Why do people from privileged class backgrounds often misidentify their origins as working class?

[bellaozzydog]

How did she make a Swiss roll..?

Push them down Dufourspitze?

 

[Sue]

My Grannie always said the best way to make a Swiss roll was to push them down the Alps...

I set 'em up...

(Pre-decimal) Greek urns coming up next.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Rhubarb can fuck off.

I always thought that. But it's delicious.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I always thought that. But it's delicious.

My mum made rhubarb crumble quite often. I refused to eat it. I think the bitterness puts kids off? Now rhubarb is one of my favourite things.

Kids don't know shit.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

My mum made rhubarb crumble quite often. I refused to eat it. I think the bitterness puts kids off? Now rhubarb is one of my favourite things.

Kids don't know shit.

I didn't eat it simply because I didn't like the look of it. Some weird purply thing off The day of the Triffids.
Then when I finally tried it in adulthood I was pretty surprised at how nice it was.

 

[Serge Forward]

Can I just say, all this ice cream/cake talk is by far some of the most interesting stuff in this thread - what with all the you're not working class if you pay a mortgage, eat avocado, vote Tory, type stuff.

By the way, when I was growing up, we had shitloads of cake every day at ours. How very posh we were. To be fair though, my dad used to nick it off his bread van

 

[Fozzie Bear]

Just remembered that my Dad used to wind us up by saying he had a vienetta to himself every day for lunch at work.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Just remembered that my Dad used to wind us up by saying he had a vienetta to himself every day for lunch at work.

And did you consider him upper class for doing so?

 

[Fozzie Bear]

And did you consider him upper class for doing so?

I was just very indignant and jealous I think, so maybe, in a way.

 

[brogdale]

Apparently my Grandfather once asked his Dad if they were posh...because they were always having pheasant.

 

[extra dry]

Was it Lenin who described the British as a nation of coupon clippers?

That was Churchhill, right?

 

[SpookyFrank]

That was Churchhill, right?

Napoleon

 

[nogojones]

That was Churchhill, right?

No, though I seem to have misquoted a bit, but it was Lenin whinging about GB in Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism

Hence the extraordinary growth of a class, or rather, of a stratum of rentiers, i.e., people who live by “clipping coupons,” who take no part in any enterprise whatever, whose profession is idleness. The export of capital, one of the most essential economic bases of imperialism, still more completely isolates the rentiers from production and sets the seal of parasitism on the whole country that lives by exploiting the labour of several overseas countries and colonies.


“In 1893,” writes Hobson, “the British capital invested abroad represented about 15 per cent of the total wealth of the United Kingdom.” Let me remind the reader that by 1915 this capital had increased about two and a half times. “Aggressive imperialism,” says Hobson further on, “which costs the tax-payer so dear, which is of so little value to the manufacturer and trader ... is a source of great gain to the investor.... The annual income Great Britain derives from commissions in her whole foreign and colonial trade, import and export, is estimated by Sir R. Giffen at £18,000,000 (nearly 170 million rubles) for 1899, taken at 2 1/2 per cent, upon a turnover of £800,000,000.” Great as this sum is, it cannot explain the aggressive imperialism of Great Britain, which is explained by the income of £90 million to £100 million from “invested” capital, the income of the rentiers.

VIII. PARASITISM AND DECAY OF CAPITALISM

www.marxists.org

 

[brogdale]

Was it Gandhi?

 

[extra dry]

Was it Gandhi?

It may of been Caesar, while walking through the muddy streets of Londinium

 

[Artaxerxes]

It may of been Caesar, while walking through the muddy streets of Londinium

Which Caesar because Londinium didn't exist until after Claudius invaded

 

[Pickman's model]

Which Caesar because Londinium didn't exist until after Claudius invaded

I think it's fair to say there's disagreement over this Introduction: London in A.D. 43 | British History Online

 

[_Russ_]

Why?, for many it simply so they can project the fake image of the self made man, the lie that they got where they are purely through their own sweat and anyone who doesnt get to the same place has only themselves to Blame, snort... chortle

 

[brogdale]

Why?, for many it simply so they can project the fake image of the self made man, the lie that they got where they are purely through their own sweat and anyone who doesnt get to the same place has only themselves to Blame, snort... chortle those from privilege

Really? Don't think that those from privileged backgrounds admire "self-made men"; it's more about disguising their own privilege, isn't it?

 

[petee]

I think it's fair to say there's disagreement over this Introduction: London in A.D. 43 | British History Online

that was very interesting, thanks. but it argues that there was very likely no or only a very small pre-Claudian settlement

"The evidence as a whole, therefore, has failed to prove the existence of a native London. But, if it has left a margin of doubt, it has at least set a limit to conjecture. It has shown clearly that we have in any case no reason for suspecting the existence of a settlement on the site more than a decade before the conquest"

 

[_Russ_]

Really? Don't think that those from privileged backgrounds admire "self-made men"; it's more about disguising their own privilege, isn't it?

That was my point

 

[brogdale]

That was my point

Apologies; clearly too subtle for me.

 

[Rimbaud]

Than private renting, yes, you are. You're not subject to yearly rent increases, and as long as you keep your job, you're not subject to the threat of eviction with a couple of months' notice. That's a big difference. (Plus, you know you are likely to have a government that will act in the interests of homeowners, generally, to the extent of borrowing massively to prop up the market.)

Social housing renting can be different. But in the UK, private renting laws are so terrible that you never have any security.

Also you are actually paying towards something you own in the end. Pay a mortgage for 30 years and you will fully own a house. Pay rent for 30 years and you will have nothing to show for it.

Also, renting is always more expensive than a mortgage, because rent is generally cost of paying the landlords mortgage (which is by itself profit because they are gaining a home on the back of someone else's labour) plus additional profit.

A landlord absolutely cannot be working class by definition. They are in the property game, even if they aren't rich, they can't be proletarians, just like a small business owner may not be rich but nor are they proletarian.

 

[Rimbaud]

The ironic thing about some of the idiot ideas on this thread ( let’s get people renting to see people paying their mortgage as their enemy, to simplify) is that most real world successful revolutions, unlike the ones in the Puffin Big Book of Revolutionary Fairytales, were organised and run, and in many cases faught, by people who would definitely be considered’the middle class’ if not often mixed with the ‘bourgeoisie ’. In the same way as most revolutions don’t come when the society/ economy is at rock bottom, but when things have started to get better. It’s fairly basic history.

Marx knew this BTW.

I agree with this - bourgeois liberal revolutions happened when the bourgeois class became more competent and better organised than the landowning classes.

The economy becoming based more on asset prices than wages could have a similar result in causing the skilled classes to become proletarianised and the property classes to become deskilled. I posted an article some years ago from Financial Times which I can't find now unfortunately, but it was some wallowing about how the poor rich people don't feel motivated to get jobs as they aren't rewarding enough compared to returns on property investments, shares and so on. Anecdotally I know a few rich people like this who pretend to run businesses but actually live off investments and are pretty useless people in most ways.

On the other end of the spectrum, you are starting to see lawyers, doctors and engineers who are starting to struggle to get on the property market if they live in somewhere like London, and so long as political parties prioritise keeping house prices rising at all costs, this phenomenon is only going to become widespread.

If things don't change with regards to assets being more important than wages, then in a few decades you could end up with a useless and incompetent propertied class who have merely inherited wealth and haven't had to work for it, and a highly skilled and well educated proletariat who are locked into renting.

Tbh this is already how things look to some extent for millennials and below and is only going to become more pronounced as time goes by if assets continue to inflate relative to wages. This will probably end in revolution, but it is more likely to be organised, not by people at the very bottom as you say, but by professionals who are well paid but locked out of the property market.

Of course it is desirable to get onto the property market, but those who get onto the property ladder are essentially the middle class which plays the function of a stable source of support for the system as a whole. However, so long as asset prices continue to inflate, each successive generation will become more proletarian than the last. A revolution will start when a tipping point is reached and home owners become outnumbered by renters, and highly skilled jobs are no longer sufficent to get on the property ladder even in less expensive cities like Newcastle or Liverpool.

 

[Chilli.s]

Its not a ladder, unless you continue to maintain a mortgage and move to more expensive property. All of that adds costs, a concept that is not lost on the lenders and others that get a profit from it.


Thing is you gotta live somewhere, and whilst it is fun to move around it does cost. If kids are added to the equation then providing stability as well as all the other costs has to be considered. How long do people want to keep paying a loan for, age 70 and still paying? The nutty thing is that through luck and stupid property ladder inflation my house has increased in value some years by more than I earnt.

All working class worries really, house is still a hovel, but my hovel.

 

[ska invita]

. A revolution will start when a tipping point is reached and home owners become outnumbered by renters, and highly skilled jobs are no longer sufficent to get on the property ladder even in less expensive cities like Newcastle or Liverpool.

Hovering under 20 pc for a few years now

England: share of private rented households 2000-2023 | Statista

The proportion of households occupied by private renters in England from 2000 to 2023 generally increased during this period, from a share of ten percent of households in 2000 to a share of 20 percent of households as of 2017.

www.statista.com

Not sure if these stats include council houses? Or housing association?

 

[iona]

Not sure if these stats include council houses? Or housing association?

No, that's separate. That site you quoted puts social rents at around 17% of households currently (link at the bottom of the page)

 

[ska invita]

No, that's separate. That site you quoted puts social rents at around 17% of households currently (link at the bottom of the page)

Thanks.. posting in the sunshine, can barely read the screen!

Getting on for 40pc total then ... ?

 

[Yossarian]

A revolution will start when a tipping point is reached and home owners become outnumbered by renters, and highly skilled jobs are no longer sufficent to get on the property ladder even in less expensive cities like Newcastle or Liverpool.

The shift seems well underway, with home ownership having fallen from a peak nearly 20 years ago, according to this study. Things might start accelerating if there is a bigger move towards hedge funds, banks etc. buying large amounts of residential properties, as seen in the US - it's even harder to buy a property when you're competing against massive institutions that want to buy it and keep you renting instead of owning.

 

[ska invita]

The shift seems well underway, with home ownership having fallen from a peak nearly 20 years ago, according to this study. Things might start accelerating if there is a bigger move towards hedge funds, banks etc. buying large amounts of residential properties, as seen in the US - it's even harder to buy a property when you're competing against massive institutions that want to buy it and keep you renting instead of owning.

that a useful graph