Old Money and New Money

What are the differences in your opinion?

As suggested I opened a new thread, inspired by this: https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4201304

What is the difference and how can you tell them apart?
Do they frequent different venues/hotspots/establishments in your experience? And talk about different things?

Will post below my personal take on this too!

@abcde3237 @Dr Pesto @Yaboi @l'etranger @prazzyjazzy

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 1

jkls92

OP

20

I can easily tell them apart by their appearance and behaviour.

New money love to display very evidently expensive clothes and accessories from well recognisable luxury brands. A new shiny Rolex Submariner (or similar looking model) screams new money like nothing else (I give the benefit of the doubt, maybe, when I see it on very young people). Mine instead (for example) is vintage and has belonged to my family for half a century. Talking about jewellery, big and/or numerous diamonds are a new money fetish since they reflect their ostentatious attitude. Back to clothes, old money prevalently dress in a way that I would define classic, conservative and elegant.

Behaviour. Old money tend to be well-behaved, elegant, snobbish, classy and possibly more discreet, reserved and stiff. Typical new money behaviours are being arrogant and loud and showing off. However, behaviours are defined much more by what kind of person you are than by money, so this often doesn't apply.

Outlook. New money are sometimes clueless to the whole game of class and wealth. You might find them boosting their excessively wide, curved, 4K, 3D TV or placing too much attention on cars. This is something new money care disproportionately about (they are informed and often discuss it), their car is usually just above what they can reasonably afford, while old money ones are usually an understatement (they often even care about fuel consumption). Old money regard certain luxuries as excessive (a really huge yacht), while new money have no such notion. I could go further on boats and say, old money=sailboat, new money=motorboat/yacht, but nowadays that would be only partially accurate. Old money have a certain superiority attitude and even mild disdain for self-made people and excessive financial ambition. They would never want to trade their position with new money and never envy their assets/lifestyle because they immediately, ex ante, a priori, set them aside as nouveau riche and therefore ""inferior"". On the contrary, plain money is central for new money, who often compete with everyone else by outspending/keeping up with them. New money families place much more focus on hard work than old money.

Work and holidays. New money can't stop working (70 years old CEO, I'm looking at you, greedy ******), old money can't be bothered starting. Being overworked, new money have to roll from a holiday to another, they have a disproportionate amount of breaks in every fashionable destination (they want to be able to say, "I was in Monte Carlo/Ibiza/Maldives/St. Moritz last month".). Old money don't need actual holidays since they don't strictly work (no occupation in the traditional sense of the word), but indeed they travel a lot.

Houses. A house is a house for old money, even if it resembles a castle. For new money, it's a villa, a penthouse, a loft whatever. Some say that old money houses are cold, while new money are excessively hot. This naive distinction is due to the fact that old money houses are older and belong to family and relatives, while new money tend to have a range of new, designer furnished pied à terre in different global partying locations.

Class. While old money are necessarily upper or uppermiddle, new money might preserve or inherit their working or middle class attitude.

Spending and finances. While it is generally believed that new money spend more, I must note that this depends on how much money one has rather than how old this money is. Also, generally, old money are impoverished/impoverishing, new money, necessarily, enriching.

This post may sound offensive towards new money. I want to stress the fact that I was dealing with generalisations and stereotypes and that I know lovely, sweet and respectable new money families who only display a fraction of these behaviours. How people are isn't defined by how old their money is, but you should still be able to use this model to recognise new or old money behaviours and characteristics in people.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 2

l'etranger

2

It was an interesting read but limited by the lack of distinction between the established meritocratic elite and the actual new rich. The meritocratic elite draws from elements of both subclasses you spoke of.

Reply 3

jkls92

OP

20

Original post by l'etranger

It was an interesting read but limited by the lack of distinction between the established meritocratic elite and the actual new rich. The meritocratic elite draws from elements of both subclasses you spoke of.

Mmhhh, necessarily limited I'd say, it was already an essay like that, imagine if I had added further distinctions! But yes, I only scratched the surface of the topic.

Reply 4

l'etranger

2

For example you rightly pointed out that new money folks place huge emphasis on hard work, but I would have characterised that attitude with the meritocratic elite. For example when your part of this class, you're a snob, you will only marry a woman who is also successful, cultured and hardworking to ensure your children turn out like you.

The actual new rich, which includes people like Trump (certainly culturally speaking) as well as self-made non-White immigrant groups just don't see why you don't marry a poor but hot girl who works as a waitress.

Reply 5

l'etranger

2

Compared the Rothschild banking family hundreds of years ago with actual British aristocrats at the time. (I'm aware they've since blended)

Reply 6

l'etranger

2

It's fairly tangential to the point but I always remember that scene from the third Godfather film where the Protestant guy tells Corleone that his family can act cultured all they want, they'll always be scum, but in the end they do become White (in the American sense of the word). In contrast Scareface was always scum, even how he tried to get rich to marry a drug addled bimbo whore, that was the real new money film.

Reply 7

jkls92

OP

20

Original post by l'etranger

For example you rightly pointed out that new money folks place huge emphasis on hard work, but I would have characterised that attitude with the meritocratic elite. For example when your part of this class, you're a snob, you will only marry a woman who is also successful, cultured and hardworking to ensure your children turn out like you.

The actual new rich, which includes people like Trump (certainly culturally speaking) as well as self-made non-White immigrant groups just don't see why you don't marry a poor but hot girl who works as a waitress.

Agreed. For example, some time ago, an influencer whose grandfather, a miner, became multi-millionaire (so relatively "new" money, but already established elite as you said), publicly proclaimed, to the greatest disdain of socialist Italy and others, that she would never marry a pizza maker.

However, I know educated professionals (good degree, postgraduate), who came from poor backgrounds and are now managers in the million(s) and, despite certainly being "new" money, wouldn't marry their children to an uncultured, unsuccessful person.

Reply 8

coupdetat~~

Is Mansa Musa old money :gangster:

Reply 9

l'etranger

2

Original post by coupdetat~~

Is Mansa Musa old money :gangster:

Richest mayn alive homie, flying pyramids ma ninja

Reply 10

l'etranger

2

Original post by usualsuspects

Agreed. For example, some time ago, an influencer whose grandfather, a miner, became multi-millionaire (so relatively "new" money, but already established elite as you said), publicly proclaimed, to the greatest disdain of socialist Italy and others, that she would never marry a pizza maker.

However, I know educated professionals (good degree, postgraduate), who came from poor backgrounds and are now managers in the million(s) and, despite certainly being "new" money, wouldn't marry their children to an uncultured, unsuccessful person.

Of course they think that way, because their lives have been purged by the bitterness of having come up from the bottom. If they can do it why can't those people they grew up with?

Reply 11

coupdetat~~

Original post by l'etranger

Richest mayn alive homie, flying pyramids ma ninja

Musa made his pilgrimage between 1324–1325. His procession reportedly included 60,000 men, including 12,000 slaves who each carried 4 lb (1.8 kg) of gold bars and heralds dressed in silks who bore gold staffs, organized horses, and handled bags. Musa provided all necessities for the procession, feeding the entire company of men and animals. Those animals included 80 camels which each carried 50–300 lb (23–136 kg) of gold dust. Musa gave the gold to the poor he met along his route. Musa not only gave to the cities he passed on the way to Mecca, including Cairo and Medina, but also traded gold for souvenirs. It was reported that he built a mosque every Friday.

Mah nikka, the only real Kang :smug:

Reply 12

l'etranger

2

Original post by coupdetat~~

Musa made his pilgrimage between 1324–1325. His procession reportedly included 60,000 men, including 12,000 slaves who each carried 4 lb (1.8 kg) of gold bars and heralds dressed in silks who bore gold staffs, organized horses, and handled bags. Musa provided all necessities for the procession, feeding the entire company of men and animals. Those animals included 80 camels which each carried 50–300 lb (23–136 kg) of gold dust. Musa gave the gold to the poor he met along his route. Musa not only gave to the cities he passed on the way to Mecca, including Cairo and Medina, but also traded gold for souvenirs. It was reported that he built a mosque every Friday.

Mah nikka, the only real Kang :smug:

He's so intelligent how he pulled those rocks out of the ground and then gave them away deflating the Arabic economy.