[Loughla]

I absolutely would call them the same. What is different in a caste system you are born into that provides privilege for some, but lack of resources to another and a class system that provides wealth and privilege for some, but lack of resources beginning at birth for others?

When education from an early age is funded via property taxes (as much of the US is), we are baking in the inequality. If you come from a wealthy neighborhood, your kids have access to resources. If you come from a poor area, your kids have no access to those resources.

If your parents are wealthy professionals, they can provide for you while you work unpaid internships or provide you with connections to college friends to start your career. If your parents are laborers or lower classes, they can't even take time off to come to your graduation. (I know that second one is a bit dramatic, but you get the idea).

In the US, much 'in-group' signaling is based around sports and hobbies that require both time and money. If you didn't play sports as a kid, you're questioned. If you don't have the 'cool clothes' or 'cool car' you're questioned. All of these are class related.

How is this different? Other than being 'formal', honestly, what is the difference between caste system and the very overt class system in the US? That's not a snide question, that's a real question. Where are the differences?

[mrep]

What people are in this 'in-group' you speak of because evidently I'm not in it because nobody questions me in a class sort of way about sports, hobbies, my plain t-shirts, shorts and sandals, my subaru car or anything of that sort. My internships admittedly weren't unpaid but that is generally for poorly paying careers anyways and I'm a highly paid software engineer nor did I get my job through connections of any sort, just went to your standard midwest public state school, applied online and even wore a hockey jersey to my interview.

I mean, I'm sure they are some people coasting through life on their parents money and connections for like the 0.1% but it definitely doesn't seem like there is an overt class system for the average person here to me.

[Loughla]

So what you're doing is using anecdotal data to draw conclusions.

Your experience sounds awesome! But to think that, because you did 'Thing A', means 'Thing B' doesn't exist is odd to me.

Overt class signaling from today, at my job:

Conversation between co-workers regarding weekend plans. Co-worker A is going to her weekend house. Co-worker B is going on a float trip on her pontoon boat. I am helping my grandpa re-do his front porch steps, because he can't afford to have a contractor build a ramp for his wheelchair.

Insert blank stare from co-workers A and B here.

It's not as if someone is saying, "What car do you drive, is it worth $55,000?" Instead, they question as to why you drive a 10 year old Kia instead of trading it in, YEARS ago for a new car. They then make you the butt of any jokes about being a cheapskate or penny pincher, when in fact, that's all you can afford because you're supporting an extended family still living in poverty.

It's not as if someone is judging you based on your clothes, by explicitly saying things like, "why don't you wear a tuxedo" or whatever. But it may be that you are passed over for promotions, because you can't afford the clothes to fit in at the golf club (let alone the fees for the membership), so you don't get to rub elbows with executives. That's if you even understand that's a thing.

[mensetmanusman]

One difference is that the class system is genetically diversified every 2 to 3 generations or so, because the people that inherit the wealth from their parents and grandparents inevitably end up wasting it away. The churn is real.