I think being a little uncomfortable in new situations and with different crowds is just the way life is. The more experiences a person has with being in different groups, the more one can realize it's okay to work your way through the discomfort and find a spot.

I also moved to a working class town after marriage. There are different topics discussed, different priorities in life... I think that in contrast to my up-bringing, there is a general focus on ideas and theories in the upper-middle-class lifestyle, whereas in the working class lifestyle it is a more practical focus. I can see how you would find it intimidating to go from working to upper class social groups, but it is also intimidating the other way. And it also isn't always about "class" - it is about regional differences and career differences.

I think the best way to prepare a child for life is to focus on good values, community, and religious faith (personally).

HTH

Tjej


----------



## AbbyGrant

Whoa. A thread with an income requirement? I didn't realize there was a different way to parent children whose parents make six figures or more.


----------



## Imakcerka

I apparently was mean for disagreeing... meh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Whoa. A thread with an income requirement? I didn't realize there was a different way to parent children whose parents make six figures or more.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

I do not meet the income requirement, but my parents were close when I was growing up. So take this with a grain of salt I suppose.

I think you should talk to them about the situations that less fortunate people find themselves in. I always find it sad when my cousins (whose parents make very good money) talk about how learning Spanish just encourages Mexican immigrants not to learn English. So I should get my son in a French class. Umm... No thanks.

I always find it enlightening when anti-choice individuals could afford to seek medical care in another country if necessary (I'm not starting a debate on this subject), or are unaware of the hypocrisy within that movement.

I would want them to know that things like food stamps and cash assistance are necessary thing for the government to provide families who are struggling to get on their feet (and that unless they've heard the stories first hand that they don't know what circumstances got them into that position). I'm a law school grad, and needed food stamps to feed my kid until I got a job, we were on state insurance during that time as well, and now we are off all assistance - but only because we had help when we needed it.

I would also teach them that ALL members of our society have value. No matter what their job is. I had a professor ask on a test what the cleaning ladies name was - if you didn't know you lost a point. The professor was adamant that she was just as important as any of the material on the test (sociology class), and that we as a class needed to value those that kept our learning environment clean. I learned a BIG lesson in that class. I try to take it to heart still.

My dad also used to tell me that he didn't care what my career ended up being, as long as I got my education. He meant it too. My younger brother is working at a grocery store while he looks for something that fits with his background, and my dad is just as proud of him as he is of me and my older brother.

Etc.


----------



## CatsCradle

Everything that Super-Single-Mama pointed out above really resonated with me because ultimately I think that what allows one to navigate through this world and in all situations is a healthy reserve of empathy.

OP, I think as far as "cultural" stuff is concerned (things like appreciation or knowledge of what some would describe as the finer things...high end cuisines, fine art, all the stuff that requires a bit of cash), one will be presented with those things at one time or another, but I don't think that lifestyle items should be the focus. I can say with confidence that the people who I've encountered who were really concerned with those skills were the people who were desperately trying to achieve a certain status, real or imagined. I think someone above mentioned something about priorities and I think that even people who reside in certain upper classes probably have such a wide range of priorities that things which once defined the upper classes don't have much meaning anymore.

I grew up in an upper middle class family and now have a very comfortable existence due to varying choices I made here and there combined with a little luck. The single best thing my parents ever did for me was to expose me to poverty...to make me aware that my fortunate childhood circumstances were not the norm. I have carried this lesson with me throughout my life and I think it has given me a much different perspective on what is actually important and what my focuses should be. On a light note, my parents weren't the traveling or dining out types, but they did give me unlimited access to books. In my youth, I like to joke, I traveled everywhere, even to outer space....I learned about people, places, things, cultures, languages, queens and kings. Through this I developed a curious mind. The great thing about curiosity is that it opens many doors. I think the curious individual will experiment, learn and adapt to many situations, whether it is surviving an Italian restaurant menu or navigating a dicey part of town.


----------



## mambera

I'm in your income bracket (was growing up as well) and honestly I think those concerns are silly and pretentious. If you have an interest in wine, that's great and it can be a fine hobby. I don't really care to waste my brain space on grape varietals and harvest years so I usually let someone else choose, or ask the waiter or sommelier what they recommend. (Btw it's largely my DH's income that put us in this bracket and he doesn't even drink.)

If I couldn't understand a menu I would either ask for an English one or again, ask the waiter what he recommended.

I majored in philosophy bc I enjoyed it; most people in this particular income bracket didn't and don't and haven't much to add to a discussion of Kantian metaphysics, and why should they? I certainly wouldn't have any expectation that someone would or wouldn't based on his tax return.

I wonder whether your own sense of being an 'outsider' is causing you to give these things more importance than they merit?

In general one makes a better impression by being comfortable in one's own skin than by trying to cover up one's imagined deficits. Eg a polite request for an English menu (or a charming smile along with, "I'm afraid I don't speak Italian; what dish would you recommend?) looks much more confident than a flustered attempt to pronounce an Italian phrase one doesn't understand.


----------



## Imakcerka

Well then... start learning as many languages as you can. You never want to feel out of place... And recently I went to lunch with the President of our company, the man makes more than all of us on mothering combined and he had no problem asking the waitress what was on the menu. It was in Hebrew... there was an English version but I think he really enjoyed talking to the people there... always learning.

By the way that's not the norm for us, he just chose to do his town hall in our City and wanted all of us to have a meal together.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom*
> 
> Wow. I have no idea why you seem so angry and offended.
> 
> As I said, I grew up in a working-class family and neighborhood. I am comfortable there. My husband grew up in an upper middle-class family, and while he's wonderfully open to friends from all walks of life, there are parts of that working-class world that are incredibly foreign to him. He has sometimes felt left out because he didn't get whatever reference or cultural norm that the other men were discussing. Those situations are what I'm considering when I think about my children's lives.
> 
> I think that you took my question to mean that one should go only to high-end places, but I'm thinking more of work-related situations. Yes, knowing the right wine to order does matter in some professions. It goes beyond food, though. I'm expected to understand references to classic literature and be able to discuss philosophers. I often have questions about what's acceptable and expected in certain groups.
> 
> I would not ask for someone to translate a menu because that just doesn't mesh with my style. That's not the way to learn for me - a single word, yes, but not an entire menu. I would never ask for someone to translate for me when I'm out with a client, for example. In the instance I mentioned, I was with an older person in my profession, and she would have been mortified if I'd asked for a translation. My answer after that situation was to pick up pocket tourist guides in a range of languages and learn the basics. That doesn't mean it's the only or best way to handle the situation, but it's how I opted to do it. I will make sure that my kids know how to order and ask for the bathroom and do those basics in a number of common languages.


----------



## Dar

I think you're talking about what Bourdieu termed "cultural capital". Wikipedia has a pretty good article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_capital

Basically, it's about knowing and doing the things that give you status - in this case, status in upper-middle and upper class society. Most people probably don't even realize they're doing these things - standing up straight, having good table manners, dressing in a certain way, speaking in a certain way and at a certain volume... and there is content-stuff too, like being able to converse about certain topics (art, theatre, politics) knowledgeably, or knowing what to bring when you're invited to a dinner party.

I guess you can teach some of that stuff, but I think it's hard if you don't live it. I was raised upper middle class and even though my daughter and I have always been poor, she has the cultural capital to fit in upper middle class US society... the knowledge, the manners, the look. I transmitted that to her mostly without thinking, because it felt "right" to me.

Asking about something on the menu is perfectly okay, in my book. The key would be being able to look directly at the waiter, asking with confidence and grace, and then thanking him. A better strategy would probably be to ask the waiter to recommend something, and say a few words about your preferences. That's what a good waiter wants to do...


----------



## Alenushka

Cultural capital does not always depend on money.

I grew up very poor just like 99% of population in Soviet Union but my education was such that by age 14 I attended more opera, theater, ballet etc than many upper middle class American will in their entire life. I can talk about many topics .

Because of my husbands work, my kids had amazing access to art in every imaginable way.

It is not always the money. Sometime it is just luck.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I would also teach them that ALL members of our society have value. No matter what their job is. I had a professor ask on a test what the cleaning ladies name was - if you didn't know you lost a point. The professor was adamant that she was just as important as any of the material on the test (sociology class), and that we as a class needed to value those that kept our learning environment clean.


One night over beers the VP and directors of my DH's company got to talking about who at the company they respected the most. One of VP said the woman who did the floors. He felt she had the most boring, repetitious job in the entire place, and he was impressed that she always had a smile on her face and said hi to everyone. He respected her work ethic.

(most of the men I know who earn over 100K prefer beer to wine)

I think that some of the things the OPer is concerned about won't ever be an issue for her kids. If you are living a certain life style, then you learn the little things that go along with it without ever trying.

There are little things that I didn't grow up with that I wanted my kids to be comfortable with. But now they aren't a big deal to my children at all. Going to a nice salon for example -- my mother always took me to the beauty college. The first time I went to a nice salon I felt like I was walking into a private club and might be asked to leave! But it isn't a big deal to my kids at all. They'd rather just let their hair grow forever and then die it with stuff from Walgreens.

One of my friends grew up poor in New Jersey near New York, and ended up married to a surgeon. She once said that what she really wanted for her DD was for her to have the self confidence that if she were in New York and needed to pee, she would just go into a nice hotel and use the restroom. The restrooms at the nice hotels were for her the same way nice salons were for me -- some place she felt she had no right to be.


----------



## nina_yyc

I think with income it's easier to support your children in extracurriculars and you have more educational choices available to you. I would like my kids to read music and play an instrument and to pursue a sport seriously, depending on their interests of course. If we didn't have any extra money I would still have the same priorities but I imagine it would be harder to see them through. My parents had a little extra and paid for years of figure skating lessons, ice time, driving to competitions, etc. They didn't teach me anything about wine pairings though - guess I'm uncultured ;-)


----------



## Learning_Mum

Well, I'm poor, so I don't know if you want to hear my answer but I would say:

- Table manners

- How to be polite and kind to everyone, even if they don't have money

- Less is more. It's terribly gauche to be flashy, that's only for the nouveau riche.

- To understand that not everyone knows everything and it's OK to ask

Other things would be for you to travel. Take them to Europe to experience the culture. Take them to shows and ballets. Take them skiing and to Fiji. Basically show them the world so they can experience different cultures and ways of life. To me that is the most important thing.

Also, I grew up upper middle class and I've never discussed philosophy with anyone.


----------



## MamaMunchkin

This seems like an issue of fitting in - whether it's based on wealth, or lack of it, or some other parameters.

The most helpful thing is to guide your DC to be a confident and resilient person - it'll help them navigate through whatever comes their way.


----------



## Learning_Mum

I will say that one thing this thread has reminded me is that I need to do this stuff with my boys. Growing up we always had the table set with a table cloth, the right cutlery, linen napkins. I've got to work on those things.


----------



## Imakcerka

If you don't do it now, you probably didn't think it was that important to begin with.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Learning_Mum*
> 
> I will say that one thing this thread has reminded me is that I need to do this stuff with my boys. Growing up we always had the table set with a table cloth, the right cutlery, linen napkins. I've got to work on those things.


----------



## Learning_Mum

Actually the most important thing to me would be grammar and elocution.


----------



## Learning_Mum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> If you don't do it now, you probably didn't think it was that important to begin with.


The thing is though that I actually do appreciate that my Mum did that because I do feel comfortable dining out. It's normal to me, but not to my boys. Well, except when they go to Grandma and Grandads!


----------



## Maren78

This thread is just... I don't know, sad? And I'm not referring to the mammas that replied to the OP.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> If you don't do it now, you probably didn't think it was that important to begin with.


I don't know -- I think it's difficult to squeeze everything into a month that I value doing, but sometimes something brings it to mind so it gets bumped up the list.


----------



## LynnS6

Essential skills?

Compassion for all people.

How to be polite to everyone when you first meet them. (If they make you uncomfortable later, you don't have to keep being polite).

How to value the gifts that you have.

How to understand that other people may have gifts or intelligences that you can't see.

How to understand that just because someone doesn't know something that you do, it doesn't make them less of a person. (We had a breakthrough with dd this weekend, where she finally recognized that even though most of her class didn't read as well as she does (and some are indeed, struggling readers), she likes them.)

How to ask for help when you need it.

How to give back to your community.

That you're not entitled to anything.

These skills, you'll notice, are not income specific. But, in my experience, these are often skills I find weak in teens/young adults who grew up in higher income homes. The sense of entitlement is horrific as far as I'm concerned. I have a friend who lives 2 blocks from the high school. Her daughter "needs" a car to drive to school every day, because some days she has dance practice after school at an offsite location. Needs?! I love my friend, but she's completely blind when it comes to her daughter. Why? Because this friend grew up in an upper middle class home with all the trappings, and couldn't imagine denying her daughter the same things. To her, the material things (paying for extra dance practices, donating extra money to the dance team even when they can ill afford it, getting the extra car, paying for her daughter's education) are essential. Her daughter unfortunately, has also learned that these things are "must haves".

To me, very little is essential. Most of the skills that you need to succeed in an upper income job or social situation can be learned. I'm not so sure about the understanding that all people have worth, especially those who weren't born into the 'system'.

As others have said, my kids are being raised in an environment where they will end up with considerable cultural capital. They will understand the education system inside and out. (Ds is 10, he already knows that to fulfill his current dream of being a teacher, he needs 4 years of college and then graduate school. He knows that if he wants to be a lawyer, he'll have to go to law school after college. Many of his classmates have no clue because of their family backgrounds.) My kids will know it's OK to question teachers, doctors and other authority figures (and how to do so politely, but firmly). They will learn how to order a meal in a restaurant, ask someone politely for directions, introduce themselves to someone at a party. They'll know the basics of how to travel, rent a car and stay in a hotel room. They'll learn to tip the waitstaff and the hotel maids. They'll learn how to do international travel because dh and I value travel. They'll learn a foreign language because it's important to me and through our community and our travel, they'll see the value. They'll know how to swim, cross-country ski and bike because those are things we like to do as a family. Some of these things are things they'd learn because they're part of basic manners. Some, like skiing or traveling, are things they wouldn't learn if we didn't have a decent income.

But none of these things are essential to living or being comfortable with who you are. Compassion is.


----------



## MadTown16

I grew up in a very wealthy family, and from the perspective of a now grown child of the 1%, I advise rethinking your priorities. The valuable lessons that my parents taught me revolved around financial responsibility--Saving, charitable giving, the importance of work, and responsible use of money. Most importantly, they taught me-through words and example- that wealth was a blessing to be thankful for. That it should be used carefully and not needlesslt flaunted. That it didn't make me better than anyone else.

The specific examples you give-learning languages, polite manners, and understanding wine-do not seem like priorities that are strictly upper class. Essentially, you value certain knowledge and hope your children do too. That's a pretty universal parenting situation. I would encourage you to approach learning those things like any other optional hobby, not as a checklist of things that they must learn because they're "upper class". It will be ok if they don't know or care about those things as long as you teach them to pursue their interests/dreams and encourage them to educate themselves so they will be successful in what THEY want to do.

For what it's worth, I was never specifically taught wealthy person skills-and I haven't once felt at a disadvantage. My husband grew up in a very poor family and he has delt with new money-related situations with ease, despite his lack of experience.


----------



## meemee

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Dar* 

Basically, it's about knowing and doing the things that give you status - in this case, status in upper-middle and upper class society. Most people probably don't even realize they're doing these things - standing up straight, having good table manners, dressing in a certain way, speaking in a certain way and at a certain volume... and there is content-stuff too, like being able to converse about certain topics (art, theatre, politics) knowledgeably, or knowing what to bring when you're invited to a dinner party.

I guess you can teach some of that stuff, but I think it's hard if you don't live it. I was raised upper middle class and even though my daughter and I have always been poor, she has the cultural capital to fit in upper middle class US society... the knowledge, the manners, the look. I transmitted that to her mostly without thinking, because it felt "right" to me.


> Asking about something on the menu is perfectly okay, in my book. The key would be being able to look directly at the waiter, asking with confidence and grace, and then thanking him. A better strategy would probably be to ask the waiter to recommend something, and say a few words about your preferences. That's what a good waiter wants to do...


The above is my experience too.

trying to teach children something else without experiencing it is not that easy.

for instance i never thought to ask my friends if they wanted to do laundry at my place before i became poor myself. and experienced it. i know differently now.


----------



## rubidoux

I was raised by a single mother in very difficult financial circumstances and ended up dropping out of high school and leaving home at 15. I met my husband a few years later when I was waiting tables and he was a sophomore at Harvard. Both of us ended up going to top ten law schools and rubbing elbows with people with lots of money. I didn't know *anything* about rich people stuff, but I can't think of a single time that that has made things uncomfortable for me. I've had tons of fairly over-the-top insanely yummy unbelievably expensive dinners, mostly in connection with my dh's career, with federal circuit court judges and the people they hang out with, but it has never been a problem that I don't know anything about wine (yuck!) or which fork I'm supposed to be using or any rules about how I'm supposed to behave. When in doubt, you can kind of hang back and see what other people are doing, but it has never been a big deal.

I certainly have never felt like I was supposed to be able to converse fluently about a topic I knew nothing about and nobody has ever expected that I'd be able to read some random language. As for the woman that would have been appalled if she realized you didn't speak Italian, I almost don't believe you -- that just seems crazy unless there's more, like are you a linguist or an opera singer or something? Are you sure you didn't read that wrong? I wonder if you're so worried about sticking out that you're seriously overcompensating. I don't think anyone would ever say that I put on aires (sp? see -- that's my background peaking through, lol). I think it's pretty obvious that I had a different sort of upbringing than my colleagues did, but, if anything, people appreciate that and find it interesting.

As for what skills my kids would need if they too end up finding themselves surrounded by those who are "well bred", I would say nothing special, nothing that I wouldn't want them to have just for life. As others have said, please and thank you go a long way, as do being interesting and interested in others.

My son does go to a school where people have "portfolios" (I always imagine that's like a folder where you've got pictures of all of your investments? -- sounds insanely pretentious!) and swim with dolphins and such. I doubt we'll ever have the money for dolphin friends or skiing. But I can't imagine that will be a big hardship for him.

I hadn't really thought about this before, but my husband, who comes from a long line of Harvard-types, is not anywhere near as comfortable with his peeps as I am. And he does know the rules. I think I kind of see myself as not of it, but I can enjoy visiting with them, and they do have yummy food at their parties. I think I would be a little sad if my kids became part of that world, but maybe not -- maybe it would have its perks and they'd still be who they are. But the idea of grooming them specifically for hanging out with rich people would go against my grain.


----------



## Imakcerka

Where'd the OP go? I suppose the thread did not go in the direction she was hoping. Sorry OP.


----------



## crunchy_mommy

I just don't get this thread at all... and that you directed your question to only families with higher incomes bothers me. People with lower incomes can still have an opinion on this matter, and people with lower incomes can also raise kids who end up upper-class. Regardless, I think a focus on class-related skills & knowledge is what encourages elitism & snobbery. I'm sorry, I hope that's not horrible to say, but it's what I feel. Maybe it's because I don't have a lot of money and never have... but I can't imagine having a 6-figure income & wasting my time teaching my kids wine pairings and how to discuss stuffy boring topics. Why not prepare them with a broader knowledge base that will apply to any 'class' they happen to fall into? Why not teach them that people who care if you can't order from a French menu probably aren't people whose opinions are worth your consideration? Why not teach them that 'class' doesn't matter as much as some rich people seem to think it does, and that we are all valuable and worthy of respect no matter how little money we make?


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> Where'd the OP go? I suppose the thread did not go in the direction she was hoping. Sorry OP.


I just thought I would say I've been enjoying your perspective in this thread.


----------



## *bejeweled*

So _Bourgeoise_.

I can't believe this was posted. Much less on MDC!

The OP feels like an 'outsider', so she wants to make sure her DC are 'insiders'.

Let your kids BE and provide them with opportunities to have great experiences and gain empathy for others less fortunate.

Money does not equal CLASS.


----------



## mtiger

I haven't read more than the first few responses... I grew up in the SES that OP mentions, but am not there now. It is what it is. In a lot of ways, kind of the best of both worlds. Both places have their positives and negatives, and things that kids can - and probably should - learn from. My kids well know the value of a dollar, how hard it is to earn, the value of hard work (in terms of money and self-satisfaction), etc. However... They also appreciate good literature, music of all sorts (from grunge to classical), good food (comfort and high-flight), etc. They are able to hold their own in all areas of life, from down on the farm to black tie affairs. My 20yo texted me yesterday, all excited because he scored free tickets to Abduction from the Seraglio. He doesn't have a lot of more formal attire, but he has a suit that fits, as well as a tux - and knows when each is more appropriate than jeans/tee or khakis/collared shirt.

Yes - those things ARE important in today's world. IMO.

I've known millionaires who were the most uneducated boobs I've ever met, and ditch diggers who could discuss Proust with a real understanding. I've also met the former who were just as comfortable shovelling manure, and the latter who didn't know that there are times ripped up jeans weren't appropriate. I'd take the literate ditch digger or the down and dirty millionaire any day. The other two? Eh, not so much.


----------



## *bejeweled*

This is so eloquent and heartfelt.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MadTown16*
> 
> I grew up in a very wealthy family, and from the perspective of a now grown child of the 1%, I advise rethinking your priorities. The valuable lessons that my parents taught me revolved around financial responsibility--Saving, charitable giving, the importance of work, and responsible use of money. Most importantly, they taught me-through words and example- that wealth was a blessing to be thankful for. That it should be used carefully and not needlesslt flaunted. That it didn't make me better than anyone else.
> 
> The specific examples you give-learning languages, polite manners, and understanding wine-do not seem like priorities that are strictly upper class. Essentially, you value certain knowledge and hope your children do too. That's a pretty universal parenting situation. I would encourage you to approach learning those things like any other optional hobby, not as a checklist of things that they must learn because they're "upper class". It will be ok if they don't know or care about those things as long as you teach them to pursue their interests/dreams and encourage them to educate themselves so they will be successful in what THEY want to do.
> 
> For what it's worth, I was never specifically taught wealthy person skills-and I haven't once felt at a disadvantage. My husband grew up in a very poor family and he has delt with new money-related situations with ease, despite his lack of experience.


----------



## Peony

I was raised middle class, probably somewhat upper but money was something we didn't talk about and they were quite frugal. DH was raised definitely in a higher bracket then I was though and he does not know how to relate to people of a lower income. This is something that is a great bother to me. My job is working with families in poverty. I know I am lucky and I never forget that. Our income is solely our's, DH built a company barely out of his teens without having gone on to any college and it is highly successful today. By DH's client standards, we are considered poor, I guess most people would be to multi-millionaires!

Being in a higher income bracket, I am grateful that we have options for our children. They go to a private school because that is what best fits DD1's learning style. We are able to provide her with all the private therapist she needs, severe dyslexia and some other issues. She loves sports so she does get to do the more expensive ones, competitive dance, snowboard team, etc... Other then that we don't do much differently. Well, we are able to have a full time nanny even though I only work part time, she helps drive to practices, that type of thing. We vacation only once a year and in FL. We are limited because we have 4 children, some that are still quite small. When they get older, I just see more sports in our future, not really learning about wine or foreign menus but that isn't how we are either.


----------



## Imakcerka

I keep checking this thread... and it's making me rage. I should probably step away from the internet now...


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> I keep checking this thread... and it's making me rage. I should probably step away from the internet now...


Why? Really, I ask sincerely - why is it so terrible for someone to ask what OP has asked? Some may not agree with it, others may. But what's so wrong with asking?

For the record - my kids actually do know what wine to pair with what and know the basics of a menu in a different language - because they both cook and like to know what tastes best with what, and what the real name for a dish might be. It's also a part of being educated. Don't see why that's such a horrid thing.

My opinion only.


----------



## sewchris2642

The best thing you can teach (and model) your children is how to be themselves and be comfortable with themselves. Not having money doesn't mean not knowing the differences between wine or modern art from the Romantics. Being financially poor doesn't translate into being culturally poor. Nor does being financially well off mean that one is also culturally rich. Teach your children manners (including the Golden Rule: treat others as you wish to be treated), give them experiences (don't have the money for museums? Get DVDs from the library and seek out quality videos online and on TV to watch), read a wide range of books, go to free/low cost lectures, plays, etc. at your local college or community playhouse, even high school. Teach them to ask if they don't know. Pretending to know is more obnoxious (and rude) than admitting that you don't know.


----------



## sewchris2642

Quote:Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom* 

-- Yes, when I had that Italian restaurant experience, I was way out of my depth. I was 22 and just out of graduate school. I was petrified! Now, I would handle things differently. It was really just an example of an out of my element kind of experience. There are intellectual and economic issues at play for me. Though I have a very high IQ, I didn't grow up in an educated family. They're smart, capable people, but they're not formally educated. I've played a lot of catch-up as an adult to know what others around me know. Of course, no one knows everything, but there is a body of knowledge that I believe it's anticipated that people in certain fields have.

I grew up poor but not knowing I was poor. My parents while not having college degrees (my dad dropped out of college on the advice of his councilor--he couldn't pass the basic algebra class) gave us a childhood rich in experiences and the knowledge that education is not just had in a classroom but is for life. Give your children the same expectations and you won't have to worry if they don't know how to order in Italian. TIfhey will be confident and ask the waiter what he/she recommends and the wine to go with the dish. There is more stigma in pretending to know than in admitting that you don't know. If a certain body of knowledge that they lack is needed for their career, giving them the ability to go find out and acquire that knowledge is a much better skill that trying to anticipate what skills they will need as adults.


----------



## Mummoth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> I keep checking this thread... and it's making me rage. I should probably step away from the internet now...


I get the giggles every time I come in here... I just keep thinking of what it would say if I'd started the thread:

"My question is specifically for families with low incomes - low 2-figures in a high COL area. What do you consider essential skills for your children to learn that are likely class-related? DH & I were talking today about groceries. Our children are way too young to shop for themselves, but I want them to know the difference between the types of promotions stores have, when it's worth paying for name-brand, etc. I am from a working class family, and I've had to kind of figure it all out on my own. I guess I'm just thinking about a more systematic approach with DC.

I was telling my husband about going into a restaurant that someone else suggested. The entire menu was in English, but there were lots of items I wasn't familiar with. I don't really remember anything about the restaurant except that I kept praying that I could guess well enough from there not being pictures to like what I ordered. I want my children to be better prepared. I'm curious as to what other parents in this income bracket feel are essential bits of knowledge."


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Why? Really, I ask sincerely - why is it so terrible for someone to ask what OP has asked? Some may not agree with it, others may. But what's so wrong with asking?


I agree. My mother grew up dirt poor -- her parents were migrate workers and as a child she picked cotton and sometime slept in the car (because they were sort of homeless part of time). My mother was the first person in her family to complete high school.

My father grew up dirt poor on a farm with too many children. They sometimes didn't have enough food. He was the first person in his family to graduate from college.

I grew up middle class with parents who were trying to figure out a middle class lifestyle from watching TV. I took piano and tennis lessons because my mother was sure that's what all middle class girls did. Often my life growing up was somewhat stilted as my parents were trying to lead a life based on what they could tell from looking at the externals. It's like they were trying to base their lives on what they learned watching Leave it to Beaver.

I think that many people have misguided notions about how others live, or what one can afford and not afford at certain salary levels (while living in one's means, saving for college and retirement, etc).

All that is to say, I think it was a valid question. I understand where it comes from.

And I think a lot of the answers here have been awesome. I've found it interesting to read about others experiences growing and that effected them.

Over all, the tone of the thread is that how we treat people is more important than status symbols, and that's a nice message. And that culture (art, music, etc) really aren't specific to a certain income level.


----------



## MrsGregory

I was in a very low-brow restaurant this weekend. I felt a little out of place because growing up, we didn't have enough spare money to eat out at all, and I was kind of overdressed in my 10$ cotton jersey dress from the Ross discount rack. I wasn't familiar with the cuisine, and I found an item that seemed nice, but I wasn't sure of all it's components, and I was unable to guess at it's pronunciation.

So... I asked the waiter how the item was pronounced, what was in it, exactly, and if he recommended it. And it was delicious. And I made two new friends, because the waiter didn't know, so he flagged down his friend, who helped both of us learn something new.

I have to admit... I'm really here in this thread to fly my little working-class flag high and proud. My husband and I are doing better than either of us ever could have thought of as children, and we're still nowhere near the tax bracket requested at the start of this thread. But if millions of dollars fell out of my backside tomorrow morning I'd still be a working class girl. I'm proud of where I come from. I was raised to carry myself with dignity, and to be smart enough to not starve to death even if we were the poorest of people in the worst of times. Raise your children to be decent, respectful, curious and hard-working, and the money shouldn't matter.


----------



## zinemama

I think it's a valid question, too. I'm not in the 6-figure income realm, but I consider our family to be firmly in the UMC by virtue of education and values. I don't particularly care whether or not my children grow up to know about fine wines or how to figure out an Italian menu. I want them to have the confidence to ask for assistance about things like that when necessary.

I consider it extremely important for my kids to be well-read by the time they are adults. I want them familiar with the classics (including the Bible, Hebrew scriptures and Christian), which are the backbone of Western culture and run through so many aspects of life, from casual references to deep influences. It's also important that they be familiar with contemporary literature and have an understanding of why those all-important classics don't include works by women or people of color, for the most part.

I want them to be aware of the privilege they have been born into and to consider it a priority to work for social and economic justice.


----------



## 95191

Quote:


> I think it's a valid question, too.


 and I think lower classes should be teaching their children as well

my first thought were of "The Covenant" (Michener) - teach wine paring and learn the history behind it, the language and if you are lucky some culture along the way

every food dish has a story and if in the end your child can order in a 5 star restaurant in Italian or French or what ever- so be it


----------



## BlueStateMama

We're in a high income bracket. I want my children to be at ease in all levels of social interactions - to be cool and have fun hanging out at a bonfire and mudding on ATVs and drinking (when they're of age  cheap beer. I'd like them to be comfortable walking into a formal dining situation and knowing how to navigate the nuances of table manners. Not having every answer, but having the confidence and the grace to look at the waiter and feel comfortable asking questions. To not be fake and pretentious.

To me, it isn't a money issue, it's class. I thank my parents for demonstrating and teaching me the ability to be comfortable in all social settings. And that being a snob was the HEIGHT of being declasse. And if I ever catch my children acting like entitled elitists, well, there would be hell to pay (and I would know that I had failed them)


----------



## A&A

I want them to know that so many, many, many children around the world don't even get enough food to eat each day. So every single day we should appreciate what we have, *not* feel superior because of it, and find ways to help others. I also want them to know basic survival skills, like how to build a fire and grow a garden. Because what we have could be taken away from us.

Beyond that, I think it's important to give our children experiences, rather than lots of things. Music lessons, for example.

And I don't drink wine. At all. So I wouldn't be pairing it with food. At all. I really don't see it as an "essential" skill.


----------



## Hoopin' Mama

I want my child to learn grace, humility, manners, kindness, compassion, confidence, and humor. From that starting point, the rest of the world can be easily navigated. This wouldn't change if we lost it all tomorrow or our income tripled.

We barely meet the income requirements for this thread. I grew up poor and I am professionally and personally surrounded by people from very wealthy families. They possess many of the qualities I admire (stated above). I want my child to learn NOT to be the person who said to me at a business dinner - Wow, you haven't traveled much, have you?


----------



## crunchy_mommy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *serenbat*
> 
> and I think lower classes should be teaching their children as well


This is it, IMO. I don't believe we should teach our kids certain things because they belong to a certain class... and certainly not to impress others of that class. If wine pairings is something enjoyable & important to you, go ahead & teach that, but why is that only for people in the 6-figure income bracket? Same with anything else you mentioned... And I also think you need to be prepared for the possibility of your children ending up in a different class than you, either by choice or chance. What if they are irresponsible or unlucky & go bankrupt? You have money & investments for them, but what if they refuse to accept these things as adults? I'd want my child to be prepared to live in various circumstances and have compassion for all. I'd feel better about the job I did as a parent if my child chose to use his money to fly to Africa to work with impoverished children than to be able to order off a menu in a fancy French restaurant.


----------



## Quinalla

I think one of the most important things to teach is that they are growing up in a privledged state and to be aware of that privledge. When I grew up, my famly was poor, but we always had enough to eat (nearly always homemade) and clothes (hand-me-downs) just ot put it in perspective, and I remember having "rich" friends (rich meaning made a lot more money than my parents at the time and affluent for the local community, not necessarily rich in any community) and they were very nice but there were times when they way they grew up being used to having "everything" made them very oblivious to how most every other child grew up.

And yes, as other have stated, learning how to do things for themselves that they might never have to do becasue of that financial privlegde. Cooking, cleaning, yardwork, basic vehicle maintenance, laundry, managing finances, etc. Life skills that I think everyone should know. Managing finances especially is somethign that can be hard to impress on kids of rich parents, you have to work at it to show them how its done, whereas if someone grows up poor or middle class, the kids will feel the constraints of money to a certain extent in their daily lives.

As far as what to know to better fit in with others in the upper class, honestly I don't know, I think that would likely be very local community specific. Where I am, there is very little class-expectation in that income bracket except that you own a house, own a certain caliber car (think Mercedes, Audi, BMW, etc.), that the husband works and the wife stays home with the kids, at most works part-time (this one gets on my nerves since I work full-time too







), that you will drink a glass of wine I suppose: that's about it here though.

(And this is from the persepective of someone in that income bracket if that matters to the OP, I definitely worry most about not impressing the importance of managing finances and raising a kid who is oblivious to her priveledge. A big thing for us though is living below our means, we want to retire early, so we live below our means to meet that goal, but we still splurge on certain things we really enjoy and we try really hard to not overspend on DD as it is so easy to do.)


----------



## swd12422

In reading the responses on this thread, another lightbulb moment for me came to mind. I was in my 20s, single, and moderately employed. I could afford to buy decent clothes and food, and go out with my friends now and then. I met up with a new friend for drinks after work one night. He was about my age, but already married with a baby and a house and a HUGE truck. He was struggling with the fact that he was struggling financially, and hoping for his wife to be able to get back to work soon. He asked how much debt I had. I said, "none." He said, "What about your car?" I said, "It's 8 years old and I paid cash for it used." I had to explain that my parents required me to get an education, so they had paid for it, and I was lucky to not have student loans. And I rented my apartment. So no debt. He reached out to shake my hand and said, "Congratulations. You are officially the wealthiest person I know." So I probed a bit b/c we had mutual friends who lived a much nicer/freer/more socially high end lifestyle than I did. All of them were in debt up to their eyeballs, and just used credit cards to pay for all the fun. It made me sad. Here I was, struggling (in their eyes, since I couldn't just eat out when I wanted and buy whatever clothes/jewelry I wanted and drive whatever car I wanted) and I was the "wealthiest" of all of them.

Now I realize that most of the people I know still place so much more importance on appearances and conveniences and having fun than on self-sufficiency and satisfaction with what is right in front of them. It still makes me sad. Raise your kids to be thankful for what they have, no matter how much or how little it is.


----------



## ~adorkable~

I'm so







sick of the reverse class discrimination that is allowed to go unchecked in life and in here on MDC. Why is it not ok (and i agree it's not) to take shots at someone for being poor, but seemingly open season of someone who is rich?

i grew up in two very conflicted worlds, my normal life 8-9 months a year was anywhere from lower working class to down and out poor. i have, as a child, dumpster dived, begged on the street, slept on the ride of the road and actually known what it was like to be "starving" a word that is so misused usually it sickens me. Then at random times in my life i was plucked out of that life by very wealthy relatives and spent time traveling the world, vacationing on private yachts, museum level art buying trips and constant exposure to fine theater and formal dinning in NYC and abroad. I am now on my own and really pretty smack dab in the middle, the rich relatives are gone and so are the dumpsters. So i feel particularly well situated to address this. One of the most confusing things about my upbringing was listening to, from a very young age, both sets of people talk trash about the other. i felt like i had to lie constantly to both groups in order not to be unfairly judged and cast out. If anything i actually got this worse from my "real" life about my "rich" life. So if i sound like a have a chip on my shoulder, I do.

a few truths:


Being poor and being rich ARE different, anyone who says they aren't and that the money you have does not mean anything is full of it. maybe it shouldn't and it doesn't in most ways that are really meaningful, but they are different.
A persons responsibility and ability to being a good human does not differ at all no matter what the situation, *ever*.
Neither "class" is more entitled to anything and both ends of the spectrum are equally guilty of thinking they are, just in different ways.
Judging someone or pigeon-holing them based solely on the money they have is completely out of line, this goes for every person on the finical spectrum equally.
There are life skills that serve everyone and you never know when you are going to need them, you would do good to teach your kids them.
There are also life skills that you are way more likely to come across needing when you are in i high income bracket or enveloped with those that are. i personally think everyone would be enriched to learn these too, but at a bear minimum, those that know that are likely to come up in their kids life are smart to be asking the questions and wanting to give them the tools.
You never know when you are going to be trust into another financial class(higher or lower), whether thru your own career success/ failure, marriage/divorce or a job role. so the only question is how prepared for life do you want to be and how far down on your priorities to you have time to teach, you can't know everything of course.

now that have ranted, i will list a fe things that i was glad i was taught and came in handy when dealing with upper class experiences, since that is what the OP asked. (many of these things are like i said above, handy for everyone)


Comfort in formal social situations, formal eating, greeting folks.
A broad open mind about food is helpful, how to politely not eat something on your plate is a good back up!
As a child it was good that i was shown the fun in formal situations, how to be entertaining to myself and the adults while not "crashing the party"
Hosting. it is a lost art and an art to be sure! i love hosting in large part because it was something i learned at the knee of someone else who love it. (I'm an military wife now I'm getting to use this in a whole new way!)
How to invest, save and spend wisely, no matter how much you have to spend.
How to protect yourself from those that would use you for your money, without getting bitter or paranoid about the world.
The joy and social responsibility of charity and that time is money and to give both if you can


and of course , maybe most importantly, every truth that is on the list above!

you can be all pissed at this post and i reality dont give a rats ass. i really feel like this is the truth that does not get spoken often enough. if you feel like you have a problem with me about this, then the problem is within yourself. i am a kind loving open minded woman. i make no insinuation that i am better or worse than anyone because of their life, class or station. We became good or bad folks based on how we treat each other and the way we better or drain the world.


----------



## Imakcerka

Alright who was taking shots here? Seriously? Because quite a few of us said we didn't think the things the OP brought up were that important? Why get worked up over it? 
And I've been on both sides of it as well. I prefer the middle ground. I still like my Jaliscos!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> I'm so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sick of the reverse class discrimination that is allowed to go unchecked in life and in here on MDC. Why is it not ok (and i agree it's not) to take shots at someone for being poor, but seemingly open season of someone who is rich?
> 
> i grew up in two very conflicted worlds, my normal life 8-9 months a year was anywhere from lower working class to down and out poor. i have, as a child, dumpster dived, begged on the street, slept on the ride of the road and actually known what it was like to be "starving" a word that is so misused usually it sickens me. Then at random times in my life i was plucked out of that life by very wealthy relatives and spent time traveling the world, vacationing on private yachts, museum level art buying trips and constant exposure to fine theater and formal dinning in NYC and abroad. I am now on my own and really pretty smack dab in the middle, the rich relatives are gone and so are the dumpsters. So i feel particularly well situated to address this. One of the most confusing things about my upbringing was listening to, from a very young age, both sets of people talk trash about the other. i felt like i had to lie constantly to both groups in order not to be unfairly judged and cast out. If anything i actually got this worse from my "real" life about my "rich" life. So if i sound like a have a chip on my shoulder, I do.
> 
> a few truths:
> 
> 
> Being poor and being rich ARE different, anyone who says they aren't and that the money you have does not mean anything is full of it. maybe it shouldn't and it doesn't in most ways that are really meaningful, but they are different.
> A persons responsibility and ability to being a good human does not differ at all no matter what the situation, *ever*.
> Neither "class" is more entitled to anything and both ends of the spectrum are equally guilty of thinking they are, just in different ways.
> Judging someone or pigeon-holing them based solely on the money they have is completely out of line, this goes for every person on the finical spectrum equally.
> There are life skills that serve everyone and you never know when you are going to need them, you would do good to teach your kids them.
> There are also life skills that you are way more likely to come across needing when you are in i high income bracket or enveloped with those that are. i personally think everyone would be enriched to learn these too, but at a bear minimum, those that know that are likely to come up in their kids life are smart to be asking the questions and wanting to give them the tools.
> You never know when you are going to be trust into another financial class(higher or lower), whether thru your own career success/ failure, marriage/divorce or a job role. so the only question is how prepared for life do you want to be and how far down on your priorities to you have time to teach, you can't know everything of course.
> 
> now that have ranted, i will list a fe things that i was glad i was taught and came in handy when dealing with upper class experiences, since that is what the OP asked. (many of these things are like i said above, handy for everyone)
> 
> 
> Comfort in formal social situations, formal eating, greeting folks.
> A broad open mind about food is helpful, how to politely not eat something on your plate is a good back up!
> As a child it was good that i was shown the fun in formal situations, how to be entertaining to myself and the adults while not "crashing the party"
> Hosting. it is a lost art and an art to be sure! i love hosting in large part because it was something i learned at the knee of someone else who love it. (I'm an military wife now I'm getting to use this in a whole new way!)
> How to invest, save and spend wisely, no matter how much you have to spend.
> How to protect yourself from those that would use you for your money, without getting bitter or paranoid about the world.
> The joy and social responsibility of charity and that time is money and to give both if you can
> 
> 
> and of course , maybe most importantly, every truth that is on the list above!
> 
> you can be all pissed at this post and i reality dont give a rats ass. i really feel like this is the truth that does not get spoken often enough. if you feel like you have a problem with me about this, then the problem is within yourself. i am a kind loving open minded woman. i make no insinuation that i am better or worse than anyone because of their life, class or station. We became good or bad folks based on how we treat each other and the way we better or drain the world.


----------



## AllisonR

Adorkable, thank you very much for this. A very honest and sincere post.

I think Adorkable has many very good points, but one of them is that you never know when you will be thrust into a higher or lower income bracket. Being capable of living frugally, and knowing the true difference between needs and wants is a valuable life skill. Kindness and respect are not class dependent, far from it. However, I do think that entitlement does sometimes come with wealth. However, not all entitlement is bad. As an example, I think everyone should be able to respectfully, yet firmly, question their doctor about anything medical. Some lower class people see the authority figure and do not feel entitled to question, which I think is to that persons detriment. And I agree that being poor and being rich are different. Not superior or inferior, but definitely different. We may not wish it to be, but it is.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> I'm so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sick of the reverse class discrimination that is allowed to go unchecked in life and in here on MDC. Why is it not ok (and i agree it's not) to take shots at someone for being poor, but seemingly open season of someone who is rich?
> 
> i grew up in two very conflicted worlds, my normal life 8-9 months a year was anywhere from lower working class to down and out poor. i have, as a child, dumpster dived, begged on the street, slept on the ride of the road and actually known what it was like to be "starving" a word that is so misused usually it sickens me. Then at random times in my life i was plucked out of that life by very wealthy relatives and spent time traveling the world, vacationing on private yachts, museum level art buying trips and constant exposure to fine theater and formal dinning in NYC and abroad. I am now on my own and really pretty smack dab in the middle, the rich relatives are gone and so are the dumpsters. So i feel particularly well situated to address this. One of the most confusing things about my upbringing was listening to, from a very young age, both sets of people talk trash about the other. i felt like i had to lie constantly to both groups in order not to be unfairly judged and cast out. If anything i actually got this worse from my "real" life about my "rich" life. So if i sound like a have a chip on my shoulder, I do.
> 
> a few truths:
> 
> 
> Being poor and being rich ARE different, anyone who says they aren't and that the money you have does not mean anything is full of it. maybe it shouldn't and it doesn't in most ways that are really meaningful, but they are different.
> A persons responsibility and ability to being a good human does not differ at all no matter what the situation, *ever*.
> Neither "class" is more entitled to anything and both ends of the spectrum are equally guilty of thinking they are, just in different ways.
> Judging someone or pigeon-holing them based solely on the money they have is completely out of line, this goes for every person on the finical spectrum equally.
> There are life skills that serve everyone and you never know when you are going to need them, you would do good to teach your kids them.
> There are also life skills that you are way more likely to come across needing when you are in i high income bracket or enveloped with those that are. i personally think everyone would be enriched to learn these too, but at a bear minimum, those that know that are likely to come up in their kids life are smart to be asking the questions and wanting to give them the tools.
> You never know when you are going to be trust into another financial class(higher or lower), whether thru your own career success/ failure, marriage/divorce or a job role. so the only question is how prepared for life do you want to be and how far down on your priorities to you have time to teach, you can't know everything of course.
> 
> now that have ranted, i will list a fe things that i was glad i was taught and came in handy when dealing with upper class experiences, since that is what the OP asked. (many of these things are like i said above, handy for everyone)
> 
> 
> Comfort in formal social situations, formal eating, greeting folks.
> A broad open mind about food is helpful, how to politely not eat something on your plate is a good back up!
> As a child it was good that i was shown the fun in formal situations, how to be entertaining to myself and the adults while not "crashing the party"
> Hosting. it is a lost art and an art to be sure! i love hosting in large part because it was something i learned at the knee of someone else who love it. (I'm an military wife now I'm getting to use this in a whole new way!)
> How to invest, save and spend wisely, no matter how much you have to spend.
> How to protect yourself from those that would use you for your money, without getting bitter or paranoid about the world.
> The joy and social responsibility of charity and that time is money and to give both if you can
> 
> 
> and of course , maybe most importantly, every truth that is on the list above!
> 
> you can be all pissed at this post and i reality dont give a rats ass. i really feel like this is the truth that does not get spoken often enough. if you feel like you have a problem with me about this, then the problem is within yourself. i am a kind loving open minded woman. i make no insinuation that i am better or worse than anyone because of their life, class or station. We became good or bad folks based on how we treat each other and the way we better or drain the world.


----------



## Imakcerka

You lost me when you said "some lower class".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AllisonR*
> 
> Adorkable, thank you very much for this. A very honest and sincere post.
> 
> I think Adorkable has many very good points, but one of them is that you never know when you will be thrust into a higher or lower income bracket. Being capable of living frugally, and knowing the true difference between needs and wants is a valuable life skill. Kindness and respect are not class dependent, far from it. However, I do think that entitlement does sometimes come with wealth. However, not all entitlement is bad. As an example, I think everyone should be able to respectfully, yet firmly, question their doctor about anything medical. *Some lower class* people see the authority figure and do not feel entitled to question, which I think is to that persons detriment. And I agree that being poor and being rich are different. Not superior or inferior, but definitely different. We may not wish it to be, but it is.


----------



## Buzzer Beater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AllisonR*
> 
> Adorkable, thank you very much for this. A very honest and sincere post.
> 
> I think Adorkable has many very good points, but one of them is that you never know when you will be thrust into a higher or lower income bracket. Being capable of living frugally, and knowing the true difference between needs and wants is a valuable life skill. Kindness and respect are not class dependent, far from it. However, I do think that entitlement does sometimes come with wealth. However, not all entitlement is bad. As an example, I think everyone should be able to respectfully, yet firmly, question their doctor about anything medical. *Some lower class people see the authority figure and do not feel entitled to question, which I think is to that persons detriment*. And I agree that being poor and being rich are different. Not superior or inferior, but definitely different. We may not wish it to be, but it is.


Yeah I don't think that's a good example.

My dear mom has six figures in her retirement income and she would never question the authority of a doctor. I don't understand this. I think a lot of folks in her generation rich or poor are like this.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> I'm so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sick of the reverse class discrimination that is allowed to go unchecked in life and in here on MDC. Why is it not ok (and i agree it's not) to take shots at someone for being poor, but seemingly open season of someone who is rich?
> 
> you can be all pissed at this post and i reality dont give a rats ass. i really feel like this is the truth that does not get spoken often enough. if you feel like you have a problem with me about this, then the problem is within yourself. i am a kind loving open minded woman. i make no insinuation that i am better or worse than anyone because of their life, class or station. We became good or bad folks based on how we treat each other and the way we better or drain the world.


The OP started a thread with an income requirement as if those that make under that amount would not have anything to add about essential life skills their children might require to succeed. I think that's a pretty ugly assumption.

edited to remove another quote and response


----------



## Imakcerka

This thread orginated because the OP wanted to know what she needed to teach her children... about the class they were in. You know how to mingle with their class so that they're not out of place. And she specifically asked 6 figure income holders to join in on the conversation. Why? Why not just be who you are? Why try to impress? Why try to "FIT IN"? I don't get it. But some of you did. And some of you agreed there are things that are important in our perspective classes that we must all pass on to our children.

Adorkable... reverse class discrimination...? Really? The persecution must be HOT HOT HOT! Every day people in the shrinking middle class are looked down upon and treated so unfairly. It pains me to think about it.


----------



## rubidoux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> This thread orginated because the OP wanted to know what she needed to teach her children... about the class they were in. You know how to mingle with their class so that they're not out of place. And she specifically asked 6 figure income holders to join in on the conversation. Why? Why not just be who you are? Why try to impress? Why try to "FIT IN"? I don't get it. But some of you did. And some of you agreed there are things that are important in our perspective classes that we must all pass on to our children.
> 
> Adorkable... reverse class discrimination...? Really? The persecution must be HOT HOT HOT! Every day people in the shrinking middle class are looked down upon and treated so unfairly. It pains me to think about it.










Yes! That's what I was thinking, too. Those poor discriminated against rich people! So unfair! But I don't think anyone here is down on anyone for having money. I am certain that there are a whole world of people with money out there who are normal down to earth folks with all the same fears and desires that the rest of us have and who would never think to judge someone poorly because they choose the wrong wine or don't know how to ski or golf or whatever. There are probably also perfectly wonderful people who really enjoy knowing a lot about wine and would like nothing more than to pick out some wine for their friend who wasn't raised to know anything about wine. I think it is odd to want to raise one's children to be able to hang out with people who would look down on people who couldn't do those things. Who would want to hang out with those people? Adorkable, I am sure you're bristling at that, but really, is it true that your rich family are the people I'm talking about? Or are they people who know which fork to use but don't think that's what's truly important in life?


----------



## Imakcerka

I don't look think it's right to look down on anyone. I also think Classism is disgusting.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes! That's what I was thinking, too. Those poor discriminated against rich people! So unfair! But I don't think anyone here is down on anyone for having money. I am certain that there are a whole world of people with money out there who are normal down to earth folks with all the same fears and desires that the rest of us have and who would never think to judge someone poorly because they choose the wrong wine or don't know how to ski or golf or whatever. There are probably also perfectly wonderful people who really enjoy knowing a lot about wine and would like nothing more than to pick out some wine for their friend who wasn't raised to know anything about wine. I think it is odd to want to raise one's children to be able to hang out with people who would look down on people who couldn't do those things. Who would want to hang out with those people? Adorkable, I am sure you're bristling at that, but really, is it true that your rich family are the people I'm talking about? Or are they people who know which fork to use but don't think that's what's truly important in life?


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> Adorkable... reverse class discrimination...? Really? The persecution must be HOT HOT HOT! Every day people in the shrinking middle class are looked down upon and treated so unfairly. It pains me to think about it.


I don't think "discrimination" is the right word. I'm not trying to put words into anyone's mouth, but I think probably what she meant is that there are assumptions and attitudes flying in both directions. For example, if you're poor, you're probably virtuous, if you're not poor, you possess neither compassion, empathy or any other positive human quality average masses possess.

I see it here all the time at MDC: self-congradulatory posts for not being like "them"...those people with fancy cars and fancy trips and disposable income.

I'm not apologizing for bad behavior on any income level. I've been on all sides of the equation and there are crappy people in every strata. But, I do recognize that it is easy to jump to conclusions about others' character based on income. I'll be the first to admit that I have and struggle with biases.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> a few truths:
> 
> 
> Being poor and being rich ARE different, anyone who says they aren't and that the money you have does not mean anything is full of it. maybe it shouldn't and it doesn't in most ways that are really meaningful, but they are different.


I'm really curious to know what you mean here, especially about the money meaning something. It's obvious there would be a difference in what could be bought as far as material goods and experiences, so I'm assuming you mean something else. I make just under the initial income requirement to answer the OP's question, so I'm just wondering how that makes me different than those who make above.


----------



## Imakcerka

Pedigree dear.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> I'm really curious to know what you mean here. I mean it's obvious there would be a difference in what can be bought as far as material goods and experiences, so I'm assuming you mean something else. I make just under the initial income requirement to answer the OP's question, so I'm just wondering how that makes me different than those who make above.


----------



## Imakcerka

People are people. Not one person is better than any other. EVER! Money, class, or lack of does not equate a persons worth. For those who say that's just how it is... Well maybe it's just how it is because you shrugged your shoulders and looked away.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> . For example, if you're poor, you're probably virtuous, if you're not poor, you possess neither compassion, empathy or any other positive human quality average masses possess.


----------



## Buzzer Beater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> I'm really curious to know what you mean here, especially about the money meaning something. It's obvious there would be a difference in what could be bought as far as material goods and experiences, so I'm assuming you mean something else. I make just under the initial income requirement to answer the OP's question, so I'm just wondering how that makes me different than those who make above.


I'm curious too. Because certainly the examples given in the OP aren't exclusive to that income level... by a long shot. I have never made close to that amount, but I know about wine and can muck around most menus even if I don't speak the language. Your cafe doesn't have to be expensive to have a bit of French on the menu. My older daughter can as well, as she has traveled Europe, Africa, and Central America. On a budget you know, on a food server's salary no less.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> Adorkable... reverse class discrimination...? Really? The persecution must be HOT HOT HOT! Every day people in the shrinking middle class are looked down upon and treated so unfairly. It pains me to think about it.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think "discrimination" is the right word. I'm not trying to put words into anyone's mouth, but I think probably what she meant is that there are assumptions and attitudes flying in both directions. For example, if you're poor, you're probably virtuous, if you're not poor, you possess neither compassion, empathy or any other positive human quality average masses possess.
> 
> I see it here all the time at MDC: self-congradulatory posts for not being like "them"...those people with fancy cars and fancy trips and disposable income.
> 
> I'm not apologizing for bad behavior on any income level. I've been on all sides of the equation and there are crappy people in every strata. But, I do recognize that it is easy to jump to conclusions about others' character based on income. I'll be the first to admit that I have and struggle with biases.
Click to expand...

I agree that there are assumptions that fly in both directions. I also agree that being rich and poor are different. The main difference, and the difference that I have the biggest problem with, is that the rich have power, and the ability to meaningfully lobby the government. The poor don't in many ways, and are underrepresented in government. Which is a BIG problem, especially since the poor carry the higher tax burdens, have less access to medical care, less access to education, less access to adequate housing, etc, and the poor income brackets are growing in size. The rich are getting richer, and are doing everything they can to keep the poor people poor. American Dream my ass. It's quickly disappearing.


----------



## 3xMama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I agree that there are assumptions that fly in both directions. I also agree that being rich and poor are different. The main difference, and the difference that I have the biggest problem with, is that the rich have power, and the ability to meaningfully lobby the government. The poor don't in many ways, and are underrepresented in government. Which is a BIG problem, especially since the poor carry the higher tax burdens, have less access to medical care, less access to education, less access to adequate housing, etc, and the poor income brackets are growing in size. The rich are getting richer, and are doing everything they can to keep the poor people poor. American Dream my ass. It's quickly disappearing.


Yes! I cannot agree with this more!!

As for the OP...I'm in two minds. First, I'm slightly appalled that this thread had an income bracket. Just because I'm poor I have nothing to add? And why are there special things you feel your children need to learn simply because you are in the Upper Middle Class? This is hard for me to process.

Then, I remember my childhood with parents who were upper middle class and how there are some things that have been difficult for me to transition to now that I am married and quite poor. None of it has to do with human decency, compassion, faith or love, though. Its had to do with how unprepared I was to be a struggling adult and how I did not realize that life happens and financial stability isn't all that stable. So to answer the questions (if you even want my response since I am no where near this income bracket and probably never will be), teach your children that life happens and money isn't necessarily lasting. Teach them how to manage money, how to budget, how to live frugally and how to save. Teach them how to clip coupons, look for sales, browse through racks upon racks of clearance items and get a good deal. Teach them that they are no different then their poorer neighbors. And teach them how to be happy without money. These are things I wish my parents had taught me. And as others said, basic life skills-cooking, cleaning, car care etc etc etc. But mostly, the money stuff.

Beyond that, I think everyone has equal access and ability to learning anything else. Being rich doesn't mean you understand philosophy any better than someone who is dirt poor. Wine is not just for those with money. Sure, you've got a better ability to buy it than I do, but it makes that expensive bottle that much more meaningful to me. *shrug* I don't see how anything else you've discussed is so class specific. And that's where I get offended. I'm just as able to know these things. My financial standing has nothing to do with my brain power.


----------



## mtiger

There were some pretty rude responses here, based purely on socio-economic status.

Yes, there ARE things people who run in moneyed circles should know, passing/cultural references they should understand. Same in other circles. Just because it's a different group doesn't make it better - OR worse - than any other.


----------



## rubidoux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> There were some pretty rude responses here, based purely on socio-economic status.
> 
> Yes, there ARE things people who run in moneyed circles should know, passing/cultural references they should understand. Same in other circles. Just because it's a different group doesn't make it better - OR worse - than any other.


Like what, though? I am totally ignorant of all of that -- I mean the passing/cultural references that should be understood -- but I don't think it has gotten in my way (although, who knows, maybe it's possible that everyone laughs when I leave the room or something).


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Yes, there ARE things people who run in moneyed circles should know, passing/cultural references they should understand. Same in other circles. Just because it's a different group doesn't make it better - OR worse - than any other.


What are the things that children in more monied circles should know that my middle class children don't need to know?


----------



## crunchy_mommy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> There were some pretty rude responses here, based purely on socio-economic status.
> 
> Yes, there ARE things people who run in moneyed circles should know, passing/cultural references they should understand. Same in other circles. Just because it's a different group doesn't make it better - OR worse - than any other.


I certainly have nothing against people with money but I do find abhorrent the idea that people with money should primarily hang around other people with money and have their own set of cultural references that is completely separate from those of people without money.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> What are the things that children in more monied circles should know that my middle class children don't need to?


Very likely so. Are your children - when they are grown - likely to go to black tie charity events at the Met (pick which one)? The Phil? To run in circles where they will be dining in restaurants where a bottle of wine runs a minimum of $350?

Running in those circles, yes, they need to have a clue regarding those kinds of things. Because like it or not, if they don't? They will be the laughing stock of the party. *I* would rather my kids know all that, AND be comfortable in a pair of jeans mucking out a barn. But yes, I do want them to know how to clean up well and hold their own with the power brokers. At least one of my kids will likely be playing in those circles, and I don't want him to come off as a boor. I'm sorry if that's offensive to some.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> I certainly have nothing against people with money but I do find abhorrent the idea that people with money should primarily hang around other people with money and have their own set of cultural references that is completely separate from those of people without money.


Why? Do you not hang around people with their own set of cultural references? Do you hang out equally comfortably with "mainstream" parents?


----------



## choli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> What are the things that children in more monied circles should know that my middle class children don't need to know?


Don't use candles on the lunch table?;-)


----------



## rubidoux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Very likely so. Are your children - when they are grown - likely to go to black tie charity events at the Met (pick which one)? The Phil? To run in circles where they will be dining in restaurants where a bottle of wine runs a minimum of $350?
> 
> Running in those circles, yes, they need to have a clue regarding those kinds of things. Because like it or not, if they don't? They will be the laughing stock of the party. *I* would rather my kids know all that, AND be comfortable in a pair of jeans mucking out a barn. But yes, I do want them to know how to clean up well and hold their own with the power brokers. At least one of my kids will likely be playing in those circles, and I don't want him to come off as a boor. I'm sorry if that's offensive to some.


So should we be trying to make sure that our kids know enough to hang out with those terribly rude people so that they don't laugh at them??? Hmmm.... I actually don't think it's true that all or most people who go to "the Met" or "the Phil" are so snarky and mean. But if they are, do I really want to prepare my children to be enough like them so that they won't be laughed at? The idea of that makes me sad. I would much rather see my children hanging out with kind hearted people who appreciate them for who they are as people rather than whether or not they have a "clue" about those sorts of things.


----------



## Imakcerka

Laughingstock? That's an Issue... Just stop tiger... please. You're not offensive... you just sound clueless. That stuff is not as important as it used to be.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Very likely so. Are your children - when they are grown - likely to go to black tie charity events at the Met (pick which one)? The Phil? To run in circles where they will be dining in restaurants where a bottle of wine runs a minimum of $350?
> 
> Running in those circles, yes, they need to have a clue regarding those kinds of things. Because like it or not, if they don't? They will be the laughing stock of the party. *I* would rather my kids know all that, AND be comfortable in a pair of jeans mucking out a barn. But yes, I do want them to know how to clean up well and hold their own with the power brokers. At least one of my kids will likely be playing in those circles, and I don't want him to come off as a boor. I'm sorry if that's offensive to some.


----------



## Imakcerka

People aren't like that rubidoux, just in the movies and really tiger has watched Pretty Women one too many times.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> So should we be trying to make sure that our kids know enough to hang out with those terribly rude people so that they don't laugh at them??? Hmmm.... I actually don't think it's true that all or most people who go to "the Met" or "the Phil" are so snarky and mean. But if they are, do I really want to prepare my children to be enough like them so that they won't be laughed at? The idea of that makes me sad. I would much rather see my children hanging out with kind hearted people who appreciate them for who they are as people rather than whether or not they have a "clue" about those sorts of things.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Very likely so. Are your children - when they are grown - likely to go to black tie charity events at the Met (pick which one)? The Phil? To run in circles where they will be dining in restaurants where a bottle of wine runs a minimum of $350?


That didn't answer my question. I asked what do children who run in more monied circles need to know that my middle lass children don't. Or did you mean my kids won't be doing any of those things when they're grown because we're middle class now?


----------



## rubidoux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> People aren't like that rubidoux, just in the movies and really tiger has watched Pretty Women one too many times.


Gosh, I hope not! lol I have to admit that it crossed my mind that they real all do have a laugh at my expense when I leave the room! But I think you're right.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> So should we be trying to make sure that our kids know enough to hang out with those terribly rude people so that they don't laugh at them??? Hmmm.... I actually don't think it's true that all or most people who go to "the Met" or "the Phil" are so snarky and mean. But if they are, do I really want to prepare my children to be enough like them so that they won't be laughed at? The idea of that makes me sad. I would much rather see my children hanging out with kind hearted people who appreciate them for who they are as people rather than whether or not they have a "clue" about those sorts of things.


If your kids are in a socio-economic circle that they will likely run in those circles as adults? Absolutely they should learn how to to act appropriately. Are ALL the people there snarky and mean? Nope. No more than those who are AP confronted by mainstream parents ALL snarky and mean. And let's face it - a fair portion of the latter are.

At the end of the day, it does kids a disservice to not prepare them for the areas they'll be circulating in. No matter what group it is. If you hang in a group where the guys all get together to play poker every Friday, would you teach your son to play bridge? Probably not. If you lived in a big football area, would you teach your kids cricket? Or vice-versa? If you lived in the UK, you'd likely teach them cricket, rugby or soccer instead of American football. Because that would help them fit in. Same thing. IMO.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> People aren't like that rubidoux, just in the movies and really tiger has watched Pretty Women one too many times.
> 
> 
> 
> Gosh, I hope not! lol I have to admit that it crossed my mind that they real all do have a laugh at my expense when I leave the room! But I think you're right.
Click to expand...

I think some probably are like that. Just like with ANY group of people, there are bad apples that make the rest look bad.


----------



## Imakcerka

Hmmm... fitting in is important.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> If your kids are in a socio-economic circle that they will likely run in those circles as adults? Absolutely they should learn how to to act appropriately. Are ALL the people there snarky and mean? Nope. No more than those who are AP confronted by mainstream parents ALL snarky and mean. And let's face it - a fair portion of the latter are.
> 
> At the end of the day, it does kids a disservice to not prepare them for the areas they'll be circulating in. No matter what group it is. If you hang in a group where the guys all get together to play poker every Friday, would you teach your son to play bridge? Probably not. If you lived in a big football area, would you teach your kids cricket? Or vice-versa? If you lived in the UK, you'd likely teach them cricket, rugby or soccer instead of American football. Because that would help them fit in. Same thing. IMO.


----------



## Imakcerka

Of course people are like that. Shallow people.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I think some probably are like that. Just like with ANY group of people, there are bad apples that make the rest look bad.


----------



## choli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> Hmmm... fitting in is important.


I think knowing how to fit in is important.
We can then choose whether or not to fit in.


----------



## ~adorkable~

Peoples reactions to my post prove my point in many ways, and since I'm not here to bicker, i am probably going to leave it at my original post. We all have a right to our own perception. i did not accuse anyone in particular or everyone in general of being discriminatory, but rather reacted to the real fact that a handful of post certainly were, some rudely so. It again proved my point when some folks reacted to my post in a very rude way as well.

the OP is a long time member on MDC with a huge post count, so I'm guessing we can assume she is a good contributing member of this community. i hate to see her honest question get thrown back in her face so much. why my strong reaction, i explained that and openly admitted to having a issue with it from having to feel with the stress of it as a innocent child.

To the folks mostly bothered that the OP had a "income requirement", she was asking for the opinion of folks in a certain bracket of our collective reality. there are tons of threads on MDC that have similar requests. how is this different from asking a thread aimed to low income mommies or the like. those posts are here every day and i doubt that folks have jumped on them and said that it was rude to think that only low income folks need to learn to spend wisely or understand a good deal.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> Hmmm... fitting in is important.


Yes, it often is.


----------



## crunchy_mommy

I can't even post the response I typed out because it's clear that we have such vastly different ideals & priorities that we will never see eye-to-eye. I didn't realize many real people were classist like that, I thought it was more of something exaggerated for TV. This is sad.


----------



## Imakcerka

Yes and initially we responded with what we thought. I'm in that bracket and obviously our concerns are different. Seriously? Everyone disagrees and that's the best part. We all learn something from it. I learned people still find this crap important. She learned some people do not.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> Peoples reactions to my post prove my point in many ways, and since I'm not here to bicker, i am probably going to leave it at my original post. We all have a right to our own perception. i did not accuse anyone in particular or everyone in general of being discriminatory, but rather reacted to the real fact that a handful of post certainly were, some rudely so. It again proved my point when some folks reacted to my post in a very rude way as well.
> 
> the OP is a long time member on MDC with a huge post count, so I'm guessing we can assume she is a good contributing member of this community. i hate to see her honest question get thrown back in her face so much. why my strong reaction, i explained that and openly admitted to having a issue with it from having to feel with the stress of it as a innocent child.
> 
> To the folks mostly bothered that the OP had a "income requirement", she was asking for the opinion of folks in a certain bracket of our collective reality. there are tons of threads on MDC that have similar requests. how is this different from asking a thread aimed to low income mommies or the like. those posts are here every day and i doubt that folks have jumped on them and said that it was rude to think that only low income folks need to learn to spend wisely or understand a good deal.


----------



## Buzzer Beater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> Yes and initially we responded with what we thought. I'm in that bracket and obviously our concerns are different. Seriously? Everyone disagrees and that's the best part. We all learn something from it. I learned people still find this crap important. She learned some people do not.


Imak, for me it wasn't that people take that stuff seriously, I know all too well they do. It was the implication in OP and other posts that if you don't make enough money you cannot understand the "finer" things in life and cannot understand what OP's kids need.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> To the folks mostly bothered that the OP had a "income requirement", she was asking for the opinion of folks in a certain bracket of our collective reality. there are tons of threads on MDC that have similar requests. how is this different from asking a thread aimed to low income mommies or the like. those posts are here every day and i doubt that folks have jumped on them and said that it was rude to think that only low income folks need to learn to spend wisely or understand a good deal.


That's deflecting from what's going on here. It really doesn't matter what goes on elsewhere on this board. But I will go ahead and say I see a difference. I've only seen those threads in the Frugality and Finance forum, and they're usually about support due to being broke not how to parent their children differently. Also, I've never seen an income requirement on those or non-low income members specifically excluded. Actually, I've seen non-low income members, one of whom has posted here, welcomed when they post with support and ideas.

edited for tons of typos


----------



## Slmommy

I know there are a lot of tensions in this thread, but the restaurant talk reminded me of something that I did once... hahaha, fresh out of college went to a way fancier restaurant than I was accustomed to with some folks who were more regular to that level of eating out... ordered sweetbreads in an appetizer, hahaha I thought they were literally some sweet bread/rolls with some savory thing going on....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweetbread

I was practically veg at the time and someone there knew that and mentioned something to me, like oh, i thought you were vegetarian... we called the waiter back. No one was rude about it, although I felt really silly....

I think the more experiences we give our kids, the more they are going to pick up things here and there. Which goes for anyone... obviously some experiences are cost prohibitive, but I think there are a lot of ways to get a wide range of activities/culture/exposure, etc.

When in doubt... don't try something off the menu you aren't sure about. If it's in another language, probably they will tell you the specials in English. Or I'll have what that lady over there is having!! Some street smarts/observation can help anyone in a situation they are not familiar with.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I agree that there are assumptions that fly in both directions. I also agree that being rich and poor are different. The main difference, and the difference that I have the biggest problem with, is that the rich have power, and the ability to meaningfully lobby the government. The poor don't in many ways, and are underrepresented in government. Which is a BIG problem, especially since the poor carry the higher tax burdens, have less access to medical care, less access to education, less access to adequate housing, etc, and the poor income brackets are growing in size. The rich are getting richer, and are doing everything they can to keep the poor people poor. American Dream my ass. It's quickly disappearing.


Which is why I'm constantly flabbergasted that people vote against their own interests. But that's the subject of another thread.


----------



## rubidoux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> But that's the subject of another thread.


As is whether or not it is morally bankrupt to spend $350 on a bottle of wine.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> I agree that there are assumptions that fly in both directions. I also agree that being rich and poor are different. The main difference, and the difference that I have the biggest problem with, is that the rich have power, and the ability to meaningfully lobby the government. The poor don't in many ways, and are underrepresented in government. Which is a BIG problem, especially since the poor carry the higher tax burdens, have less access to medical care, less access to education, less access to adequate housing, etc, and the poor income brackets are growing in size. The rich are getting richer, and are doing everything they can to keep the poor people poor. American Dream my ass. It's quickly disappearing.
> 
> 
> 
> Which is why I'm constantly flabbergasted that people vote against their own interests. But that's the subject of another thread.
Click to expand...

I know. I think it's because people believe the BS that is spun by the conservative party (I'm progressive, I know that most of the very wealthy are not, which probably means I shouldn't post that here where I'm already not supposed to post, since I do not meet the income requirement).


----------



## homeschoolingmama

This post makes me want to cry. 

It makes me feel sick thinking of people spending that much on a bottle of wine or a bunch of money on a tiny bit of food when people are starving around the world. It just doesn't make sense that people have HUGE houses for status but people are dying from poor drinking water and starvation. I bet those children who are picking eggshells from garbage cans to lick would run through a restaurant and devour whatever they could and not care what fork to eat with or caring what others thought about how they acted.

I am not perfect by any means of course. I buy things and wonder if it is necessary. But my gosh! What a waste.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> As is whether or not it is morally bankrupt to spend $350 on a bottle of wine.


See, I have problems with the morality part of it, as I think morality is a bit more complex. For me personally, it would be morally wrong to purchase high end items (on the assumption that I could afford it) while at the same time spitting in the general direction of those with less resources by (a) not caring; and (b) not doing my part to alleviate the problems of poverty. So where does it stop? I pay a $100 bucks for a pair of shoes and someone else pays $5. Does that make me morally bankrupt? I don't think the morality of the price of consumer goods really addresses the issue. The price of gas rises and falls. Do people who continue to subscribe to car ownership buy into a morally bankrupt idea?

My main gripe is that when I say that I support the causes and plights of poor people, I'm called a socialist and marxist. I'm told that I'm unpatriotic and that I don't care about America. This is the culture in America, people, and this is why I'm frustrated that people believe people in elected positions who say that people who care about income equality and all the trappings are socialists, communists, you name it. Argue about the morality of coach handbags and the cost of wine all you want. Those aren't the real issues.


----------



## choli

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> See, I have problems with the morality part of it, as I think morality is a bit more complex. For me personally, it would be morally wrong to purchase high end items (on the assumption that I could afford it) while at the same time spitting in the general direction of those with less resources by (a) not caring; and (b) not doing my part to alleviate the problems of poverty. So where does it stop? I pay a $100 bucks for a pair of shoes and someone else pays $5. Does that make me morally bankrupt? I don't think the morality of the price of consumer goods really addresses the issue. The price of gas rises and falls. Do people who continue to subscribe to car ownership buy into a morally bankrupt idea?
> 
> My main gripe is that when I say that I support the causes and plights of poor people, I'm called a socialist and marxist. I'm told that I'm unpatriotic and that I don't care about America. This is the culture in America, people, and this is why I'm frustrated that people believe people in elected positions who say that people who care about income equality and all the trappings are socialists, communists, you name it. Argue about the morality of coach handbags and the cost of wine all you want. Those aren't the real issues.


I agree, those are not the real issues. But that those points came up is a pretty good illustration of this point:

Quote:


> I don't think "discrimination" is the right word. I'm not trying to put words into anyone's mouth, but I think probably what she meant is that there are assumptions and attitudes flying in both directions. For example, if you're poor, you're probably virtuous, if you're not poor, you possess neither compassion, empathy or any other positive human quality average masses possess.
> 
> I see it here all the time at MDC: self-congradulatory posts for not being like "them"...those people with fancy cars and fancy trips and disposable income.


----------



## 3xMama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> That's defecting from what's going on here. It really doesn't matter what goes on elsewhere on this board. But I will go ahead and say I see a difference. I've only seen those threads in the Frugality and Fiance forum, and they're usually about support due to being broke not how to parent their children differently. Also, I've never seen an income requirement on those or non-low income members specifically excluded. Actually I've seen non-low income members welcomed when they post with support and ideas one of whom has posted here.
> 
> edited for typo


I agree with this completely. What has me so hot under the collar is that specifically because I am low income, I supposedly have nothing to offer the OP. In actuality, I feel I had some pretty good points (course I would think that but...







) because I am low income but grew up in the income bracket the OP wanted opinions from. I could tell her my experiences going from wanting nothing because I had it all to being completely broke and trying to scrape by month to month. And honestly, I've loved seeing high income posters on the low income support threads. Lets me know that you can make it and there can be light at the end of the tunnel. Keeps some hope alive that things will change.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slmommy*
> 
> I know there are a lot of tensions in this thread, but the restaurant talk reminded me of something that I did once... hahaha, fresh out of college went to a way fancier restaurant than I was accustomed to with some folks who were more regular to that level of eating out... ordered sweetbreads in an appetizer, hahaha I thought they were literally some sweet bread/rolls with some savory thing going on....
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweetbread
> 
> I was practically veg at the time and someone there knew that and mentioned something to me, like oh, i thought you were vegetarian... we called the waiter back. No one was rude about it, although I felt really silly....
> 
> I think the more experiences we give our kids, the more they are going to pick up things here and there. Which goes for anyone... obviously some experiences are cost prohibitive, but I think there are a lot of ways to get a wide range of activities/culture/exposure, etc.
> 
> When in doubt... don't try something off the menu you aren't sure about. If it's in another language, probably they will tell you the specials in English. Or I'll have what that lady over there is having!! Some street smarts/observation can help anyone in a situation they are not familiar with.










I remember when my husband was in culinary school and they had offal week. He was talking about sweetbreads at home and I thought those sounded nice, I wouldn't mind having sweetbreads, thinking exactly what you thought. Yeah...the look on my face when he told me what they actually are was apparently hilarious and sent him into laughter fits. I feel for ya!!


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> Which is why I'm constantly flabbergasted that people vote against their own interests.


My husband's theory is that it's because they think one day they'll be rich too.


----------



## mtiger

Thing is... The folks who CAN afford to toss $350 for a bottle of wine more often than not are also quite philanthropic. Look at Bill and Melinda Gates. Or the late Steve Jobs. They can afford to live large, but they also put money where it's needed. I see nothing wrong with spending large when you've worked hard for it. AND then also give where needed. And most do.

As I said - I'm not in that "class" by any stretch, But I can see at least one of my kids spending time with those who are. And I think it's important for him to know how to behave appropriately, to have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation, etc.

As for the income range OP specified? Big deal. Those who are there likely know better what flies those who aren't.


----------



## rubidoux

I really didn't mean to start an argument about whether there is a moral issue about spending that kind of money on wine. Dh and I would never do that because our dream is to get back to having two cars again and 350 would be enough for a whole months car payment. But there are probably a lot of people out there who would think that we don't each need a car and question the morality of us spending on that. I don't think two cars is frivolous but I do have an iPhone, an iPad, and a Mac notebook and that's pretty hard to justify.

Gotta say that I picture these meanies at the Met as being played by the cast of Downton Abby.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> I really didn't mean to start an argument about whether there is a moral issue about spending that kind of money on wine. Dh and I would never do that because our dream is to get back to having two cars again and 350 would be enough for a whole months car payment. But there are probably a lot of people out there who would think that we don't each need a car and question the morality of us spending on that. I don't think two cars is frivolous but I do have an iPhone, an iPad, and a Mac notebook and that's pretty hard to justify.
> 
> Gotta say that I picture these meanies at the Met as being played by the cast of Downton Abby.


And maybe that's the point - everyone has their own priorities. The iStuff is for some, not for others. And there is NOTHING wrong with that! Yep. I have spent close to $350 for a bottle of wine. When my (now) ex got his PhD, I took him out for a really pricey dinner - $400 for the two of us, $300 of which was for the wine. And ya know... I saved for that dinner over 5+ years. I refuse to feel guilty for that, It was a big occasion - one I felt worthy of celebrating in a big way. Not everyone's choice, and THAT is okay, too.

Maybe if we all spent less time judging others for their choices and more time focusing on our own lives, the world would be a better place.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> As for the income range OP specified? Big deal. Those who are there likely know better what flies those who aren't.


Well at least you're honest not to mention unapologetic about your prejudice.


----------



## Alenushka

Somehow Sergey Brin and Stever Jobs figured it all out without tips from their parents.


----------



## Buzzer Beater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Thing is... The folks who CAN afford to toss $350 for a bottle of wine more often than not are also quite philanthropic. Look at Bill and Melinda Gates. Or the late Steve Jobs. They can afford to live large, but they also put money where it's needed. I see nothing wrong with spending large when you've worked hard for it. AND then also give where needed. And most do.
> 
> *As I said - I'm not in that "class" by any stretch, But I can see at least one of my kids spending time with those who are. And I think it's important for him to know how to behave appropriately, to have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation, etc.*
> 
> As for the income range OP specified? Big deal. Those who are there likely know better what flies those who aren't.


wow.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> Gotta say that I picture these meanies at the Met as being played by the cast of Downton Abby.


Oooh, Downton Abby is my guilty pleasure. They're much cooler than meanies at the Met. The youngest ran off with the chauffeur!


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Well at least you're honest not to mention unapologetic about your prejudice.


Yep - *I* am.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buzzer Beater*
> 
> wow.


Why the wow? That I want my child to be able to hold his own among the people who will be able to fund his dreams? Sorry, but I suspect that folks who don't make the big bucks aren't going to be commissioning symphonies any time soon. So yeah - he needs to know how to schmooze. Like it or not. that's kind of known as the reality of life.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Yep - *I* am.


Am I to assume your emphasized "*I*" is some thinly veiled attempt to imply I'm prejudice? I have nothing against the wealthy, and you won't find anything I've said here that indicates otherwise. Pointing out individual's prejudice does not make one prejudice.


----------



## Imakcerka

To each there own. I got where I'm at mostly by hard work and knowing the right people. The right people wouldn't be caught dead wasting money on thing that are not important. Pretty sure that's how they got where they are.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Yep - *I* am.
> 
> Why the wow? That I want my child to be able to hold his own among the people who will be able to fund his dreams? Sorry, but I suspect that folks who don't make the big bucks aren't going to be commissioning symphonies any time soon. So yeah - he needs to know how to schmooze. Like it or not. that's kind of known as the reality of life.


----------



## Mom31

Most of my family is upper middle class if not upper class. Some own trading firms, are VP's at the merk- own golf courses etc.

I am a poor single mom who cleans houses for a living.

I would love for my kids to have the opportunities that my cousins kids have.... but I think my kids are learning valuable lessons down here in the lower income with me. They appreciate what they have. My parents see to it that they know how to eat at a table.... we had candle lit dinners as a child- a housekeeper, and a very comfortable life most of the time. My dad was the President of a firm.

he chaired many community organizations etc.

I don't like reading this thread. At all. Just thought I would chime in- not all of the poor people started out that way- or have no need to know those things either.

I for one am dating a man who would be considered upper middle class. We got to wineries and when I don't know what to do I just ask him. When we go to dinner and I am concerned about what to order I ask the waiter for a suggestion. When we tried to eat this fancy sushi one time- on our first date and I could not figure out how to get it into my mouth without a fork I made a joke of it.

I think confidence is key. And you can teach that in any income bracket. If you teach your kids that *they matter* regardless of the amt of money their parents or they make and they should be proud of who they are and where they come from- I think they will be able to handle most situations well.... even if they have to wing it- it won't crush them to be in an awkward situation- they will be able to brush it off- or just be confident and ask for help.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> You have me rolling!


Which part? Just so we can have a good laugh together.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> As I said - I'm not in that "class" by any stretch, But I can see at least one of my kids spending time with those who are. And I think it's important for him to know how to behave appropriately, to have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation, etc.


My experience is totally anecdotal but I think it is somewhat on point. I went from West Virginia back-sticks to the NYC art world in a flash. My survival (and the survival of my colleagues) depended greatly on the generosity and support of monied individuals. In retrospect, it wasn't about intelligence or cultural knowledge, etc. It was about good salesmanship. The intelligence and cultural knowledge were already there. We were artists, mind you. LOL. In order to survive, however, the most awesome artist needs the ability to sell his/her goods. He/she needs to convince others that they absolutely need what you are offering. You need to convince others that your work is important and valid...that it benefits them personally and society at large.

There will be times when the random prodigy comes along and the savvy sponsor will recognize the talent and underwrite it. For most of us, though, it's all about sales. You can talk the talk but there is a certain level of sales (whether likable or not) that is involved in selling what some consider ideas, trends, cultural markers. Look, I spent much of my life as a visual/theatre artist and then I became a lawyer. Basically, in both in arenas, I sell ideas, thoughts, knowledge. I love what I do but at the end of the day I think it's all a scam. A scam because I don't think what I do justifies the price that people pay for what I do. I still have a lot of old fashioned ideas about "work" means. To me, my thoughts aren't work, but there are people out there that pay a premium for me to think. It's so messed up.

But it all boils down to sales, in my opinion. All the good sales people I've ever met have been "jacks of all trades" and have managed to sweet talk me into something I didn't know I wanted or needed. All the tony people of the world without sales ability are just hangers-on, groupies, etc. They want to be there, but they have nothing to offer.

Sorry guys, saying all this in love and laughter and complete self-deprecation.


----------



## MrsGregory

I personally don't care how you spend your 350.00. I don't find the marginally rich, moderately rich or mega-rich offensive simply by dint of their wealth. What struck me was that each class, each group of people, each and every sub-culture has it's own social currency, however, the rules for "not sucking at life" remain, in general, the same for everyone. We are, after all, the same species, just divided up into classes based on resources, race and religion. The very rich schmooze. I schmooze. I doubt we're schmoozing the same people, but the skill set remains the same. I found the insinuation that the well-off simply need to know how to do more a little troubling. *Why can't we discuss how we teach our children to operate in our society, whatever our society is? *

I was also fairly bemused by the whole restaurant side-bar; how does a person who has accumulated enough wealth to worry about teaching her children about wine pairings not feel comfortable asking for assistance with a menu not in her native tongue? I was under the impression that stockpiling money took some grit, some nerve, some chutzpah... maybe I was wrong. Maybe this is why I'm not doing the backstroke in my $$$s like Scrooge McDuck. By no means is this an attack on the OP; I'm truly baffled by this. Maybe my comfort with asking questions brands me as working class; maybe raising my hand and inquiring is declasse. But I just don't get it. So I weighed in.

Finally, I want to say that although I am certain everyone has troubles and travails in life, I find the idea that being well-to-do is as difficult or nearly as difficult, as marginalizing or nearly as marginalizing, as challenging or nearly as challenging as being working class, poor or indigent frankly and wholly ridiculous. I disagree that it is more socially acceptable to take shots at the rich; I think that by and in large in USAian society it is completely acceptable to attack the poor, blaming them for their situation and refusing any public action that might benefit the poor at large and society as a whole.

I don't believe any of the posters that mentioned they were offended by posts to this thread bore my previous post in mind, however, I wanted to clarify my position. What I type I do so as gently as possible, and respectfully, but really... why can't we discuss how we share our social capital with our children as one group? Why was this a "class thing"?


----------



## ladytigerfairy

wow - this thread even appearing on mothering has me surprised.......

Wine, ordering in a restaurant? give me break !!!!!!!! I think teaching your children about how to change the world for the greater good, about politics, human rights, other cultures... to respect & value all humanity, life is sacred.

One day without thinking, I rolled down our car window and gave our lunch to some random guy on a street corner with a "help" sign, and had to spend the next hour explaining to my two year old why I gave our lunch way.. Has zero to do with income, everything to do with having a caring, compassionate child who will grow up to positively contribute to our world.


----------



## LynnS6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrsGregory*
> 
> Finally, I want to say that although I am certain everyone has troubles and travails in life, *I find the idea that being well-to-do is as difficult or nearly as difficult, as marginalizing or nearly as marginalizing, as challenging or nearly as challenging as being working class, poor or indigent frankly and wholly ridiculous.* I disagree that it is more socially acceptable to take shots at the rich; I think that by and in large in USAian society it is completely acceptable to attack the poor, blaming them for their situation and refusing any public action that might benefit the poor at large and society as a whole.


I agree fully. There's a huge difference between life when you have to worry about whether you're going to have a roof over your head or be able to feed your kids (or yourself) next week and when you don't. There is a reason that poor people have shorter life expectancies, and it's not just because they can't afford organic foods. Stress really weighs you down. It weighs you down even more when you have no control over it.

As for attacking the rich vs attacking the poor: No one has suggested that rich kids clean schools because they haven't learned a work ethic from their parents. (Despite the fact that most rich kids don't have to work that hard around the house.)

Quote:


> I don't believe any of the posters that mentioned they were offended by posts to this thread bore my previous post in mind, however, I wanted to clarify my position. What I type I do so as gently as possible, and respectfully, but really... why can't we discuss how we share our social capital with our children as one group? Why was this a "class thing"?


It's a "class thing" because social capital in different social milieus is a different thing. And in our current culture, income level and culture are so intertwined it's hard to tease them apart. I agree it doesn't have to be income-based, and the skills I value the most, compassion, kindness and politeness, aren't. But there is a whole set of cultural things that my kids are picking up simply because of who their parents are. How many 7 year olds in the US know about graduate school? Mine does, not because I'm pushing her to go, but because I talk about my job. This isn't an essential skill, merely a byproduct.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrsGregory*
> 
> I disagree that it is more socially acceptable to take shots at the rich; I think that by and in large in USAian society it is completely acceptable to attack the poor, blaming them for their situation and refusing any public action that might benefit the poor at large and society as a whole.


Exactly. So well said!


----------



## Buzzer Beater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> As I said - I'm not in that "class" by any stretch, But I can see at least one of my kids spending time with those who are. And I think it's important for him to know how to behave appropriately, to have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation, etc.


I said wow to this because I can't believe what you are saying. That folks in certain classes have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation and others don't. That's such prejudice. Cultural knowledge comes from education, not money. That's what bothers me about this thread, not that some folks have money, want money, spend money or whatever. It's the myth that folks with money are finer or more intelligent. That may have been true in history but not now.

You go on later to say your son wants to work with folks who commission symphonies? Yeah, that takes big bucks but intelligent conversation doesn't. Do you see how that sounds? I'm sure you don't mean your other children will be stuck with unintelligent conversation.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> My experience is totally anecdotal but I think it is somewhat on point. I went from West Virginia back-sticks to the NYC art world in a flash. My survival (and the survival of my colleagues) depended greatly on the generosity and support of monied individuals. In retrospect, it wasn't about intelligence or cultural knowledge, etc. It was about good salesmanship. The intelligence and cultural knowledge were already there. We were artists, mind you. LOL. In order to survive, however, the most awesome artist needs the ability to sell his/her goods. He/she needs to convince others that they absolutely need what you are offering. You need to convince others that your work is important and valid...that it benefits them personally and society at large.
> 
> <etc>


Realistically, though, it is much easier if you are dealing with the same currency as your buyers. Playing the naif only works if you're young and cute. Of course being a good sales person is important. And part of that is being on the same playing field, being able to talk about things your buyer understands and is interested in. I think you'll agree with that.


----------



## Mama Metis

If there is one skill a rich kid needs, it is how to never talk about class openly. Don't even acknowledge that it exists! Only when absolutely pressed, one might use euphemisms like "high net worth."


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buzzer Beater*
> 
> I said wow to this because I can't believe what you are saying. That folks in certain classes have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation and others don't. That's such prejudice. Cultural knowledge comes from education, not money. That's what bothers me about this thread, not that some folks have money, want money, spend money or whatever. It's the myth that folks with money are finer or more intelligent. That may have been true in history but not now.
> 
> You go on later to say your son wants to work with folks who commission symphonies? Yeah, that takes big bucks but intelligent conversation doesn't. Do you see how that sounds? I'm sure you don't mean your other children will be stuck with unintelligent conversation.


And you completely misunderstood what I posted. If you had read my FIRST post on this thread, you'd see that. Maybe you'd like to go back and read that before going further.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> I don't believe any of the posters that mentioned they were offended by posts to this thread bore my previous post in mind, however, I wanted to clarify my position. What I type I do so as gently as possible, and respectfully, but really... why can't we discuss how we share our social capital with our children as one group? Why was this a "class thing"?


Unfortunately "class" is alive and well. I wouldn't put it in the class arena of yesteryear, where social and class strata was more defined (think Pride & Prejudice and stuff like that), but I would say that the idea of class is embedded in our psyches as a result of politics. There are several political theories out there (which I consider scams and promoted for the sole purpose of dividing people): people are poor because they don't work hard enough; rich people are rich because they worked hard enough; poor people will rise to the top once rich people are adequately compensated for their hard work (trickle down economics); there will always be rich and poor, and kindness toward the poor is should be optional; discussion of social capital is un-American.

This is chatter I hear in the political discourse in our country.

We can expound all we want on MDC about social mobility and the sharing of resources for the greater good. I'm afraid to say that MDC represents a very small portion of the whole. Until our collective attitudes change about why people are poor and why there are insanely rich people out there, I don't think we can even touch the concept of collective responsibility. Things are too polarized. There are too many hang-ups and misconceptions about what people are worth and their place in society. I don't think things like education and knowledge matter any more. There is too much power concentrated in a tiny area with little recourse in the majority. I go back to my previous post that I believe people don't vote in their best interest or in the interest of society. They've bought a story, hook, line and sinker. I don't know what to do to change that.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Realistically, though, it is much easier if you are dealing with the same currency as your buyers. Playing the naif only works if you're young and cute. Of course being a good sales person is important. And part of that is being on the same playing field, being able to talk about things your buyer understands and is interested in. I think you'll agree with that.


I agree that being able to talk about the same things that your buyer understands is valid, but realistically that knowledge is only applicable to the goods that you are selling, as well as selling yourself as a product, so to speak. Take for instance, Jean Michel Basquiat, a Brooklyn kid and high school drop-out. Here is a kid that rose to prominence in the '80s art world not because he was cultured, but because he had a combination of talent plus public image savvy. He didn't possess the background of the finer things in life, but he sure did possess personality and the ability to impress. Andy Warhol is another example of working class hero rising to the top, not because his parents instilled any basic skills in him for fineries, but because he was the ultimate sales guy and observer of culture and trends. I would say that in both instances, the skills followed the smarts. I think that both Andy and Jean Michel were probably exposed to a lot of ideas whether on purpose or through their own musings. I don't think they were trained to jump social groups. I think they were the ultimate sales people, and they were neither cute (by vogue standards) or naive. I guess what I was trying to say in previous post is that in order to step into a different social group, you have to know how to sell yourself and your ideas. Good salespeople will always come to the table with the necessary skills, but without the salesmanship, you're just another person in the crowd.


----------



## Buzzer Beater

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> And you completely misunderstood what I posted. If you had read my FIRST post on this thread, you'd see that. Maybe you'd like to go back and read that before going further.


Good to know, my bad. I most certainly did not see your first post so you can imagine what I thought reading the post I objected to. It means something entirely different in context I didn't have.


----------



## Imakcerka

Tiger, this is all absurd. Status and money only go so far. I get that we all hope for our children to have bright futures, at this point I think we all have a different idea of what constitutes success. I said you have me laughing because I cannot for the life of me fathom how a social circle would determine your child's success.


----------



## Dar

A lot of people seem to be taking this really personally... do you not think that there is a certain body of cultural knowledge that upper and upper-middle class people generally learn while people in other classes often don't? Really, each social class has its own sphere of cultural knowledge, but if you're interested in becoming upper-middle class then it helps to know that cultural currency. Some of it is as simple as knowing how to navigate going to college or grad school, or what to wear to an interview, or how and when to write a thank you letter. Part of it is feeling comfortable at cocktail or dinner parties, and most people feel more comfortable when they know something about the topics being discussed and understand some of the social graces and manners expected (Which fork do you use? What is the 4:20 position? Where should you leave your napkin when you're finished?). No one will hunt you down if you make a faux pas, but it still feels uncomfortable, and I'm not seeing why it's wrong to acknowledge that. Making social connections is important for many careers, whether we like to think it is or not.

Of course everyone wants their kids to be good, kind, caring people. That's a given.And it really isn't about money - it's about class, and as another poster said before, they're different things but often related. The U.S. is widely seen as having more class mobility than most other countries but it's still not always easy to change classes, in part because of not having the cultural capital.


----------



## Drummer's Wife

This thread is interesting. I'll have to come back and comment when I haven't had as much wine to drink. Wine that I have no idea how to pronounce, much less what food it pairs best with. I just know it was damn tasty. I, for one, have no problem asking a waiter about fancy foods or wines, and, I have never noticed my social group giving a crap. Hell, if I'm going to be paying $80 for my food and drinks alone, I think it's okay to ask a question or two (or just point at the menu and say I'd like to try that). Anyone who is too snooty to judge, is not worth spending time with.


----------



## tropicana

if you teach your children nothing else, teach them that there are three categories of everything there is to know in life:

1) the things you know.

2) the things you know that you don't know.

3) the things you don't know that you don't know.

everyone can identify the the things that they know. those are one's familiar trappings... middle class, upper middle class, working class, whatever.

sometimes people can identify some of the things that they know they don't know. those would be the trappings of the lifestyle of another "class"... street terms for an upper middle class man. wine tastings for a working class person. etc.

and then there is the always tricky issue of the things that you don't know that you don't know. and there are always things that you don't know that you don't know. and the fact that you don't know that you don't know them, sets you up to be fooled by these things. one such "thing" that comes to mind in reading your OP (and i have to admit i have not read all 7 pages yet), is that you don't seem to "know" that it's *perfectly OK* to not know one's way around wine tastings. i grew up somewhat upper middle class. i'm not the least bit insecure that i don't know wine tastings, nor do i care to know wine tastings. i'm getting by in my life perfectly well without knowing flavors of wine, and, if the occasion were to arise in which knowing wine flavors would be some sort of social requirement, i would feel perfectly comfortable coming right out and stating that someone is going to have to give me some help here. it's OK to not be "up" on such things.

in a gentle way, i would hope to just open your eyes a bit to see that *perhaps* you are feeling just a tad insecure yourself perhaps coming from a working class background (you stated) and marrying into an upper middle class lifestyle, with a husband who is uncomfortable not being versed in working class jargon and ways of life.

as you go on with your life, i think it becomes easier to see, perhaps with age, that we are all essentially the same, having more money is not necessarily an advantage in life, and that all backgrounds, everybody, truly has the power to have an impact on the tapestry of our world.


----------



## tropicana

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Thing is... The folks who CAN afford to toss $350 for a bottle of wine more often than not are also quite philanthropic. Look at Bill and Melinda Gates. Or the late Steve Jobs. They can afford to live large, but they also put money where it's needed. I see nothing wrong with spending large when you've worked hard for it. AND then also give where needed. And most do.
> 
> As I said - I'm not in that "class" by any stretch, But I can see at least one of my kids spending time with those who are. And I think it's important for him to know how to behave appropriately, to have the cultural knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation, etc.
> 
> As for the income range OP specified? Big deal. Those who are there likely know better what flies those who aren't.


i have to respectfully disagree.

first off, people don't get to be super rich by giving their money away. because, if they did give their money away, well, they wouldn't be rich anymore.

that's just a fact. follow the money.

sure they can give WAY more than the average joe. because they have/make way more.

it doesn't make them any better, and it doesn't make a bigger difference just because it's more.

oh, and they get super tax breaks too, when they (the super rich) give to charity.

compared to, say, the person who is too poor or without a house or children who doesn't even itemize their taxes, giving to charity of what they have. "poor" people who give to charity get no tax break. they may give as much or even more percentage-wise as the super rich, but it's a more "pure" gift.

AND if you're going to use the example of Bill Gates, well, he's very political and controlling in his giving, don't you think? a poor person giving all that they can doesn't get to dictate how his or her funds are used.

--

on the other hand, we can always make the assumption that the persons giving $350 for a bottle of wine are doing their part to bolster the economy. that much seems true.


----------



## Linda on the move

I find this thread fascinating, but some points to clarify -----

100K for a family of 4 even in a moderate income area isn't enough to live the way many are describing -- with a Merc and black tie events and frequent trips to Europe. Not by a long shot.

Second, I think that some people base their idea of how they rich live, act and think on TV and movies. But life is not a Frasier episode.









Because of my DH's job, he deals with people who are wealthy and upper middle class. You know wanna know what is really important for him to be able to talk about???? The big mystery subject......

sports

Seriously. He's multi lingual in sports. He can discuss hockey with a Canadian, soccer with a Brit, and of course football with an American. He can do it all in French if required. And he takes time out of his week (sometimes while on a plane) to keep up with what is going on in the major sports in N. America and Europe. It's the important cultural information for him to have. Sometimes I find it disconcerting when he does it in front of me for a sport/country I didn't know was on his watch list.

Next, many people find themselves with varying levels of income over the course of their lives (as shown in this thread). There's really no way of knowing where in all that any of our children will end up. I do think that becoming middle class AT ALL is becoming more difficult. I think financially things are more difficult for people coming of age now than they were a couple of decades of ago. Its impossible to project what it will really be like when our children come of age. Perhaps helping our children become resourceful and flexible are some of the most important skills.

I think a few posters here sound to me like they are preparing their children to live in Victorian England rather than then 21st century.


----------



## joensally

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> A lot of people seem to be taking this really personally... do you not think that there is a certain body of cultural knowledge that upper and upper-middle class people generally learn while people in other classes often don't? Really, each social class has its own sphere of cultural knowledge, but if you're interested in becoming upper-middle class then it helps to know that cultural currency. Some of it is as simple as knowing how to navigate going to college or grad school, or what to wear to an interview, or how and when to write a thank you letter. Part of it is feeling comfortable at cocktail or dinner parties, and most people feel more comfortable when they know something about the topics being discussed and understand some of the social graces and manners expected (Which fork do you use? What is the 4:20 position? Where should you leave your napkin when you're finished?). No one will hunt you down if you make a faux pas, but it still feels uncomfortable, and I'm not seeing why it's wrong to acknowledge that. Making social connections is important for many careers, whether we like to think it is or not.
> Of course everyone wants their kids to be good, kind, caring people. That's a given.And it really isn't about money - it's about class, and as another poster said before, they're different things but often related. The U.S. is widely seen as having more class mobility than most other countries but it's still not always easy to change classes, in part because of not having the cultural capital.


This.

These Wikis do a pretty good job of describing core issues discussed in this thread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_middle_class

I think the OP is looking for the key "trappings" of an UMC lifestyle to propel her family into, and entrench them within, an UMC life. Ok. I also understand the motivation, when the economy is so horrible, to forecast oneself into a strata with the appearance of greater security.


----------



## *bejeweled*

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Alenushka*
> 
> Somehow Sergey Brin and Stever Jobs figured it all out without tips from their parents.










Ha ha.


----------



## *bejeweled*

So, once your son learns how to "schmooze", will your feelings be hurt if he leaves you behind? After all, you will be of a lesser class.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Yep - *I* am.
> 
> Why the wow? That I want my child to be able to hold his own among the people who will be able to fund his dreams? Sorry, but I suspect that folks who don't make the big bucks aren't going to be commissioning symphonies any time soon. So yeah - he needs to know how to schmooze. Like it or not. that's kind of known as the reality of life.


----------



## DoubleDouble

And here I was, all ready to post about a great skill that makes me feel at home at white-tie events at Imperial Palaces (not of the Las Vegas kind)... and realized I don't earn 100K to qualify to contribute! oh well....


----------



## GoBecGo

I read the first page and a selection since and laughed and laughed. I have to admit that i need a fairly good (but possible) exchange rate to "qualify" for this thread, but hey, they archive these so there's no reason not to think on a given day i might be ok here.

Teach them Good Manners. They are free, which is surprising when you think of how many people of AL income brackets seem to lack them so sorely.

And please don't force anyone to learn about wine unless they are passionately interested in it. If they know more than the sommelier does then the restaurant probably isn't going to be worth the mortgage they charge for dinner anyway.


----------



## mtiger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by **bejeweled**
> 
> So, once your son learns how to "schmooze", will your feelings be hurt if he leaves you behind? After all, you will be of a lesser class.


The only response this warrants is <rolling eyes>.


----------



## crunchy_mommy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> A lot of people seem to be taking this really personally... do you not think that there is a certain body of cultural knowledge that upper and upper-middle class people generally learn while people in other classes often don't? Really, each social class has its own sphere of cultural knowledge, but if you're interested in becoming upper-middle class then it helps to know that cultural currency. Some of it is as simple as knowing how to navigate going to college or grad school, or what to wear to an interview, or how and when to write a thank you letter. Part of it is feeling comfortable at cocktail or dinner parties, and most people feel more comfortable when they know something about the topics being discussed and understand some of the social graces and manners expected (Which fork do you use? What is the 4:20 position? Where should you leave your napkin when you're finished?). No one will hunt you down if you make a faux pas, but it still feels uncomfortable, and I'm not seeing why it's wrong to acknowledge that.


I guess what's uncomfortable about 'acknowledging that' is the insinuation that the less well-off don't need to know these things. Don't poor kids also need to know how to navigate going to college (though they'll struggle more to get there & pay for it), ace an interview, and write a thank you letter? Those seem like pretty universal skills. Shouldn't they know how to handle a fancy dinner party, perhaps moreso because they may have less exposure & practice with it? Are the middle-class & poor not expected to have manners and carry on an intelligent conversation?


----------



## mamazee

I was lower middle class growing up, and then I married my husband and instantly became wealthy. I never felt out of place or like I hadn't learned something I needed to know. I just don't think there's as much difference between upper and upper-middle classes and other classes in the US as some in this thread seem to think. If people are polite and respectful, they'll be fine.


----------



## Imakcerka

you have to admit this thread has gotten crazy.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> you have to admit this thread has gotten crazy.


It's fun, though. I missed threads like this on MDC.


----------



## pianojazzgirl

There is certainly a lot of crazy talk here.

We all need to know how to be gracious, be polite, write thank you letters, eat with polite table manners, converse on topics of which we have knowledge, conduct ourselves well during an interview, etc.

I think no parent needs to worry about teaching their children about wine, nor do they need to teach their children every language they might ever conceivably see on a menu.

Wild.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> A lot of people seem to be taking this really personally... do you not think that there is a certain body of cultural knowledge that upper and upper-middle class people generally learn while people in other classes often don't? Really, each social class has its own sphere of cultural knowledge, but if you're interested in becoming upper-middle class then it helps to know that cultural currency. *Some of it is as simple as knowing how to navigate going to college or grad school, or what to wear to an interview, or how and when to write a thank you letter. Part of it is feeling comfortable at cocktail or dinner parties, and most people feel more comfortable when they know something about the topics being discussed and understand some of the social graces and manners expected (Which fork do you use? What is the 4:20 position? Where should you leave your napkin when you're finished?).* No one will hunt you down if you make a faux pas, but it still feels uncomfortable, and I'm not seeing why it's wrong to acknowledge that. Making social connections is important for many careers, whether we like to think it is or not.


I don't think these things are specific to being upper class with the possible exception of the "4:20 position," which I couldn't even find on a cursory Google search BTW. Most of them are just good life skills that pretty much anyone regardless of class or income would benefit from knowing.

And based on my own experience, I certainly don't believe they're things the upper class "generally learn" while the other classes "often don't." Maybe a hundred years ago this might have been true, but class is more fluid now leading to more variety, and there's a large middle class with access to more. I'm middle class and grew up middle class, and I managed to pick up everything listed other than the aforementioned 4:20 position. I don't think I'm unique in that respect.

ETA - I just found out what the 4:20 position is. I actually did know that rule just didn't know it was called that. I'm so middle class.









ETA #2 - It's how you place your utensils diagonally across the plate at the end of a meal.


----------



## pianojazzgirl

I just googled the 4:20 position too. I've always done that (I suppose my parents taught me), but I never knew there was a term for it.


----------



## ollyoxenfree

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> Because of my DH's job, he deals with people who are wealthy and upper middle class. You know wanna know what is really important for him to be able to talk about???? The big mystery subject......
> 
> sports
> 
> Seriously. He's multi lingual in sports. He can discuss hockey with a Canadian, soccer with a Brit, and of course football with an American. He can do it all in French if required. And he takes time out of his week (sometimes while on a plane) to keep up with what is going on in the major sports in N. America and Europe. It's the important cultural information for him to have. Sometimes I find it disconcerting when he does it in front of me for a sport/country I didn't know was on his watch list.


This, this, this. So true. Especially helpful for women in male-dominated professions (engineering, law.....). Someone gave me this tip when I first started my professional life and I can't tell you how helpful it's been. If you are in a new town or a different country, it's more important to scan the local sports pages before a business event than the business section.

I need to read through the entire thread to comment further, this caught my eye and I had to comment.


----------



## mambera

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> My experience is totally anecdotal but I think it is somewhat on point. I went from West Virginia back-sticks to the NYC art world in a flash. My survival (and the survival of my colleagues) depended greatly on the generosity and support of monied individuals. In retrospect, it wasn't about intelligence or cultural knowledge, etc. It was about good salesmanship. The intelligence and cultural knowledge were already there. We were artists, mind you. LOL. In order to survive, however, the most awesome artist needs the ability to sell his/her goods. He/she needs to convince others that they absolutely need what you are offering. You need to convince others that your work is important and valid...that it benefits them personally and society at large.
> 
> There will be times when the random prodigy comes along and the savvy sponsor will recognize the talent and underwrite it. For most of us, though, it's all about sales. You can talk the talk but there is a certain level of sales (whether likable or not) that is involved in selling what some consider ideas, trends, cultural markers. Look, I spent much of my life as a visual/theatre artist and then I became a lawyer. Basically, in both in arenas, I sell ideas, thoughts, knowledge. I love what I do but at the end of the day I think it's all a scam. A scam because I don't think what I do justifies the price that people pay for what I do. I still have a lot of old fashioned ideas about "work" means. To me, my thoughts aren't work, but there are people out there that pay a premium for me to think. It's so messed up.
> 
> But it all boils down to sales, in my opinion. All the good sales people I've ever met have been "jacks of all trades" and have managed to sweet talk me into something I didn't know I wanted or needed. All the tony people of the world without sales ability are just hangers-on, groupies, etc. They want to be there, but they have nothing to offer.
> 
> Sorry guys, saying all this in love and laughter and complete self-deprecation.


Jeebus. This is exactly why I would never want to try and make a living out of my art.


----------



## mambera

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> ETA - I just found out what the 4:20 position is. I actually did know that rule just didn't know it was called that. I'm so middle class.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ETA #2 - It's how you place your utensils diagonally across the plate at the end of a meal.


Good Lord. Thanks for saving me the Google. I do meet the 'income requirement' for this thread







and all that sprung to mind on this one was marijuana.


----------



## ollyoxenfree

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mambera*
> 
> Good Lord. Thanks for saving me the Google. I do meet the 'income requirement' for this thread
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and all that sprung to mind on this one was marijuana.


Thank you. That was also my first thought, but I didn't want to say.....


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ollyoxenfree*
> 
> Thank you. That was also my first thought, but I didn't want to say.....


Me too.







I thought perhaps it was special way the upper class held it.


----------



## pianojazzgirl

LMAO!


----------



## ollyoxenfree

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Me too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought perhaps it was special way the upper class held it.


I remember my college roommate expounding at length about the song "Pass the Dutchie From the Left-Hand Side".

She had a long thesis about how it was about social rules and class warfare and the left wing and um, yeah, marijuana


----------



## Imakcerka

Pinkies out while you toke.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Me too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I thought perhaps it was special way the upper class held it.


----------



## ollyoxenfree

Cultural capital, indeed.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> I remember my college roommate expounding at length about the song "Pass the Dutchie From the Left-Hand Side".
> 
> She had a long thesis about how it was about social rules and class warfare and the left wing and um, yeah, marijuana


----------



## Imakcerka

Well good this thread just got better.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Now I'm going to have that song in my head all day!


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mambera*
> 
> Jeebus. This is exactly why I would never want to try and make a living out of my art.


You and me both! (that's why I'm presently a lawyer







) (TBH: I actually had an attitude problem in the arts about making what others liked/expected...so I opted to make my living in another capacity, whilst maintaining some modicum of personal integrity).


----------



## MrsGregory

Are death and marijuana the two great equalizers of humankind? I think so...


----------



## rubidoux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> It's fun, though. I missed threads like this on MDC.


I've been thinking this, too. Good to see a little life here! And it's an interesting topic.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> You and me both! (that's why I'm presently a lawyer
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) (TBH: I actually had an attitude problem in the arts about making what others liked/expected...so I opted to make my living in another capacity, whilst maintaining some modicum of personal integrity).


I would love to do my art for a living and I could probably get away with an etsy business (I had a pretty brisk business going for a while) but the law school loans will not wait forever. Sucks that I have to be a lawyer mostly just to pay for the school.  I could have made enough on etsy to have that second car and probably pay for most of my sons' schooling for the next few years. But I'm studying for the freaking bar, which is hateful, imho.


----------



## Hoopin' Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> I find this thread fascinating, but some points to clarify -----
> 
> 100K for a family of 4 even in a moderate income area isn't enough to live the way many are describing -- with a Merc and black tie events and frequent trips to Europe. Not by a long shot.
> 
> Second, I think that some people base their idea of how they rich live, act and think on TV and movies. But life is not a Frasier episode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because of my DH's job, he deals with people who are wealthy and upper middle class. You know wanna know what is really important for him to be able to talk about???? The big mystery subject......
> 
> sports
> 
> Seriously. He's multi lingual in sports. He can discuss hockey with a Canadian, soccer with a Brit, and of course football with an American. He can do it all in French if required. And he takes time out of his week (sometimes while on a plane) to keep up with what is going on in the major sports in N. America and Europe. It's the important cultural information for him to have. Sometimes I find it disconcerting when he does it in front of me for a sport/country I didn't know was on his watch list.
> 
> Next, many people find themselves with varying levels of income over the course of their lives (as shown in this thread). There's really no way of knowing where in all that any of our children will end up. I do think that becoming middle class AT ALL is becoming more difficult. I think financially things are more difficult for people coming of age now than they were a couple of decades of ago. Its impossible to project what it will really be like when our children come of age. Perhaps helping our children become resourceful and flexible are some of the most important skills.
> 
> I think a few posters here sound to me like they are preparing their children to live in Victorian England rather than then 21st century.


Thank you!!!!

I was beginning to think I was transported into an Edith Wharton novel.

And no offense to anyone, but 200k a year does not a Metropolitan Black Tie Hobknobber make.

People who spend their days courting donors - they better be up on local sports, current local events, and know their organization inside and out.

I think the OP just wants her kids to be prepared for things she wasn't. I get that, we all want that for our kids. Honestly though, I think much of what they need to be prepared can be done by fostering an open mind, a love of learning, and an intellectual curiosity. And we should all be teaching our children etiquette for our society, and how to respect other cultural norms. I just fail to see how anyone of this income related, really.


----------



## VisionaryMom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tjej*
> 
> Interesting question and interesting thoughts.
> 
> I think I grew up in what you are talking about, and my parents did a decent job. They taught me the value of money and hard work. They let me experience things that I couldn't have if I had needed to work those full-time summer jobs every year. I was able to do a lot of volunteering and service work.
> 
> I think the comfort you are talking about is pretty evasive. It really depends on which circle you end up in. I mean, teaching table manners for a nice restaurant, so your kid isn't rude is probably about the only thing I can think of that is universal. Things like italian and skiing and cruises, etc. really depend on where you live and what interests there are socially. I suppose teaching a child to listen before they speak would be helpful. Then you can understand where the other person is coming from before you spout off ignorantly about something. Perhaps the art of being subtle? It's always classier to be less ostentatious. And I suppose the idea that everyone pursues higher education is class related.
> 
> ...
> 
> I also moved to a working class town after marriage. There are different topics discussed, different priorities in life... I think that in contrast to my up-bringing, there is a general focus on ideas and theories in the upper-middle-class lifestyle, whereas in the working class lifestyle it is a more practical focus. I can see how you would find it intimidating to go from working to upper class social groups, but it is also intimidating the other way. And it also isn't always about "class" - it is about regional differences and career differences.


Thank you. These were the kinds of issues that had me thinking. I've read The Millionaire Next Door. We donate both financially & personally to a whole range of charities. Of course, we have people over for dinner and play backyard games. We're involved in a religious community, and our children have a range of friends. It's not that we don't live a typical life. Even if we did have millions of dollars, we still would do those things. I'm not questioning the core of who I am - just how to help my children gain knowledge that many of the other people around us know already because they grew up in upper-class families where they picked up that knowledge.

My questions were specifically about helping my children to fit into a different social class from the one in which I grew up, and while people can theorize about social class being unimportant, the truth is that different socioeconomic classes do have different expectations and experiences. Our society is not a pure meritocracy, and my children have a very different life from the one I had growing up. I'm glad that they do, and I don't feel badly about saying that. I don't want them to be the kid who's always left out because we cannot afford anything. I don't want them to have to panic if they're invited somewhere that costs money because we can't do it. I don't want them to have only 3 pairs of pants that they have to wash and be sure to rotate. I grew up with that, and it wasn't fun or life-enriching. It's not noble to be poor (unless you took a religious vow of poverty, I suppose) just like it's not better to be affluent. Great and horrible people exist at both ends of the economic spectrum. I'm not asking about the value of a human life, for God's sake. I'm asking about little bits of knowledge that I should share in a systematic fashion with my children over the course of their lifetimes. I live in a place that still has cotillions. I could sign my kids up for those classes, but I'd prefer to teach them throughout their childhoods.


----------



## One_Girl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> A lot of people seem to be taking this really personally... do you not think that there is a certain body of cultural knowledge that upper and upper-middle class people generally learn while people in other classes often don't? Really, each social class has its own sphere of cultural knowledge, but if you're interested in becoming upper-middle class then it helps to know that cultural currency. Some of it is as simple as knowing how to navigate going to college or grad school, or what to wear to an interview, or how and when to write a thank you letter. Part of it is feeling comfortable at cocktail or dinner parties, and most people feel more comfortable when they know something about the topics being discussed and understand some of the social graces and manners expected (Which fork do you use? What is the 4:20 position? Where should you leave your napkin when you're finished?). No one will hunt you down if you make a faux pas, but it still feels uncomfortable, and I'm not seeing why it's wrong to acknowledge that. Making social connections is important for many careers, whether we like to think it is or not.
> Of course everyone wants their kids to be good, kind, caring people. That's a given.And it really isn't about money - it's about class, and as another poster said before, they're different things but often related. The U.S. is widely seen as having more class mobility than most other countries but it's still not always easy to change classes, in part because of not having the cultural capital.


I think it is so funny that you think those things are upper class skills. Most of the skills you list are common to all social class. I think what people are offended about is the assumption that lower middle class and poor people don't teach their kids to use manners, write thank you notes, speak another language, go to college, teach them about art, visit museums, travel, etc... I am sure there are some actual differences, but the one I am picking up on is that upper middle class and upper class people make a lot of inaccurate assumptions about other classes. Not that it is all sunshine and roses down on the other end but some of the assumptions are insulting, especially the college one.


----------



## Mom31

This thread makes me think of the unsinkable molly brown and her new money( titanic)- I think if someday I become wealthy I will not let it change me a bit- I think I will be like Molly Brown and stay the same.... I will laugh at my faux paus and joke about the ridiculousness all the while being myself.

Of course- I will be polite and gracious to others- but I would not let it change who I was- who my friends were or what my core values were.

Some of the richest people I know- you would never ever know it. My aunt always wears shorts and tights with flats and a casual shirt- sometimes that casual shirt will cost 300 $....

She is who she is regardless of who she is with- and people appreciate her for not putting on a show.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom*
> I'm asking about little bits of knowledge that I should share in a systematic fashion with my children over the course of their lifetimes. I live in a place that still has cotillions. I could sign my kids up for those classes, but I'd prefer to teach them throughout their childhoods.


You should share with them the hobbies that you enjoy, teach them how to advocate for themselves at school, how to budget responsibly, allow them to develop their own interests (sports, skiing, music, art, etc) and hobbies, encourage them to get an education, and teach them basic manners. The rest will follow by example most likely. The best way to teach them to have intelligent conversations, for example, is to include them in intelligent conversation at dinner each night. It gives them practice in a safe environment. Challenge their views and make them back up whatever arguments they offer (not by force, but in conversation). Most of what they learn will come from you.

My cousins know about wine, but only because my aunt and uncle enjoy wine, and enjoy cooking great meals. I know nothing about it, and its no big deal. My parents are in the class you are talking about, and my mom enjoys some wine, but its not a big hobby of hers like it is her sisters.

I happen to think all parents should do this anyway. I don't think it has to do with class or money. I guess YMMV.


----------



## VisionaryMom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *One_Girl*
> 
> I think it is so funny that you think those things are upper class skills. Most of the skills you list are common to all social class. I think what people are offended about is the assumption that lower middle class and poor people don't teach their kids to use manners, write thank you notes, speak another language, go to college, teach them about art, visit museums, travel, etc... I am sure there are some actual differences, but the one I am picking up on is that upper middle class and upper class people make a lot of inaccurate assumptions about other classes. Not that it is all sunshine and roses down on the other end but some of the assumptions are insulting, especially the college one.


I GREW UP WORKING CLASS. I do know exactly what life looks like in a working class and a middle class family. I'm not making assumptions. Unless my family was wildly different (and we are Southern, which I realize also matters culturally), no one brought up Copernicus or the local Rembrandt exhibit at dinner - not at my house and not at the houses of my friends. We played backyard football, not lacrosse. Short of people who grew up in immigrant households, I don't think that learning a second language is a priority in many working-class households. The reason that I addressed my comments to upper-middle and upper class families specifically was because of a thread here about a year ago. A number of parents said that they don't feed their children things like lobster because they cannot really afford to eat it and don't want to give their children a taste for something out of range. Quite a few people said that thank-you cards were outdated and not something their friends did; also most people agreed that teaching things like how properly to spoon soup and use multiple forks were not useful lessons. Many an MDC-er "lol"ed at the notion of eating at "such fancy places." So, yes, if you're working class and do those things, by all means share, but the general consensus (on a thread that also went pages and pages and pages) was that most people do not need to teach their children such esoteric skills because they would be unlikely to use them.

I'm sure that there are some working-class parents who teach those things to their children, but I'm confident in saying that they aren't the majority - or even a sizable minority. My mother - who was young and single when I was born - insisted that I learn to play golf and tennis because her outsider view was that making important business deals happened after such sporty outings. She pushed very hard (and I listened) for me to take French in high school because she viewed it as a more sophisticated language choice than Spanish. Those lessons, along with a lifelong push for college & grad school and a keen understanding of how professional women should present themselves, were actually pretty odd where I grew up. Other people went to college, of course, but their parents hadn't pushed it the way my mother did. No one played golf (no courses around). People didn't drink wine (strictly a beer and tequila kind of place). They didn't go to art museums. I'm not making up the differences that I can see between my childhood and my adulthood.


----------



## mamazee

To the OP, other than things like table etiquette, the things you're wanting them to know probably can't really be taught anyway. They're more absorbed by growing up in that environment. If you take them out to eat and talk about what wine you're chosing, they'll learn a bit about that. If you choose food off a menu and they hear what you order and see what you get, they'll learn that. If you are really that concerned and people have cotillion where you are, by all means get your kids involved with that when the time comes, but really I think this is something you can overthink and that isn't as big a deal as it feels like.


----------



## Mom31

My aunt and uncle pushed golf on my cousin- he got a full ride scholarship to college and now owns a trading firm. I guess you just answered your own question. teach them about wine golf and tennis.

Sounds like your mom really valued you moving up in class....

to me it's important for my son and dd to achieve more then I have up to this point and I talk to them almost daily about college and good professions. For one I talk to ds about going to U of I. But I am the only non college grad in my family- so maybe I am in the minority of poor folks.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

If you want your kids in a wealthy circle, get them involved in Crew. Its a sport, and is VERY expensive (think $200 uniforms, several regattas out of state, the use of equipment that costs many thousands of dollars.....) It also teaches discipline in a way that many other sports don't, and offers a way to get good scholarships for college.


----------



## *bejeweled*

You likely won't be able to teach them much about cotillions, because you are not familiar with them. Just let them experience the process. They will learn what is necessary through experiences. Cotillions are different in every region anyway!

[quote name="VisionaryMom" url="/ I live in a place that still has cotillions. I could sign my kids up for those classes, but I'd prefer to teach them throughout their childhoods. 
[/quote]


----------



## Dar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *One_Girl*
> 
> I think it is so funny that you think those things are upper class skills. Most of the skills you list are common to all social class. I think what people are offended about is the assumption that lower middle class and poor people don't teach their kids to use manners, write thank you notes, speak another language, go to college, teach them about art, visit museums, travel, etc... I am sure there are some actual differences, but the one I am picking up on is that upper middle class and upper class people make a lot of inaccurate assumptions about other classes. Not that it is all sunshine and roses down on the other end but some of the assumptions are insulting, especially the college one.


Statistically speaking, the more money you make and the more education you have, the more likely your child is to go to college, and the more likely he is to go to a selective or highly selective university. I attend one of the top 20 universities in the U.S. as a grad student, and less than 5% of our undergrads even qualify for Pell grants - which families are eligible for if they make up to 50K a year, in some cases, so not really even poor. Going to college - again, especially a selective college, more so than a community of state college - takes know-how and time, and it also takes seeing going to college as an option.... which many families still don't.

I live in the city of St. Louis.I know poor people - really poor, not just grad student poor like me. Multigenerationally poor... and generally no, they don't travel internationally, or visit art museums, or speak a foreign language (unless their parents are immigrants). How would they be able to do those things? Those things take time, money, and knowledge, and really, why would they be relevant? Generally they aren't, especially when it's hard enough to ensure that kids are well-fed, clean, safe, doing well in school, etc...

As far as manners, there are different manners for different social settings. Do your kids know an oyster fork from a fish fork from a salad fork? Have they ever needed to? Not that I think it's something everyone should go right out and teach their kids - one can always watch someone else, and failing that, outside to inside is a good general rule- but it's an example of manners that generally aren't relevant unless you're of a certain class.


----------



## JollyGG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom*
> 
> I GREW UP WORKING CLASS. I do know exactly what life looks like in a working class and a middle class family. I'm not making assumptions. Unless my family was wildly different (and we are Southern, which I realize also matters culturally), no one brought up Copernicus or the local Rembrandt exhibit at dinner - not at my house and not at the houses of my friends. We played backyard football, not lacrosse. Short of people who grew up in immigrant households, I don't think that learning a second language is a priority in many working-class households. The reason that I addressed my comments to upper-middle and upper class families specifically was because of a thread here about a year ago. A number of parents said that they don't feed their children things like lobster because they cannot really afford to eat it and don't want to give their children a taste for something out of range. Quite a few people said that thank-you cards were outdated and not something their friends did; also most people agreed that teaching things like how properly to spoon soup and use multiple forks were not useful lessons. Many an MDC-er "lol"ed at the notion of eating at "such fancy places." So, yes, if you're working class and do those things, by all means share, but the general consensus (on a thread that also went pages and pages and pages) was that most people do not need to teach their children such esoteric skills because they would be unlikely to use them.
> 
> I'm sure that there are some working-class parents who teach those things to their children, but I'm confident in saying that they aren't the majority - or even a sizable minority. My mother - who was young and single when I was born - insisted that I learn to play golf and tennis because her outsider view was that making important business deals happened after such sporty outings. She pushed very hard (and I listened) for me to take French in high school because she viewed it as a more sophisticated language choice than Spanish. Those lessons, along with a lifelong push for college & grad school and a keen understanding of how professional women should present themselves, were actually pretty odd where I grew up. Other people went to college, of course, but their parents hadn't pushed it the way my mother did. No one played golf (no courses around). People didn't drink wine (strictly a beer and tequila kind of place). They didn't go to art museums. I'm not making up the differences that I can see between my childhood and my adulthood.


What your write makes sense. However, in my experience what you are talking about is more a social grouping thing not an economic class thing. I'm very middle class, I grew up very middle class. Most of my friends would enjoy talking about the local Rembrandt exhibit. However, I remember going to some of my son's little league games with other parents who were mostly in my same income bracket and many in a slightly higher bracket and being bored silly because there interests were so different from mine. I have very academic interests. My son is interested in languages so he takes Mandarin lessons. I'm often looked at like I have two heads when I talk about these things. It's not because I'm sitting in the wrong economic class it's because I'm sitting with people who I have nothing in common with and don't share interests with.

I think what others are trying to say is that I know plenty of people of all income brackets who would love to talk about my academic and eclectic interests. I know plenty from all income brackets who would be very uninterested in what I enjoy talking about. To me this is about finding a social circle that shares your interests, not a social circle that meets your economic status.

I will admit that more academic interests can usually be met with a more educated crowd. In the broadest grouping more educated individuals are often found at the upper income bracket. However, I know several people with college degree's making very little more than minimum wage. I know people with no advanced education who make a lot of money. I also know plenty of people who have academic interests who never went on to higher education.

It sounds to me like you simply want your kids to be exposed to lots of things to decide where their interests lie and want them to value education. I think that if your raise them with those values in mind you'll do well. Let your kids know that you value it when they express curiosity about a lot of things and that you value varied life experiences. Teach them to keep an open mind about a visit to the opera, a baseball game, a museum, a crawdad feed, or whatever so that they can find their interests and they will do fine in any polite conversation and will eventually find a social group that fits their interest.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> Statistically speaking, the more money you make and the more education you have, the more likely your child is to go to college, and the more likely he is to go to a selective or highly selective university. I attend one of the top 20 universities in the U.S. as a grad student, and less than 5% of our undergrads even qualify for Pell grants - which families are eligible for if they make up to *50K a year,* in some cases, so not really even poor. Going to college - again, especially a selective college, more so than a community of state college - takes know-how and time, and it also takes seeing going to college as an option.... which many families still don't.


50k a year isn't much, and people making $50k are most certainly poor in some parts of the country. I make $48k/year, and my ds and I would not make it if it weren't for child support. Literally. We could not make it. Not in my city. My rent is $1500/mo (which considering ALL of my utilities are included, I have a washer and dryer and dishwasher in the unit, most places you have to use coin operated laundry, I have a GREAT deal on a sweet place). Daycare? $1400/mo. and its the cheapest option that doesn't have chickens running around in the kitchen (yes, literally, I looked).

Also, going to a selective college, means being a legacy admission in most places (ie, your parents/grandparents/aunts/uncles/cousins went there too). After accepting legacy admissions, elite schools accept the students that they need to fill certain roles (stroke of the 8 on the crew team, quarter back, trumpet player for the orchestra, 1st chair violin, baseball players, etc), and then they diversify. If you go to a private school, and are not a legacy admission, you aren't going to an Ivy League college, you just aren't. No matter how rich, how elite, how well versed you are in ethics, whatever. 2 friends of mine from my crew team got accepted to Yale - they went to public schools (shitty ones), were valedictorians with a perfect 4.0 gpa, and were FAST by high school crew standards. One qualified for youth nationals and junior world championship regattas. Thats what it took in her case - she was good in a way that none of us could compare to. Her erg scores were outrageous. And she had a perfect gpa. She wasn't anything special outside of that, and had zero know how when it came to getting into college. The other guy? Was rich, but went to public school because his parents knew the system, was also fast (but not as fast as the girl - she routinely beat him on the ergs, and not because of qualifying the scores she just beat him outright - but she was pretty exceptional and had scholarships to be on the team), and he was probably a legacy to some degree, but also got a crew scholarship.

ETA - in my city everyone goes to museums. They're free (and they're among the best). Best city ever.


----------



## Mulvah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JollyGG*
> 
> ...I'm actually more worried about my kids learning things they might miss from living a comfortable lifestyle then in wanting them to learn the social niceties of being an upper income earner.
> 
> I worry that if I pay for my kids college they won't value it as much and work as hard (I payed my own way and am still working on the loans, but I knew the cost and value of what I was paying for each semester as I payed my tuition).
> 
> My kids don't see us making a lot of sacrifices to meet our budget and I wonder if they appreciate the value of an economical menu, few extras, ect. and if they ever do need to cut back to make ends meet will they know how to do it having never seen it.
> 
> I guess I worry more about them learning the value of hard work, how to make frugal decisions, how to live on a budget and those sorts of things.


This.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mambera*
> 
> ...I wonder whether your own sense of being an 'outsider' is causing you to give these things more importance than they merit?
> 
> In general one makes a better impression by being comfortable in one's own skin than by trying to cover up one's imagined deficits. Eg a polite request for an English menu (or a charming smile along with, "I'm afraid I don't speak Italian; what dish would you recommend?) looks much more confident than a flustered attempt to pronounce an Italian phrase one doesn't understand.


I agree with the above.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *~Adorkable~*
> 
> ...Why is it not ok (and i agree it's not) to take shots at someone for being poor, but seemingly open season of someone who is rich?....


This definitely happens here.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> I find this thread fascinating, but some points to clarify -----
> 
> 100K for a family of 4 even in a moderate income area isn't enough to live the way many are describing -- with a Merc and black tie events and frequent trips to Europe. Not by a long shot.
> 
> Second, I think that some people base their idea of how they rich live, act and think on TV and movies. But life is not a Frasier episode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next, many people find themselves with varying levels of income over the course of their lives (as shown in this thread). There's really no way of knowing where in all that any of our children will end up. I do think that becoming middle class AT ALL is becoming more difficult. I think financially things are more difficult for people coming of age now than they were a couple of decades of ago. Its impossible to project what it will really be like when our children come of age. Perhaps helping our children become resourceful and flexible are some of the most important skills.
> 
> I think a few posters here sound to me like they are preparing their children to live in Victorian England rather than then 21st century.


Ahh, finally, some sense in this thread.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> If your kids are in a socio-economic circle that they will likely run in those circles as adults? Absolutely they should learn how to to act appropriately. Are ALL the people there snarky and mean? Nope. No more than those who are AP confronted by mainstream parents ALL snarky and mean. And let's face it - a fair portion of the latter are.
> 
> At the end of the day, it does kids a disservice to not prepare them for the areas they'll be circulating in. No matter what group it is. If you hang in a group where the guys all get together to play poker every Friday, would you teach your son to play bridge? Probably not. If you lived in a big football area, would you teach your kids cricket? Or vice-versa? If you lived in the UK, you'd likely teach them cricket, rugby or soccer instead of American football. Because that would help them fit in. Same thing. IMO.
> 
> It would never have occurred to me to pick a sport for my kids, based on whether or not that would help them fit in. I don't ski (nor do my parents) even though almost every friend I ever had went skiing regularly. I don't ice skate, although the same goes. I've never voluntarily played a team sport, and I never will. None of my kids have played soccer, or hockey (I'm Canadian - hockey's HUGE), although ds2 may do the hockey thing - he's showing interest.
> 
> And, I'd much rather teach my children not to care if some rich person is going to gossip about them and laugh at them for not knowing how to behave at a black tie event. I don't want them to fit into that kind of behaviour, to tell the truth. I can't imagine why I would.
> 
> And, the post upthread about finding oneself in a higher bracket makes me cringe. I'm already in a much higher "class" than the one I was born to, and I don't care for it a lot of the time. I really hope dh never reaches the "upper" class "heights", because I don't think I'd survive it. The description in this thread make it sound every bit as tedious and snooty as I believed it to be as a teen, when I suffered from severe reverse snobbery.


----------



## swd12422

Can someone PLEASE tell me what working class is, and why it's so different than what we're talking about here? The OP didn't specify that only those who are independently wealthy need reply. My dad would have met her qualifications for answering this thread, and like many of you, wouldn't have had much to say about whether the kids should know their wines (he didn't), play cricket or rugby or do crew (none of the above), or speak a foreign language (he doesn't). So he made the income we're talking about, but he had a JOB. He WORKED. We weren't poor, so do we not qualify to be working class? We certainly don't qualify to be wealthy...


----------



## Bekka

I agree mostly with Jolly. I live in a high COL area of the country and we live comfortably here. We also have "old" middle class cars, and live in a "middle class" neighborhood, in a 4 BR house with about 2200 sf, which is way smaller than all the McMansions around us. We spend a LOT of money on music education, because that is important to us (we just estimated how much and it is a lot); our kids attend public schools and are doing fine.

The things that are important to me have to do with feeling "comfortable" wherever you are--not to be intimidated. Part of my motivation for buying this house was for my dad not to be intimidated here--because he is quite intimidated by "McMansions." (2nd story entryways, etc.). But I want my children to be able to visit a friend at their "country manor" (good friends) or at their 2 br apt. (good friends as well). I want my kids to be able to change their tire, balance their checkbook, sew a straight seam with a sewing machine, sew on a button, use a drill, cook 5 kinds of dinner by the time they leave home, budget their money, and learn to save up for something big. I insisted I would NOT buy American Girl dolls, FE, but my children saved their little allowances for several months and were able to save up for beautiful dolls. They value them so much. I want my kids to learn CPR and to learn about true poverty (like someone else said). Our family does not drink any alcohol for religious reasons, so they will not develop "refined" taste in coffee or wines, but I would always probably recommend the "house" wine or ask the server for a recommendation.

We would like to travel a bit, hopefully to Australia and Europe (separate trips), but it is expensive and many years in the future, so this year we will drive to Colorado and camp with my family.

We highly value learning, and we always want to retain that excitement and curiosity in our children. We also have 5 children, so that in and of itself is a bigger commitment of resources.  We want our children to be able to support themselves and not rely on anyone else financially, even the girls. (Just have to say it... a couple of my sisters didn't get that message growing up even though I was in the same family as them...).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JollyGG*
> 
> I'm middle middle class but I'm actually more worried about my kids learning things they might miss from living a comfortable lifestyle then in wanting them to learn the social niceties of being an upper income earner.
> 
> I worry that if I pay for my kids college they won't value it as much and work as hard (I payed my own way and am still working on the loans, but I knew the cost and value of what I was paying for each semester as I payed my tuition).
> 
> My kids don't see us making a lot of sacrifices to meet our budget and I wonder if they appreciate the value of an economical menu, few extras, ect. and if they ever do need to cut back to make ends meet will they know how to do it having never seen it.
> 
> I guess I worry more about them learning the value of hard work, how to make frugal decisions, how to live on a budget and those sorts of things.


----------



## Mom31

working class- generally refers to blue collar workers.


----------



## Dar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JollyGG*
> 
> My son is interested in languages so he takes Mandarin lessons. I'm often looked at like I have two heads when I talk about these things. It's not because I'm sitting in the wrong economic class it's because I'm sitting with people who I have nothing in common with and don't share interests with.


Actually, Mandarin lessons for kids is a pretty hot thing among parents with, yes, high incomes.... it's even trickling down to the middle class. Your son is actually trendy...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> 50k a year isn't much, and people making $50k are most certainly poor in some parts of the country.


Okay... so then what do you call the people making 25K a year and living in your city? Those would probably be the ones using daycare with indoor chickens and sharing a bedroom with their kids and perhaps another couple of relatives, just in case you can't picture them.


----------



## nstewart

This is a very interesting thread. I think I tend to dilude myself into thinking that class doesn't matter anymore. I guess I am wrong.

While I meet OPs "cut-off", the things that I hope to teach DS have nothing to do with income level and the circles he will or may roll in some day. They are the things that make you successful no matter what life has in store.

- a hard work ethic

- respect for others, no matter who they are or what they do

- being thankful for what you have and finding the joy in every day life

- being a good listener and asking thoughtful questions

- have a positive outlook on life

Honestly I think if DS has these skills, his life will be "successful" in all the ways that matter, no matter his income bracket or that of those he socializes with. This is how I was raised, and it was confirmed for me by an experience I had in university.

I had a classmate who's family has more money than probably all the posters on this thread combined, without exageration. We went to school together for 3 years and I had no idea he was wealthy. He was just "S". "S" is one of the greatest people I'd ever met. He was smart, thoughtful, a gentleman, fun to be around. He worked hard in school, but was always up for a beer at the pub too. He's one of those people you just instantly like. He is a loving husband to his wife and dad to his kids. His family is his life. He wore regular clothes and drove a regular car. I didn't even know about his family's "status" until we ended up working at the same firm together after school, and then only because a co-worker informed me of "who he is".

What I see is that he was raised with the values that I listed above and I know that he will earn his success and not have it handed to him on a silver platter even though his parents could have ensured he would never have to work. He just wasn't raised that way. And "S" would have been successful with those skills even without his great advantage of having parents who could help him start out without debt, etc.


----------



## CrazyCatLady

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> 50k a year isn't much, and people making $50k are most certainly poor in some parts of the country. I make $48k/year, and my ds and I would not make it if it weren't for child support. Literally. We could not make it. Not in my city. My rent is $1500/mo (which considering ALL of my utilities are included, I have a washer and dryer and dishwasher in the unit, most places you have to use coin operated laundry, I have a GREAT deal on a sweet place). Daycare? $1400/mo. and its the cheapest option that doesn't have chickens running around in the kitchen (yes, literally, I looked).


I live in Los Angeles, CA and I have about $10,000 a year coming in for my daughter and I. Me and just about everyone I know could do pretty darn ok on $50k a year...especially compared to how we are living now. 50k might not be much by American standards (I have no idea really)...but I don't consider it even close to "poor".

(I realize this isn't the point to the thread, and sorry for that. I just couldn't help but say something).


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtiger*
> 
> Realistically, though, it is much easier if you are dealing with the same currency as your buyers. Playing the naif only works if you're young and cute. Of course being a good sales person is important. And part of that is being on the same playing field, being able to talk about things your buyer understands and is interested in. I think you'll agree with that.


I don't think that's true at all. Sales ability, ime, has very little to do with one's playing field. I've seen salespeople with blue collar backgrounds who could sell anything to anyone. I've seen "upper crust" people attempt sales to their own class, with laughable results. I'm working class, edging into middle class (my own family background is blue collar, and my own work background is mostly what used to be called "pink collar", although I haven't heard the term in a long time...clerical, mostly...operations and accounting, with some reception thrown into the mix, but dh is solidly middle class, with a white collar/professional background). I have no sales ability whatsoever. My mom, who grew up in a solidly middle-class family (but with pretensions - my maternal grandmother had a fair bit in common with Hyacinth from Keeping Up Appearances), and worked her way back "up" into something approaching upper middle class, has no sales ability. My ex-husband, and his father, whose backgrounds blue collar, alternating with unemployed poverty, could sell anything to anyone.

The natural sales people don't need to be on the same playing field, because they're generally very good at managing chit chat, by learning tidbits about whatever they may need to sell to the people they want to sell to. They don't have to learn it on a lifestyle level, or down in the bone, because their innate "sales gift" just doesn't work that way.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> Okay... so then what do you call the people making 25K a year and living in your city? Those would probably be the ones using daycare with indoor chickens and sharing a bedroom with their kids and perhaps another couple of relatives, just in case you can't picture them.


I'm sorry, but I have to defend Super-Single-Mama here because I know exactly what she is talking (she used to live in NYC, where I currently reside) and I can say with confidence that an income of $50k here with a family is really pushing the limits. I know a little about DC and its environs so I can speak with confidence about that area too. I don't care if you're homeschooling, growing chickens on your balcony or are television-free, 50K here is BARELY making it. I know because my brother lived in Queens with four kids and it was a complete struggle on his salary. Food overall is cheaper (in my experience) but rents and cost of housing are insane.

FYI: DH and I make a salary that qualifies us for the so-called 25% in this country (in terms of averages), yet, we live in a one bedroom apartment because (a) we have other priorities for the way we spend our money; and (b) it is the norm here in the city to live in close quarters. I have a neighbor (family of six) next door who lives in a two-bedroom apartment. No big deal. Everyone here does this sort of thing. Bedrooms, thus, aren't a good marker. I think it is easy to speak in terms of McMansions from a suburban point of view, but that discounts the millions of people of don't live in suburbia.

People making half of $50k in my town (with a family) ARE probably counting on other resources for survival: family living arrangements; pooling of resources; public assistance. Those with families who don't have these resources are doing without (and I don't mean deciding whether or not to have cable or Game Boy, I mean doing without).

The reason I say this is that I know that Super-Single comes from the same background and demographic (in terms of city life) as myself. I think it goes to OP's original post and requirement of $100k plus people: the income is insignificant in terms of riches or upper society where I live.


----------



## Hoopin' Mama

OP - maybe it would help to understand what you are wanting them to be prepared for? For a profession or for social reasons? I guess that's why I'm so confused. Art history is well covered in college. Surely as adults they will mingle with people from many backgrounds and there are so many valuable, esteemed professions that require zero knowledge of a proper table setting. What scenarios are you envisioning?

My ds studied English and philosophy and works in theatre and has many friends from what would be called "old money". He or his friends very rarely spout Beckett or Kant at any dinner table. I work with mostly wealthy people but my profession is also dominated by liberals. So in my circle it is more impressive to know about, say, sustainability practices or small villages in Oaxaca than it is to know wine. I would say as one of the few people at my company coming from a poor family, what I notice I lack most is travel experience.

So as I said, I think a love of art, music, and multiculturalism in the home is the most beneficial. And manners and etiquette.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Dar* 

A lot of people seem to be taking this really personally... do you not think that there is a certain body of cultural knowledge that upper and upper-middle class people generally learn while people in other classes often don't? Really, each social class has its own sphere of cultural knowledge, but if you're interested in becoming upper-middle class then it helps to know that cultural currency. Some of it is as simple as knowing how to navigate going to college or grad school, or what to wear to an interview, or how and when to write a thank you letter. Part of it is feeling comfortable at cocktail or dinner parties, and most people feel more comfortable when they know something about the topics being discussed and understand some of the social graces and manners expected (Which fork do you use? What is the 4:20 position? Where should you leave your napkin when you're finished?). No one will hunt you down if you make a faux pas, but it still feels uncomfortable, and I'm not seeing why it's wrong to acknowledge that. Making social connections is important for many careers, whether we like to think it is or not.
A lot of this stuff has more to do with the person than their cultural milieu. DS1 will be comfortable almost anywhere he's dropped and has the social intelligence to navigate unfamiliar situations with grace. He probably learned fewer of the social niceties as he was growing up than I did, and he was certainly in a lower financial bracket. But, he slid into the atmosphere of his high school peers (mostly upper middle class, and many making well into the six figures, and having the asset base that results from making such money for a couple of decades) with little or no effort. I went to the same school, and I never fit in at all. But, I wouldn't have fit into a working class school any better than I did in the one I attended. And, I'll never be comfortable at a cocktail or dinner party, unless I know pretty well everyone there. It has nothing to do with my class.
Of course everyone wants their kids to be good, kind, caring people. That's a given.
Maybe in your world. I don't think it's a given at all. It might be a given on MDC, but it's not a given, in general. Lots of people want their kids to grow up "tough", and if tough means bullying, they're okay with that. To be fair, though, this trancends class issues. When I was younger, I thought it was only teh upper classes that taught their kids to look down on others, but I did eventually realized I just noticed it more, because those were the ones who targeted me.
And it really isn't about money - it's about class, and as another poster said before, they're different things but often related. The U.S. is widely seen as having more class mobility than most other countries but it's still not always easy to change classes, in part because of not having the cultural capital.


> In this particular thread, at least, "class" seems to be definted as income level.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *swd12422*
> 
> Can someone PLEASE tell me what working class is, and why it's so different than what we're talking about here? The OP didn't specify that only those who are independently wealthy need reply. My dad would have met her qualifications for answering this thread, and like many of you, wouldn't have had much to say about whether the kids should know their wines (he didn't), play cricket or rugby or do crew (none of the above), or speak a foreign language (he doesn't). So he made the income we're talking about, but he had a JOB. He WORKED. We weren't poor, so do we not qualify to be working class? We certainly don't qualify to be wealthy...


The middle class works. "Working class" usually refers to lower income, and mostly blue collar, families. My dad was a furniture mover. I like "working class" better than saying I grew up "lower (or low) class', but I'm okay with that, too, if it clarifies things.


----------



## Maren78

This is pretty much the American kind of wealth, isn't it?


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> Quote: Originally Posted by Dar Okay... so then what do you call the people making 25K a year and living in your city? Those would probably be the ones using daycare with indoor chickens and sharing a bedroom with their kids and perhaps another couple of relatives, just in case you can't picture them. I'm sorry, but I have to defend Super-Single-Mama here because I know exactly what she is talking (she used to live in NYC, where I currently reside) and I can say with confidence that an income of $50k here with a family is really pushing the limits. I know a little about DC and its environs so I can speak with confidence about that area too. I don't care if you're homeschooling, growing chickens on your balcony or are television-free, 50K here is BARELY making it. I know because my brother lived in Queens with four kids and it was a complete struggle on his salary. Food overall is cheaper (in my experience) but rents and cost of housing are insane. FYI: DH and I make a salary that qualifies us for the so-called 25% in this country (in terms of averages), yet, we live in a one bedroom apartment because (a) we have other priorities for the way we spend our money; and (b) it is the norm here in the city to live in close quarters. I have a neighbor (family of six) next door who lives in a two-bedroom apartment. No big deal. Everyone here does this sort of thing. Bedrooms, thus, aren't a good marker. I think it is easy to speak in terms of McMansions from a suburban point of view, but that discounts the millions of people of don't live in suburbia. People making half of $50k in my town (with a family) ARE probably counting on other resources for survival: family living arrangements; pooling of resources; public assistance. Those with families who don't have these resources are doing without (and I don't mean deciding whether or not to have cable or Game Boy, I mean doing without). The reason I say this is that I know that Super-Single comes from the same background and demographic (in terms of city life) as myself. I think it goes to OP's original post and requirement of $100k plus people: the income is insignificant in terms of riches or upper society where I live.


Thanks for backing me up. We survive, and have some extra - but that is because I have good benefits thru work, and because I get $500/ mo in child support, plus my ex pays for half daycare. If he didn't? Or it wasn't reliable? We'd be living with family, which we did for 3mo while I saved up for an apartment. And DC groceries are about 30% more than NYC groceries - no joke. It's tough. We don't eat out, I take lunch to work every day. We can afford to eat decently in part because DS eats breakfast and lunch at school. And, we live in a 1BR apartment. We share a room. My ds is going to get his own bed for the first time (at my house) in a few weeks. We don't have tons of space, but it helps that we are a family of 2. If I had another child it would be financially devastating.

We are doing OK - ds will not go without. But my income is supplemented by child support, without child support we'd be in BIG trouble, and would be quite dependent on family.

Oh yeah, and that daycare with chickens? It was $900/mo and no food was provided. To send lunches to school with my son, the way groceries are here, would put me at least at $1100/mo. Not only that, they didn't have space. They had a wait list.


----------



## delfin

this is so strange... my background is middle class, my friend[s too, and we all can speak at least one other language, been to many restaurants and eat and replicate the cooking at home, can talk about art, books, cinema, have traveled....im from south america, these things are pretty normal. has nothing to do with money. maybe the country i grew up in values culture more than the us exet for the wealthy...but doesn't have to do with money.


----------



## One_Girl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom*
> 
> I GREW UP WORKING CLASS. I do know exactly what life looks like in a working class and a middle class family. I'm not making assumptions. Unless my family was wildly different (and we are Southern, which I realize also matters culturally), no one brought up Copernicus or the local Rembrandt exhibit at dinner - not at my house and not at the houses of my friends. We played backyard football, not lacrosse. Short of people who grew up in immigrant households, I don't think that learning a second language is a priority in many working-class households. The reason that I addressed my comments to upper-middle and upper class families specifically was because of a thread here about a year ago. A number of parents said that they don't feed their children things like lobster because they cannot really afford to eat it and don't want to give their children a taste for something out of range. Quite a few people said that thank-you cards were outdated and not something their friends did; also most people agreed that teaching things like how properly to spoon soup and use multiple forks were not useful lessons. Many an MDC-er "lol"ed at the notion of eating at "such fancy places." So, yes, if you're working class and do those things, by all means share, but the general consensus (on a thread that also went pages and pages and pages) was that most people do not need to teach their children such esoteric skills because they would be unlikely to use them.
> 
> I'm sure that there are some working-class parents who teach those things to their children, but I'm confident in saying that they aren't the majority - or even a sizable minority. My mother - who was young and single when I was born - insisted that I learn to play golf and tennis because her outsider view was that making important business deals happened after such sporty outings. She pushed very hard (and I listened) for me to take French in high school because she viewed it as a more sophisticated language choice than Spanish. Those lessons, along with a lifelong push for college & grad school and a keen understanding of how professional women should present themselves, were actually pretty odd where I grew up. Other people went to college, of course, but their parents hadn't pushed it the way my mother did. No one played golf (no courses around). People didn't drink wine (strictly a beer and tequila kind of place). They didn't go to art museums. I'm not making up the differences that I can see between my childhood and my adulthood.


I grew up well under poverty level until I was ten then working class after my mom married, a level I am still at now. I don't know what it is like growing up in the south but the way you grew up and the way I grew up sound very different because I did have a lot of opportunity, we did a lot of enriching things, attended classes and private music lessons, and I was surrounded by the people who saw college as the norm.


----------



## crunchy_mommy

I grew up lower-middle class or working class (I don't know really, I know we were on welfare for a while and money was always tight but I wouldn't have called myself poor) and had many friends in the same income bracket or lower. We played tennis and learned instruments (public school). We went to museums (free days & library passes). I learned 3 foreign languages and most of my friends learned at least 1 besides English (public school). Our parents drank wine (yes, usually cheap, and yes, beer, too, but they would appreciate a good wine). We wrote and received thank you cards. We were expected to use proper manners and always sit up straight. We went to college (on scholarships/financial aid). We could carry on an educated conversation. These things are about interests & ideals, not money. Sure, money helps meet those ideals more easily, but those of us who never make it to the upper middle class aren't all sitting around on our torn-up couches drinking beer and blubbering on about nothing while our uneducated, impolite, never-set-foot-in-a-museum kids are using spoons instead of forks and wiping their dirty hands on their clothes.


----------



## Dar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> Thanks for backing me up. We survive, and have some extra - but that is because I have good benefits thru work, and because I get $500/ mo in child support, plus my ex pays for half daycare..


The fact that you see 50K as poor in your city (also where my daughter lives, btw) I think demonstrates one of the problems with this conversation. One in five households in DC live below the federal poverty line - about 20K a year for a family of 4. Last semester, my daughter worked for an after school program with kids from some of those families. That's poor. CrazyCatLady and her daughter are poor.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> Statistically speaking, the more money you make and the more education you have, the more likely your child is to go to college, and the more likely he is to go to a selective or highly selective university. I attend one of the top 20 universities in the U.S. as a grad student, and less than 5% of our undergrads even qualify for Pell grants - which families are eligible for if they make up to 50K a year, in some cases, so not really even poor. Going to college - again, especially a selective college, more so than a community of state college - takes know-how and time, and it also takes seeing going to college as an option.... which many families still don't.


I'm guessing the reason the percentage of people that qualify for a Pell grant is low at your school is because people who qualify for a Pell grant probably wouldn't be too interested in a private university that costs over $40,000 a year. There's a pretty low cap on Pell grants. One wouldn't even put a dent in that tuition.

I certainly couldn't have afforded a school like that, but I don't think that's a bad thing. I went to a community college for two years and then transferred to a highly selective public university, or in your words a "state school," which is routinely ranked as one of the top public universities in the country (think public ivy). I got a Pell grant and other aid. It was by far a more sensible decision than if I had tried to go to the highly selective private university down the road that would have cost ten times as much. Private universities are not better or more selective.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> I live in the city of St. Louis.I know poor people - really poor, not just grad student poor like me. Multigenerationally poor... and generally no, they don't travel internationally, or visit art museums, or speak a foreign language (unless their parents are immigrants). How would they be able to do those things? Those things take time, money, and knowledge, *and really, why would they be relevant?* Generally they aren't, especially when it's hard enough to ensure that kids are well-fed, clean, safe, doing well in school, etc.


I'm truly dumbfounded. I'll give you the international travel because that takes money, but public museums usually don't require admission, and it doesn't take any special knowledge to appreciate art. And learning Spanish at least on a conversational level could be done for free and in many parts of the country could prove invaluable. And sometimes those not in the upper class or upper middle class like to do things just to enrich their lives.

I'm wondering if we substituted race for class if people would still think it acceptable to make these kinds of generalizations.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> As far as manners, there are different manners for different social settings. Do your kids know an oyster fork from a fish fork from a salad fork? Have they ever needed to? Not that I think it's something everyone should go right out and teach their kids - one can always watch someone else, and failing that, outside to inside is a good general rule- *but it's an example of manners that generally aren't relevant unless you're of a certain class.*


Good table manners and basic etiquette are relevant to people outside the upper class. Non-upper class people might actually be invited to functions where knowing a formal place setting or at least how to pass as you mentioned might come in handy. Or if they're like my very traditional southern MIL, they might actually have this stuff and break it out on special occasions.


----------



## Maren78

Allright nobody answered my question but here's my 2 cents.

I was born into a wealthy family in Switzerland, I attended a public school which I suppose they are entirely different from the ones in the States or here in Australia for that matter, we were wealthy, I grew up multilingual not really because Switzerland is a multilingual country, but because my parents are from different countries ( different languages culture, etc). I was rich growing up really, my mother (Lebanese born in Mexico) also belongs to a wealthy family. I do specify the countries in which I grew up and frequented because being "rich" in a certain place is different from another.

When I moved to Australia, I was not receiving any help from my family, my parents thought it was important from me to do everything on my own,so yes I was poor, or lower class, and yes being lower class, after I had a my DD1 still I was "lower" class, I was a single, young and a working mom. When I was struggling financially my DD was very young but I seriously doubt that I would've given a thought on enrolling my DD on an expensive sport or telling her to learn another language because its classier than the other ( I actually think it's ridiculous), just to fit in with the rest of my family.

Right now, I will say yes we are wealthy, not wealthy as I was growing up or how wealthy my DH was growing up for that matter, but we have more than enough. My husband who is probably the wealthiest person I've known ( well his parents at least) would rather eat a cheeseburger and drink beer ( oh because beer is soo low class) and walk around in jeans and sneakers all the time , oh and he is monolingual aswell.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dar*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> Thanks for backing me up. We survive, and have some extra - but that is because I have good benefits thru work, and because I get $500/ mo in child support, plus my ex pays for half daycare..
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that you see 50K as poor in your city (also where my daughter lives, btw) I think demonstrates one of the problems with this conversation. One in five households in DC live below the federal poverty line - about 20K a year for a family of 4. Last semester, my daughter worked for an after school program with kids from some of those families. That's poor. CrazyCatLady and her daughter are poor.
Click to expand...

My ds and I are FAR from being middle class. Yes, there are MANY that have much LESS than I do. I realize how fortunate I am that I have this salary (I have a law degree, so I do have some upward mobility as well). I also know that on my salary, my reality is that I would not be able to afford daycare and an apartment. Without my ex's reliable child support, we would be largely dependent on family (meaning we would live with family rent free - not that they would pay for everything). That's MY reality. If you want to come pay my bills, and live in my reality for a year, and then tell me what I'm doing wrong, be my guest.

It is important to note that I'm also in that somewhat awkward income bracket where I do not qualify for any assistance whatsoever, and have to pay nearly the max on any sliding scale fees. Without including child support (since it is not considered income). Again, I realize that there are people with less. I'm just sharing my reality, and if I am so tight (on what you say should be plenty) then I don't know how anyone manages on 10k per year. I don't think it's possible.


----------



## Mom31

When I was with xh we made between 30,000 and 60,000 a year. It was enough for me to stay home if we lived frugally and would have been a lot more comfy if we did not have debt. Which he did have quite a bit and it took us years to pay off...

We bought an 80,000 dollar house, drove a newer car, of course if I worked daycare would have knocked out what I made since I don't have a degree - so it made little sense for me to work.

In our area- it was considered middle class and we lived in a nice subdivsion... 3 br 1 bath ranch house

I dont know- I know living with less like I do now- is different than when I was with him... now I make way less than half of that- and that is including cs and assistance I get...

but I drive an older paid off car, and don't get to do anything- and anything- I mean drive twenty min to go hiking- is not in the budget.


----------



## Imakcerka

Interesting twist this conversation has taken. Everyone has been just about everywhere in life. These are the kind of people I want my kids to know. REAL people. People who understand how to be. I think I've said this before, but I'm blessed. I'm blessed because all my hard work is paying off. I'm blessed because I have what I need. I'm blessed with a peaceful life. And when I started making decent money again, I was and have been blessed by all the people that money has touched. I know what it's like to struggle and I know what's it's like to have more than I need. And I refuse to find people less important than how I appear to my peers.

I don't need to fit into with the right crowd and I don't need to follow the "class" rules. I need to teach my girls to be gracious, kind and responsible. Not just responsible for themselves but to all around them. To me that means High Class.


----------



## Drummer's Wife

Maybe we should discuss (again) what constitutes middle class, upper class, low class, etc.

Of course, there's the whole family size and COL factor. $50K might be decent for a single person in Ohio, but a family of four in California may be around the poverty level and qualify for assistance.

Clearly, the OP has decided $100k is Upper/upper-middle class for parents. Not everyone would agree. Plenty of families on that income aren't worried about making sure their kids know wines and such; whereas, I'm sure there are families making $30k who happen to give their kids the experience of horse back riding lessons or fancy dining etiquette, or whatever.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife*
> I'm sure there are families making $30k who happen to give their kids the experience of horse back riding lessons


Where I live, horse back riding lessons are $50 per lesson per child. Seriously. And they have to have equipment. I don't see how any body making 30K a year could pay for that

BUT I do know a teen girl (with a single mom who is a student) who trades for lessons. She spends time mucking out stalls in exchange for lessons. She also attends the same private school my kids do. She's on a scholarship.

I think that parents with tight incomes can make very cool things happen for their kids, but it's a lot more work for them to make it happen.

The more money you have, the *easier* it is to make the cool things happen.

I know a lot of people who make over 100K, and I only know 1 wine snob. She isn't employed and her DH doesn't earn nearly the kind of money that some of the people I know do. (her youngest child is 17 and she doesn't volunteer at school, so I don't think she counts as a SAHM any more. Realistically, at some point, it's not about spending time with your kids anymore.)

It's sort of odd -- in my circle, the more money and real accomplishments someone has, the less they care about status symbols.


----------



## LynnS6

OK, maybe the class division isn't so much income level as education level. I teach at an "urban" university. What that means practically is: We get a lot of 1st generation college students. We get a lot of students who are working 2 jobs to be able to pay rent and tuition, because their financial aid (most of it in the form of loans) just doesn't cover their costs. Our students are, by and large, incredibly motivated because many of them have spent years at physically hard jobs or really boring ones.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *One_Girl*
> I think it is so funny that you think those things are upper class skills. Most of the skills you list are common to all social class*. I think what people are offended about is the assumption that lower middle class and poor people don't teach their kids to use manners, write thank you notes, speak another language, go to college, teach them about art, visit museums, travel, etc...* I am sure there are some actual differences, but the one I am picking up on is that upper middle class and upper class people make a lot of inaccurate assumptions about other classes. Not that it is all sunshine and roses down on the other end but some of the assumptions are insulting, especially the college one.


People who didn't go to college do value college, for the most part. They do teach manners, etc. But first generation college students are at a much higher risk for failing or dropping out (yes, I have numbers to back this up). Why? Because they don't have anyone to help them navigate the system. I had one very earnest undergraduate in my office a couple of years ago. He was going to school, working night shift, living in a 2 bedroom apartment with his wife, 2 kids, and his parents (who were unemployed). He was failing my course because he didn't know how to write the kind of paper I was requesting. I basically cornered him and dragged him to my office because I didn't want to see him fail. He was in his last year of college and this was the first time he'd ever been in a professor's office! He'd failed a number of courses, not because he was dumb, but because he didn't understand that it was OK to go to someone's office and say "Help, I really don't understand this assignment." I need to teach that lesson to 2-3 students every single quarter I teach. And some of them don't believe me. And, alas, many of them don't come in until it's hopeless (if you've failed the first 6 assignments, it's too late. If you come in after the 1st one, we can work on it.)

Now, some students pick this up how to navigate the system on their own. But it's a lot easier with someone who knows the system to help you. When my brother (son of two teachers, one a Ph.D.) needed to get into an algebra course that was a prerequisite for the degree he wanted, he knew enough to contact the professor when he didn't get in, go to class on the first day and keep hanging around until enough people dropped that he could get in. He then knew how to petition to add the course after the registration period had closed. I've had students who have tried to register for a required 3 quarters in a row, but couldn't get in. They couldn't get in because they registered late because they had a financial hold on their records. Because they couldn't pay their bill (because their families couldn't help) and because they didn't know enough to contact me early on in the registration process, they graduated late.

The problem isn't that these students don't value education -- they don't know that there's a whole set of unwritten rules about how to get into classes that are full. Thus, they're at a disadvantage. They can't ask the right questions because they don't realize that there is another possibility. THAT is cultural capital. We have, in our department, started teaching some of these things overtly to both our undergraduates and our graduate students. Why? Because a majority of us believe it's unfair to students who come in without that cultural capital not to have the rules spelled out for them. Teaching them overtly levels the playing field. A couple of my colleagues don't agree however. Their opinion is "I figured it out on my own, why can't they?" (Interestingly enough, they come from more high income/highly educated families.)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mambera*
> 
> Good Lord. Thanks for saving me the Google. I do meet the 'income requirement' for this thread
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and all that sprung to mind on this one was marijuana.


OK -- so here's a type of cultural knowledge that I missed completely because I'm an nerdy academic who just didn't care to party. And my parents were no help either. I know very little slang related to marijuana or other drugs. I just don't. And I really don't care to learn. Just like I really don't care enough about wine to learn. But, it does leave me out of a whole bunch of conversations!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> I'm truly dumbfounded. I'll give you the international travel because that takes money, but public museums usually don't require admission, and it doesn't take any special knowledge to appreciate art. And learning Spanish at least on a conversational level could be done for free and in many parts of the country could prove invaluable. And sometimes those not in the upper class or upper middle class like to do things just to enrich their lives.


True, but if no one in your family has ever done them, if no one in your community knows about these things, how are you going to learn? You certainly aren't going to get this knowledge in the public schools any more because art, music and that sort of thing has been completely cut from most budgets, especially in really poor districts. In addition, at least where I live, public museums do charge admission -- up to $8 per person. There are free nights and there are passes you can get from the library. But, again, you have to know this, and you have to know how to navigate the public library system to reserve these (it's not easy). Even then, you're still going to need to have the time to take the bus to the museum (plus money for the bus fair for you and your kids).

My kids go to a school with 80% free and reduced lunch. We have a lot of parents who would love to help out at school, but they can't because they work odd shift hours or they can't get transportation to the school. It's that kind of life circumstance that prevents people from taking advantage of opportunities. You need to know the opportunities exist, have the time to take advantage of them, and the means to take advantage of them. I have spent a number of years beating my head against a wall with the middle class parents in our school because they keep saying things like "those parents just don't care". They do care, but the system is not set up for them, they don't know how to navigate it (many are immigrants), and even if they do, few have the time or resources to do so. And the few who do try are often put off because they don't know the unwritten rules.


----------



## LynnS6

VisionaryMom: Personally, I think if your kids have good manners, the ability to converse on a range of subjects (sports being a good one), strong self-confidence, the ability to observe carefully what others are doing around them, and the willingness to ask questions to learn, they'll have what they need. You can't teach them all they need to know -- not because you grew up working class but because you can't predict what they're going to need to know in the future. What they will need to know really depends not only on class/income, but also on where you live, and who your associates are. My in-depth knowledge of sports that I got from my family of origin is pretty worthless in academic circles. But if I were in business, it'd be a boon.

Thus, if they know how to learn, observe and ask, doing all of these things politely, they'll most likely learn to get along, no matter where they end up.


----------



## tangledblue

This is a very interesting thread. Thanks to the OP for asking the question. Not sure why people are getting angry as we all have valid experiences to share--except that I think that "class" in terms of financial capital and "class" in terms of education/cultural capital seem to be easily confused. "Lower class" is not necessarily an insult (although it can be depending on context), just a description of where one might be in our income-stratified society. I also agree with the idea that part of this whole question has to do with moving between subcultures, and that moving "down" can be as socially unsettling as moving up.

I started out economically poor, but with some cultural capital. We always had enough to eat, but clothes were all hand-me-downs and I got free lunches at school. I went to a top college and I did have some playing catchup to do, particularly in terms of understanding my post-college options and the impact my undergraduate career would have. There have been some social norms that I have gained a better understanding of since growing up.

Now, in a much better place financially, I also understand what a frugal childhood taught me, and I hope to somehow pass those lessons on to my children. I think they will grow up feeling much less financially precarious than I did, much more comfortable being around people who are used to financial security. I still feel a little out of place sometimes, mostly because of an assumption of comfort that other people seem to have. And of course I want my kids to feel comfortable...but I also want them to not be overly entitled. It is difficult (impossible?) to find a balance between providing them with security and having them understand exactly how fortunate they are. I'm not sure they can fully understand their good fortune without experiencing the opposite. I have been asking sort of the opposite question from the OP: how can I get them to understand what it's like to not have enough or just barely?

Here's my response to the OP's question:

I think that certain broad skills will help your kids more than specific knowledge about wine, etc. Broad skills will help them "know what they don't know" and know how to find the answers.

-They should be avid readers, because that will expose them to all kinds of worlds and ways of thinking beyond their immediate surroundings. They will absorb all kinds of vocabulary that would be helpful for say, reading restaurant menus.

-They should take a good survey course in the humanities at least once in high school and once in college.

-They should understand scientific principles enough to talk to a scientist at a comfortable layperson level.

-Make sure they take at least one foreign language and gain proficiency in it as much as possible.

-They should be informed about current events, from multiple sources.

-They should know that part of being polite is being genuinely interested in other people.

-They should know basic etiquette rules without being overly formal. Know when to be formal/informal.

-Spelling. Seriously, the written communication will get you every time, particularly misspelling words that sound the same but have different meanings (e.g. "piqued" and "peeked.")

-Have the self respect to know that as long as they are gracious, polite, etc., if someone treats them snobbily it reflects on the other person not on them.

-Learn a musical instrument. We didn't have the cash for this when I grew up and I still regret it.

-General understanding of what makes something high quality, whether it is clothing or food or whatever. Even if you can't afford it it is still nice to know.

-Travel and get out of their comfort zones.

-Wine--Just drink some and find out what you like!  Then order with confidence.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife*
> 
> Maybe we should discuss (again) what constitutes middle class, upper class, low class, etc.
> 
> Of course, there's the whole family size and COL factor. $50K might be decent for a single person in Ohio, but a family of four in California may be around the poverty level and qualify for assistance.
> 
> Clearly, the OP has decided $100k is Upper/upper-middle class for parents. Not everyone would agree. Plenty of families on that income aren't worried about making sure their kids know wines and such; whereas, I'm sure there are families making $30k who happen to give their kids the experience of horse back riding lessons or fancy dining etiquette, or whatever.


I have no idea where to draw the lines, but I read not long ago that median household income for my municipality is $88K. That doesn't suggest to me that $100K would be considered to be a very high income.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LynnS6*
> 
> True, but if no one in your family has ever done them, if no one in your community knows about these things, how are you going to learn? You certainly aren't going to get this knowledge in the public schools any more because art, music and that sort of thing has been completely cut from most budgets, especially in really poor districts. In addition, at least where I live, public museums do charge admission -- up to $8 per person. There are free nights and there are passes you can get from the library. But, again, you have to know this, and you have to know how to navigate the public library system to reserve these (it's not easy). Even then, you're still going to need to have the time to take the bus to the museum (plus money for the bus fair for you and your kids).


We could talk all day about how life can be a struggle financially and otherwise for the poor and the effects of generational poverty. But that doesn't erase the suggestion that certain things like art and language have no relevance to the non-grad student kind of poor.

Also, where I live, the admission price to the state art museum is a recommended amount but not required. I've seen the same at other public museums. It's the same at The Met (the art one in case mtiger is still reading) in New York, although I've never pushed it there. I've been plenty of times to the art museum here and donated little to nothing when I didn't have much. Plus I went to museums here all the time as a kid on free public school field trips. I was in New York City recently with my aunt who is very low income, and she got past the "suggested admission" at the American Museum of Natural History. Poor folks can be resourceful.


----------



## AbbyGrant

ooos! double post.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LynnS6*
> 
> People who didn't go to college do value college, for the most part. They do teach manners, etc. But first generation college students are at a much higher risk for failing or dropping out (yes, I have numbers to back this up). Why? Because they don't have anyone to help them navigate the system. I had one very earnest undergraduate in my office a couple of years ago. He was going to school, working night shift, living in a 2 bedroom apartment with his wife, 2 kids, and his parents (who were unemployed). He was failing my course because he didn't know how to write the kind of paper I was requesting. I basically cornered him and dragged him to my office because I didn't want to see him fail. He was in his last year of college and this was the first time he'd ever been in a professor's office! He'd failed a number of courses, not because he was dumb, but because he didn't understand that it was OK to go to someone's office and say "Help, I really don't understand this assignment." I need to teach that lesson to 2-3 students every single quarter I teach. And some of them don't believe me. And, alas, many of them don't come in until it's hopeless (if you've failed the first 6 assignments, it's too late. If you come in after the 1st one, we can work on it.)
> 
> Now, some students pick this up how to navigate the system on their own. But it's a lot easier with someone who knows the system to help you. When my brother (son of two teachers, one a Ph.D.) needed to get into an algebra course that was a prerequisite for the degree he wanted, he knew enough to contact the professor when he didn't get in, go to class on the first day and keep hanging around until enough people dropped that he could get in. He then knew how to petition to add the course after the registration period had closed. I've had students who have tried to register for a required 3 quarters in a row, but couldn't get in. They couldn't get in because they registered late because they had a financial hold on their records. Because they couldn't pay their bill (because their families couldn't help) and because they didn't know enough to contact me early on in the registration process, they graduated late.
> 
> The problem isn't that these students don't value education -- they don't know that there's a whole set of unwritten rules about how to get into classes that are full. Thus, they're at a disadvantage. They can't ask the right questions because they don't realize that there is another possibility. THAT is cultural capital. We have, in our department, started teaching some of these things overtly to both our undergraduates and our graduate students. Why? Because a majority of us believe it's unfair to students who come in without that cultural capital not to have the rules spelled out for them. Teaching them overtly levels the playing field. A couple of my colleagues don't agree however. Their opinion is "I figured it out on my own, why can't they?" (Interestingly enough, they come from more high income/highly educated families.)


I'm not discounting the fact that first-gen low income students face some unique challenges, and I've read about some great programs that address the issue, but the significantly higher drop out rate can't simply be chalked up to lack of cultural capital due to their background. Often times it can be due to lack of money and to difficulty balancing work and school and sometimes children. And higher income students still drop out at a pretty high rate which often can't be explained by lack of money, so clearly they can have problems finding a balance and navigating the system too. Large institutions can be difficult for many people to figure out especially when they're young, inexperienced, and/or have a lot of other things going on. It's something I've seen students from all backgrounds struggle with and something all students could use some help with. The college drop out rate is a costly problem that needs to be addressed.


----------



## crunchy_mommy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drummer's Wife*
> 
> Maybe we should discuss (again) what constitutes middle class, upper class, low class, etc.
> 
> Of course, there's the whole family size and COL factor. $50K might be decent for a single person in Ohio, but a family of four in California may be around the poverty level and qualify for assistance.
> 
> Clearly, the OP has decided $100k is Upper/upper-middle class for parents. Not everyone would agree. Plenty of families on that income aren't worried about making sure their kids know wines and such; whereas, I'm sure there are families making $30k who happen to give their kids the experience of horse back riding lessons or fancy dining etiquette, or whatever.


I also think there is a whole range of low-middle-class (maybe $25K-$60K, depending on COL etc.) where you are no longer technically impoverished but don't _feel_ financially more well-off than the truly poor. It's in this range where you no longer qualify for any public assistance, trying to make ends meet without any help or any tax breaks... you still have to struggle to make ends meet each month, still have trouble saving up & getting ahead or paying for any extras, can't afford things that many consider basic -- insurance, phone/internet, legal representation, etc.


----------



## Mom31

yes this- if I was to stretch myself so thin- work two jobs- etc I would not be any better off then I am now and I would not see my kids- at all. So I could get above the poverty level if I really really tried- worked 60 hours a week. But I am a single mom raising kids- So I don't. And even then- with my earning potential I could make still under 30,000 a year. And would be part of the working poor who could not make ends meet.

I tried to go back to university ( I have a year or two left for a BA) but it had been 8 years since I had been to school- I just did not get blackboard... I lived 25 min from campus...they put me in part b of classes I had taken 8 years prior- ( partly my mistake but really couselor!!!) I did not have a computer- it was essentially ridiculous to try to go to school without a computer- and without ability to go to the library- because I had two small children.

I was taking 300 and 400 level classes after being out of college for 8 years. I should have eased into it took some electives.... but essentially all I did was waste a pell grant. I had to withdraw.

I do plan to go to the community college and try to take some classes- but my degree was in psychology.... lol. So I don't really see a bachelors in it lifting us out of poverty instantly.

Now to put this into the mix. My son is gifted. And I want him to succeed.... I can see him as a professor in a college. Since I come from a family of people that have this knowledge- ( golf) lol.... I believe when he gets a bit older I will send him to his city cousins to learn these things and ways of life since I don't live them.

I see my dd as a nurse of midwife. Or movie star 

This thread is interesting since I am a part of both worlds- and I feel I navigate both just fine. I have very very poor friends and very very wealthy family.

I feel more at home with regular people tho- not pretentious ones and most of my well off family is not pretentious and most of my friends are not ignorant. There are exceptions to this rule.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Also, I just wanted to point out that Pell grants do not have a specific income limit of $50,000 as was previously suggested, and you don't automatically get one if you make up to that amount or any other. You have to demonstrate significant need. There's a formula used that determines eligibility based on things like income, assets, number of children in the household, number of children attending college, etc. You have to be pretty low-income to get one.


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Also, I just wanted to point out that Pell grants do not have a specific income limit of $50,000 as was previously suggested, and you don't automatically get one if you make up to that amount or any other. You have to demonstrate significant need. There's a formula used that determines eligibility based on things like income, assets, number of children in the household, number of children attending college, etc. *You have to be pretty low-income to get one. *


Yup, and they don't have pell grants for anything above undergraduate level coursework. With rising tuition costs, Pell grants don't defray very much cost either, especially at a 4 year school. At community colleges they can put a serious dent in the cost, but still don't cover everything.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Also, here's a US News & World Report table showing the percentage of students receiving a Pell grant at the top 25 ranked universities in the country. It ranges from 37% at UCLA to 7% at Washington University in St. Louis (which is the only one that low perhaps because of the high cost but low name recognition). The article states that Pell grants usually go to those making under $20,000. Considering that, I'd say low-income folks are represented pretty well on the campuses of the most highly selective schools.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools

Sorry for the serial posting, but some of the generalizations and assumptions on this thread have really gotten under my skin.


----------



## LynnS6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> We could talk all day about how life can be a struggle financially and otherwise for the poor and the effects of generational poverty. But that doesn't erase the suggestion that certain things like art and language have no relevance to the non-grad student kind of poor.
> 
> Also, where I live, the admission price to the state art museum is a recommended amount but not required. I've seen the same at other public museums. It's the same at The Met (the art one in case mtiger is still reading) in New York, although I've never pushed it there. I've been plenty of times to the art museum here and donated little to nothing when I didn't have much. Plus I went to museums here all the time as a kid on free public school field trips. I was in New York City recently with my aunt who is very low income, and she got past the "suggested admission" at the American Museum of Natural History. Poor folks can be resourceful.


*I* never said that languages and art don't have relevance to the poor (that was someone else). I was just pointing out that even if it has a lot of relevance to you, it's going to be harder to become self-educated in this area if you don't have the financial resources to make access to those things easier. My point is that it's a heck of a lot easier to gain cultural capital if someone else has paved the way for you.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LynnS6*
> 
> *I* never said that languages and art don't have relevance to the poor (that was someone else). I was just pointing out that even if it has a lot of relevance to you, it's going to be harder to become self-educated in this area if you don't have the financial resources to make access to those things easier. My point is that it's a heck of a lot easier to gain cultural capital if someone else has paved the way for you.


Oh, I know you didn't and apologize if I seemed to imply otherwise.







But you responded to my comment about that person's comment, so that's why I mentioned it. I just meant there's no excusing the comment.

I don't think one always needs financial resources to learn things. Crew, sure. Art, not so much. I understand that it's easier to learn about certain things if those around you find them important and have knowledge to pass on. And I understand about generational poverty. But it just seems to me like a lot of the cultural capital talk here is very academic and theoretical and a bit cold and kind of underestimates the power of the individual and overestimates the power of knowing about certain subjects.


----------



## nstewart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> But it just seems to me like a lot of the cultural capital talk here is very academic and theoretical and a bit cold and kind of underestimates the power of the individual and overestimates the power of knowing about certain subjects.


I totally agree with this.

You can have all kinds of "cultural capital" that you acquired growing up in a monied household but if you are an a**hole it really won't get you anywhere. If you are an engaging, self confident person who can carry on a conversation and ask intelligent questions, and if you are good at reading people, it will not matter if you've travelled or eaten at fine dining establishments or if you know more than one language as you'll figure it out as you go along.

Certainly in some respects it would help to have parents who could help you navigate certain experiences (I think specifically about the college example given by LynnS6 as I was the first person in my family to attend university and had to figure it out as I went along) but I think the personality and essential "life skills" as opposed to cultural experiences of the individual are far more important.


----------



## littlest birds

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nstewart*
> 
> You can have all kinds of "cultural capital" that you acquired growing up in a monied household but if you are an a**hole it really won't get you anywhere.


It depends on where you are trying to get. This doesn't seem to be about trying to be a better person. The OP is new money and wants her children to grow up comfortable in certain social circles. This is separate from learning to be a nice confident person or other such things and OBVIOUSLY not more important. Those social skills and cultural knowledge are okay to be concerned with in addition to other aspects of teaching one's children.

Some of those extracurricular experiences are really major luxuries. It's hard for me to even swing music lessons. We rarely do summer camps--and there are some awesome summer camps that really only serve this higher income bracket. Travel experiences are hard to come by. There is so much natural exposure if your children are involved with other children accustomed to such experiences and also experiencing them with their peers, I would think there is actually little to go out of your way to teach to help them be part of these circles. People with more money as adults may have the responsibility to make bigger decisions as adults, so you might want to consider how to teach the background knowledge of being decision-makers, ethics, etc. Survival skills when one is on the edge and when one lives off an inherited nest egg are quite different.


----------



## nstewart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *littlest birds*
> 
> It depends on where you are trying to get. This doesn't seem to be about trying to be a better person. The OP is new money and wants her children to grow up comfortable in certain social circles. This is separate from learning to be a nice confident person or other such things and OBVIOUSLY not more important. Those social skills and cultural knowledge are okay to be concerned with in addition to other aspects of teaching one's children.


I agree that the cultural knowledge OP is referring to is also nice to have and ok to teach kids (although I think I have different ideas than OP about what those things would be, to each their own). What I am getting at is that if you don't have basic interpersonal skills then the cultural knowlege and other "assets" won't do you much good as you just won't be invited to the party, so to speak. They just won't get you anywhere if you are kept on the "outside" because people just don't want to be around you.


----------



## FarmerBeth

Valued skills are more dependent upon overall culture than income. Living in a rural location, I can positively say that those in the upper class bracket in the country value quite different skills than upper class urbanites. Also, while I realize we are talking about socioeconomic class and not purely income, people who have earned their income as entrepreneurs or in supposedly blue collar trades also have different values than people earn their money in careers that typically involve post graduate education. My brother would qualify in this income bracket. He works in upper management in a large engineering and construction firm and his background is purely community college followed by apprenticing, journeyman, etc route available to carpenters. My husband used to work in the oil industry and the welders he was acquainted with (especially those qualified in underground welding) made significant income easily in this range.

I think the important thing for those in the upper income classes to remember is that they have an opportunity to give their children a very broad exposure to experiences. A range of experiences (not so much which ones in particular) give one more to fall back on as an adult. Some experiences (like extensive travel, certain sports, music lessons) are easier to give children if you have a higher income, so why not use the opportunity in a varied way according to the family's personal interests?

Other than that, teaching good financial skills, clear communication, practical skills, and the value of hard work are good skills for anyone to learn.


----------



## Imakcerka

For all those interested learning a language is actually really easy. Once I learned one... it was not hard to pick up another. Most people I know are proficient in more than one other non native language. All it takes is want.

As for the rest of it Meh... I don't care


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> For all those interested learning a language is actually really easy. Once I learned one... it was not hard to pick up another. Most people I know are proficient in more than one other non native language. All it takes is want.
> As for the rest of it Meh... I don't care


I agree, Imakcerka. I studied an extensive amount of French but discovered that it really helped me in Spanish and Italian too (although I can only get by in those two languages for survival purposes...like: I want water, please, or, where's the train station).

I did take modern Hebrew back in the day and while not the most practical language in the world, it was very beneficial for me, in my youth, to learn to read a different visuals besides my native alphabet. I was shut out of Russian class in the early '80's at my university, but later I found that they canceled the class and I think it was an anti-communist thingy. Wish I had learned to speak Russian because it is a huge demographic where I live.

I actually think language acquisition is a fairly utilitarian thing. Maybe in the old days, when people tended to be isolated in their own native cultures and didn't have the opportunity to travel or learn anything above rudimentary stuff, did language acquisition reside in the world of the elite. Not so much anymore. I live in a neighborhood where at least five non-English languages are spoken (Arabic, Italian, Spanish, Russian and Mandarin) and exposure is par for the course. Kids pick up on it. My DD picks up on it. It's not hooty-flalooty. It's just life as we know it.


----------



## nstewart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Imakcerka*
> 
> For all those interested learning a language is actually really easy. Once I learned one... it was not hard to pick up another. Most people I know are proficient in more than one other non native language. All it takes is want.
> As for the rest of it Meh... I don't care


And opportunity to use the 2nd languange.

Seems like where you are there are Spanish and English speakers, based on other threads? Where I am, 95% of the population I know (recognizing that there are other communities in my city that speak other languages) speak English only. So, even though I took Spanish for 2 years of Uni, other than traveling to Spain where my skills improved drastically in only 3 weeks, I have had very little opportunity to practice my Spanish in the last 7 years (despite the fact that my Tia, although not a blood relative, speaks spanish as a first language and I do practise with her when I can). DHs father speaks French as a first language and DH attended school in French until grade 9, but spoke
English at home as his mom doesn't speak French. As an adult, he's had little opportunity to use it and his French is attrocious. His brother, who speaks French often due to his work, is still fluent. Opportunity is key, although I recognize if your desire is strong enough it's likely those opportunities could be created. It is easier living some places than others, however.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LynnS6*
> 
> OK -- so here's a type of cultural knowledge that I missed completely because I'm an nerdy academic who just didn't care to party. And my parents were no help either. I know very little slang related to marijuana or other drugs. I just don't. And I really don't care to learn. Just like I really don't care enough about wine to learn. But, it does leave me out of a whole bunch of conversations!
> 
> I'm not sure how much this is related to one's general drug knowledge. I smoked pot daily through my last two years of high school, and a little while afterwards. My ex and most of our friends were potheads, to one degree or another. I've been around potheads a lot, and was one for a while. And, I'd never heard of the 4:20 thing until I came across it (quite randomly) online. Imentioned it to a woman I know and she was like, "oh, yeah - that's been around for a while". To the best of my knowledge, she's never smoked even a single joint, and she certainly doesn't have a lot of pothead friends. It was just something she came across somewhere, the same way I did.


----------



## Amys1st

Well I go away from this board for 48 hrs and look what happens!

I am right there at the 6 figure. I am drinking a glass of wine as I type this. Why? Because it was left in the fridge, and just enough to enjoy. BTW, this wine, is white and I paid about $6 for it. I bought it because it was on sale, I needed some for a recipe that was italian and I cannot pronounce it either nor could I when I went to Italy. LOL. But DH is working late (Hell how do you think we have this $$$) and the kids are watching a dvd.

The best tasting wine I have found is the one that you open and drink with close friends or family. Everyone is happy and enjoying the wine, the meal, or whatever. I have done this with 3 buck chuck (although I had a huge headache in the am) and very expensive wines as well. But I cannot recall the other names but I can recall the times drinking them and what a great occasion it was, because of the company, not the wine. Anyone who has to take a course on food and wine to talk to people or be friends, you dont want to be friends let alone break bread with those types.

I should add, DH and I are huge foodies and drink snobs. But that is our thing and we go to your house for the pleasure of YOUR company and your hospitality. So if you serve up the 3 buck chuck, hell pour me a glass and we will have a nice time! I will love whatever you are excited about because its about you not your stuff.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> I live in a neighborhood where at least five non-English languages are spoken (Arabic, Italian, Spanish, Russian and Mandarin) and exposure is par for the course. Kids pick up on it. My DD picks up on it. It's not hooty-flalooty. It's just life as we know it.


Reading your posts always makes me wish I could raise my kids in New York.


----------



## FarmerBeth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nstewart*
> 
> And opportunity to use the 2nd languange.
> 
> Seems like where you are there are Spanish and English speakers, based on other threads? Where I am, 95% of the population I know (recognizing that there are other communities in my city that speak other languages) speak English only. So, even though I took Spanish for 2 years of Uni, other than traveling to Spain where my skills improved drastically in only 3 weeks, I have had very little opportunity to practice my Spanish in the last 7 years (despite the fact that my Tia, although not a blood relative, speaks spanish as a first language and I do practise with her when I can). DHs father speaks French as a first language and DH attended school in French until grade 9, but spoke
> English at home as his mom doesn't speak French. As an adult, he's had little opportunity to use it and his French is attrocious. His brother, who speaks French often due to his work, is still fluent. Opportunity is key, although I recognize if your desire is strong enough it's likely those opportunities could be created. It is easier living some places than others, however.


It would come back quickly for your husband if he were to be exposed again. I grew up in a bilingual (French and English) household, schooled in French, and then was mostly only around English speakers for a good 15 years. My French was very rusty, but now that I'm living in a more bilingual region again (and some other languages, besides) it has come back quickly. Also, if you have more than one language, not only do you have more exposure to patterns within language families (reading Italian is easy if you speak French, German and English are similar, etc), but you also learn the steps to acquiring a new language (learning how to learn so to speak). I think the learning of other languages is a wonderful, life broadening skill that extends beyond any sort of class value. We don't live in a population with many Asians, but my daughter had an opportunity to learn some Korean this last year from a new Canadian and I thought it was wonderful all of the interest shown by the many students who opted to take Korean as an extra-curricular. I don't care if she gets to use it, it's great she's learning about another language and culture.


----------



## nstewart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FarmerBeth*
> 
> It would come back quickly for your husband if he were to be exposed again. I grew up in a bilingual (French and English) household, schooled in French, and then was mostly only around English speakers for a good 15 years. My French was very rusty, but now that I'm living in a more bilingual region again (and some other languages, besides) it has come back quickly. Also, if you have more than one language, not only do you have more exposure to patterns within language families (reading Italian is easy if you speak French, German and English are similar, etc), but you also learn the steps to acquiring a new language (learning how to learn so to speak). I think the learning of other languages is a wonderful, life broadening skill that extends beyond any sort of class value. We don't live in a population with many Asians, but my daughter had an opportunity to learn some Korean this last year from a new Canadian and I thought it was wonderful all of the interest shown by the many students who opted to take Korean as an extra-curricular. I don't care if she gets to use it, it's great she's learning about another language and culture.


Yes, I absolutely agree with this. I know it would come back fast for him. I also took French, was in French Immersion for 2 years but as neither of my parents speak any French I was moved into English and took French as a second language until grade 12 (really, taking it as a second language you barely learn passable French, IMO). I still understand a lot of it, but can't reply. I also think this is why I picked up Spanish relatively easily, I knew the basic grammer rules (long since forgotten now!). I think learning a second language is an amazing opportunity not just for the skill but because of the neural pathways created which facilitate learning other skills as well. I hope to have DS attend French Immersion when he's enrolled in school. Still, to keep a language you need to use it.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VisionaryMom*
> I live in a place that still has cotillions. I could sign my kids up for those classes, but I'd prefer to teach them throughout their childhoods.


I think you are looking at this from a wonky perspective. If you live some place that has cotillions, you want your children to learn the skills taught at cotillion, and you can afford cotillion (and the wardrobe that goes along with it), then just sign them up for it. What's stopping you?

Cotillion teaches a certain set of social skills and provides practice with those skills. There's NO WAY for any parent to provide the exact same thing with just their family, which is why some families mess with cotillion. You can only practice that stuff with a group.

Second, you can't catch it because you don't know it. (If I didn't know how to swim, would my kids most likely turn out to be better swimmers if I tried to figure it out and teach them myself, or if I just hired a swim instructor?)

There are lots of things we do with our families and get the hang of, but when people really want to hone those skills, they get real teachers, coaches, and people to practice with. The more money the parents have, the more true this becomes.

To go back to my swimming example, we've spent lots of time in water as a family, but the reason my kids can kick a$$ across a pool is because they swam on a team with great coaches. If you want your kids to learn something (and they are at least open to it) find the best teachers you can.


----------



## Linda on the move

movie this thread most reminds me of --- Pride and Prejudice.

The scene were several characters are describing the traits of an "accomplished young woman." There's a long list with everything from playing the piano and singing and drawing to speaking "all the modern languages." Elizabeth Bennet says she's never met such a creature, but says she would be "very fearsome to behold."


----------



## Smithie

This is one of the most classicist posts I have seen in a long time.

Grammar and proofreading, OP. Teach your children not to make unintentional puns when they are trying to lay the smake down.









But the hilarity inspires a serious point - give your children a very broad and thorough classical education if you want them to be socially mobile and/or to enrich the modest social stratum which they may inhabit in adulthood. I am surrounded by homeschoolers (many of who are poor by any definition, it truly runs the gamut socioeconomically) who have observed that while functional literacy is holding steady in our society (I can read and understand a menu, a job application, and a traffic ticket), actual literacy (I can read and understand Shakespeare, the KJV, and my AP Biology textbook) is sharply declining in public schools. You know where actual literacy is NOT permitted to decline? Exeter, Choate, and the Boston Latin School. Most people can't pay for that kind of secondary education, but you can make good headway into it with some judicious afterschooling and academic summer programs, even if homeschooling is not for you.

Have your kids study Latin and ancient literature. Classicists, as opposed to classists, have been successfully mingling with rich folks for quite some time. And the mental training confers many other benefits unrelated to social mobility.


----------



## crimsonandclover

This thread reminds me of reading "The Social Animal", by David Brooks. He talks about the lack of correlation of money to happiness, and pulls dozens of interesting surveys to prove his point. Basically, the happiest people are the ones who are socially and intimately connected. In fact, people who join a club that meets monthly report more long term happiness over those who double their income the same year. Regarding the upper classes, and I quote:

"Many members of this class, like many Americans generally, have a vague sense that their lives have been distorted by a giant cultural bias. They live in a society that prizes the development of career skills but is inarticulate when it comes to the things that matter most. The young achievers are tutored in every soccer technique and calculus problem, but when it comes to their most important decisions-whom to marry and whom to befriend, what to love and what to despise-they are on their own. Nor, for all their striving, do they understand the qualities that lead to the highest achievement. Intelligence, academic performance, and prestigious schools don't correlate well with fulfillment, or even with outstanding accomplishment. The traits that do make a difference are poorly understood, and can't be taught in a classroom, no matter what the tuition: the ability to understand and inspire people; to read situations and discern the underlying patterns; to build trusting relationships; to recognize and correct one's shortcomings; to imagine alternate futures. In short, these achievers have a sense that they are shallower then they need to be".

Just something to think about. Your children might benefit more from urging them to follow their interests and social activities than they may benefit from getting to ride with Barack Obama on a customized dolphin chariot or learning to order caramelized pork belly with a vanilla bean arugula reduction in French AND Sanskrit. But that's just my opinion.


----------



## pianojazzgirl

Very interesting.

And I'm LMAO @

Quote:


> getting to ride with Barack Obama on a customized dolphin chariot or learning to order caramelized pork belly with a vanilla bean arugula reduction in French AND Sanskrit


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> I am surrounded by homeschoolers (many of who are poor by any definition, it truly runs the gamut socioeconomically) who have observed that while functional literacy is holding steady in our society (I can read and understand a menu, a job application, and a traffic ticket), actual literacy (I can read and understand Shakespeare, the KJV, and my AP Biology textbook) is sharply declining in public schools.


Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. Shakespeare. I'm so sick of Shakespeare. I'm functionally literate, but I'm apparently not actually literate. I don't understand large chunks of Shakespeare, without a guide. I have no interest in understanding Shakespeare. Maybe, if I hadn't had his work crammed down my throat in the most tedious fashion possible as part of my "education", I'd be able to find the merit in his work, but it bored me to tears. Sure - he had insight into humanity. So do hundreds of other authors. If we're concerned about literacy in English, maybe there should be more focus on authors who wrote in something resembling the English language that we actually speak.

Sorry - you hit a nerve. Shakespeare isn't about "actual literacy". He's about the upper class equivalent of street cred. Not wanting to put down my book to dig out a Shakespeare study guide doesn't make me illiterate.


----------



## rubidoux

Lisa, I'm with you on Shakespeare and I don't even know what the KJV is.







I've done fairly well for myself considering my actual illiteracy, though.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rubidoux*
> 
> Lisa, I'm with you on Shakespeare and I don't even know what the KJV is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've done fairly well for myself considering my actual illiteracy, though.


I think KJV is "King James Version" (of the Bible). I agree with Lisa and while I think that literature can be a tool for becoming literate, I don't think that Shakespeare, Chaucer, biology textbooks or the Bible are necessarily markers for determining literacy. Chaucer (just using that as an example because I had to read it in high school) and Shakespeare were written in a form of English that most of us don't practice anymore. Plus, there is an element of poetry that dominates both those authors' work and I think that there has to be learned appreciation for that type of poetry and style of writing too. Regarding biology books: sure, I might be able to pick one up and pronounce all the words, but do I understand what I'm reading? Probably not, unless I have learned the terms of biology - so there is another level of learning there that has less to with literacy itself and more to do with acquisition of knowledge particular to a certain subject. Am I making sense?


----------



## Smithie

I don't snuggle up in front of a roaring fire with Hamlet, either.







But yes, I can understand most of the vocabulary and allusions, because I had a rigorous liberal arts education. "Upper class street cred?" Yup. The OP is looking for that, after all. But it's not just that - so many great authors and historians and politicians learned to read on the KJV and took their rhetorical cues from that Great Books syllabus, and I understand their work more deeply because I can follow their allusions.

As for the AP Biology textbook, "literacy" doesn't just refer to reading fluency. (That's "functional literacy," which is not an insult, BTW.) Educated people who've completed their secondary schooling need to possess sufficient scientific literacy to read books like that and understand them. That one's less of a yuppie party trick, and more of requirement for full citizenship in the modern world, where you pretty much need that level of scientific literacy to figure out what groceries to buy. Now, figuring out what groceries to buy and then hooking your friends up with new sources - THAT'S a yuppie party trick, and also a nice thing MDCers and IRL friends to do for each other with no pretensions to yuppiness. Context is all.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> I think KJV is "King James Version" (of the Bible). I agree with Lisa and while I think that literature can be a tool for becoming literate, I don't think that Shakespeare, Chaucer, biology textbooks or the Bible are necessarily markers for determining literacy. Chaucer (just using that as an example because I had to read it in high school) and Shakespeare were written in a form of English that most of us don't practice anymore. Plus, there is an element of poetry that dominates both those authors' work and I think that there has to be learned appreciation for that type of poetry and style of writing too. Regarding biology books: sure, I might be able to pick one up and pronounce all the words, but do I understand what I'm reading? Probably not, unless I have learned the terms of biology - so there is another level of learning there that has less to with literacy itself and more to do with acquisition of knowledge particular to a certain subject. Am I making sense?


You're making sense to me, at least. 

I don't read a lot of "literature", if we're using that term the way it's usually used. But, for many, many years, I read a minimum of five books a week, and frequently as many as ten. Occasionally, I re-read, but the majority of those books were first reads. They were predominantly science fiction, and included a lot of "hard" SF. That might not be the equivalent of an AP Biology textbook, but those books definitely required an ability to really read, understand what I was reading, and work through complicated, difficult, technical passages. The sociological speculation that's prevalent in SF also requires good comprehension, and at least some ability to think about what one is reading. I haven't read the KJV (keep thinking I should, but I don't own one, and never quite get around to it), and I've only read a bit of Shakespeare, and no Chaucer. It really bugs me when people use that sort of thing as a measuring stick for "actual literacy". I'm not terribly well-educated, especially in a formal sense, but I don't think anyone could claim that I'm not literate, yk?


----------



## Smithie

It's amazing how many scientific concepts I have picked up from SF. I'm with you there.

But I started with a rigorous formal grounding in the basic branches of science, did a subset of the Great Books (no normal person can do them all!) at the secondy and postsecondary levels, and that's the absolute min-bar for my kids, who are privileged to have access to prep school and two well-educated parents. (If my DH were in this thread, he would add a min-bar for formal mathematical study, and it would be waaaay above Algebra II where I quit.)


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> (That's "functional literacy," which is not an insult, BTW.)


When it's compared to "actual literacy," I think it could be seen as one.


----------



## Mummoth

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> This is one of the most classicist posts I have seen in a long time.
> 
> Grammar and proofreading, OP. Teach your children not to make unintentional puns when they are trying to lay the smake down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the hilarity inspires a serious point - give your children a very broad and thorough classical education if you want them to be socially mobile and/or to enrich the modest social stratum which they may inhabit in adulthood. I am surrounded by homeschoolers (many of who are poor by any definition, it truly runs the gamut socioeconomically) *who have observed that while functional literacy is holding steady in our society (I can read and understand a menu, a job application, and a traffic ticket), actual literacy (I can read and understand Shakespeare, the KJV, and my AP Biology textbook) is sharply declining in public schools.* You know where actual literacy is NOT permitted to decline? Exeter, Choate, and the Boston Latin School. Most people can't pay for that kind of secondary education, but you can make good headway into it with some judicious afterschooling and academic summer programs, even if homeschooling is not for you.
> 
> Have your kids study Latin and ancient literature. Classicists, as opposed to classists, have been successfully mingling with rich folks for quite some time. And the mental training confers many other benefits unrelated to social mobility.


I think this is a little bit like saying "Okay, you can balance your cheque book, and figure out how many days a tank of gas will last you, but you haven't learned calculus so you don't actually understand math." I think 'actual literacy' is being able to convey your meaning, and understand another person's meaning through text.

I enjoy reading Shakespeare, but it's a different kind of reading. The closest thing to it that I've seen in modern day writing is legal documents... you can't focus on every word and sentence, you have to read a few more lines before get the gist of what's being said or it's totally overwhelming. Educating oneself in certain topics might be advantageous if you're trying to fit into a certain crowd, but I wouldn't assume that literature was the thing to know. (I just had to spell check 'literature', oops! ha ha)


----------



## crunchy_mommy

I hate Shakespeare. I find it dull & repetitive.

I have 2 college degrees, have read a ton throughout my life... in the realm of hundreds of books a year, until I had a kid & got too busy. But I mostly read medical or psych books, I have no patience for fiction, whether it's Shakespeare or JK Rowling, though I do enjoy poetry (not so much classical poets...)

I have to admit, I think of the people who like Shakespeare as uptight, stuffy, self-important types who believe academics and theoreticals are more important than reality. No offense to anyone who likes his works, that's just the stereotype I seem to have stuck in my mind lol.


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> I hate Shakespeare. I find it dull & repetitive.
> I have 2 college degrees, have read a ton throughout my life... in the realm of hundreds of books a year, until I had a kid & got too busy. But I mostly read medical or psych books, I have no patience for fiction, whether it's Shakespeare or JK Rowling, though I do enjoy poetry (not so much classical poets...)
> I have to admit, I think of the people who like Shakespeare as uptight, stuffy, self-important types who believe academics and theoreticals are more important than reality. No offense to anyone who likes his works, that's just the stereotype I seem to have stuck in my mind lol.


You know what's funny....is I don't think Shakespeare intended the general public to read his work, but to see it performed. I love a good Shakespeare play and all the trappings. I'm a big fan of Julie Taymor and she did a great interpretation of Titus Andronicus (it was in the movie theatres for about a week - but such is the life or art films). I like to see different actors and actresses interpret the characters. I love the premise of Shakespeare's tales (morality, death, sex, intrigue). There's just a language barrier there that turns a lot of people off and I think the problem is that we are introduced through reading, rather than seeing and hearing. I have the complete works of Shakespeare sitting on my shelf and let me tell you, I use it only as reference. They are plays. It would be like us sitting around reading movie scripts today. His work is meant to be viewed in the realm of stage/theatre.


----------



## AbbyGrant

This discussion has a scene from one of my kid's favorite movies, Gnomeo and Juliet, running though my head.

(hear Michael Caine and Maggie Smith while reading)

Lord Redbrick: I don't like what you're incinerating. 
Lady Bluebury: The proper word is "insinuating", illiterate. 
Lord Redbrick: I am not illiterate! My parents were married!


----------



## crunchy_mommy

CatsCradle, I think you are totally right! Good point!


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> It's amazing how many scientific concepts I have picked up from SF. I'm with you there.
> 
> But I started with a rigorous formal grounding in the basic branches of science, did a subset of the Great Books (no normal person can do them all!) at the secondy and postsecondary levels, and that's the absolute min-bar for my kids, who are privileged to have access to prep school and two well-educated parents. (If my DH were in this thread, he would add a min-bar for formal mathematical study, and it would be waaaay above Algebra II where I quit.)


To each their own. I will point out that I know multiple people (some friends, some classmates) who were turned off of reading completely by the reading lists in high school. If I hadn't already been an avid reader before starting school, I suspect I may have been the same way. If people get something out of those books, that's great. But, if what they get is "reading is effing boring, and I don't want to do it", I don't think there's any great benefit to be had.

I'll have to look up the "Great Books", as I'm not sure which ones fall under this heading. But, I have no min-bar for my kids when it comes to books. I just want them to enjoy reading. If that means that, at 18, they're like ds1, who only reads sporadically, but discusses what he reads on multiple levels, I'm okay with that. I just want them to read.

Okay...I just looked up the Great Books Syllabus. All the Shakespeare would bore me out of my mind. I've read a few books in there, and started on a few more, which were too boring to hold my interest (notably War and Peace). But, I can't see how it's necessary to read them to understand allusions to many of them. I've never read The Odyssey, or The Divine Comedy, or the Old Testament (or New Testament, for that matter) or any Shakespeare beyond the two plays (MacBeth and The Taming of the Shrew) that were crammed down my throat in school. But, I also don't live under a rock. I'd have to live either there, or in a closet, to not be able to pick up on a lot of these things. Does anybody who ever reads anything not know at least the basics about 1984 or Romeo and Juliet?

I'll freely admit there are books in there that I haven't read, but I also have to say that if reading more Shakespeare (and I think CatsCradle made a good point about him) or Orwell is the price I'd have to pay for being "acutally literate", I'll happily remain in a state of mere functional literacy. Getting through that list would leave me never wanting to pick up a book again. Orwell...really? I had to read Animal Farm in high school, and I can't imagine forcing myself through two of his books. (I am glad to see that the execrable Lord of the Flies isn't on there, though. That one almost put me off books, for fear I'd pick up something that bad again.)


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I'll freely admit there are books in there that I haven't read, but I also have to say that if reading more Shakespeare (and I think CatsCradle made a good point about him) or Orwell is the price I'd have to pay for being "acutally literate", I'll happily remain in a state of mere functional literacy. Getting through that list would leave me never wanting to pick up a book again. Orwell...really? I had to read Animal Farm in high school, and I can't imagine forcing myself through two of his books. (I am glad to see that the execrable Lord of the Flies isn't on there, though. That one almost put me off books, for fear I'd pick up something that bad again.)


I think part of the "forcing it down our throats" in education is that someone, somewhere, has determined that it is culturally relevant. I can understand that to an extent, but at the same time, I think the forcing of cultural stuff has been a very recent thing (give or take a 1000 years or so). Somewhere along the way, someone or some body of individuals determined that certain works were/are worthy of our attention. I don't know, I think it is our attachment to history. I see the same thing in the way that people scrapbook now...there is some human compulsion to hang onto history...to make it special...to highly edit for personal comfort.

Not that anyone noticed, but my member name "CatsCradle" is the title of a Kurt Vonnegut Jr. book, my favorite book in all of human history. He's a 20th century writer and is crass and prone to gallow humour, but he best defines how I feel about life. I love that guy. I would have asked him to marry me if he had been my contemporary. I care a lot about modern fiction because it speaks to me and in my language and circumstance. My DH is a Phillip K. Dick fan but I haven't read any of his books...just love the adapted films. I think, Storm Bride, you are right in that the themes of the so-called important books are in our collective brains, and I don't think it is important to actually tediously read this stuff to understand the morality and drama behind those stories. Perhaps it is helpful to acknowledge them and know their place, but why torture yourself? I think we tend to adequately educate ourselves through our own interests and things that excite us.


----------



## NicaG

I really think the most important things you can teach kids about moving fluently between social classes:

-read anything you can get your hands on, spend some time in bookstores, it's good to have intellectual curiousity and a broad cultural literacy

-never feel ashamed of where you come from--every life is unique and interesting. Be proud of who you are and where you come from

-openness, a sense of humor, and curiosity go a long way. If you don't know something, just ask. No one will hold it against you, especially if you're friendly about it


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> I think part of the "forcing it down our throats" in education is that someone, somewhere, has determined that it is culturally relevant. I can understand that to an extent, but at the same time, I think the forcing of cultural stuff has been a very recent thing (give or take a 1000 years or so). Somewhere along the way, someone or some body of individuals determined that certain works were/are worthy of our attention. I don't know, I think it is our attachment to history. I see the same thing in the way that people scrapbook now...there is some human compulsion to hang onto history...to make it special...to highly edit for personal comfort.
> 
> I think that's exactly. it. These books have been deemed to be culturally relevant, so we have to read them. But, honestly, for many of those books, I'd have had much more fun reading brief summaries, including information about the impact each book had, in a historical/cultural/literary sense, than I had actually having to read them. I think the same probably goes for a lot of other people, too. I remember asking my mom (during one of my many violent anti-school rants, admittedly) if the educational system wanted kids to hate reading. She told me she didn't think that was the case, but had wondered herself at times. It might have been fun to read a brief summary of Lord of the Flies, and then have a class discussion about the point of the book, and what the author wanted to say, and things like that. (I do have to admit to having been highly social phobic and insanely self-conscious as a teen - heck, I am now, and I'm nowhere near as bad as I was - so I probably wouldn't have actually said anything...but it would have been interesting.)
> 
> Not that anyone noticed, but my member name "CatsCradle" is the title of a Kurt Vonnegut Jr. book, my favorite book in all of human history. He's a 20th century writer and is crass and prone to gallow humour, but he best defines how I feel about life. I love that guy. I would have asked him to marry me if he had been my contemporary. I care a lot about modern fiction because it speaks to me and in my language and circumstance. My DH is a Phillip K. Dick fan but I haven't read any of his books...just love the adapted films.
> 
> I can't believe I never picked up on that. I never really got into Vonnegut, because I didn't like his writing style that much, but I did read Cat's Cradle, and one other one, which I can't even remember (I know it wasn't Slaughterhouse-Five). I kept thinking I should go back and read some more when I got older (read the couple I did when I was about 17), but never got around to it. I've read some Phillip K. Dick, but only short stories. I liked them fairly well, but he was never a favourite. I liked his ideas, and some of where took them, but (again) wasn't crazy about his writing style.
> 
> I think, Storm Bride, you are right in that the themes of the so-called important books are in our collective brains, and I don't think it is important to actually tediously read this stuff to understand the morality and drama behind those stories. Perhaps it is helpful to acknowledge them and know their place, but why torture yourself? I think we tend to adequately educate ourselves through our own interests and things that excite us.
> 
> That's my take, for the most part. It's one of the reasons I'm homeschooling (I'm not a real unschooler, but something along those lines). I want my kids to follow their interests. It's even things like geography. When I was in school, we studied whatever countries were in the textbooks. But, if a child has a strong interest in, say, South Africa, why not study that, instead of Kenya, yk? I want my kids to learn about the whole world, but I don't see any reason to focus in on parts that don't interest them. We can start with the stuff that does interest them, and see where it goes (eg. they're both at least somewhat intrigued by Brazil, as a result of visits to the "Amazon Gallery" at our local aquarium).
> 
> I certainly have no objection to my chlidren reading the "great works", but I'm not going to make them, yk? That "Great Books" list also has a "good books" list for younger people. I read quite a few of them - loved some (eg. all things Edgar Rice Burroughs - he was my favourite author when I was 10 or 11), liked others (eg. Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer), and hated others (Little Women was a snoozefest). I'm reading the Little House books to dd1 now. I'm enjoying them, and so is dd1. If she weren't, we'd move on to something else.


----------



## nstewart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> I don't snuggle up in front of a roaring fire with Hamlet, either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yes, I can understand most of the vocabulary and allusions, because I had a rigorous liberal arts education. "Upper class street cred?" Yup. The OP is looking for that, after all. But it's not just that - so many great authors and historians and politicians learned to read on the KJV and took their rhetorical cues from that Great Books syllabus, and I understand their work more deeply because I can follow their allusions.
> 
> There's the "upper class" OP is talking about, which is from a socio economic perspective, and then there's academic "street cred" which is what I think you are actually getting at here. Oh, and if you want to get all these types of allusions you are referring to, turn no further than The Simpsons. Is that what the "upper crust" are watching these days? Probably not, but an academic will pick up on the numerous illusions you are referring to. For example, what street does Mr. Burns live on? On the corner of Croesus and Mammon streets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do I know that? I'm a giant nerd. If this came up with any of my friends who actually grew up "upper class", far, far beyond the level OP is talking about, they'd just confirm my nerdy-ness. Trust me, these things don't put you in with the "cool kids" from an upper class perspective. What does? Being social (having social intelligence), having financial literacy.
> 
> Educated people who've completed their secondary schooling need to possess sufficient scientific literacy to read books like that and understand them. That one's less of a yuppie party trick, and more of requirement for full citizenship in the modern world, where you pretty much need that level of scientific literacy to figure out what groceries to buy. Now, figuring out what groceries to buy and then hooking your friends up with new sources - THAT'S a yuppie party trick, and also a nice thing MDCers and IRL friends to do for each other with no pretensions to yuppiness. Context is all.
> 
> Really?? I think groceries require more common sense than "scientific knowledge" of any kind. And from someone who has 2 post secondary degrees, I actually find this kind of insulting. I *have* to read biology? (Eye roll). And math?? (Double eye roll). Math skills and financial literacy aren't even related.


Sorry, your post just really rubs me the wrong way!

OP is talking about fitting in, not getting ahead. And then a lot of what you are talking about is just great from an academic perspective, but not practical from a "getting ahead" perspective either.


----------



## Storm Bride

Oops - I've gone way OT. I keep thinking this is the thread about going to college.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nstewart*
> 
> I don't snuggle up in front of a roaring fire with Hamlet, either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But yes, I can understand most of the vocabulary and allusions, because I had a rigorous liberal arts education. "Upper class street cred?" Yup. The OP is looking for that, after all. But it's not just that - so many great authors and historians and politicians learned to read on the KJV and took their rhetorical cues from that Great Books syllabus, and I understand their work more deeply because I can follow their allusions.
> 
> There's the "upper class" OP is talking about, which is from a socio economic perspective, and then there's academic "street cred" which is what I think you are actually getting at here. Oh, and if you want to get all these types of allusions you are referring to, turn no further than The Simpsons. Is that what the "upper crust" are watching these days? Probably not, but an academic will pick up on the numerous illusions you are referring to. For example, what street does Mr. Burns live on? On the corner of Croesus and Mammon streets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why do I know that? I'm a giant nerd. If this came up with any of my friends who actually grew up "upper class", far, far beyond the level OP is talking about, they'd just confirm my nerdy-ness. Trust me, these things don't put you in with the "cool kids" from an upper class perspective. What does? Being social (having social intelligence), having financial literacy.


This is an interesting post. I was the "poor" kid at my high school, and I was also the one who would get the jokes like "Croesus and Mammon streets". Knowing those things just made me more of a misfit than anything else. I don't think the kids at my old school were the "upper crust', but they certainly fit into the class in the OP. I'd have done better socially if I'd known more about sports. Literary references just didn't cut it.


----------



## nstewart

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> This is an interesting post. I was the "poor" kid at my high school, and I was also the one who would get the jokes like "Croesus and Mammon streets". Knowing those things just made me more of a misfit than anything else. I don't think the kids at my old school were the "upper crust', but they certainly fit into the class in the OP. I'd have done better socially if I'd known more about sports. Literary references just didn't cut it.


I was not the poor kid at my school, but growing up in a very small town being "the rich kid" is not the same as growing up with money. It doesn't take much money in a small town, KWIM? I was always the nerd, but also lucky enough to play sports although I didn't fit in with the jocks. FF to Uni, when I made friends who actually DID have money and it becomes apparent how the other half lives, so to speak, and what helps you fit in with them. In my experience they accepted my nerdy-ness because I was pretty social as well. None of them read Shakespeare, or Atwood, or Findley or Tolstoy, or etc. etc. etc. or cared much about the groceries they bought. They did care about Christmas at Whistler and what seats they could get at the olympics.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nstewart*
> 
> I was not the poor kid at my school, but growing up in a very small town being "the rich kid" is not the same as growing up with money. It doesn't take much money in a small town, KWIM? I was always the nerd, but also lucky enough to play sports although I didn't fit in with the jocks. FF to Uni, when I made friends who actually DID have money and it becomes apparent how the other half lives, so to speak, and what helps you fit in with them. In my experience they accepted my nerdy-ness because I was pretty social as well. None of them read Shakespeare, or Atwood, or Findley or Tolstoy, or etc. etc. etc. or cared much about the groceries they bought. They did care about Christmas at Whistler and what seats they could get at the olympics.


Sports and sociability are definitely helpful. I don't play sports - I don't enjoy them, and I'm really, really bad at them (very uncoordinated, and I also lack depth perception). I'm also not a social type. I'm okay with people I know well, but strangers make me twitch....and I prefer very small groups, even with friends.

Christmas at Whistler? Are you local to the area, or is it a bigger tourist destination than I realize?


----------



## Super~Single~Mama

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> Christmas at Whistler? Are you local to the area, or is it a bigger tourist destination than I realize?


It's a bigger tourist attraction than you realized. I have some family in the super filthy rich category and they used to go skiing there. Maybe not at Christmas, but it was a frequent trip. They also used to go to another fancy pants rich ski resort in Colorado. The name escapes me at the moment.


----------



## Linda on the move

I disagree that Shakespeare and the like are part of what one needs to know to fit in with with 100K to 250K crowd. (It's possible that things are different in social circles with lots more money than that).

I like Shakespeare; I've seen about 20 of his play performed, many in London. It has never helped me navigate social waters. A lot of people who are upper middle class make their money in fields like IT and engineering. Nerds do better financially than English majors. Some of things being listed on this thread are things that are more true of the *spouses* of people earning those kinds of salaries, but not typically true of the people earning those salaries. Lots of people who like to discuss Shakespeare end up doing things like working at Starbucks.

Academic concerns are not social concerns. Being a fun person to hang out with at a Super Bowl party, being able to tell a funny story over a drinks, etc are more important *socially* than being intellectual.

When our kids are grown, they will be socializing with each other and with people slightly older and younger than themselves. They'll talk about movies, video games, vacations, etc. Sure, books will make it in there, but something like "Hunger Games" may be more important for conversation than "Othello."

Isn't the best reason to read a book because you enjoy it? Isn't that something we want to instill in our kids? (what ever sort of salaries they eventually end up with.)


----------



## DoubleDouble

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> Not that anyone noticed, but my member name "CatsCradle" is the title of a Kurt Vonnegut Jr. book, my favorite book in all of human history.


Hey, I noticed, and I always wondered if that's what it was. Btw, I remember his interview on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart, back in 2005, he was great, I was lucky to catch that show.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nstewart*
> 
> OP is talking about fitting in, not getting ahead. And then a lot of what you are talking about is just great from an academic perspective, but not practical from a "getting ahead" perspective either.


Yeah, "schmooze and act thrilled when they share the insider gossip" would help much better with fitting in than instructions such as "read as many books as you can, spend times in bookstores, have never ending intellectual curiosity". Trust me, I know. Reading Sophocles' plays for fun never helped me to fit in. If anything, it makes it even more annoying to be stuck at a party and listening to tipsy people go on about nothing.


----------



## Smithie

OK, I accept the consensus here that knowing about sports and the latest gossip are more useful for fitting in to the upper-class than having an upper-class education and a high level of cultural literacy (which is obviously what I should have said, rather than "actual literacy." Sorry about that.) I do OK at parties and such, but that's social intelligence - I know how to identify the people who will appreciate what I have to offer, and I know how to find neutral topics when I'm with somebody whose enthusiasms don't intersect with mine.

In that case, I guess having my kids fit in with their social class is not nearly as important to me as I thought it was. I thought I cared a lot about it, because social rejection sucks and I don't want them to feel that pain. But if I look at my parenting choices, it doesn't look like I'm priming them to win a yuppie popularity contest. Oh well. Apparently nobody primed me to win one either.


----------



## DoubleDouble

But what is upper-class education, anyway? Might it include going to Ivy League or exclusive liberal arts colleges, getting Cs there and having a great social life? (A Presidential Special Ed, sort of?) I've seen very upper-class students in remedial English courses (not English 101, more like English 51), getting those Cs and having a great time at lacrosse and field hockey. I've heard that math courses at said colleges that were not all that, really. People who went to serious universities afterwards reported that the whole semester of math at liberal arts college was covered in two weeks at the uni - that shocked them.

Upper-class education is not equal to first-class education, right?


----------



## Mulvah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> This is one of the most classicist posts I have seen in a long time.
> 
> Grammar and proofreading, OP. Teach your children not to make unintentional puns when they are trying to lay the smake down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the hilarity inspires a serious point - give your children a very broad and thorough classical education if you want them to be socially mobile and/or to enrich the modest social stratum which they may inhabit in adulthood. I am surrounded by homeschoolers (many of who are poor by any definition, it truly runs the gamut socioeconomically) who have observed that while functional literacy is holding steady in our society (I can read and understand a menu, a job application, and a traffic ticket), actual literacy (I can read and understand Shakespeare, the KJV, and my AP Biology textbook) is sharply declining in public schools. You know where actual literacy is NOT permitted to decline? Exeter, Choate, and the Boston Latin School. Most people can't pay for that kind of secondary education, but you can make good headway into it with some judicious afterschooling and academic summer programs, even if homeschooling is not for you.
> 
> Have your kids study Latin and ancient literature. Classicists, as opposed to classists, have been successfully mingling with rich folks for quite some time. And the mental training confers many other benefits unrelated to social mobility.


All I can think about is Good Will Hunting. Trying. Too. Hard.


----------



## Smithie

Unless you're a natural genius (and I'm definitely not), it's hard NOT to try too hard if a first-class education is what you're after. But in this day and age, you don't need to be rich to have access to all that, and as I said above, I agree with the other posters that education by itself wouldn't accomplish what the OP is after (although I still think cultural literacy is a social asset).


----------



## APToddlerMama

I haven't read the whole thread but OP to answer your original question... DH and I are I this income bracket and I grew up in a home where we lived below the poverty line and then eventually what you would consider upper middle class. I so totally value my upbringing, specifically living with little, learning how to save, not taking anything for granted, learning to work hard etc. DH and I talk on a regular basis about how to artificially create an environment for our kids that is way more middle class and way less upper middle class than we actually are. It's hard when you can afford to buy your kids anything because you want to not to do that, but we don't feel like that is a good thing. DH grew up with a real silver spoon in his mouth as did many of our friends. I guess I don't wish to instill the lessons in my kids that come from that sort of lifestyle. No, I don't want them to grow up in poverty and I want to be able to have fun experiences with them, but I also want them to realize how the majority of the world lives and not get caught up in or see their own worth as being tied to knowing a lot about wine. I guess I really see having too much money as a curse in many ways and while I am grateful we do not struggle, and we could afford to do many things and associate only with upper middle class families, I don't want my kids to grow up that way. I want them to be well rounded and be able to relate to all different types of people regardless of socioeconomic status. To me, that is way more important. If your kid needs to know about wine for work, fine, but they can learn that when they are 30 and need to.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Super~Single~Mama*
> 
> It's a bigger tourist attraction than you realized. I have some family in the super filthy rich category and they used to go skiing there. Maybe not at Christmas, but it was a frequent trip. They also used to go to another fancy pants rich ski resort in Colorado. The name escapes me at the moment.


Wow. I guess I knew that, but I grew up knowing all kinds of people who were going up to Whistler for a weekend of skiing or whatever. It's easy to forget that local places are big deals, I guess. It was at Whistler that ds1 got the concussion I posted about it at Christmas.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Smithie*
> 
> In that case, I guess having my kids fit in with their social class is not nearly as important to me as I thought it was. I thought I cared a lot about it, because social rejection sucks and I don't want them to feel that pain. But if I look at my parenting choices, it doesn't look like I'm priming them to win a yuppie popularity contest. Oh well. Apparently nobody primed me to win one either.


You know...rejection does suck, but I think it also has a lot to do with who people are, not how they're brought up. I can't help looking at my experiences in high school, compared to ds1's experiences at the same school. In the 20 years between my graduation and his first year of school, the "upper class" kids at the school became, if anything, wealthier overall than they'd been when I went through. DS1's upbringing was less advantaged than my own. (I grew up working class, yes - but my parents owned their own home, and by the time I was in high school, they'd bought another one, and used the rent on the first one to pay the mortgage. The year I graduated, they bought a third, which my mom still owns, although they sold the other two a long time ago. DS1, otoh, grew up in rental suites, and his early childhood was in borderline poverty. I also had an alcoholic dad, of the "absent", not abusive, variety, and my parents stayed together until my 20s. DS1 had a father who was addicted to cocaine - among other things - mostly unemployed, and dropped completely out of his life once we split up. Until dh came along, I was supporting ds1 on a smaller income - in actual, not adjusted, dollars - than my dad had been earning in the 80s.) And, I stuck out like a sore thumb all through school, and made very few friends, almost all of whom were outcasts and misfits. DS1 slid into the social scene at his school as if he were born to it, and made tons of friends (mostly, but not solely, in the "drama clique"...the musicians, actors and artists). Anyone of the families of his 3-4 best friends could buy and sell me and dh a dozen times (or more) over. But, he fits. I never did. I had a considerably "better" upbringing, in many ways. But, I'm not good at social stuff. DS1 is. He can fit into any social environment he wants to fit into...and I, at 43, still haven't found one that I fit into worth crap.


----------



## MamaMunchkin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *APToddlerMama*
> 
> DH and I talk on a regular basis about how to artificially create an environment for our kids that is way more middle class and way less upper middle class than we actually are. It's hard when you can afford to buy your kids anything because you want to not to do that, but we don't feel like that is a good thing.


I know what you mean - we've stuck with buying necessities for kids. Whenever they want something we consider extra - we'd ask them what they need it for.

We'd like our kids to learn the difference between needs and wants - it's challenging when the other kids around them get everything they want, and more, most of the time. We do get the extras for special occasions and spread little surprises throughout the year. We don't want them to take
those non-essentials for granted.


----------



## pigpokey

Not responding to the responses, but just the OP.

Generally children who are solidly middle class and up would be expected to do one or more sports for most of the year. In the professional classes it is typical for boys start out playing soccer, girls to do something like dance, gymnastics or soccer; boys to do multi-season baseball. Or competitive swimming for both sexes. In Atlanta, the children who do not swim year round are likely to swim at least summer league at their private pool or country club at least in the early years. This is said to be important as all parents want very strong swimmers for safety reasons. I imagine this is true in most areas.

Many children will also play one or more instruments and/or a children's choir and attend church.

At this point there is not much time for anything else until summer comes. The solidly middle class will usually try to send older age kids to sleepaway summer camp, often the camp a parent attended. Unlike the wealthy who can afford a $10,000 camp bill for an 8 week experience, the solidly middle class will spend about $1500 for two weeks of a well regarded general camp or a theme camp advancing one of the child's areas of interest (sport, drama, etc). They may also invest in several pricey day camp weeks in the $200-250 a week range because they are offering something interesting. Circus camp, sports camp, etc.

This is what is typically going on, and I don't see wine tasting anywhere. That's an individual thing and you can't know everything. Also as people have described, some of that has do with professional norms and you learn it if you need it.


----------



## sewchris2642

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> Ugh. Ugh. Ugh. Shakespeare. I'm so sick of Shakespeare. I'm functionally literate, but I'm apparently not actually literate. I don't understand large chunks of Shakespeare, without a guide. I have no interest in understanding Shakespeare. Maybe, if I hadn't had his work crammed down my throat in the most tedious fashion possible as part of my "education", I'd be able to find the merit in his work, but it bored me to tears. Sure - he had insight into humanity. So do hundreds of other authors. If we're concerned about literacy in English, maybe there should be more focus on authors who wrote in something resembling the English language that we actually speak.
> 
> Sorry - you hit a nerve. Shakespeare isn't about "actual literacy". He's about the upper class equivalent of street cred. Not wanting to put down my book to dig out a Shakespeare study guide doesn't make me illiterate.


To be honest, Shakespeare should, like all plays, be read out loud, listened to, and watched to be really appreciated. If you don't like, can't understand the original language (it is after all, where our language came from), get a modern version of one of the plays--West Side Story (Romeo and Juliet), Kiss Me Kate (Taming of the Shrew) to name 2. Heck, even Disney's Lion King was, in many ways, a retelling of Hamlet. Danny De Vito's Renaissance Man had the Saint Crispen's Day speech from Henry V in it. Clueless is a retelling of Pride and Prejudice.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *sewchris2642*
> 
> Clueless is a retelling of Pride and Prejudice.


It was based on Emma.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sewchris2642*
> 
> To be honest, Shakespeare should, like all plays, be read out loud, listened to, and watched to be really appreciated. If you don't like, can't understand the original language (it is after all, where our language came from), get a modern version of one of the plays--West Side Story (Romeo and Juliet), Kiss Me Kate (Taming of the Shrew) to name 2. Heck, even Disney's Lion King was, in many ways, a retelling of Hamlet. Danny De Vito's Renaissance Man had the Saint Crispen's Day speech from Henry V in it. Clueless is a retelling of Pride and Prejudice.


I'm not interested, so why would I bother? I'm sure the plays are fine, but I'm just really not interested. Despite what English teachers would have us believe, literature (and even writing plays) doesn't begin and end with Shakespeare. He was one writer, and one I don't particularly care for. The antiquated language is a big part of it, but not the only part, and I can understand it, with a study guide. I understood it without the study guide, to some extent (more than most of my classmates, certainly). I just don't like it, and I'm not interested in putting forth the mental energy to bother.

I've seen West Side Story, and it bored me, too. If Kiss Me Kate is based on Taming of the Shrew, there's no possiblity that I'll watch it, because I can't stand that play.

You know, in almost any other form of entertainment, people are willing to accept personal taste as a factor. But, when it comes to Shakespeare and a handful of other writers, as well as certain visual artists, personal taste is suddenly invalid. I don't get it. If I said I didn't like some other author, most people would just accept it (maybe with a "but, how can you not like him/her?", if they happen to be a fan of said author). But, a dislike of Shakespeare just isn't acceptable. Not liking Shakespeare means the person has to try harder, or "doesn't get it" or whatever. Sometimes, people just don't like Shakespeare. Sure, the plays are better as performances than they are to read on a printed page. But, they just don't interest me very much.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:
Originally Posted by *pigpokey* 

Generally children who are solidly middle class and up would be expected to do one or more sports for most of the year. In the professional classes it is typical for boys start out playing soccer, girls to do something like dance, gymnastics or soccer; boys to do multi-season baseball. Or competitive swimming for both sexes. In Atlanta, the children who do not swim year round are likely to swim at least summer league at their private pool or country club at least in the early years. This is said to be important as all parents want very strong swimmers for safety reasons. I imagine this is true in most areas.

Many children will also play one or more instruments and/or a children's choir and attend church.

At this point there is not much time for anything else until summer comes. The solidly middle class will usually try to send older age kids to sleepaway summer camp, often the camp a parent attended. Unlike the wealthy who can afford a $10,000 camp bill for an 8 week experience, the solidly middle class will spend about $1500 for two weeks of a well regarded general camp or a theme camp advancing one of the child's areas of interest (sport, drama, etc). They may also invest in several pricey day camp weeks in the $200-250 a week range because they are offering something interesting. Circus camp, sports camp, etc.

This is what is typically going on, and I don't see wine tasting anywhere. That's an individual thing and you can't know everything. Also as people have described, some of that has do with professional norms and you learn it if you need it.

This is an awesome post, very true from my experience, and what the OPer needs to know. It really isn't so much about making sure they know certain things, but providing certain experiences with the assumption that those experiences teach the right things.

Swimming is also considered a great sport because it provides all over body conditioning useful in other sports -- it's a hell of a work out. Some kids swim on a team only when their other sport isn't playing. It's also very hard for kids to get heavy while swimming 1-2 hours a day. Some parents keep their kids on team just so they will have nice bodies (this first time I heard moms on my kids' teams discussing this, I about passed out).

Also, swimming and other sports are hard work. Some parents want to make sure their kids are hard workers. That they face their fears. That they learn to compete. They develop self confidence.

One thing not listed because it is so obvious is attending a really good school. It may be public and it may be private, but kids whose parent make over 100K are going to be attending a good school. Some of the things being bickered about would fall into "things one learns at a good school."

Since my kids are teens, conversations among the moms are how to instill judgment around alcohol, not wine tasting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant* 

Quote:

It was based on Emma.

Yes, and "You've Got Mail" was based on "Pride and Prejudice"

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 


> You know, in almost any other form of entertainment, people are willing to accept personal taste as a factor. But, when it comes to Shakespeare and a handful of other writers, as well as certain visual artists, personal taste is suddenly invalid. I don't get it. If I said I didn't like some other author, most people would just accept it (maybe with a "but, how can you not like him/her?", if they happen to be a fan of said author). But, a dislike of Shakespeare just isn't acceptable. Not liking Shakespeare means the person has to try harder, or "doesn't get it" or whatever. Sometimes, people just don't like Shakespeare. Sure, the plays are better as performances than they are to read on a printed page. But, they just don't interest me very much.


In the creative arts, writing, visual arts, and music, understanding *why* someone is considered important -- what is amazing/innovative/timeless about their work -- is part of our cultural literacy. Then gen ed classes at classes, such as History of Theater, are one of the places where culture is maintained.

I don't think everyone has to *LIKE* Shakespeare to be well educated. We all have different taste. But that's altogether different from *appreciating* Shakespeare.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> In the creative arts, writing, visual arts, and music, understanding *why* someone is considered important -- what is amazing/innovative/timeless about their work -- is part of our cultural literacy. Then gen ed classes at classes, such as History of Theater, are one of the places where culture is maintained.
> 
> I don't think everyone has to *LIKE* Shakespeare to be well educated. We all have different taste. But that's altogether different from *appreciating* Shakespeare.


Well, I don't appreciate Shakespeare, either (and I don't see his work as timeless, except in the sense that he's a constant fixture in boring English classes all over the Western world).

But, then...I've never pretended to be well educated.


----------



## meemee

oh this is so sad. shakespeare is boring?!!!

i know. i know. i am not pointing fingers at anyone.

i am just comparing how education changes your view of things.

i went to a private expensive school abroad.

we studied his language so well, his culture so well that i look upon his work with wonder.

it isnt a case of like or dislike - its a matter of appreciating how 'he' as a man of his times could write so much about things he was not supposed to be aware of, the change in language (the disappearance of the 'ash'), etc.

a lot of what i studied esp. in literature - because we studied so deeply - having a social and cultural and historical perspective that i find old classics a fascinating read.

i definitely think my education contributed to my love for classics.

i am not self taught like my ex who read paradise lost with a guide on his own. i cant do that. so school in that sense was good for me. it taught me to appreciate things i normally would not have.


----------



## DoubleDouble

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meemee*
> 
> oh this is so sad. shakespeare is boring?!!!
> 
> i know. i know. i am not pointing fingers at anyone.
> 
> i am just comparing how education changes your view of things.
> 
> i went to a private expensive school abroad.
> 
> we studied his language so well, his culture so well that i look upon his work with wonder.
> 
> it isnt a case of like or dislike - its a matter of appreciating how 'he' as a man of his times could write so much about things he was not supposed to be aware of, the change in language (the disappearance of the 'ash'), etc.
> 
> a lot of what i studied esp. in literature - because we studied so deeply - having a social and cultural and historical perspective that i find old classics a fascinating read.
> 
> i definitely think my education contributed to my love for classics.
> 
> i am not self taught like my ex who read paradise lost with a guide on his own. i cant do that. so school in that sense was good for me. it taught me to appreciate things i normally would not have.


I was enjoying Shakespeare as a kid (9-10 yo), and read all of his plays I could get my hands on, way before I got any serious education in literary analysis. After I did, I still enjoy Shakespeare. I kept re-reading Homer because I enjoyed it, in elementary school, way before the formal learning about history, anthropology, literature, stylistics, etc. It does not mean that everyone has to love those authors. For example, even though I know how important James Joyce was, his place in 20th century literature, his influences etc., I'm not re-reading that stuff. No thanks.







Sometimes thorough learning about things does not make one appreciate them. Not everyone has to love Shakespeare, it's expected that someone doesn't have a taste for it. And vice-versa, one can love an author without first learning extras about the history, the language, etc.

Looking back at Shakespeare, I think that some of his plays are a mix of true greatness and fluffy movie scripts. E.g., "Midsummer Night's Dream" is nice, I always loved it, but it's a summer comedy movie, pretty much, high-quality one, but still. One book by Theodore Dreiser has more depth than half a dozen of Shakespeare's certain plays that are just fluff and easy reading.


----------



## GoBecGo

I feel really sad for Shakespeare reading all this! LOL! I've read a lot of him, seen some, like some, hate some. He is just a writer, that his work has survived is a cultural reflection. The modern "boring" english teachers who endorse him aren't Time Lords with a grand plan. He still exists on his own merits, and even if you hate his stuff, isn't it still interesting that he survives? Isn't it the same of ALL "classic" works of art or literature? Isn't it interesting to read/view/experience the piece, then contextualise your own feelings about it against culture or even against your own life experience? I can remember loving R&J as a soppy, naive teenager. Now i'm an adult with kids and relationships deeper than the teenaged infatuations i'm faintly horrified by it and its message. At school the Merchant of Venice was soooooooooooooooo boring - i can remember telling my english teacher that in my mind the curtain between acts was grey and FAR more exciting than what had passed or was yet to come! I flipped through it the other day and it is still super dull to me.

To me that is the point of "classic" literature, whether it was written 600 years ago or last year. It speaks of our journey through culture, because enough people or the "right" people have distinguished it for some reason (and who did that and why everyone else allowed them to is also interesting). And to me those reasons, whether i love or hate the actual piece of work, are why it's fun to read them, think about them, discuss them. I'm not a snob about it, i'm as happy to discuss King as Shakespeare, it's just that art/literature is a jumping off point for communication to me. I've read some really disturbing stuff that was deemed "important", really terrible stuff that was deemed "great". I like measuring me with the cultural yardstick, i like looking at how fashions change in EVERY sphere of human life and interaction, and i like to read the things so many other humans have read and commented on and thinking about how i feel.


----------



## sewchris2642

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> It was based on Emma.


My bad. You're right. Linda on the Move got it right. I was mixing up the movies.


----------



## sewchris2642

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I'm not interested, so why would I bother? I'm sure the plays are fine, but I'm just really not interested. Despite what English teachers would have us believe, literature (and even writing plays) doesn't begin and end with Shakespeare. He was one writer, and one I don't particularly care for. The antiquated language is a big part of it, but not the only part, and I can understand it, with a study guide. I understood it without the study guide, to some extent (more than most of my classmates, certainly). I just don't like it, and I'm not interested in putting forth the mental energy to bother.
> 
> I've seen West Side Story, and it bored me, too. If Kiss Me Kate is based on Taming of the Shrew, there's no possiblity that I'll watch it, because I can't stand that play.
> 
> You know, in almost any other form of entertainment, people are willing to accept personal taste as a factor. But, when it comes to Shakespeare and a handful of other writers, as well as certain visual artists, personal taste is suddenly invalid. I don't get it. If I said I didn't like some other author, most people would just accept it (maybe with a "but, how can you not like him/her?", if they happen to be a fan of said author). But, a dislike of Shakespeare just isn't acceptable. Not liking Shakespeare means the person has to try harder, or "doesn't get it" or whatever. Sometimes, people just don't like Shakespeare. Sure, the plays are better as performances than they are to read on a printed page. But, they just don't interest me very much.


I'm not saying that you need to see/read/enjoy Shakespeare or any other playwright. I'm sorry if that's how my post came out. I was trying to suggest a reason why many people don't like him--it could very well be the fault of the educational system. I don't like Hemming way or Fitzgerald. There are a lot of authors I don't like and therefore don't read.


----------



## BlueStateMama

I don't love Shakespeare, but I have a good working knowledge of his works, characters, plotlines, major quotes etc. Same for things like Chaucer (ugh "Canterbury Tales" was my Waterloo v. minoring in English) I call it the "Jeopardy" factor. I consider it a solid education to know enough about the who/what/when/how/why and that having some personal love for the Bard or or literary greats isn't necessary. Great if you like it, but you're not a lesser academic if you don't.

Same for all subjective areas of arts - you don't have to love abstract painting to have a solid grasp on the Abstract Expressionist movement. It's more essential to know about the school of work - why it was important in the context of art history etc than it is to love Kandinsky (spelling?)

You can appreciate the academic nature of these things without personally adoring them.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sewchris2642*
> 
> I'm not saying that you need to see/read/enjoy Shakespeare or any other playwright. I'm sorry if that's how my post came out. I was trying to suggest a reason why many people don't like him--*it could very well be the fault of the educational system*. I don't like Hemming way or Fitzgerald. There are a lot of authors I don't like and therefore don't read.


That's possible. IME, the educational system (at least at high school level) goes out of its way to make reading anything as unenjoyable as possible. They take that to special heights when it comes to Shakespeare (and poetry), though.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlueStateMama*
> 
> I don't love Shakespeare, but I have a good working knowledge of his works, characters, plotlines, major quotes etc. Same for things like Chaucer (ugh "Canterbury Tales" was my Waterloo v. minoring in English) I call it the "Jeopardy" factor. I consider it a solid education to know enough about the who/what/when/how/why and that having some personal love for the Bard or or literary greats isn't necessary. Great if you like it, but you're not a lesser academic if you don't.
> 
> Same for all subjective areas of arts - you don't have to love abstract painting to have a solid grasp on the Abstract Expressionist movement. It's more essential to know about the school of work - why it was important in the context of art history etc than it is to love Kandinsky (spelling?)
> 
> You can appreciate the academic nature of these things without personally adoring them.


I suppose that's the real issue for me. I don't care about any of that stuff. I can't summon enough interest in it to even retain what I learn working with dd1. I suspect she already has a better grasp on art history than I do, just from a couple of books and a trip to the local art gallery. That stuff all goes in one ear (or eye) and out the other for me. I have very little ability to retain information/knowledge that doesn't interest me. And, I actually know more about both Romeo and Juliet and Hamlet, although I've never read or seen either of them, than I do about MacBeth or Taming of the Shrew, both of which I've read (and have also seen the movie version of the latter, with Elizabath Taylor). I've picked up a lot of Hamlet and Romeo & Juliet over the years, from references in books, movies, etc. I was interested in the books and movies in question, so the information stuck in my head.

I think maybe I'm unusually challenged at retaining things that don't interest me. I've never been very good at it.


----------



## MamaMunchkin

So, so, so, ... now now now, let's get this straight ...

wine + philosophy = upper middle class ???

wine + philosophy + cotillion = upper upper middle ???

literature + arts = upper middle ???

literature + arts + math + sciences = upper upper semi-upper middle ??

We could quantify all these combinations and assign rank to your social class.

If you only know wine - your class rank is 15.5.

If you know wine + philoshopy - it's 24.3 ...

I'm going for the whatever category ...


----------



## BlueStateMama

For me, I file it under cultural literacy. To me, it means a working knowledge of significant figures/events in history. I'm a magpie about picking up info., so I go that route. I may never love Shakespeare, but I can explain who he is and his significance to my children. When they cover his works in Jr High/HS I'll be able to contribute (and will likely/hopefully learn a lot more myself from their studies and take on his works)

Everyone has their "thing" though - I may be nerdy about literature and art - but I know there are 100s of women here who could school me on much more practical lifeskills. I venture into the forums about living off the grid/farming/homesteading and I'm blown away. (no idea where the f I'd even start to learn about bee-keeping!! lol)

As I mentioned, I loathe Chaucer, heck, Faulkner irritates me and ee cummings vexes me - but I've made it a point to get a basic handle on who they are and their work. Maybe now it's time I learn some more practical skills??? lol


----------



## pickle18

I have now read this.entire.thread. What a rollercoaster!!! mtiger and Adorkable - you have my sympathy for the endless attacks made upon you. So does the OP!!!

Newly placed at the top of my list for you OP:

*1.) The ability to not take everything in the world so ridiculously personally* (e.g., the OP in this case was asking a question about a social group - addressing people in that social group DOES NOT mean that OP thinks you are a worthless piece of scum because you don't make six figures - it is no different than requesting the advice of those who live in a certain country, or, for that matter, those on MDC) This will help your children navigate perceived social injustices with grace, rather than raw indignation - because it may turn out that the offense was not even directed at them, and they would have behaved irrationally and foolishly, or burned bridges unnecessarily.

*2.) The ability to be secure in themselves, no matter what class they may find themselves in at the moment* - As many have pointed out quite rightly, this can shift like sand. Teach your children that they are blessed with financial security now, but that their inner worth transcends any level of income, and is independent of what anyone else may think (so that they might also not feel the need to behave so defensively or demonize the rich/poor as a group depending on their current opposite position - which is all too common).

*3.) The ability to refrain from turning every social conversation into a soapbox for your particular political beliefs* - They are likely, in any income bracket, to be associating with people of divergent viewpoints - political debate is fine when all parties agree to it and enter into it with that understanding - morphing an otherwise apolitical conversation into your off-topic rant is not socially acceptable in any class.

I grew up in a solidly UMC family (certainly not millionaires, but we never went without designer clothes and three kinds of caviar in our fridge for frequent entertaining, we had housekeepers and a nanny, etc.) - then my Dad lost his lucrative banking job and we went through all our savings during his two years of underemployment. My Mom went back to work in retail and my Dad worked telemarketer jobs and the graveyard shift at the mini-mart - we couldn't make ends meet without the charity of family members and our church. It was a time of great upheaval in our family, but it taught us alot about budgeting. As other have mentioned, that would benefit your children as well.

The main thing that your children could learn and glean from this time in their lives is...

*4.) How to be comfortable in social situations around all types of people, including the extremely wealthy* - Because I grew up with bank VPs playing my Nintendo as a fancy cocktail party went on downstairs, I've never been intimidated to talk to anyone, nor felt the need to be aggressive or defensive when dealing with someone of a higher income or social status. It is incredibly freeing. I do know alot of lower income families who raise their children with either an air of defiance toward the wealthy or they put them on pedestals. This has hindered some of my friends careers and social lives because they are privately frightened of or hold secret prejudices toward rich people as a group. They are unable to make polite conversation with them without this baggage. This *IS* a skill your children are more likely to need in their young lives than most. Teach them to be respectful and friendly, but not to be sycophants. Teach them to be confident and simply themselves.

Yes, everyone should speak to everyone this way, and yes, lower income families should also teach it to their children. But your children are more likely to be put in a position to interact with very wealthy people in the present, which is why I bring it up.

This ability alone will help them navigate things they don't yet know (language, wine pairings, etc.), but will likely become proficient in naturally by exposure. I agree that academic subjects can (sadly) be far less important in social conversation than social skills - with the possible exception of grammar and spelling, which will also help your children tremendously in all forms of communication. That said, manners are a given, and sports are an excellent point of conversation. As a child we were involved in every activity from horseback riding to piano lessons, ballet to basketball, figure skating to Girl Scouts (you get the drift), pretty much every day of the week. I would say definitely involve your children in these early on, but allow their interests to guide them and try not to overschedule them, or they may burn out (or drown in the possibilities). Travel is always a gem for conversation, as well as general knowledge about the world and the circumstances/culture of others. Honestly, the difference between your own experience and DHs will also help balance what they are exposed to and your guidance will help them build a more complete world view. Just guard against their viewpoints narrowing and becoming self- (and stuff- ) centric.


----------



## crunchy_mommy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I think maybe I'm unusually challenged at retaining things that don't interest me. I've never been very good at it.


Sometimes I feel like you're my long-lost twin Storm Bride!

I'm exactly like this... I can't retain things that don't interest me, though for things I DO find useful, I have a pretty amazing memory!


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crunchy_mommy*
> 
> Sometimes I feel like you're my long-lost twin Storm Bride!
> I'm exactly like this... I can't retain things that don't interest me, though for things I DO find useful, I have a pretty amazing memory!


My memory's not wonderful these days (related to some health issues I'm having, I think - lots of brain fog), but it used to be exceptionally good...when I was interested in something, at least. I also had a great short-term memory, even for things that bored me, so I could cram for tests, get great marks (I never got less than an A in poetry analysis or when we studied Shakespeare, for instance - usually at least 95%, and perfect marks weren't uncommon), and then just...let it go. For even remotely long-term storage, I need to be interested.


----------



## Youngfrankenstein

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BlueStateMama*
> 
> For me, I file it under cultural literacy. To me, it means a working knowledge of significant figures/events in history. I'm a magpie about picking up info., so I go that route. I may never love Shakespeare, but I can explain who he is and his significance to my children. When they cover his works in Jr High/HS I'll be able to contribute (and will likely/hopefully learn a lot more myself from their studies and take on his works)


This is it in a nutshell for me. I certainly don't come close to having a great education and I only have a high school diploma, but I want what BSM is saying and I think I have it. DH is much smarter than me as well as having had much more education than I but we both happily watch Jeopardy and I get plenty of answers. It's really true that you don't have to have tons of in-depth knowledge of everything, it's knowing a bit about "everything" that I feel can make you "fit in".

I do think things like wine education really are more hobby-type things than knowing the proper rules of dining. I never drink wine so I don't have one bit of interest in learning much about it but I'd feel silly if I didn't put my napkin on my lap or ate peas with my knife.


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Youngfrankenstein*
> 
> I do think things like wine education really are more hobby-type things than knowing the proper rules of dining.


I agree. All anyone really needs to know is who and how to ask for a wine suggestion. Actually, I think asking for a suggestion can show a certain confidence, openness, and sociability.


----------



## youngspiritmom

I haven't read this whole thread, but this is a heated discussion for sure.

I think that kids whose parents have more money than most parents need the same essential knowledge as all kids - learn how to be a compassionate human being, learn to enjoy learning, learn to be polite/kind/considerate, and have a variety of life experiences.

The one thing that I do think kids whose parents have a lot of money need to learn MORE is how to be grateful and humble - i.e. understand why your family has money, learn about why others don't, learn the value of money, learn about spending/saving, learn about charity.

As far as being able to hob nob with others in your class, its your choice if you want to put your kid in private school, giving them golf lessons, etc. (not that these are exclusively upper class things; insert your item of choice here). But these things are all details and are NOT!!! "essential knowledge" -- essential knowledge should be the things I mentioned first. Essential knowledge for kiddos is how to be a decent human being on the earth - wine tasting and Italian are not important factors here.


----------



## Tjej

I was listening to CBC radio today in the car and my son asked me what they were talking about - it was about wine pairing with foods... 

So, public radio... 

Tjej


----------



## Mom31

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youngspiritmom*
> 
> The one thing that I do think kids whose parents have a lot of money need to learn MORE is how to be grateful and humble - i*.e. understand why your family has money, learn about why others don't, l*earn the value of money, learn about spending/saving, learn about charity.


Curious on this.


----------



## Youngfrankenstein

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mom31*
> 
> Curious on this.


I'm guessing that it means teaching kids that people don't have different amounts of money for one specific reason. I know that we try to instill in our kids that being poor isn't a moral issue. I think as young kids they want black and white about why people have or don't and it's my job to explain all kinds of things about the world that aren't intuitive to them. And as much as I've seen on this thread, pointing fingers at being conservative as bad...it's been my experience that many people assume if you're wealthy that you inherited a bunch of money or that you cheated and lied to get what you have. That's not any more fair than saying someone is poor and it's their fault.


----------



## Mulvah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Youngfrankenstein*
> 
> I'm guessing that it means teaching kids that people don't have different amounts of money for one specific reason. I know that we try to instill in our kids that being poor isn't a moral issue. I think as young kids they want black and white about why people have or don't and it's my job to explain all kinds of things about the world that aren't intuitive to them. And as much as I've seen on this thread, pointing fingers at being conservative as bad...*it's been my experience that many people assume if you're wealthy that you inherited a bunch of money or that you cheated and lied to get what you have. That's not any more fair than saying someone is poor and it's their fault.*


Your statements reminded me of an article I read here today. I had a good chuckle at the poll results and that rich is apparently defined as those who make over $150,000/year.


----------



## ~adorkable~

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Youngfrankenstein*
> 
> I'm guessing that it means teaching kids that people don't have different amounts of money for one specific reason. I know that we try to instill in our kids that being poor isn't a moral issue. I think as young kids they want black and white about why people have or don't and it's my job to explain all kinds of things about the world that aren't intuitive to them. And as much as I've seen on this thread, pointing fingers at being conservative as bad...it's been my experience that many people assume if you're wealthy that you inherited a bunch of money or that you cheated and lied to get what you have. That's not any more fair than saying someone is poor and it's their fault.


this is so well said, thank you


----------



## youngspiritmom

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mom31*
> 
> Curious on this.


Hey Mom31 - I mean that kids should understand that the reason they have more money that the average Joe (and a lot more than the world in general). This could be explained in grateful spiritual terms ("we're very blessed and should thank God for the bounty He has given us"), practical terms ("we worked really hard to save money and get here. Hard work pays off. A few generations ago our family/relatives were immigrants etc."), or even just relational terms ("We have a lot of money, and lots of people have none. This isn't because we're better than them or more deserving. Everyone has different challenges. Many people in x country don't even have fresh food or water. Remembering them can make us more grateful for how much we have. And it is important to share some of what we have with them."). Basically, I mean that kids need to learn why they have money and others don't -- even lots of adults still think they have more money because they are more deserving, better, or inherently smarter that group x or person y. This type of arrogance does not produce compassionate beings.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *youngspiritmom*
> 
> Basically, I mean that kids need to learn why they have money and others don't -- even lots of adults still think they have more money because they are more deserving, better, or inherently smarter that group x or person y. This type of arrogance does not produce compassionate beings.


I agree that arrogance doesn't produce compassionate humans, but I truly don't understand why some people have so much more money than others. I see people all around me working extremely hard for very low wages. I don't buy into the "god blessing" thing because it makes no sense to me that god loves me and my family enough to make sure we have plenty of money to send our children to a lovely private school but doesn't bother to bless the poor children on the other side of town who are stuck in a school where the teachers and just trying to keep everyone safe. That makes god into a bit of an ass as far as I can see.

We do work hard. And we've made a lot of sacrifices for my DH's career. We've given up things that other people wouldn't. None the less, I feel nothing but grateful that we have enough money to pay medical bills, buy healthy food, and get our kids braces. I don't have any great reason that I can tell my kids for why they have grown up with more than other people.

All I can tell them is that what really matters in life is how they treat people. That every single person is sacred, and that being able to see that in people, even in people who don't act like it and can't see it in themselves, is what it means to live well.


----------



## zebu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> I recommend reading The Millionaire Next Door.
> 
> It's a study of self-made millionaires and how they do things, and there is some VERY interesting stuff in there on parenting and money. I think the information to be comfortable in a snotty life style is far, far less important than teaching kids financial skills. Right now, your plan could easily make your children bottomless financial pits.
> 
> *It's not setting them up to Have Money, but rather to Spend Money*. Very different things.


So true.

I want to start out by saying that I haven't even read through the first page and this thread is huge and I hope that isn't an indicator that you got a huge thrashing, VisionaryMom. I am not here to thrash, but to offer some advice.

I grew up upper middle class and am currently living an upper middle class lifestyle. I've had many many years here, is all I'm saying, so I've learned a few things.

Wine. I used to worry that I would make a fool out of myself ordering the wrong wine. Now I realize that overtly pairing wine is pretty pretentious (and alliterative, apparently). Everyone has different opinions, like what you like, get what you like, there is no wrong answer. Whoever judges you for improper pairing is a pretentious ass.

Observe the upper and upper middle classers and figure out which ones are being cool and follow their example, and which ones are being pretentious and *don't act like them.*

Humility is AWESOME!


----------



## mnnice

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CatsCradle*
> 
> I think part of the "forcing it down our throats" in education is that someone, somewhere, has determined that it is culturally relevant. I can understand that to an extent, but at the same time, I think the forcing of cultural stuff has been a very recent thing (give or take a 1000 years or so). Somewhere along the way, someone or some body of individuals determined that certain works were/are worthy of our attention. I don't know, I think it is our attachment to history. I see the same thing in the way that people scrapbook now...there is some human compulsion to hang onto history...to make it special...to highly edit for personal comfort.
> 
> Not that anyone noticed, but my member name "CatsCradle" is the title of a Kurt Vonnegut Jr. book, my favorite book in all of human history. He's a 20th century writer and is crass and prone to gallow humour, but he best defines how I feel about life. I love that guy. I would have asked him to marry me if he had been my contemporary. I care a lot about modern fiction because it speaks to me and in my language and circumstance. My DH is a Phillip K. Dick fan but I haven't read any of his books...just love the adapted films. I think, Storm Bride, you are right in that the themes of the so-called important books are in our collective brains, and I don't think it is important to actually tediously read this stuff to understand the morality and drama behind those stories. Perhaps it is helpful to acknowledge them and know their place, but why torture yourself? I think we tend to adequately educate ourselves through our own interests and things that excite us.


OT I have actually wondered if you user name was a Vonnegut reference. DH and I had read several of the same Vonnegut books before we met and many of our early "courting" conversations were about his books.


----------



## Coral123

Interesting thread.

We probably won't be working on the wine pairings.

As for being able to read menus in other languages...not really important to me. I know enough of one language to make a stab at guessing what might be on a menu in another language. Same will probably be true for at least one of my kids.

It really isn't an issue that has come up very much in everyday life though.


----------



## La Limena

My thoughts on this is if you want your child to fit in well in your social class, they will pick up most of what they will need to know if you provide proximity to others in this class in school and extracurricular activities.

Live in the neighborhood of the social class you are part of and send the kids to the schools in the area and you will quickly learn which are the preferred sports, music lessons, clubs, and general interests of your local kids and their families. You will also learn which are the preferred brands and styles for everything from clothing, accessories, and toys. Plan for college, not just for learning, but also for networking.

It is kind of funny, but it brings to mind the "Grover" episode of Portlandia. The parents made a pictorial chart titled "A FUTURE OF SUCCESS". The first step was getting 4 y/o Grover into "Shooting Star Preschool" so he could get into the right schools (shows a diploma) and an Ivy League University and make plenty of money (shows a safe) and buy a ferrari. The ferrari was the final and highest point on the chart.

This is in contrast to the chart "A FUTURE OF FAILURE" which shows the first step as "Public School" which is populated by a bunch of riff raff leading to educational failure (shows a broken pencil) and community college, guns, drugs, and the final step is a shopping cart, which one would presumably have once homeless. You would have to shoot squirrels and birds for dinner.

Of course it is meant as parody, but parts of the charts ring a little true.


----------



## Coral123

La Limena..I think that is a very good answer.


----------



## Smithie

It is a good answer to the OP's question, but the life it sketches out seems really depressing to me. I don't want to live where everybody else lives and do what everybody else does.


----------



## Coral123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mama Metis*
> 
> If there is one skill a rich kid needs, it is how to never talk about class openly. Don't even acknowledge that it exists! Only when absolutely pressed, one might use euphemisms like "high net worth."


Yep, I'd agree with that. I'm not sure if that is how the wealthier operate today though.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Coral123*
> 
> Yep, I'd agree with that. I'm not sure if that is how the wealthier operate today though.


The nouveau riche are so gauche.


----------



## Dona Barry

I wanted to say to everyone who commented on this thread that I am doing research on cultural competence between the classes (which are stratified by income in the US). I came across this thread and was saddened to see that only one of you really understood the significance of being diversely culturally competent and the rest of you in your own little ways flamed that person. There is a book called "Unequal Childhoods" that you should try to read. Its simple message is that unless a child is taught to live in a particular society he will rarely ever achieve success outside of his class. Parents teach what they know. The cycle is perpetuated with little intervention. The intervention that occurs through public schools and church is limited by the parents ability to maneuver and participate in the social structure of the educational system. In other words, parents of working class teach their children that family values are most important and that working yourself to death is the only way to keep family together, parents living in poverty (with no upper level experience) teach their children how to survive in poverty and not how to survive with wealth. For example: a child from a poverty stricken family will know how to get aid from shelters, church rummage sales and other community resources but someone from working class or middle class will not know how to survive there. None of us if we have never experienced extreme wealth and the lifestyle that goes with it will be culturally competent and therefore cannot teach our children to be successfully competent in a wealthy situation. Reversely, a wealthy child, who is not taught to live in poverty will not survive in poverty. Think of Paris Hilton's "Simple Life". She wasn't able to be competent in living that way but her public encounter showed she was very competent in disgracing, demeaning other people and their ways. This is taught. I hope that you get the point that finding ways to teach your children to be culturally competent is important, whether you think its "fitting in" or just teaching success. In order to teach them, you have to learn also. Our educational system isn't set up for this. Most children in poverty will attend only a public education and will not have the opportunity to attend private schools where other cultural competence is expected. I hope that you can see where there are mechanism in our US system that keeps poor people poor, rich people rich, and the rest of us sliding down the slope to poverty.-Dona


----------



## Jen Muise

The points you make about moving between classes are good ones, Dona, but the OP's superficial example of wine tasting kind of threw the conversation off I think. Generally, the differences between the classes is more significantly different than that. A wealthy or upper middle class child is taught how to relate to people differently, to advocate for themselves with professionals such as doctors, and to expect a certain standard of living among other things. Good table manners and knowing how to judge your audience etc. are important lessons for everyone, but things like skiing and horseback riding aren't going to get you ahead. Having a role model to follow, seeing that education is critically important, understanding the system and how it works are all things that richer kids get regular exposure to that less wealthy kids might have less exposure to. Thinking it's about the trappings that money brings is a classic error that lower classes make when evaluating the differences between them and higher classes.


----------



## Dona Barry

Yes, there are different ways to parent based on income. Please check out some good reading called Unequal Childhoods. It addresses that very thing. I don't think anyone here was being mean, just explaining the world as they see it from their particular place on the planet. BTW: gov cheese and commodities IS a handout. Those millionaire grandparents didn't do much to increase your cultural competence either.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dona Barry*
> 
> There is a book called "Unequal Childhoods" that you should try to read. Its simple message is that unless a child is taught to live in a particular society he will rarely ever achieve success outside of his class
> 
> Yet this thread is full of experiences from those of us who have been in different classes as different points in out lives. How... interesting ... that you feel we should discount our own experiences in favor of what you read in a book.
> 
> I hope that you can see where there are mechanism in our US system that keeps poor people poor, rich people rich, and the rest of us sliding down the slope to poverty.


But that's not what the OP was talking about. She HAS changed class -- at least economically. And she wants to make sure she provides the extra sort of information that usually goes along with that income to her children.

The whole question disproves your point. (As well as the number of people I know who are doing better than their parents did).

Also, OPer also wasn't asking about the wealthy. 100K a year for a family of 4 isn't wealthy. Not by a long shot. It's middle class, it's just the more comfortable end of middle class.


----------



## skreader

As long as we're recommending books, I would recommend Pierre Bourdieu's "Distinction". Although its basis is a study of class and culture from ethnography done in France in the 60s, the theory about cultural capital, and how different classes and cultures within a society view what is appropriate for their eating, drinking, listening, viewing, reading, etc. is still useful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Distinction

http://www.amazon.com/Distinction-Social-Critique-Judgement-Taste/dp/0674212770

It is kind of dry, and a bit repetetive but I found it intriguing.

So, perhaps the OP is trying to figure out what sort of cultural capital is important and necessary for her kids, since she does not view the cultrural capital that she already has is adequate or the right type?

My kids lack cultural capital in terms of knowing US sports teams. It's not something that comes up here very much, but I know that it may be likely if my son lives in the USA when he grows up, that he will need to develop cultural competence in knowing about and having opinions abouy US grid-iron football teams and basketball teams and probably ice hockey and baseball teams as well. If not, I suspect he may sometimes lack small-talk among men in the US of many classes.

In my kids' high school, knowledge about rugby teams and who you favor is important cultural data. This would be less important in other milieus where (for example) knowledge and skill in Mahjong or Big-2 (a card game) would be very important, much more so than poker or bridge. In fact, it my kids' high school, knowledge of Rugby and Big-2 can widen a social circle.


----------



## pigpokey

I disagree with this statement.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dona Barry*
> 
> I hope that you can see where there are mechanism in our US system that keeps poor people poor, rich people rich, and the rest of us sliding down the slope to poverty.-Dona


Poverty in my county in the "US System" -- which is not a particularly great or well run county -- means you have air conditioning, hot and cold running water, basic medical care, one bedroom for every 2 kids, a transport pass that will take you all over the city, a bus that picks up your kids near their door and drives them to school to eat breakfast and lunch that you don't have to pack, and so much food that obesity is a notable problem in your social class. You have multiple pairs of shoes and access to a washer for your clothes. You probably use a dryer. You watch TV and DVDs.

I'll admit that the lifestyle of "poverty" in the US is so completely adequate for a lot of people's needs that there's not a huge incentive to climb out if your personality does not worry about the benefits that being middle class does offer. It's a tiny part of life's needs that aren't covered by the US version of "poverty." When everything is good, everything is good. But when your child gets a complicated illness, or a family member gets arrested and needs a good lawyer, or your adult brother needs to go into addiction treatment ... this is when the extra hustling to stay middle class pays off.

Compared to the 70s when I was growing up, most people in my extended family on both sides (in-laws included) are either living much larger than they were then -- or they were already living an upper middle lifestyle. But a lot of us weren't then, and are now.


----------



## gcgirl

You can make six figures without being exposed to wines. Lol. DH makes six in a blue collar job where a lot of his coworkers still like beer and strip clubs. Thank goodness he's not like that. 

Nothing in particular matters except to experience life wholeheartedly, with an open mind, and learn all you can. That's it. No class-handbook needed.


----------



## gcgirl

Haha! That's great. I believe it. The other big topic you can ALWAYS count on to make you friends? The OTHER person. Develop a genuine interest in the other person, ask them questions about themselves and let them ramble on about their favorite subject (themselves!). You will never be a fish out of water with THAT trick up your sleeve. 

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> Because of my DH's job, he deals with people who are wealthy and upper middle class. You know wanna know what is really important for him to be able to talk about???? The big mystery subject......
> 
> sports


----------



## Linda on the move

F Scott Fitzgerald wrote, "the rich are are different than you and I."

Hemingway wrote, "yes, they have more money."

I think these days that could be changed to "yes, they get better seats at the game."

Today we were at a BBQ where the guest of honor was a self made millionaire. Guess what he wanted to talk about ---

he asked my teenagers what the big deal is about Hunger Games, why teens like it. He later told me that he liked their answers and they were sharp. And that I should enjoy every day of the next couple of years, because he feels like he blinked at the teen years were over and his kids were suddenly in their 30s.

So I thought I would pass it along, my parenting advice from a millionaire: Enjoy your kids









He also really liked the bottle of local wine I brought along. (Or at least he was polite enough to say he did!)


----------



## Storm Bride

So...I'm not really here much, anymore (as my health is improving, I'm cutting way back on my computer time), but this thread caught my eye again. And, a few posts (Rona Barry's, especially) rubbed me the wrong way. I'm not sure people mean it this way (I'm not sure they don't, either), but there's an underlying vibe in some of these posts that comes across in a very "success = money" kind of way. I think it's a sickness that infects people - and cultues - very easily, but I don't see success as being about how much money someone has, and it really gets to me that this sentiment is so common.

Cultural competence? Sure - we should teach it to our children, to as great an extent as we can. But, if one isn't culturally competent in the things one needs to know to function at a certain "level", then one can't teach one's children to be culturally competent at that level. I teach my kids as many things as I can think of to teach them. In ds1's case, I'm realizing that I missed a few things...but that's largely because of his personality. He's missing some basic life skills (esp. as regards paperwork), partly because he's always been really slippery about learning them. He's not interested, and his focus has always been elsewhere. However, he's managed cultural competence in areas I never taught him, because those areas do interest him, and they became relevant when he started associating with kids from homes where different competencies were/are valued. I have little need to master the cultural competencies of the upper class, because I have no interest in joining the upper class. If I'm ever forced there (by dh's income, for instance), then I'll learn to manage, but it's not something that I want to do, in any way.

I also can't pretend to care about sports - any sports. So, if that becomes a necessity, I'll cultivate silence. I want to be around people who are interested in things that are interesting to me, not spend my time learning to fake it, so as to acquire "cultural competence". If cultural competence requires me to fake it all the time, then it's not a culture I want to be competent in, yk?

Anyway - it's all been an interesting conversation, for sure.


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I also can't pretend to care about sports - any sports. So, if that becomes a necessity, I'll cultivate silence. I want to be around people who are interested in things that are interesting to me, not spend my time learning to fake it, so as to acquire "cultural competence". If cultural competence requires me to fake it all the time, then it's not a culture I want to be competent in, yk?


I think there is a difference between being able to carry on conversations with a wide variety of people and faking things.

Some situations are more fun and I feel more comfortable because the other people are what I am interested in. My book club for example.

In other situations, I'm around people that I don't have that much in common with on a core level, but I can carry on a conversation about things that other person cares about. I'm not faking anything if I ask someone if they are into the Final 4, if they have a team that is doing well. I'm just making conversation.

Conversing with people about things they are interested is a bit like playing a friendly game of badminton -- the goal is to keep the shuttle in the air -- to hit it in such a way they can return it.

To insist that everyone I ever speak to only speak to me about things I am interested in, never about things they are interested seems very limiting. If one starts with the premise that every person is worthy of respect that whatever they are interested in is fine, conversing becomes an art. How to draw out the other person, how to make them comfortable.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> I think there is a difference between being able to carry on conversations with a wide variety of people and faking things.
> 
> Some situations are more fun and I feel more comfortable because the other people are what I am interested in. My book club for example.
> 
> In other situations, I'm around people that I don't have that much in common with on a core level, but I can carry on a conversation about things that other person cares about. I'm not faking anything if I ask someone if they are into the Final 4, if they have a team that is doing well. I'm just making conversation.
> 
> Conversing with people about things they are interested is a bit like playing a friendly game of badminton -- the goal is to keep the shuttle in the air -- to hit it in such a way they can return it.
> 
> To insist that everyone I ever speak to only speak to me about things I am interested in, never about things they are interested seems very limiting. If one starts with the premise that every person is worthy of respect that whatever they are interested in is fine, conversing becomes an art. How to draw out the other person, how to make them comfortable.


I know nothing about sports. I don't want to know anything about sports. I have no idea what the Final 4 is, and I don't care. I, in fact, hate sports with a passion, and there actually is no way for me to talk about them without being a fake. I can manage to draw someone out about things that I'm not terribly interested in (although if they keep talking about it, the conversation is eventually going to bore me to tears), but drawing someone out about sports would be about like volunteering for a root canal on a healthy tooth. If someone is so interested in sports that I can't find anything else to talk to them about, then we have absolutely no common ground, and having a conversation is pointless, anyway. That doesn't mean they're not worthy of respect. It means we have nothing to talk about. I can also assure you that none of the people I've met who believe that I should learn to talk about what other people are interested in (usually sports or some form of the arts) ever think those people should be able to carry on a conversation about my interests, because my interests are "weird", and...not deserving of respect.

However, I also structure my life to avoid small talk to as great an extent as humanly possible. It's one of the many reasons I have no interest in moving "up" the class ladder. Being stuck in social situations with people I don't know and have nothing in common with is a nightmare, and I don't want to be in a class where it's considered necessary.


----------



## LynnS6

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
> 
> I know nothing about sports. *I don't want to know anything about sports. I have no idea what the Final 4 is, and I don't care.* I, in fact, hate sports with a passion, and there actually is no way for me to talk about them without being a fake. I can manage to draw someone out about things that I'm not terribly interested in (although if they keep talking about it, the conversation is eventually going to bore me to tears), but drawing someone out about sports would be about like volunteering for a root canal on a healthy tooth.


Ah but you know enough about sports to know that the Final Four is a sporting event!

Personally, I think that talking about sports is really useful in the corporate world. There are lots of other areas where it's not so important. Talking sports in an English department at a university? Probably only going to engage about 1/3 of the people around you. It's not "essential" knowledge unless you really want to move up in the corporate world. I have not interest in the corporate world, but I do have a mild interest in sports. I like baseball. Dh loves soccer and so I like that too. Ds will watch any sport on (as dh put it "if there were season tickets to dog sled racing, he'd go!). I'm actually really fond of curling, but never get to see it anymore. When we lived in Buffalo, it was on Canadian TV regularly. But curling isn't going to win me a lot of popularity contests anywhere, even in Canada!


----------



## CatsCradle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LynnS6*
> 
> Ah but you know enough about sports to know that the Final Four is a sporting event!
> 
> Personally, I think that talking about sports is really useful in the corporate world. There are lots of other areas where it's not so important. Talking sports in an English department at a university? Probably only going to engage about 1/3 of the people around you. It's not "essential" knowledge unless you really want to move up in the corporate world. I have not interest in the corporate world, but I do have a mild interest in sports. I like baseball. Dh loves soccer and so I like that too. Ds will watch any sport on (as dh put it "if there were season tickets to dog sled racing, he'd go!). I'm actually really fond of curling, but never get to see it anymore. When we lived in Buffalo, it was on Canadian TV regularly. But curling isn't going to win me a lot of popularity contests anywhere, even in Canada!


I work in the legal field, and knowledge of sports is really hit and miss. The legal industry is full of weirdos, outsiders, insiders, schmoozers, genuinely intellectual types, as well as run-of-the-mill people who just happen to be lawyers, paralegals, etc. I would say about 10% of the people in my firm (which comprises about 125 lawyers in my office) are really interested in sports. Everyone else is a bit too busy with family stuff, personal interests or are just plain workaholics. Funny, the people who are most interested in sports are the 20-something guys who are still following college football and stuff like that. Everyone else grows interested at Super Bowel time if, and only if, the local team is playing. Honestly, it is not on the radar of a lot people my field in my area.

Now, that being said, I grew up in a college town where sports ruled supreme. Sports were the life and breath of that town. People burned (and I think still do) couches in the streets when they won or lost to the rivals and team spirit permeated everything. It was a small university town and sports were that town's identity. I moved to a similar town in the north where there were two professional teams (football and baseball) and sports were also the identity of that town. Sports are talked about in my current city, but it is lower down on the totem poll of subjects. I'm happily ignorant of all things sports (except for things that truly interest me like marathon runners) and I've managed quite well in conversations. I would say that the art of listening is more important in some instances than the knowledge of any particular subject and being able to talk about it. In my line of work, there's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know the subject and asking people to elaborate. In fact, I think other people like to educate others on certain subjects, especially if they feel they are experts. I have to deal with a lot of small talk in my daily work and you just learn to roll. It doesn't necessarily come naturally to me, but I have to do it in my line of work. I've found a lot of genuine and interesting people, even if their interests don't necessarily interest me.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LynnS6*
> 
> Ah but you know enough about sports to know that the Final Four is a sporting event!
> 
> Not really. I guessed it was from the context in which Linda on the Move used it in the post that I was replying to.
> 
> Personally, I think that talking about sports is really useful in the corporate world.
> 
> LOL. It probably is. There isn't enough money - or anything else - in the world to make me dip my feet into the corporate world any deeper than I already have (some temp work, and a couple of jobs at small branch offices). Sports aren't the reason, but that's just one more reason for me to avoid the corporate world.
> 
> There are lots of other areas where it's not so important. Talking sports in an English department at a university? Probably only going to engage about 1/3 of the people around you. It's not "essential" knowledge unless you really want to move up in the corporate world. I have not interest in the corporate world, but I do have a mild interest in sports. I like baseball. Dh loves soccer and so I like that too. Ds will watch any sport on (as dh put it "if there were season tickets to dog sled racing, he'd go!). I'm actually really fond of curling, but never get to see it anymore. When we lived in Buffalo, it was on Canadian TV regularly. But curling isn't going to win me a lot of popularity contests anywhere, even in Canada!
> 
> I know a very little about curling, but only because my ex-boss (my first real boss, and my one actual mentor in the work world - I worked for her for eight years, and loved every minute of it) was on a curling team. She didn't talk about it a lot, because she knew I wasn't into it, but she did talk a little, especially when she had tournaments to attend and things like that. So, at one time, I knew a little bit about curling. I've picked up very minimal knowledge of hockey, baseball, softball (although I don't know the differences between baseball and softball, except for the ball itself - are there any?) and basketball, just from television, books, movies, etc. (and being forced to play them in high school). I know almost nothing about football, except the names of some of the positions and what touchdowns and field goals are. Football gives me a headache. I know nothing about soccer, except what the ball looks like, and that there's a goalie involved (no idea how many players are on the field, even), and you're not supposed to touch the ball with your hands (I think?). None of that stuff is even on my radar, and sports barely exist in my world, except as a waste of space in my daily paper.
> 
> I'm glad to hear your opinion about sports and the corporate world, though. I'm about equally uninterested in having anything to do with one as the other.


----------



## pickle18

I agree that money shouldn't be synonymous with success - but it is for a lot of people (or, at least, it's a major factor in defining success). Alot of people also get their jollies from "who they know" and how quickly they can reach people in high places. Personally, having enough money that I can stay home with my son is important to me - having enough that I can be flashy with my material possessions is not (though not all people with money are...not by a long shot). Any number of things (including being raised in meager circumstances without enough food, clothing, etc.) can drive people to include money in this definition. It's certainly not my position to judge others for their own definition just because it's not ascetic enough, any more than I would want to be judged for mine.

I think talking about sports and other things that are helpful in the corporate world/upper class are easily taught to your children as tools in their toolbox, depending on the social situation they are in. They may or may not need them, and they may grow up to move in those worlds or not, whether by their own choice or not. But it can't hurt to teach them. Not to mention, many general social graces have been discussed here, which are helpful to all.

Your child may want to go to an Ivy League school and be a real mover and shaker in the business world - or they might run from that environment. Still, even if your child grows up to be a starving artist, she may end up needing to sell herself to galleries, art dealers and potential buyers. I don't think this thread needs to be about making a value judgment on certain circles of society. You never know whom you might need to associate with, or what circles your children may end up in while trying to achieve their dreams - and I think that's something this thread has presented very well.


----------



## aHikaru

Our family, DH DD and I, are a middle class family.

From my own experience, I was raised with both lower class and upper class upbringing, since my parents were divorced and "street" smart is way more important to me than having "class". There are "classy" people that are trashy and vice versa. You can't buy an education or class, it's something you have to want to teach yourself, so unless your traveling to Italy in the near future or your children are curious about the world you live in and what you and your husband choose to do with your personal lives, then let them ask you when they are ready.

I plan on raising DD the way I was raised, immersing her in worldly experiences and teaching her how to change the oil in her car. At the end of the day, it's what information that our children retain is what will stay with them for the rest of their lives and if something bad should ever happen in this world, her knowing how to filter water will be more important than her knowing another language she will not use in her daily life.


----------



## Buzzbuzz

Its funny -- when I think of "upper class" skills, I think about sports -- the ones the cost lots of money. So skiing, sailing and, for girls, horse-back riding. Maybe in some circles or areas of the country shooting as well.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pickle18*
> 
> I think talking about sports and other things that are helpful in the corporate world/upper class are easily taught to your children as tools in their toolbox, depending on the social situation they are in. They may or may not need them, and they may grow up to move in those worlds or not, whether by their own choice or not. But it can't hurt to teach them. Not to mention, many general social graces have been discussed here, which are helpful to all.
> 
> They're only easily taught by some people. I would have no idea how to teach a child to talk about sports, for instance. Conversations about sports make my brain shut down.
> 
> Your child may want to go to an Ivy League school and be a real mover and shaker in the business world - or they might run from that environment. Still, even if your child grows up to be a starving artist, *she may end up needing to sell herself* to galleries, art dealers and potential buyers. I don't think this thread needs to be about making a value judgment on certain circles of society. You never know whom you might need to associate with, or what circles your children may end up in while trying to achieve their dreams - and I think that's something this thread has presented very well.


Learning to sell oneself is one of the most valuable things a person can learn, no matter what they do. At the very least, they're almost certainly going to face job interviews. I suck at it. I always have, and I probably always will. My mom does, too. We both took an aptitude test years ago (not Myers-Briggs, but that kind ot fhing), and we both scored zero on sales ability. We don't have it. We can't learn it. I've been to job interviews. I know how they work. I suck at them. If I could actually sell myself for what I'm worth to a company, I'd own a house, instead of living in a crappy, too-expensive rented townhouse. But, I don't have it. DS1 has it in spades. He could probably get hired for a job he wasn't qualified for, at twice whta I'd get paid for a job I was highly qualified for, because he can sell. So, again...I think this is a very valuable skill to have, but it's not one I can teach, because I don't understand it. Maybe ds1 can give the other three pointers...although I doubt he's ever really thought about it.


----------



## Mom31

this whole thread makes my head spin.


----------



## pickle18

Storm Bride - I don't blame you - sports are not my thing at all! I guess I wasn't necessarily thinking you could teach your kid the ins and outs of football so much as, let them know that these things are helpful to learn for conversation, and support their interest in learning it or participating in it if they have one. It doesn't necessarily have to come directly from you - give them access to books, clubs, teams or other opportunities. If everything I could teach DS was limited by what I'm good at, enjoy, or thoroughly understand - well, that may be a tiny world indeed!


----------



## DaughterOfKali

I'm about to run out right now but will come back to post something later (subbing so I won't forget.)


----------



## Calliope84

Wow. I read this entire thread.

I think all of you would be interested in the book by Charles Murray - Coming Apart. (Many of you will probably be offended by what the book has to say, though.)

Random thoughts...

A Classical education helps you to understand why our culture is the way it is. It isn't a weird sort of indoctrination or an outdated collection of so-called "important" works. It can give you a really deep understanding of the modern world and also help to prepare you for a modern career.

Fancy Colorado Ski resort? Vail? Aspen?

--------

OP's question was a valid one, imo. No one is happy or comfortable thinking that OP's kids might have some special cultural norms in store for them that our children don't because we're not "upper class".

My grandparents were working class, my parents were middle class (white collar), and I went to a public school in a poor area and also to a private school where all the kids seemed to have doctors and lawyers for parents. At the moment I don't know what DH and I are. We're both unemployed at the moment and I bet we'd qualify for public assistance. DH was wealthy as a child and they lost it all. My mom remarried into the upper class and my dad also now qualifies as belonging to the "upper class". There is certainly a different lifestyle when you make more money. You can afford things that are well-made, so they don't need to be replaced as often. You sometimes acquire a taste for what most Americans would consider to be weird or "fancy" foods.

(That book I mentioned above talks about this... like how the "new upper class" probably drinks beer from a microbrewery and not bud light, buys green products, doesn't smoke cigarettes, shops at whole foods, etc. There is a whole sub-culture and quite frankly, many of you on MDC are well aware of this sub-culture and may be living it - upper class or not.)

Someone in this thread was talking about being "subtle" about wealth... and it is true. I remember reading a research paper along these lines and it talked about how those on the cusp of wealth tended to buy the lower cost designer purses and such that very ostentatiously screamed "I can afford this!" because they want to be seen as a member of the class above them. While the really wealthy people purchased the even more expensive stuff that sometimes didn't even have a logo on it (think Louis Vuitton purses). They surveyed people in different zip codes and the people from very wealthy zip codes knew right away which purses were the most expensive ones, while the people from the lower earning zip codes chose the most ostentatious ones as being the most expensive. That term "cultural capital" that everyone has been throwing around... it is real and it applies to SO much more than just handbags.

(Just found it. Google "Signaling Status with Luxury Goods: The Role of Brand Prominence" to read the PDF if you are interested.)

I feel like I am straddling two different worlds sometimes, but I don't mind. There are lots of different sub-cultures in this country and we all have some that we feel more comfortable or less comfortable in. OP just wants to ensure her kids feel comfortable in the sub-culture they are being brought up in since she seems to feel unsure about whether or not she can guide them. ---- And these sub-cultures are not just based on money, though as many posters have mentioned, some opportunities do require more money.


----------



## AllyRae

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> I find this thread fascinating, but some points to clarify -----
> 
> 100K for a family of 4 even in a moderate income area isn't enough to live the way many are describing -- with a Merc and black tie events and frequent trips to Europe. Not by a long shot.


No kidding. LOL! We make about that each year, and as a family of 5, we in no way eat at fancy restaurants. Chipotle is pushing it at times. LOL! Our kids don't take violin lessons or ride horses (or even have access to any!). I have no idea about wines. My kids get their clothes from a consignment store for the most part. We don't even have a minivan! LOL!

However, we are fortunate. We have a house that meets our needs, eat healthy meals daily, and do not want for necessities. We are not "upper class" even with our income, but we are very very fortunate.

That being said, the things I want my kids to learn are the things I would want them to learn regardless of our income:

1) Actions speak a whole lot more than being able to throw money at something. Get your hands dirty and help out others.

2) They are no better than anyone else. They do not have the right to act better than anyone else. All people have value and need to be treated with respect and dignity.

3) Poverty is real. Poverty is NOT "I can't afford the latest electronic gadget" or "I can't afford a $100 outfit". Poverty is real, crushing, and devastating. Poverty can lead to things like human trafficking, parents not being able to raise their own children, and people starving. It is important to know this, understand this, and do your best to help ease the burden.

4) Education is important. Learn everything you can and try your hardest. The name of the school is not as important as how you applied yourself.

5) Laziness is not an option. If you want something, you need to work for it.

6) Treat yourself with respect. Do not harm yourself with drugs, crappy food, or neglecting your own needs.

7) You are privileged simply because you have food to eat, clean water to drink, medical care when you are sick, and a roof over your head. Not everyone is that lucky. Be thankful that you have it, but understand that there are others that do not have basic needs met. It's ok to appreciate what you have, but it's essential that you realize that it's not the case everywhere.

8) Learn about other cultures in the world. Appreciate the food, arts, lifestyles, and people from around the world. The world is huge beyond your own doors.

9) Above all, treat every person with dignity and respect. Everyone you meet plays a role in the world. Every race, gender, age, class, etc. of people are important, and they are all humans.

As you can tell, we are very very big on teaching our children that there are children in the world who do not have even the basic of needs met. We want to instill a heart for others. This is very very important to our family, especially considering our middle child lost her birth family due to oppression and poverty.

I don't have "upper class" and "lower class" lessons. I just want my children to be good humans.


----------



## DaughterOfKali

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AllyRae*
> 
> That being said, the things I want my kids to learn are the things I would want them to learn regardless of our income:
> 
> 1) Actions speak a whole lot more than being able to throw money at something. Get your hands dirty and help out others.
> 
> 2) They are no better than anyone else. They do not have the right to act better than anyone else. All people have value and need to be treated with respect and dignity.
> 
> 3) Poverty is real. Poverty is NOT "I can't afford the latest electronic gadget" or "I can't afford a $100 outfit". Poverty is real, crushing, and devastating. Poverty can lead to things like human trafficking, parents not being able to raise their own children, and people starving. It is important to know this, understand this, and do your best to help ease the burden.
> 
> 4) Education is important. Learn everything you can and try your hardest. The name of the school is not as important as how you applied yourself.
> 
> 5) Laziness is not an option. If you want something, you need to work for it.
> 
> 6) Treat yourself with respect. Do not harm yourself with drugs, crappy food, or neglecting your own needs.
> 
> 7) You are privileged simply because you have food to eat, clean water to drink, medical care when you are sick, and a roof over your head. Not everyone is that lucky. Be thankful that you have it, but understand that there are others that do not have basic needs met. It's ok to appreciate what you have, but it's essential that you realize that it's not the case everywhere.
> 
> 8) Learn about other cultures in the world. Appreciate the food, arts, lifestyles, and people from around the world. The world is huge beyond your own doors.
> 
> 9) Above all, treat every person with dignity and respect. Everyone you meet plays a role in the world. Every race, gender, age, class, etc. of people are important, and they are all humans.
> 
> As you can tell, we are very very big on teaching our children that there are children in the world who do not have even the basic of needs met. We want to instill a heart for others. This is very very important to our family, especially considering our middle child lost her birth family due to oppression and poverty.
> 
> I don't have "upper class" and "lower class" lessons. I just want my children to be good humans.


I was going to post something long but I don't have to after reading your post. You pretty much summed it up.

I do live in one of the wealthiest towns in the USA. The basics that kids are expected to know are Tennis and French. Parents tend to want kids to know how to dine properly (which fork to use for what; manners; placement of utensils/glasses.) Sports (soccer, lacrosse, skiing.)

Even the kids ask each other where they 'summer'. The majority of people own at least one summer home (either on the Cape/islands or elsewhere in the world.)


----------



## AbbyGrant

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Calliope84*
> 
> OP's question was a valid one, imo. No one is happy or comfortable thinking that OP's kids might have some special cultural norms in store for them that our children don't because we're not "upper class".


It doesn't make me uncomfortable to acknowledge that different groups have different cultural norms. But cultural norms are complex and based on more than simply income, so it doesn't make much sense to me to ask about the norms for certain income brackets. I don't think there's a specific set that apply to those that earn in the low six figures. That seems like a very arbitrary distinction to me. I think that's why it's been difficult to get a consensus on the answer to the OP's question even after seventeen pages. It doesn't appear there's much "class related" knowledge for that income bracket.

Also, low six-figures in a moderate COL area is not what I consider "upper class" or wealthy anyway, although it's certainly a good living. My family has a single income of less than six figures as do many of the people I know. However, many of those in my family's social circle, particularly the dual income families, earn low six figures (I know what they do and where they work, so it's pretty easy to determine...many are probably mid-100's to low 200's). Our lives are definitely more alike than they are different, so I was pretty amused by the implication here that their kids need to know something mine don't.

While the people that I know in that higher income bracket might be able to afford more, we all seem to be doing a lot of the same things. We all value education for our children. Some choose private school, but most choose public (and some of the ones I know well that choose private have mentioned they have to make sacrifices in other areas to afford it). We all seem to be trying to raise our children to be good human beings and good citizens of the world. We all seem to be trying to enrich their lives the best we can. While they might be able to afford more extra-carricular experiences and vacations, they aren't necessarily different ones. They are not vacationing in Vail or hobnobbing with the rich and famous at The Met. To my knowledge, they are not teaching their children how to pair wines or order from menus in various languages (I don't even think there is a restaurant in the area with a menu like that anyway), and I know some would scoff at the idea. We have a lot in common based on our backgrounds, educations, and careers. The income difference just isn't an issue. If we end up in that income bracket, I'm certain I will not be needing to teach my children anything different.

Also, I've never heard any of these people mention taking a cruise or swimming with the dolphins which someone upthread mentioned were standard experiences for children in this income bracket in her area. Those things just don't seem to be priorities for them. I think this is where issues other than income come into play.

Quote:



> Originally Posted by *Calliope84*
> 
> (That book I mentioned above talks about this... like how the "new upper class" probably drinks beer from a microbrewery and not bud light, buys green products, doesn't smoke cigarettes, shops at whole foods, etc. There is a whole sub-culture and quite frankly, many of you on MDC are well aware of this sub-culture and may be living it - upper class or not.)


I'm not quite sure I understand what the author of that book is trying to get at. I mean I do think I know that sub-culture







, but it has to do with a lot more than income. I know a lot of non-upper class people who fit that description and some high income earners who are much happier with Bud rather than microbrews, who prefer the regular grocery store or Costco over Whole Foods, and who think green products are weird and/or inferior.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pickle18*
> 
> Storm Bride - I don't blame you - sports are not my thing at all! I guess I wasn't necessarily thinking you could teach your kid the ins and outs of football so much as, let them know that these things are helpful to learn for conversation, and support their interest in learning it or participating in it if they have one. It doesn't necessarily have to come directly from you - give them access to books, clubs, teams or other opportunities. If everything I could teach DS was limited by what I'm good at, enjoy, or thoroughly understand - well, that may be a tiny world indeed!


Somehow, I missed this post until now.

DS2 already knows more about soccer and hockey (the important one around here) than I do, because his friends talk about it. He talks sports with them a little bit, as well. I think some people figure these things out on their own, and some people don't. DS1 has always known what he needs to know to converse with his friends (higher class than we are - and you can take that pretty much any way you want to). I went to the same school, 25 years earlier than ds1 did, when there was a similar split in "class". Like ds1, I was on the low end. I never figured out what to talk about or how to fit. Partly, I think I just didn't care enough, to be honest. I still don't. If I have to talk sports to get along with someone, we're not going to mesh, anyway.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Also, low six-figures in a moderate COL area is not what I consider "upper class" or wealthy anyway, although it's certainly a good living.


After dh's most recent raise, we're getting very close to the six figure barrier. It's not a bad living (and I know several of my neighbours make it work on less), but it's far from "upper class" or wealthy. We live in the cheapest rental accommodation available in our municipality. There is no possibility of buying property - not even a one bedroom apartment to rent out. We take fairly minimalist vacations (our most extravagant, by far, was a trip to Disney World, which was a Christmas gift from my in-laws). We order in an occasional pizza, but very rarely dine out, anywhere. I haven't bought new shoes in almost four years (admittedly, that's only partially financial - it's mostly because it's very hard to find shoes that fit my 7EEEE feet - well, they're honestly more like a 6.5EEEEE). Our retirement savings are about a quarter of what we'd like them to be. We're using a dining suite that I got secondhand over 20 years ago...and it's seen better days. We live larger than my family of origin ever did...but we're definitely not wealthy...and nobody would ever consider us to be upper class.

My kids do participate in a fair number of activities, but they're partially paid for through our homeschooling program. DS1 is almost entirely on his own for college tuition.


----------



## Calliope84

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AbbyGrant*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> It doesn't make me uncomfortable to acknowledge that different groups have different cultural norms. But cultural norms are complex and based on more than simply income, so it doesn't make much sense to me to ask about the norms for certain income brackets. I don't think there's a specific set that apply to those that earn in the low six figures. That seems like a very arbitrary distinction to me. I think that's why it's been difficult to get a consensus on the answer to the OP's question even after seventeen pages. It doesn't appear there's much "class related" knowledge for that income bracket.
> 
> -----
> 
> I'm not quite sure I understand what the author of that book is trying to get at. I mean I do think I know that sub-culture
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , but it has to do with a lot more than income. I know a lot of non-upper class people who fit that description and some high income earners who are much happier with Bud rather than microbrews, who prefer the regular grocery store or Costco over Whole Foods, and who think green products are weird and/or inferior.


Yes. 100k buys a different lifestyle depending on where you live. So it isn't really a useful cut-off.

The author is talking about the "new" upper class, which some people also call the "creative class". I also know people who are in this sub-culture and don't have a high income. And my mom and step-dad are very "mainstream". What he was getting at was that he felt that people living in this subculture (which largely does consist of highly educated individuals who have a disproportionate influence on how our society is going to evolve) and their children - are becoming increasingly out of touch with what the rest of America lives like. He shows how the wealthier people all live in the same zip codes... like they are segregating themselves. He argues that back the 60's (for instance), the difference between being rich and being poor was not that big of a cultural difference. Everyone still ate the same foods, still entertained in similar ways, and watched the same shows and movies. Rich people just lived in houses valued at double the average joe's house and dined using more expensive china.

Then the book takes a turn and becomes...worse / bizarre / rambling / controversial / interesting...

He talks about how, in lower income communities, the rates of births to unwed mothers have skyrocketed and it has become an accepted way to have kids. But that we know there are poor outcomes when children are raised in single parent households. Then he shows that, in the new upper class, people are still getting married before having kids. He talks about other things like work ethic, having a sense of community and trusting other people, and religion (*wince*) and how those have also eroded in lower income communities. He thinks the culture of political correctness and the idea that "all ways are of equal value" is causing our society to go down hill. He thinks the people with the power in our society right now should actually preach what they are practicing.

*That, by the way, isn't my opinion... I don't even know if I agree with any of his arguments.* Many of you may be offended just reading my synopsis... but don't shoot the messenger, please!  It was an intriguing book that poked at many of the things we're either uncomfortable with or with certain cultural norms we don't agree exist.


----------



## Blt178

I can't believe people actually talk in terms of class... that seems a tad crude. Why wouldn't it be framed in terms of "what I'd like my kids to know"... you'd like them to be comfortable ordering in Italian. Ok. You'd like them to be able to hold their own on the golf course as a lot of business transactions take place there. Sure thing. But why oh why would you presume to make this about class? It is about life skills that you would like to prioritize. I would think nearly anyone who has a yearning to impart certain knowledge to their kids can accomplish that despite their income level?

I would like to ensure my kids understand that people are people no matter what kind of house they live in or brand of car they drive. I've met fascinating people in ALL socio-economic brackets. Shouldn't we be teaching kids to look at a person's soul?


----------



## ~adorkable~

This thread is old it was talked about a lot in a very heated way, if you would like you can read over the many many pages where folks explain their feelings. They certainly have a right to them. Mostly it was about semantics and helped us understand a lot of sensitivities on both sides I think some folks had not thought of. I would encourage you to read the whole thread before responding if you haven't already. If I remember correctly some responses were so much an attack feeling the the lady who started it never came back, no one really deserved that.


----------



## Linda on the move

I also encourage reading the entire thread before responding.

I actually enjoyed this thread, but I don't have any desire to rehash the exact same things that have been said.

<<Why wouldn't it be framed in terms of "what I'd like my kids to know"...>>

The reason this wouldn't work is that the OPer was trying to figure out what those things were for a specific income bracket. She didn't know what the things were, so your solution wouldn't work for her.

I don't know how to phrase the question so that it wouldn't step on toes.


----------



## erigeron

As far as teaching your kids to talk about sports, I think it would be more just teaching them that if they don't know much/anything about the subject, they get a lot further by not being rude about it or saying they hate it. Kind of a social nicety thing. Not like you have to sit by for hours while people talk about it, but being able to listen to the conversation for a bit isn't bad. And also, if they understand a bit but something comes up that they're confused by, they can potentially ask, because people like explaining things they are interested in. (On the other hand, this may vary for guys. My experience as an adult woman becoming more interested in football has been that guys are more than eager to answer any questions I have, but a boy or man who asked some of the questions I've asked might just get made fun of.)

I had a preceptor once in school who told me that I shouldn't tell people I've just met that I don't like the local team, because it doesn't accomplish anything at all in the conversation--it just shuts down conversation and potentially antagonizes people. I think he had a point. This is a huge football town, but now when it comes up I just say that I don't really follow the team and leave out the part where they annoy me and I'm glad when they lose.

So it seems to me that it is less about the specific topic and more about learning to engage with others on a subject you're not terribly interested in. And generally telling people you've just met that you hate something they're a big fan of doesn't win you any friends.


----------



## Buzzbuzz

What I do find interesting is how some of the material signifers of class have gone the way of the dodo --

For my mom's generation -- there were certain items that a home had to show that it was middle class. In her childhood and in her area, a middle class home had a piano and an encyclopedia, a radio and maybe a TV.

Right now, I can't think of anything specific that a home "has to have" to make it middle class or upper middle class.

Our nanny has a nicer car and i-phone than I do. Our friends who are scraping by have flat-screen TVs. Middle class and upper middle class friends who have married recently haven't registered for sterling silverware or fine china. Does anyone (with the exception of the very upper class or maybe in the South which has always been more traditional) even have (uninherited) fine china anymore?


----------



## contactmaya

do carpets count? how about a china vase?


----------



## nstewart

Oh wow...I remember this thread....


----------



## Linda on the move

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *erigeron*
> 
> As far as teaching your kids to talk about sports, I think it would be more just teaching them that if they don't know much/anything about the subject, they get a lot further by not being rude about it or saying they hate it. Kind of a social nicety thing. Not like you have to sit by for hours while people talk about it, but being able to listen to the conversation for a bit isn't bad. And also, if they understand a bit but something comes up that they're confused by, they can potentially ask, because people like explaining things they are interested in. (On the other hand, this may vary for guys. My experience as an adult woman becoming more interested in football has been that guys are more than eager to answer any questions I have, but a boy or man who asked some of the questions I've asked might just get made fun of.)


I think in the context of the OPers question, being able to carry on a basic conversation about the major sports is just part of it, if you are male or female, esp. if you are a female who wants to be "one of the guys" in a business meeting.

No one can know everything about every team for every sport, and asking questions IS polite. My DH's current projects have him spending a lot of time in Canada, so he is very up on Canada hockey right now. This certainly isn't something he grew up with, and he has learned a lot by asking questions and being truly interested.

And it does help in difficult business situations.

And the women who make it in his field can drink beer and talk about sports. It's cultural literacy. This is what culture is now.

And my point when I brought up sports was that if you are wanting to help your kids be *socially and professional successful,* teaching them to carry on polite conversations about things like sports is one of the things you could do.

But I agree that being able to engage a wide variety of people on a wide variety of subjects is really key -- my DH's boss, who has about about 2,000 people under him, can carry on a conversation with ANYONE and make them feel like they are the most interesting person to talk to. He can even do this with my DD who has autism, and he is one of the few people who can. He is also amazing at his job and consistently works 80 hours a week, but his strong social skills have been a tremendous asset to his career. If he were just as smart and hardworking without the social no-how, he would be a project lead making a fraction of the money.

I'm still pondering the question of what upper middle/ upper class people own, and I really don't know. We are in that group, but got here by moving a lot for promotions. And we have cats. So the things we once had that were breakable are long gone. The families I know with more money are quicker to buy their kids the latest/greatest gadget, but plenty of people who are really tight for money seem to come up with the money for Kindle Fires/iPads/ etc.

(I know more people live like they have money than who actually have money)


----------



## FarmerBeth

I've just gone back to school in a male dominated field (environmental engineering for the natural resource sector). I really agree with the above about women typically male fields needing a comfort level with sports and traditionally "male" topics. I'm grateful for having an involved father who always included me in what he found interesting.

I think that even though the OP was specifically asking about skills specifically about the upper and upper-middle income class, more generally what this is really about are social skills and cultural literacy. I think many of these skills are across social and economic barriers. I've met many people who started I one social "class" and because of great people skills are able to be comfortable in settings outside of what they grew up with (despite what one PP said, I think lots of people can manage to adjust outside of their "class"). My little part of Nova Scotia has many examples of politicians and industry leaders with parents who grew up mining coal who are now having dinner with politicians or consulting with universities. I think having a genuine interest in others and in learning more about the world outside one's own little corner counts for more than any specific skill or experience.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FarmerBeth*
> 
> I've just gone back to school in a male dominated field (environmental engineering for the natural resource sector). I really agree with the above about women typically male fields needing a comfort level with sports and traditionally "male" topics. I'm grateful for having an involved father who always included me in what he found interesting.
> 
> I had an involved father who included me (us, really) in what he found interesting. That didn't include sports, though. When I was about...12?...my dad watched the World Series on tv, and I was in shock. To this day, I have no idea what prompted it, but he'd never watched any kind of game before that, and never watched another one again. My brother didn't watch sports (until recently - in the last few years, he and my sister have both become hockey nuts).
> 
> However, this is also one of the many reasons I didn't pursue a career in any male dominated fields. (I seriously considered engineering when I graduated from high school.) It's also one of the many reasons I won't work for large corporations. I go to work to get my job done, not to spend all my time talking about something as mind-numbing as sports (no insult to sports fans - I'm sure they'd find many of my interests to be mind-numbing, too). All the social crap that goes on in the workplace drives me insane. I so miss my first job, where it was about the job.
> 
> I think that even though the OP was specifically asking about skills specifically about the upper and upper-middle income class, more generally what this is really about are social skills and cultural literacy.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> I think many of these skills are across social and economic barriers. I've met many people who started I one social "class" and because of great people skills are able to be comfortable in settings outside of what they grew up with (despite what one PP said, I think lots of people can manage to adjust outside of their "class").
> 
> I agree with this, too.
> 
> DS1 flips between totally different social scenes (from my ex's family - alcoholics and drug addicts, for the most part, who are under or unemployed to his girlfriend's family - skiing at Whistler, and possibly a European cruise next summer - and everything in between). He has the knack. I didn't fit into my own social class as child, don't fit into my current socio-economic class (not really relevant, as dh doesn't socialize much), and will probably never fit into any class. I don't have the knack. I think dd1 has it, to a reasonable degree. DS2...probably not. It's hard to tell with dd2, because she's still little, but I think she's like ds1.


----------



## Blt178

Apologies, i actually didn't realize it WAS an old thread until after I replied. Wasn't looking to stir up an old pot, just felt compelled to reply to what felt to me to be an outrageous thread.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Linda on the move*
> 
> I also encourage reading the entire thread before responding.


I read quite a bit and tried to take in as much as I could (17 pages y'all!) and it seemed most were fully indulging in the idea posed by the OP which got my blood pumping before I double checked the posting dates.


----------



## Storm Bride

I was talking to dh about this thread last night. He commented that he has to agree about sports, and that, in a work sense, it becomes more and more important the higher you climb. No wonder I always preferred to be a peon.


----------

