Those kinds of hard consumer goods are more easily financially attainable than a nice home in a good school district, the ability to pay for your kids’ college, a stock portfolio, a retirement fund etc. If you think you will never have access to those other things, why not spend your money on consumer bling? Why defer gratification for a better future that will never arrive? I think a lot of people reason this way. They never expect even middle-class security.
@NJSue - I can relate to this. My daughter rides horses (so right there you know that generally speaking we are dealing with first world problems here). Financially we are not in a position to fund an expensive elite competition level horse for her. Well if we decided to forego our retirement savings we could but that would be a poor decision and thankfully my husband keeps me in check on that front. But we are in a financial position to be able to fund some of the trappings of the competition world (show clothes, helmets, etc.) which, while still expensive, don’t come close to approaching the cost of buying or leasing and maintaining a horse. So without knowing more about our situation someone could look at us and assume we have the wealth to compete at higher levels than we actually do.
Silence and passivity are not behaviors that are rewarded in the classrooms of elite institutions. Professors expect students to talk, to be engaged, and to challenge. Well-prepared students bring these behaviors with them to college. They are also more likely to know that deadlines can be flexible and certain things can be negotiated with professors. The article pointed out that many low-income/SES school districts feature heavy amounts of rote learning and authoritarian discipline. If that’s what one thinks school is, then Brown or similar will be a huge shock to the system.
NJSue is correct.
Social class in America and social class in education was an obsession of mine. I agree with ucbalumnus’s posts. I can see he has studied these issues.
I took a class on social class and its effect on education when I was in my 40’s. The professor’s husband went to Phillips Exeter. She was talking to the class. I guess she knew I lived in Tiburon Ca. A lot of wealthy people live there. The town has a great public education system. K to 8th grade. My kids went to the public schools in Tiburon. The professor said, “More than half the kids in Tiburon go to private schools”.
I said in front of the whole class, “You are wrong. I live in Tiburon. You are wrong. The public schools are great. You are wrong.” The professor smiled. I went home and I decided to investigate. There must be some reason the professor said what she said. I had some data. I coached kids. I had lists. I had school directories. Turned out she was correct.
I don’t know if I apologized in front of the whole class. I doubt it. 
I did go up to her and I told her she was right.
The professor said to me, “The upper class wants to associate with the upper class. The upper class does not want to associate with the upper middle class”.
I smiled. I like that.
Social class is a very big deal in the United States whether people like to acknowledge it or not.
It’s true. I would rather be a poor person in Marin County than a poor person in Richmond CA. However, a poor person in Marin County is not having anything close to the life a wealthy person is having in Marin County. Opportunities are not the same. Experiences are not the same. Not even close.
Can this thread PLEASE not turn into a thinly veiled attack against so-called, virtually non-existent welfare queens?
Nice clothes can be found for CHEAP at resale stores (especially in better off areas), smart phones can be found for very cheap (especially refurbished phones) and for some, it’s necessary for a job (raises hand), fake gems are cheap and basically indistinguishable from real stones and can make cheap jewelry look expensive, and on and on.
Poor people know how to scrimp and make do with what they have… and that includes getting “nice” things on the cheap. Middle and upper income people can do this too but do so less often because they don’t need to.
Carry on.
Really? There are two obvious places in Marin County with lots of poor people. The larger one is a state prison.
NJSue, I like the point you make about well off kids knowing they can negotiate deadlines aren’t afraid to advocate for themselves or ask for special favors. Less well off kids are more likely to think rules are rules and not try.
There’s also the factor that some had firsthand experiences where they found deadline extensions and other special favors were only given to those who were from the higher SES or favored groups(i.e. Children of local “pillars of the community”) and not only denied to them outright, but also harshly rebuked or sometimes even punished by TPTB for even asking.
Some may have also been raised in sub-cultures which considers asking for special favors or deadline extensions to be severely morally compromising as they consider it a form of “cheating”. In short, the “rules are rules” mentality on steroids.
@ucbalumnus My husband tried EVERYTHING he could to get my son to apply to Havard bc he knew about this… 
no luck…my son only had eyes for Penn (Wharton) …
Harvard is the only one though that gave us financial aid… and we ran every net price calc!
We actually heard that Harvard was considering FREE TUITION bc their endowment is so high…
And @Lizardly from our experience more low income students break the rules than well off kids… the well off students are afraid to “ruin” their college acceptances by breaking any rules… I have found many low income students are better advocates for themselves bc they have had to do all of the work due to parents busy/not speaking English so well… things like that… I think there may be other factors at play here
Re: “rules are rules” #47
Perhaps it may also be that higher SES people are more likely to be able to hire lawyers and/or leverage connections to bend the rules than lower SES people. Or the rules are written (intentionally or not) in ways that are easier for higher SES people to fulfill. E.g. holding an approved government issued photo ID is somewhat less common among poor people than non-poor people, and acquiring such an ID may not be very convenient, particularly if someone has to take time off work to get to some place, etc., so requiring the presentation of an approved government issued photo ID for something may make accessing whatever that is more difficult for poor people than non-poor people.
NJSue must have walked into my college campus recently 
Herein lies the paradox and my ambivalence - I see shiny Macs, Iphones, MK bags, etc. But students put off buying textbooks. I get at least a few emails each semester about not being able to afford a textbook - at the end of the message , it says “Sent from an Iphone”. Sometimes, all my empathy just goes out the window when I see that sort of stuff.
Older model iphones are nearly free.
@mathprof63 one of my friends changed her email signature to say “Sent from an iPhone” before she got an iPhone as a joke.
Not to mention the low-income kid might have gotten it free by winning it as a prize in some contest or a gift from a generous non-family benefactor.
Not necessarily from spending scarce cash on it.
Also, if one is resourceful in repairing/troubleshooting electronics, that’s another way to get flashy electronics for extremely nominal prices or even free. On this, I speak from firsthand experience.
You can easily be from Marin County and not have grown up rich. I did just that. I lived in Novato for 3 years when my dad was a sergeant in the Air Force stationed at Hamilton AFB. We lived in a suburban housing tract that was owned by the Air Force. No one who lived anywhere near us was rich.
Romani’s concern noted, the acquisitiveness rampant in American society has not skipped the low-income.
However, it is difficult to believe the priority for some of today’s ubiquitous consumer goods over other items which do not publicize that one is “on trend,” which takes place not only among the poor, but everyone else for that matter.
What I have seen is the disease of acquisitiveness. It is not having, but continually upgrading, continually acquiring, and then not being able to buy the textbook, or health insurance, etc.
I do like @cobrat’s contribution about winning some common, moderately expensive item . I have seen that happen.
As to whether lower socioeconomic kids advocate for themselves in the classroom, by asking for extensions, or a tweak in some rule, that exchange can often be fraught with all that lies in the chasm between the professor/administrator and the student.
Some kids from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may be perceived to be too aggressive, or, alternately, too distant and seemingly non-plussed, with the net result being the request is not granted. After one or two bites at the apple, it can sting.
“Some may have also been raised in sub-cultures which considers asking for special favors or deadline extensions to be severely morally compromising as they consider it a form of “cheating”. In short, the “rules are rules” mentality on steroids.”
What specific subcultures are you referring to? (A one sentence answer is just fine)
I bought some clothing for my kid (who receives financial aid) today. A Columbia fleece jacket and vest and a Patagonia jacket. Probably $300+ worth of gear, with labels anyone can see.
I got it at a thrift shop that was having a “fill a bag for $5” sale to clear out their winter stuff to make room for summer stuff.
It’s dangerous to make assumptions.
Walking through Chinatown the other day in NYC plenty of people asked me quietly if I wanted to buy a designer bag. Likely cheap and likely not real, but may well say MK or other designer. A cell phone is not a luxury good these days and most college students need a laptop. Perhaps every relative gave the kid some cash for college and he got a laptop. Maybe the college gives laptops to,poor kids. There are some who game the system, but the kids talked about on the article have very limited means and are not buying expensive toys instead of books.
It is a pretty broad statement to say that low income kids break the rules more often. What is the basis for that statement? What kind of rules?
As said above, high SES kids typically have more adults they can count on for help than poor kids.
There has been a big effort to promote community colleges over the last few years. But why should an exceptionally bright kid be forced to go that route if they have the ability to attend an elite college?