California still exists, even in SoCal

[FresnoFacts]

Originally Posted by user_id

And...why are you talking about work? I can easily share the ideas, its the citations that I can't quickly provide. Are you suggesting that one shouldn't talk about anything unless they have a list of sources on hand?

Did you forget you originally asked me for sources of something I said? You questioned something I said and challenged me to provide a source. So I took the time and found you several public ones.

So now you are saying that I need citations and you don't. That's one sided.

Originally Posted by user_id

No, I'm not forgetting that, I entirely disagree with that. People's leisure activities are shaped by their socioeconomic and cultural background, different leisure activities signal different things within their social groups.

You mean like surfing?

It has no functional use, people don't commute to work that way. So I guess it is simply for people who need the "look at me I'm cool" factor.

Sounds like an ego or status symbol thing among a social group to me.

Originally Posted by user_id

You seem to think I'm suggesting that some activities are strictly upper-class while others are strictly working-class, but that isn't what I"m saying. Its all statistics, the more details you know about the person the more accurately you can pinpoint their social-class.

I don't think you are suggesting all activities are strictly one class or another, but you have been saying that horse ownership reflects only a certain social class or level of wealth.

And absolutely the more details are important to determine social class. You said your family had a $80K income. You don't say where that was but that is still above the median income in this state.

Based on that one data point of income someone could say your family was middle to upper middle class, not the working class tag you stated. To determine better means more data is needed like education levels, job types, etc.

But haven't you been trying to determine social class by one data point, horse ownership? Or OK maybe only two, plus location near Los Angeles? That is way too little info for the determination.

As you just said, the more details the more accurately you can pinpoint social class, and it really takes more than 1 or 2 data points to do that accurately.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by Dhult

But how many purchase that big flat screen to flaunt it to their neighbors? Could be that they find more enjoyment watching television on a larger screen. Who wouldn't?

I'd suggest most, of course today flat screens are common place. But why did people rush out to replace their old perfectly functioning TVs with flat screens? Perhaps, because having the old TV says to others that "I'm broke". What people enjoy is not independent of their social surroundings.

Anyhow, people make fun of my cell-phone all the time, why? Why does anybody care what cell phone I use, especially when it works perfectly fine? How long will I resist the social pressure?

Originally Posted by Dhult

In your example you state we don't need horses so it is a form of conspicuous consumption.

Its the costs in additional to the lack of function that makes it conspicuous consumption. Dogs in the past were conspicuous consumption and even today people buy special breeds as an conspicuous item (the more expensive and useless the dog is the better), but outside the expensive breeds dogs are much less expensive than horses and are within the means of all but the poor. You'll find this often, that is, things that use to function as symbols of wealth that have eroded over time as they become more accessible to the general public.

Originally Posted by Dhult

No, to you because one can afford a horse and do, they are flaunting their wealth. Couldn't have anything to with enjoyments, passion, quality of life or anything else in that realm.

It does have to do with enjoyment, passion, etc, but those things are all shaped by their social surroundings and status seeking. Everyone, except perhaps the mentally ill, seeks status in some way.

Originally Posted by Dhult

I'm sure all those little girls wanting ponies and all those little boys wanting to be cowboys had those desires to flaunt their wealth.

Children seek status just as well as adults, observe a classroom filled with kids and that becomes apparent rather quickly. You'll find a clear social hierarchy. I'm not sure about girls and ponies, but little boys wanting to be cowboys has everything to do with status. Cowboys are portrayed as ultra-masculine, tough, etc....exactly the sort of thing a little boy wants to be. Anyhow, status seeking is a general behavior, children don't do all the things adults do because they don't have the underlying conceptual understanding of matters. In fact this thread is appealing to this sort of imaginary, the tough cowboy. The OP just doesn't seem to realize that people in urbanized areas don't care much about it, riding a horse is more liking to get you called gay than associate you with being tough.

[nullgeo]

unbelievable

[user_id]

Originally Posted by FresnoFacts

Did you forget you originally asked me for sources of something I said?

Yes, you mentioned that "several studies" so I thought it was odd you didn't cite one. But, when did I suggest your request for a citation was unreasonable?

Originally Posted by FresnoFacts

You mean like surfing?
It has no functional use, people don't commute to work that way. So I guess it is simply for people who need the "look at me I'm cool" factor.
Sounds like an ego or status symbol thing among a social group to me.

Exactly like surfing, there is definitely a "cool" factor in surfing and performance on the waves is certainly used as a way to seek status in the subculture. Surfing isn't a symbol for wealth though, its basically free.

Originally Posted by FresnoFacts

but you have been saying that horse ownership reflects only a certain social class or level of wealth.

I said that horse ownership in urbanize areas is about displaying wealth and horse ownership is highly correlated to being upper-middle class to upper-class.

Originally Posted by FresnoFacts

Based on that one data point of income someone could say your family was middle to upper middle class, not the working class tag you stated. To determine better means more data is needed like education levels, job types, etc.

Right, because income is a very rough proxy for social class. But you seem to just be repeating something I already suggested, knowing more information will undoubtedly enable you to make a better judgment about someones social class. That doesn't mean that individual things aren't more correlated with one social class vs another though, if individual items weren't correlated in such a way knowing more things wouldn't help you pinpoint someone's social class.

[scottfreez]

Yeah but unless you're naturally gifted, before you become a "cool" surfer you go through an ardorous and indefinite period of being a "kook" which in most cases makes the "coolness" hard-earned and thus, genuine.

[NorCal Dude]

Originally Posted by scottfreez

Yeah but unless you're naturally gifted, before you become a "cool" surfer you go through an ardorous and indefinite period of being a "kook" which in most cases makes the "coolness" hard-earned and thus, genuine.

gotta earn your grommie stripes before playing with the big dogs