The lower class

I'd agree - my understanding is that upper/middle/lower is reference to the amount of income you have (at least in the US) rather than the quality person you are.

I'm certainly a member of the "wish I didn't have to work" class, and there are quite a few members of the top 1% of earners who are in the "never have to work" class. But then you're not suggesting we lump together the parasitical poor with the parasitical rich in a single socioeconomic class, are you?

David Rockefeller worked; Bill Gates worked; Nelson Rockefeller worked. John D. Rockefeller Sr. worked.

I see. I always thought the middle class was actually the doctors, lawyers, and managers, with the upper classes being the the non working, old money owners.

My dad was a postal worker - mailman and was considered middle class typically your blue collar workers. There is a sub-set often referred to as upper-middle class which would be more white collar - many lawyers, business people that fit into this catergory.

I think I was first introduced into the upper middle class when I went to a private college - I found these to be people that want to really be upper class, but don't quite make enough money to officially be upper class. That was at least what these guys were referred to in college.

Most people fall into middle class - but middle class is often divided into lower-middle/middle-middle/upper middle.

Not a huge fan of wikipedia but this gives a decent explanation of what I was trying to say...

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

Scary though, part of their description of income puts me in upper class - which I know is incorrect. One problem is you can't have a broad imagine of yearly income as some areas require significantly more income to meet basic standards.

I never have thought of the classes as being anything but economic. Having been raised in the lower class or, perhaps, the lower middle class, I never thought of the term "lower" as being derogatory. The point I'm trying to make is that if political correctness is the reason for substituting "working" for "lower" then this in itself is defining the lower class as a derogatory term.

I can't say I'm surprised at the negative responses to my original comment, being that so many people on this site are loose and free with negative strokes merely--it seems--to get the same in return.

And I also took it the same way as you.

Lower class meaning - you earn/have the least - not that you are "Low class" - I'm sure we all know people that have much monetary-wise - but are about as "low class" as you can be.

Maybe for clarification - you can say - income/wealth-wise what is the break out of the classes and terminology - hopefully that is pc enough not to offend.

My understanding is that working class is also used though for middle class (especially those more blue-collar)- not necessarily lower class. So I don't think they can really replace lower for working. The term doesn't make sense any way as according to much I've read - homeless is considered the lowest of the low class and they ain't working so doesn't make much sense.

what makes you believe that homeless people don't work?

I travelled in India, where they are trying to get rid of the class system, untouchables being the lowest. I think the term lower class has always been derogatory and ignorant, because it doesn't take into account class at all. Working class makes sense to me.
However, I'm not the one who made it about laziness, you did that. Saying that people who are not financially on par with the rest of society because they don't want to work or never will was your contention, not mine. I find that ignorant as well. Perhaps if you'd thrown in a few smiley faces it wouldn't have been so distasteful to my ear.
Bernie Madoff, one of the richest men in the USA, had a high class lifestyle and left many of his victims broke. Are his victims a lower class than him? And why in god's name would you consider 'working' a derogatory term? It's what most of us do...

Most don't - jeepers the pc police are at it again. I know many homeless that are incapable of working.

Most reasonable people would surmise that most homeless are not working. Jeepers please be normal or at least use some common sense.

So even if you were to take it that homeless people work, classifying a group level would not make sense as working class - as each of those groups lower/middle/upper all have people that do work. My take on working class is that on average the middle is made up of mostly people that are working.

And to be pc - not that all classes do not have people that do not work in some capacity just that the typical workers are in the middle.

I'm neither PC nor the police...

"Most reasonable people would surmise that most homeless are not working."

why?

(I think you are writing the homeless of as being bums.)

I think the vast majority of homeless are homeless, not because they don't or won't work, but because there is a very real lack of affordable housing. Sure, there are people who don't for medical reasons, drugs, or mental issues.
I'm not PC either.. However, if you want to see me in that light, go for it. It doesn't change reality one little bit and it doesn't make you right either.

huh???

I don't think I addressed any of your posts, but...

ok.

(I'll try to be more "normal" for linkat)

Sorry, should have clicked on Link, not you..

No - actually many of the homeless (if you read clearly) cannot work - many should not be out in the street - I've met many and they are issues that do not allow them to work (not of their own making).

Exactly what I was speaking of - if you have dealt with homelessness (more the ones that are continuously homeless not short term in a sense - that need some help to get back on their feet) - they mental, medical or drug related issues. And unfortunately are not getting the help they need.

I’ve met some very wealthy people that had no class what so ever.

Lyndon Johnson was deemed to be among them.