Posted by Jay Livingston
Chris Christie’s net worth (at least $4 million) is 50 times that of the average American. His household income of $700,000 (his wife works in the financial sector) is 13 times the national median. But he doesn’t think he’s rich.
“I don't consider myself a wealthy man. . . . and I don't think most people think of me that way.” That’s what he told the Manchester Union-Leader on Monday when he was in New Hampshire running for president.
Of course, being out of touch with reality doesn’t automatically disqualify a politician from the Republican nomination, even at the presidential level, though misreading the perceptions of “most people” may be a liability.
But I think I know what Christie meant. He uses the term “wealth,” but what he probably has in mind is class. He says, “Listen, wealth is defined in a whole bunch of different ways . . . ” No, Chris. Wealth is measured one way – dollars. It’s social class that is defined in a whole bunch of different ways.
One of those ways, is self-perception.
“If you were asked to use one of four names for your social class, which would you say you belong in: the lower class, the working class, the middle class, or the upper class?”That question has been part of the General Social Survey since the start in 1972. It’s called “subjective social class.” It stands apart from any objective measures like income or education. If an impoverished person who never got beyond fifth grade says that he’s upper class, that’s what he is, at least on this variable. But he probably wouldn’t say that he’s upper class.
Neither would Chris Christie. But why not?
My guess is that he thinks of himself as “upper middle class,” and since that’s not one of the GSS choices, Christie would say “middle class.” (Or he’d tell the GSS interviewer where he could stick his lousy survey. The governor prides himself on his blunt and insulting responses to ordinary people who disagree with him.)
I also suspect that Christie is thinking of social class not so much as a matter of money as of values and lifestyle – one of that bunch of ways to define class. To be middle class is to be one of those solid Americans – the people who, in Bill Clinton’s phrase, go to work and pay the bills and raise the kids. Christie can see himself as one of those people. Here’s a fuller version of the quote I excerpted above.
Listen, wealth is defined in a whole bunch of different ways and in the end Mary Pat and I have worked really hard, we have done well over the course of our lives, but, you know, we have four children to raise and a lot of things to do.” |
He and his wife go to work; if they didn’t, their income would drop considerably. They raise the kids, probably in conventional ways rather than sloughing that job off on nannies and boarding schools as upper-class parents might do. And they pay the bills. Maybe they even feel a slight pinch from those bills. The $100,000 they’re shelling out for two kids in private universities may be a quarter of their disposable income, maybe more. They are living their lives by the standards of “middle-class morality.” Their tastes too are probably in line with those of mainstream America. As with income, the difference between the Christies and the average American is one of degree rather than kind. They prefer the same things; they just have a pricier version. Seats at a football game, albeit in the skyboxes, but still drinking a Coors Light. It’s hard to picture the governor demanding a glass of Haut Brion after a day of skiing on the slopes at Gstaad, chatting with (God forbid) Euorpeans.
Most sociological definitions of social class do not include values and lifestyle, relying on more easily measured variables like income, education, and occupation. But for many people, including the governor, morality and consumer preference may weigh heavily in perceptions and self-perceptions of social class.
---------------------------
* An ealier post on relative deparivation among the rich is here.
2 comments:
I've had this discussion with my wife before. I came from a working class background myself, and my wife's family was definitely a bit higher on the social class ladder. She's often compared herself to the people she grew up around, and as we live near a wealthier area of Dallas, she also seems to compare us to others that live around here. It skews her perception, and she has often lamented that other people seem to have it easier than us. I've pointed out that we're doing better than most people, and her reference points are off kilter. Full disclosure, our annual income 2 of the last 3 years has been around $85,000, which puts us neatly within the top 20% in Dallas county, and also within that percentile nationally (at least based on last census data I checked out). So, you're right. It's likely there's a lot of skewing from bad reference cases that Christie is using here.
I think there are often individuals who we might consider "status inconsistent" such that ,yes, by income definition, they are wealthy. This is easily empirically measured. Yet it is likely that the Governor might not live like others who occupy the same economic social class. Belonging to certain groups, i.e. country clubs, having overt status a symbols, and maintaining relationships with peers of the same group. Because of this inconsistency it might be likely that he might not view himself or his family as wealthy. Your comment about the GSS survey I think illustrates this as well.
Post a Comment