On Classism

Dear Michelle,

One of the things that most upsets me is the way that people view and treat the poor. The situation has existed for as long as society has included enough opportunities for a significant gulf between the rich and the poor. Those who have little in the way of income and property are viewed as detestable by those who live lives of luxury. They are often regarded as savage, uncouth, and barbaric.

However, it is important to remember that they are still human. It is true that children learn what they live, and anyone who grew up in a poverty-stricken environment would turn out similarly. I once attended a seminar in which the speaker described the differences between lower-, middle-, and upper-class society. It wasn't something I'd thought of before, but there are certain things that you only learn to do by being part of a specific social class. For example, upper class people generally know how to manage servants, organise social functions like charity balls, and influence politicians. Middle class people are more likely to know how to balance a checkbook, function in parent-teacher associations, and plan errands around children's activities. Lower class people often gain the skills of finding free food, hiding from police, and navigating welfare bureaucracies.

The reason this is true is because people have no need (or no opportunity) to practise the skills of the other classes. In a nutshell, the reason that poor people act "uncivilised" is because it is necessary for their survival. I was once told that the reason that lower class citizens have such a pathological obsession with respect is because it's the one thing they have that they don't need to pay for. It doesn't matter what car you drive if your neighbours know not to mess with you.

The point is that while the behaviour of the poor people is sometimes unpleasant, it's no reason to discriminate against them, and I see this sort of bigotry often. It makes me sick, and I hope very much that you never succumb to the sort of elitist attitudes often held by the well-off.

On Conspicuous Consumption

Dear Michelle,

I'm sure you've noticed that many people insist on spending more money than they really need to. They are often buying totally unnecessary items, which may fall into one of several categories. There are some things that are purely decorative (knick-knacks, figurines, posters and other wall hangings), some that have a super-specialised function that can be performed by other items (salad-shooters, for example, which serve only to slice and shred vegetables, even though that can be done perfectly well by other more mundane tools), some that are nonessential but people think are required (such as televisions, mobile phones, video game consoles, and home stereo equipment), and some that are simply frivolous and pointless (a lot of clothing falls into this category).

This rampant consumerism is called "conspicuous consumption." It is, in essence, spending money simply to show off that you have money to spend. Simply put, it's the wealthy rubbing their wealth in the noses of the less well-off. "I have so much money that I can afford to throw it away on unnecessary stuff like huge cars that get 2 miles per gallon or less!" is the message they're trying to convey.

Of course, money isn't the only thing that people spend in their quest for conspicuous consumption. They also waste time. The idea is that they're suggesting "I am so wealthy I can afford to stand around here accomplishing nothing of any use whatsoever." A perfect example of this is golf. Of all the sports that have ever been created, none has as ridiculously an unbalanced ratio of time spent doing nothing to time of activity.

The point in all this is that you will eventually find yourself in a situation where you are tempted to buy something that you really and truly don't need, just because you can and it passingly catches your fancy. I would recommend that you analyse anything you want to do or to buy, and decide if you really need it. For that matter, when you get the urge to throw something away, you should contemplate whether this urge is rooted in the item's having outlived its usefulness, or if it's simply no longer "in style." You can save a lot of money this way, and that money can be spent on more reasonable pursuits, such as a vacation or a hobby about which you are truly serious. And if nothing else, you can always donate the extra money to charity, so that people who can't even afford food will benefit from those people who really do have more money than they need.

On Money

Dear Michelle,

One day, you will be faced with the paradox of money. On the face of it, money does not seem to be a very complex subject; people go to work, for which they are paid money, which they then spend on items that the need, such as food and shelter, or on things they want, such as video games and books.

But it is not as simple as that. People have a tendency to define social status by income. Even in early school years, you will find that people begin sorting themselves into classes based on buying power. Those who are wealthy will not associate with those who are poor. As you reach adulthood, it will become more pronounced. People go on to define themselves by their material possessions. The man with several large houses, a fleet of cars, a yacht, a private jet, and a staff of servants are seen as being more worthwhile than the poor family who can barely afford a single-room apartment.

Once upon a time, this was important for human survival. The wealthy villager had the responsibility of caring for the entire tribe, and helped to maintain the social order that was necessary to allow everyone to work together. This is no longer the case, but we still possess the instincts that have been bred into us after millenia of operating in this manner.

We are instinctively drawn to those who have more power, and money equals power. It doesn't make sense; the clerk at a store gets paid the same no matter whether he's serving Donald Trump or Joe the Plumber, but he's more likely to be polite to Donald than to Joe. He gets nothing out of his extra effort, yet he does it anyway.

What this means is that you will have to make a choice. As you grow to adulthood, you will need to select a career. Some people choose a career that they enjoy. Others pursue employment that they know they can do, even if they don't like it or won't make a lot of money. Still others seek work that will make them a lot of money, even if it's not something they enjoy doing.

You have to choose carefully. Do you want to do something you'll enjoy, or something that pays well? The two seldom overlap. It is possible to do both; I once wanted to be a surgeon, but as I grew older, I realised that it would be very difficult to continue loving that job because so many others do it solely for the money. They drained my desire to help people, and caused me to change my career plans.

But there is a third option. Some people choose to forgo money entirely, and attempt to live alternative lifestyles. If this is what you want to do, I will of course support your decision, but you have to realise that it is not easy. We live in a world that is so overwhelmingly based on the flow of money that trying to do without it means that you will have to forgo many of the luxuries that are taken for granted by modern society: electricity, heated water, easy-to-prepare foods, and many other things.

It's not fair, and it's not right, but that's the way it is. Better that you learn this now, and be able to deal with it when you become an adult, than find out the hard way when it's too late, like I did.