What social class do you consider yourself to be?

What do you think a Marxist approach to class means?

£100,000+ per person puts you in the top 1% of the income distribution in the UK (also, women earn less, sometimes far less, than men so to find a woman who earns £100,000+ is even more rare). So upper-middle doesn't sound quite right, does it.

You know that unless you are royalty, you can go no higher than upper-middle right? I'd agree with you if the royalty did not exist but they do so you have to take into account that upper-middle is basically the same as America's upper class.

You know that unless you are royalty, you can go no higher than upper-middle right? I'd agree with you if the royalty did not exist but they do so you have to take into account that upper-middle is basically the same as America's upper class.

No, I did not know that. To be honest, I am not so sure this is a valid distinction anymore (it used to be when wealth and power were concentrated in that class). As far as I am concerned, a billionaire in the UK is not "upper-middle class" simply because he has no royal titles (and there are plenty of them).

That really isn't true. Royalty? No. What about all the thousands and thousands of lesser titled people? And their relatives. Not to mention very wealthy landowners and business people who are not titled.

I've read a few of your other posts like this and you seem to be quite unclear about both the British and US class system from what I can see.

I have been told by a fair few British people that they are not considered upper class due to lack of title, the US class system is mostly based on wealth. I am not unclear.

That is up to you to decide but while people with titles are still at the top (regardless of wealth), the max they can go into is upper-middle although it is a complete bumout really... owning class would most likely be more adept name for them.

Well, how do you classify yourself? I think immigrants have a class from their own background in their parent country, plus an 'adopted' class identity in the country they migrate to, which can be, as you say, partly set by the way that society defines them as migrants.

Utterly unconvinced. It's highly likely that everything we associate with the upper class - education, etiquette, etc - is going to be available to the sons and daughters of billionaires (foreign billionaires even). That they have no royal titles is irrelevant. They are powerful, well connected and extremely wealthy. To call them middle class (even upper-middle class) as if all they have is wealth (like the early medieval merchants) when they actually run the country, is misleading.

The nobility used to be the upper class both because it was the wealthiest class (and it was) and because it wielded all the political power. That is no longer true.

I would probably describe myself as 'middle class'. My dad much runs his own hedge fund so we're talking about a seven figure salary or more. My mum comes from a well to do family, but does nothing productive and is a lady of leisure. Was a city lawyer in the past. Maybe I could be described as upper middle class, but I was not sure.

I go to probably one of the best private schools in the country, holiday abroad are reasonably frequent . I don''t think class is a big issue at all, the main issue is that people from similar backgrounds usually have more in common. One of my closet friends is working class, but the sort who won't be forever.

I would probably describe myself as 'middle class'. My dad much runs his own hedge fund so we're talking about a seven figure salary or more. My mum comes from a well to do family, but does nothing productive and is a lady of leisure. Was a city lawyer in the past. Maybe I could be described as upper middle class, but I was not sure.

I go to probably one of the best private schools in the country, holiday abroad are reasonably frequent . I don''t think class is a big issue at all, the main issue is that people from similar backgrounds usually have more in common. One of my closet friends is working class, but the sort who won't be forever.

Upper middle class. Why? 3 out of my 4 grandparents went to public school and university (I'd argue that education is a fairly big class indicator), as did my parents. I went to a leading private school and university. People make jokes in Latin at family dos and other people understand them and laugh. My family is well off but not particularly rich and full of professionals - professors, lawyers, generals etc with a smattering of earned titles but nothing hereditary.

I think my background is middle class, but some would say my current situation is more upper working class. My family all have very respectable careers and went to university (psychologist, barrister, graphic designer, teacher etc), but my mum was the "naughty posh girl" and decided to party and not go to university. She raised me as a single parent and I live with her in my gran's house which is fairly big and in a typical middle class area. She's a nurse so earns an adequate income, not a high one. All my family, including my mum, are very cultured and enjoy the arts and literature.

I think many people these days are 'nouveau riche'. A lot of people I know live in very nice areas in very nice houses and had private education, but this is only because their parents have just acquired money through business and other such things. Their parents' parent, however, are from places not so middle class and have jobs of the lower class field.

In my opinion, social status is rather shallow and I find social climbers to be particularly irritating. Their desire to be at the top of the social ladder is completely counteracted by their lack of (natural) intelligence and contrived beliefs and activities.