In practice, however, there are de facto social classes in the United States; this phenemonon is sometimes called " emergent elitism". Most likely, these social classes result from massive disparities in access to wealth, income, social access, and influence, as well as the tendency for people to associate with people of comparable social capital and financial means. Class is usually correlated strictly to ownership of productive, financial, cultural, social and human capital. For this reason, social class is often called socioeconomic status because of this inextricable connection. The connection is bidirectional, that is:

Capital begets class, because people with unusual amounts of capital are often sought by others and can make transactions on terms that are favorable to them. Unlike in some European societies where "upper class" is tied to nobility, capital can usually buy access to some, but not all, of the "upper class" elites. Generational social mobility is also pronounced; the children and grandchildren of "self-made" wealthy people may have additional social access that the initial generators of wealth did not, due to the stigma some associate with nouveau riche status.

Class begets capital, because individuals with social capital can often access other forms of capital more easily than others.

Class is reinforced by class traits, or characteristics of speech and behavior that signify a person's class. "Class ascendants", or social climbers, frequently attempt to emulate class traits of people in higher social classes. See snob for further discussion of this phenomenon.

Five-class model

Exact class lines are difficult, if not impossible, for outsiders to draw, and there is no agreement on precisely where they lie. Some argue that class is more of a continuum than a phenomenon of discrete categories. For many individuals, social class is more a matter of self-identification in terms of how the person views his or her relationship to society, particularly along the most fuzzy borders, like that between "middle class" and "upper-middle class". Sociological models depict society as having as few as two or as many as nine social classes, with the admission of "fuzziness" at the interfaces of classes. Most Americans, when asked, describe themselves as some variant of "middle class". Many sociologists, and popular sociology, use a five-class model, which includes:

• An upper class consisting of multiple elites. Membership in one elite may or may not connote membership in another. Extreme wealth, a notable name or accomplishment, or celebrity will usually bring an individual into this class, although most enjoy membership as a legacy of inherited wealth or familial prominence. The US elite are reputed to sustain themselves, and secure continued advantage, through social connections and networking rather than hard work. While demonstrated by some members of the American elite, hard work is clearly of secondary importance compared to the quality of the result, and largely elective.

On the job market, members can exploit their connections to secure coveted and prestigious occupational positions with salaries in excess of $200,000 per year, as well as perks generally considered excessive like golden parachutes and corporate-purchased housing. These positions are generally only available to people with social connections to existing members. If these occupational positions were available to middle class individuals, the compensation for them would roughly equal the compensation of traditionally upper-middle class professional jobs.

• A middle class divided into three subcategories:

• • A largely professional upper-middle class. Individuals within this class rarely have the elite social privileges lavished upon the upper-class, but normally have access to high-quality education. Individuals within this class typically make between $75,000 and $200,000 per year, though individuals with smaller incomes but valuable cultural capital (such as graduate and professional students) are sometimes included, as would be a well_to_do "stay_at_home" homemaker who declines occupational work by choice. Since class has as much to do with occupational prestige and lifestyle as with salary, highly_compensated blue collar workers are usually not considered "upper-middle class".

• • A "middle-middle" class that, some evidence indicates, is decreasing in number. Corporate downsizing and the loss of manufacturing jobs has eliminated many of the skilled unionized jobs that provide membership within this class. As a result, many individuals within this group have drifted either into more skilled work, in the professional sectors (upper-middle class) or have fallen downward into the service sectors (lower-middle class). The state of the economy at a given time depends which trend is more prevalent; during strong economies, laid-off people are more likely to be better- than worse-off in subsequent jobs. During weak economies, the opposite is true.

• • A lower-middle class, or "working poor". Thse individuals usually have very limited personal capital, and their occupational and educational skills are normally restricted to one type of work. Largely working in semi-skilled or unskilled service jobs, individuals within this social class often face varying hours, unpleasant occupational environments, and impersonal supervisors. Short of higher education, which is usually priced well beyond their means, they have almost no mobility. By the standards of poorer nations, these individuals might be considered materially privileged. Nonetheless, they are socially disadvantaged, marginalized members of American society.

• A lower class of often impoverished and desperate individuals. Crime and hunger are daily threats for them, and illiteracy, homelessness (most U.S. job applications require that the applicant provide a home address) and, in some cases, previous criminal records ensure that their chances of securing work remain low.

Class delineations are sometimes considered artificial—formal class membership does not exist, and people rarely think of themselves, in any meaningful way, as members of a specific class. Furthermore, a person's social class may change throughout his or her life. Social classes, therefore, are more often used in aggregate sociological depictions than they are applied to individual people. While people may maintain ties to specific families, social or ethnic groups, and institutions, it is rare for a person to have meaningful ties to a social class.

Middle class divisions

Some dispute the divisions within the middle class as specifically class distinctions so much as lifestyle disparaties resultant from the large range of income levels classified as "middle class". It's true that "upper-middle" and "lower-middle" class individuals live dramatically different economic lives, but class requires a specific type of sociological barrier. Class barriers are usually considered almost impossible to cross, except by attaining the favor of people within higher classes, or losing the favor of those within one's social class. The barrier between the lower and lower-middle classes, as well as that between the upper-middle and upper classes, is generally considered more rigid than any barrier separating the middle classes.

Class in terms of relation to the labor market

The lower class is often considered under_invested; they have human potential, but little personal capital. Poor family and educational environments exacerbate these problems, placing these individuals at emotional and academic disadvantages from which some never recover. These individuals frequently work in part_time or secondary labor, and face extreme difficulty in attaining the sort of stable, well_paying job that is necessary for a functioning economic life.

The middle classes are sometimes considered to be under_valued, since their compensation is usually tied to market value of their labor. This market value is determined by Bertrand competition among workers more often than the productive value of their labor (which is a rarely-met upper bound of compensation). If a strictly profit-maximizing firm can hire these people for compensation below their productive value, it will.

Self-employed or otherwise independent middle-class individuals— such as small business owners and independent consultants — are not under-valued in this traditional sense. However, frequently they lack the social privileges (such as publicity, access to influential people) available to wealthier competitors— upper-class individuals and large firms. These access privileges are not distributed according to merit; if it were, middle-class individuals would definitely have more of them. It is in this way that this group of people is often considered under-valued.

Most individuals within the upper classes are over-valued, at least in strict mathematical terms when one compares their productive worth to their compensation. Often by more than an order of magnitude their salaries and compensation exceed what would be the market_value of their work were their privileged occupational positions opened to middle_class individuals, many of whom, by all accounts, would be competent to manage them. Through social connections and "sweetheart" deals these individuals often secure positions of considerable compensation and influence that are rarely open to the general public, and benefit from salaries that some consider excessive. Socially, they may have public access comparable to that of celebrities.

Class and political leaning

The traditional assumption of political theorists has been that upper_class individuals will tend to be more conservative while lower-class individuals are more liberal. In the early 21st century, there is evidence that this correlation has reversed: upper-class individuals may be more likely to be liberal or leftist in their politics. There are possible several reasons for this reversal:

• Wealthier people may be more cosmopolitan, and therefore exposed to more liberal, urban environments.
• Wealthier people tend to be more able to afford formal education, which correlates with liberal-to-left politics.
• Upper-middle class people have developed leftist tendencies out of a fear of "middle-class squeeze".

Middle-class squeeze

A prevalent issue in contemporary America is the "middle-class squeeze". While the salary of the median American has increased during the 2000s, healthcare and housing costs have, by all measures, outpaced these salary increases. Low inflation as defined by the consumer price index has been offset by cultural inflation resulting from recent growth in communications technology. For example, Internet access, which few people had in 1983, now has the status of a virtual necessity for middle-class life. The same can be said of education over the past century. In terms of class-access, most academic degrees are considered to have devalued by about four years since the mid_20th century; this makes education, for the purpose of maintaining or acquiring social class, even more expensive.

This means that real wages and salaries have declined for the median American. Add to that unemployment, discouragement, and underemployment, and one has a phenomenon commonly known as "middle-class squeeze". Middle-class squeeze was a divisive and key issue during the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign — Kerry alleged that President Bush's social and economic policies were contributing to middle_class squeeze.

Some political theorists believe that "middle-class squeeze" represents a societal crisis. Correlating socioeconomic status with the political spectrum, they equate middle_class social status with political moderation. This correlation has a valid logical basis— middle_class individuals have some capital and, thus, stake in a stable society, but also have aspirations that would prevent them from being resistant to change. According to this theory, the disappearance of a middle class would lead to a "collapse of the center" that would result in societal schism, class warfare, or even violent revolution.

Furthermore, many middle-class people in the United States have high aspirations with regard to education, personal growth, financial success and accomplishment. (See: American dream.) These individuals are also, traditionally, the initators and leaders of rebellions. Some theorists believe that widespread frustration of middle-class ambitions may lead to massive societal upheaval in the United States, though the probability of a violent revolution is generally considered low. More likely scenarios involve a conflict wherein educated middle-class individuals, as well as wealthy leftists, infiltrate government and the NGO sector, then enact policies that place quality of life, equality, sustainability, and human and civil rights at higher priorities than Canada and the European Union nations.

Class ascendancy

Class ascendancy, an aspect of the American dream, is a central theme in American literature and culture. Because of its complete absence of officialized class distinctions, most Americans believe that anyone can reach the upper echelons of society. A large proportion of Americans expect to be wealthy in the future; if, however, American society maintains its current shape, mathematical fact has it that a vast majority of them will be disappointed.

American desires for class ascendancy reflect aspirations exactly opposite to the purported reality of middle_class squeeze. This is another reason why some political and social theorists predict massive societal upheaval in the 2000s or 2010s. In what some consider paradoxical, though, the political culture of the United States remains predominantly conservative— despite Democratic hopes for high liberal voter turnout, President Bush was re-elected by a decisive margin.

Fussell's system

Paul Fussell lists nine classes in America:

• Invisible Top: the super-rich, heirs to huge fortunes

• Upper Class: rich celebrities and people who can afford servants

• Upper-Middle Class: self-made well-educated professionals

• Middle Class: office workers

• High Prole: skilled blue-collar workers, generally belonging to a union

• Mid Prole: workers in factories and the service industry

• Low Prole: migrant farm-workers and casual laborers

• Destitute: the homeless

• Invisible Bottom: those incarcerated in prisons and institutions

For Fussell, class is more about culture and lifestyle than income bracket. For instance, people in his "High Prole" class may sometimes make more money than others in his "Middle Class".

References

• Paul Fussell, Class: A Guide through the American Status System, ISBN 0671792253, ISBN 0671449915