PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: The Teixeira thesis
- To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: The Teixeira thesis
- From: "Devine, James" <jdevine@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 09:21:32 -0800
- Thread-index: AcQC1ceVMMhfrYT9R4aTPtohNegwvwAAFQIQ
- Thread-topic: [PEN-L] The Teixeira thesis
the politically correct definition of the "working class" is either (1) all those with paid jobs (including CEOs) or (2) those with relatively low incomes. Or course, many want to define "it" as vaguely as possible, because it plays well politically.
------------------------
Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Henwood [mailto:dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:18 AM
> To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PEN-L] The Teixeira thesis
>
>
> Max B. Sawicky wrote:
>
> >In a meeting at EPI I said you could define
> >the working class as those who must work to finance a standard
> >of living, and somebody said that was a marxist definition.
>
> What's the acceptable definition of the working class? People who
> bowl non-ironically?
>
> Doug
>
- Thread context:
- Re: The Teixeira thesis, (continued)
- Re: The Teixeira thesis,
Devine, James Fri 05 Mar 2004, 17:14 GMT
- Re: The Teixeira thesis,
Devine, James Fri 05 Mar 2004, 17:22 GMT
- Re: The Teixeira thesis,
Devine, James Fri 05 Mar 2004, 20:51 GMT
- Re: The Teixeira thesis,
Michael Hoover Fri 05 Mar 2004, 21:36 GMT
- Re: The Teixeira thesis,
Michael Hoover Fri 05 Mar 2004, 21:45 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]