So it really still is based on 'status' and 'old money?'


>Its not simple.
>
>upper class people would tend to be well off because of family money (ie old money) but they could fall on hard times.
>
>working class people could make a fortune and become richer than many upper classes but they still wouldn't be upper or middle class. But most working class people would be less well off.
>
>to really change class would take a few generations. So you'd need to not work and maybe be living off grandpas or great grandpas money
>
>>But your classes don't have anything (or are not primarily) to do with income levels or net worth, correct?
>>
>>
>>
>>>Upper
>>>Upper middle
>>>middle
>>>Lower middle
>>>Working
>>>
>>>with little aspiring layers between each.
>>>
>>>Class reared its head again with the split between prince william and kate middleton which some commentators put down to her family being the wrong class.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hmmmm, is there a 'known' class hierarchy? What is each class? I thought there were really only two in England:
>>>>
>>>>those with (upper)
>>>>those without (lower)
>>>>
>>>>or in other words:
>>>>
>>>>born with
>>>>born without
>>>>
>>>>:o)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You'd have to work out your class and you'd get a huge wave of Polish migrant workers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I certainly wouldn't travel to England anytime soon (until the dollar goes up) :o) Just considering, if Britain were to reclaim the U.S., what all would really change here in the U.S.?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>With 2 dollars plus to the pound I may just come over and buy the whole lot on my credit card.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Well, we are still expecting you all to try to reclaim America and we have to be prepared! :o)
>>>>>>>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/29/AR2005122901412.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/from/ET/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Since he was never prosecuted for any crime, he was able to purchase the weapons. However, there is ample evidence that he was mentally ill... This article doesn't mention his English teacher contacting the police earlier due to disturbing writings (that was on morning news)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As you seem very reluctant to ban guns in the US I would have thought additional tax on them could be used to pay for additional checking of the buyer and of their justification for buying a gun.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Nick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Justification? I thought all the buyer needed in the U.S. was to show a lack of any criminal record. Does he also have to show some sort of justification?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes thats right. But some investigation of what the gun is for would be a good idea plus evidence of training in how to use it. Its an offense to use a car without a license proving you have been trained how to use it, the same should be true of guns.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Personally, I feel that is reasonable, and I would comply. However, I have noticed a trend that most hunters/gun enthusiasts seem to be Republican and are against more regulations and government interference in general.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Yes the training could also incorporate some element of checking you aren't a complete nutter. It wouldn't be foolproof but it would probably have caught this guy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Now when you talk about that, you are approaching a slippery slope. What is definition of a complete nutter? If I took depression medicine 5 years ago in college, should I be qualified to buy a firearm today?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Well thats always the problem with a system . Where do you draw the line. At the moment you have no line so any madman provided he has id can buy a lethal weapon. So if you took depression medication 5 years ago it should still be possible to decide if you are competent now to own a gun.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>So we implement the system with reasonable standards, and something else bad happens. The standards become more and more unreasonable.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Maybe the right to bear arms as its is enforced now isn't compatible with the sort of society we have now. A much more crowded stressed way of life for many of us. It seems odd not to move the goalposts a little when everything else had moved over the last 100 years .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The right to bear arms was written into the constitution so the yanks could shoot any of us marauding limeys (Minutemen) as I understand it (in defence of the realm) - not to blast deer, cops, burglars and college students.