I used several factors to help me determine my friend’s social class such as their house, car, clothes, education, income, and taste preferences. Based on those factors I may say that his family must be successful. I may be wrong or right but sometimes looks may be deceiving, this is where conspicuous consumption plays a role. My friend may dress nice and have nice things but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he is wealthy. Some of the aspects where I feel that Lloyd Warner’s model is accurate is that the main three social classes can still be broken down into upper and lower, making it more realistic. Also that the upper-upper class is composed of the people born into wealth, I mean you can’t be considered super wealthy unless you can manage to keep that wealth for several generations. I also feel that Warner’s model is accurate where he shows a difference in the between two lower-middle classes. There has to be a point where the middle class is divided among the persons who work with their brain and with people who work with their hands. People who are in the lower-middle class, who work with their brain are more likely to move up to the upper-middle class than those who work with their hands, either move up to the other lower-middle class or move down to the upper-lower class. I would consider the middle class as an equilibrium point, where you aren’t considered poor but not wealthy
I used several factors to help me determine my friend’s social class such as their house, car, clothes, education, income, and taste preferences. Based on those factors I may say that his family must be successful. I may be wrong or right but sometimes looks may be deceiving, this is where conspicuous consumption plays a role. My friend may dress nice and have nice things but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he is wealthy. Some of the aspects where I feel that Lloyd Warner’s model is accurate is that the main three social classes can still be broken down into upper and lower, making it more realistic. Also that the upper-upper class is composed of the people born into wealth, I mean you can’t be considered super wealthy unless you can manage to keep that wealth for several generations. I also feel that Warner’s model is accurate where he shows a difference in the between two lower-middle classes. There has to be a point where the middle class is divided among the persons who work with their brain and with people who work with their hands. People who are in the lower-middle class, who work with their brain are more likely to move up to the upper-middle class than those who work with their hands, either move up to the other lower-middle class or move down to the upper-lower class. I would consider the middle class as an equilibrium point, where you aren’t considered poor but not wealthy