Possessions as Social Capital

[pcooley]

On another thread I've started, the conversation has moved on to discussing why people, particularly people with little money, spend money on what seems to be status items. Steve mentioned an article in which an interviewee at a job interview was looked down upon because she had a tank top on under her shirt instead of a silk shell. Steve then goes on to say

If I were to interview for another tech job and pulled out an old beat-up flip phone to retrieve a phone number, I would fail to meet the expectations of those interviewing me. I may not need a smartphone (or even want one) but sometimes the appearance it provides offers much more than the cost. And, courtesy of our consumerist society, even pulling out a smartphone is subject to some judgement ("Heh. Prepaid cheap Android phone." "What is that? It has a physical keyboard!").

I know some of what I've written here appears to contradict what I wrote earlier. It's not a simple thing. And we all get to make it up as we go along.

That made me think about the complexity of, well, everything - money, simple living, education, race and social status. My initial response was, "I can't imagine being judged for having an old flip phone, even if I were being interviewed for a programming job." That goes for a lot of things - we lived, by choice, without a car for eight years, and I still want to get back to living without a car. I arrived at the interview for my current job by bicycle, and I had no concerns that I might not get the job because I did not own a car. But when I've spoken to other people wondering why poor people that live in the city still own cars when it isn't strictly necessary, I've been told that they have to have a car if they want to be employed, and some people opt to live in their car rather than rent an apartment because the car is such a necessity for work.

Is it only when you have enough money to own a car that you can NOT own a car with confidence?

I also wonder the degree to which education plays a role. (My wife and I both have Master's degrees. Neither of us has seen a reason to go further on borrowed money. I would like to get my Ph.D., but since my academic "field" is roughly classic Chinese Buddhist poetry, I don't see it leading anywhere.) When my wife was pregnant with our second child, we were reading a bit about how healthy bare feet are, and she convinced her boss to let her be barefoot at work. Is it education that would allow my wife to get away with being bare-footed in a public work space, whereas it would be seen as a sign of poverty in a person who didn't graduate from high school? (And then there's Carrie from "Sex and the City" with her Manolo Blahniks. That's like a side of culture that seems utterly foreign).

And then, how much is just geography? If, instead of living in funky Santa Fe, I lived in the D.C. area, would I be more self conscious of my flip phone? I find that in Santa Fe, I'm only slightly out of sync with the culture, and in a way that people admire. I'm acquainted with the mayor and with some of the city councilors from my work on bicycle advocacy, and not in the way of "Oh my god, here's this guy at the microphone in the city council meeting again," but in a convivial, I'm glad you're part of the community way. I feel like I belong to the community, and I have a positive impact on the lives of the people that live in the community. To a large extent, I think that's because I am in just the right place for me and my predispositions.

I think all the issues go much, much deeper. In spite of my desire for simplicity, there are things I possess that, while perhaps not having mainstream cachet, are somehow important to how I see myself. I argue for them on the basis of quality and durability, but I think they might serve the same purpose as Carrie's shoes. I ride a custom made touring bicycle. I bought it because I couldn't find exactly what I wanted in local bike shops at the time I was looking for a bike, (1999ish. The type of bike I bought at the time has come somewhat back in style). However, from a strictly financial standpoint, a $200 bicycle would have been just as functional as my $4000 one. I wanted something specific to reflect what I was drawn to in the books I was reading. It wasn't to belong to a particular group, or even to impress any particular set of people, (and I'm actually a little embarrassed when someone recognizes the brand and wants to talk about my bicycle), but there was something I wanted to communicate to myself. I also like waxed cotton panniers, wool jackets, very specific vintage backpacking equipment, and so on. I have no idea how these particular items, or this particular style, became lodged in my subconscious, but there it is.

When you have enough money, even if it is just a little money, to have a particular style, maybe it doesn't matter so much what the style is. Maybe my flip phone doesn't project to people, "there's a guy who doesn't have enough money to buy a smartphone" but "there's a guy who sees himself as a flip phone user, (or a bicyclist, or a public transportation user). That's cool."

I should add, in parting, that I of course don't disregard money, however much I want to. I'm always struggling with the budget and family dynamics. I want to get this damn mortgage paid off, and I'm close, but because we don't have an astronomical income, I think I'm going to have to delay when I wanted to have it paid by because family matters keep coming up. (Activities, activity fees, blah, blah, blah). I'd like a tiny house in a pine tree grove with a nicely waxed wooden floor and beautiful windows next to a bicycle path that would take me into the heart of a vibrant and pedestrian oriented city. There are lots of things I want, but I want them because I have a mistaken image in my mind that they would help lead me to a sense of clarity, focus, and beauty. Maybe I see my inner state as my real social capital. Men like Gandhi impress me. Donald Trump, no so much. That clarity of purpose and intensity of life in people like Gandhi or Thich Nhat Hanh is what I've spent my life pursuing, and I see the preoccupation with and purchasing of various things as a sort of moral failure. (Maybe that's my fundamentalist childhood rearing its head, though my family had no problem with recreational shopping).

Anyway - I didn't mean to ramble on so long - what's your take on the whole complicated issue?

[ApatheticNoMore]

If I were to interview for another tech job and pulled out an old beat-up flip phone to retrieve a phone number, I would fail to meet the expectations of those interviewing me. I may not need a smartphone (or even want one) but sometimes the appearance it provides offers much more than the cost.

I'd keep my phone off my person then . Buying that smartphone is going to keep you locked in aweful tech jobs all your life (dark satanic cubicles, the prison of the soul) spending nearly every penny you make. And who doesn't hope for more than that horrid fate even if it's all they may ever get? Now you may say that smart phones alone will not cost that much on a middle class salary. And that's right they won't! But it depends on what other habits one has. And if you are content to spend all your money I'm tempted to say "keeping up appearances" but Misses Bucket comes to mind and on nothing else that may actually have more value for your life (for your real values system, not appearances - maybe it's organic food, maybe it's education to do something other than tech jobs - it's up to you) then ok ..... And if the only reason you own a smartphone is purely for job and job seeking purposes (though they of course won't pay for it) - at a certain point your on a very sad treadmill indeed, spend all your time making money, AND THEN also spend all your money on job related things!!!

Is it only when you have enough money to own a car that you can NOT own a car with confidence?

well yes I think lower paying jobs are more likely to ask if you have a car and care about the answer. Now a car is still awefully convenient in white collar jobs (as it's the fastest means between two points) but the boss doesn't care how you get there, just get there, that much is taken for granted in a higher paying job.

I also wonder the degree to which education plays a role. (My wife and I both have Master's degrees. Neither of us has seen a reason to go further on borrowed money. I would like to get my Ph.D., but since my academic "field" is roughly classic Chinese Buddhist poetry, I don't see it leading anywhere.) When my wife was pregnant with our second child, we were reading a bit about how healthy bare feet are, and she convinced her boss to let her be barefoot at work. Is it education that would allow my wife to get away with being bare-footed in a public work space, whereas it would be seen as a sign of poverty in a person who didn't graduate from high school?

to me it's obviously so. But it's not just about being seen as a form of poverty. And I'm someone who has gotten in trouble several times at work for walking around without shoes (they claim it's a safety issue) - and at more than one job! But back to the question, what you can get away with at a job is quite obviously a sign of bargaining power to me and bargaining power is not very high for low wage jobs. That's why I take it for granted many low wage jobs are treated badly.

I think all the issues go much, much deeper. In spite of my desire for simplicity, there are things I possess that, while perhaps not having mainstream cachet, are somehow important to how I see myself. I argue for them on the basis of quality and durability, but I think they might serve the same purpose as Carrie's shoes.

Well I like nice things too But I really could give very little what people think of me most of the time, it really really is just all about pleasing yours truly. If I buy something more expensive it's all about pleasing me! But I dress ok, that's one concession I make to the world. So the status aspect of things I really care very little about. But it doesn't mean I don't' see how much money buys from healthy foods, to safer neighborhoods (with better school districts if your care about that - being childfree can't say I do), to convenience (the convenience of owning a car is huge although I very much admire those who go without it but it's a sacrifice around here), to being able to maintain your car, to the security at night of knowing you have an emergency fund, to the better psychological health of not living on the edge, to being able to take a few days off when someone you love is dying and F whether they're paying you (heck F if they fire you over that - just too bad so sad), the whole 9 yards. I'm not naive about that stuff and pretending it doesn't matter. I mean it's a charming thought to pretend so but .... I've never been made of such charming thoughts. I have an idealist streak a mile wide, but it doesn't blind me to reality.

[catherine]

I think you ask a lot of very interesting questions! I've often thought about this.. One time I tried to imagine what outfit a person could wear that would make absolutely no statement about who they were or what they stood for. But I couldn't really think of any. Even if you just grab two random pieces of clothing from the Goodwill bin, that's a statement that you don't believe in outside appearances.

Being a marketing professional, I'm really fascinated by brands and branding. We have shortcuts in our brains so that we don't have to analyze every piece of data that goes in, and branding is one of those short-cuts. So you see IZOD you might think golfer, upper middle class, preppie. You see Prius, you think enviornmentalist, tree-hugger. You see Sears and you might think dowdy, old-fashioned, etc.

So when you walk into an interviewing situation, you are presenting your brand. Your prospective employer has probably already filed away all kinds of associations he/she has for people who wear Rolexes vs. Timex watches; people who don't have a smartphone; people who drive "beaters" vs. late-model luxury cars. It's unfortunate, but we all do it. What I love are people who manage to transcend these branding images and throw us all for a loop--like Erin Brockevich, who at first glance you might think is a cheap, dumb classless chick type if you saw her, but who actually is an impassioned paralegal and environmental activist.

People often assume I am a teacher based on first impression, and I've always wondered why. Another interesting thing is how people make associations and assumptions about your "tribe" based on how you look and act. So, my DH was going to a certain bar in Princeton often, and after a couple of months I decided to meet him there (I had never been there). I met some of his acquaintances, and word got back to me that his friends were surprised at what I look like--I'm kind of the Elizabeth Edwards look--vs. what I think they assumed would be more the Ann Romney look--more "done-up" to match DH's dapper, confident, expensively dressed persona.

There was a truly fascinating NYT Magazine feature story about status symbols years back--it was kind of a big infographic about the status symbols all different types of people have... it was really interesting. These status symbols are ingrained in our DNA, I believe. I would bet the existing indigenous tribes have them.

Finally, I read a really interesting book called The All-Consuming Century written by Gary Cross about the history of consumerism in America, and he explains just what you are talking about : possessions as social capital. If you can get it at your library I highly recommend it.

That's all I have time to write now.. but I may be back. This is a fascinating topic.

[pinkytoe]

As a young artistic person, I was advised to study advertising art vs fine arts. Even back then, I did not want to go that route after taking a marketing class and realizing how people are put into boxes and sold to. Decades later, I still search for "authenticity" in myself and others but alas I am weak and often fall for the tribal mentality. I DO drive an old beater by choice because it has saved me immeasurable amounts of money over the years. The other day, I had to drive my work group who are all much younger than I to a lunch meeting. Even though my old Volvo is clean and well-maintained, I felt the usual twinge of shame about driving a 20 yr old car. Guess what, they thought it was cool and I believe they respect me for being so obviously different. I do keep my Tracfone out of sight at work since I rarely use it anyway. The thing is I do know what is important to me and I find it often, but just not in the company of the general populace; I have to search hard for people who have my values. I think the majority of people find great comfort in lockstep preferences, ie fitting in. So yes, if you want to "belong" to a particular tribe, then your possessions definitely serve as social capital. Higher education is the one area I failed in as far as fitting into my demographic. Especially today, not having a college degree is seen as a major failure although there are many very successful people income-wise who did not finish college. I have a lot of street smarts though and I can live with that.

[Geila]

Hi,
I happened to pop in this morning and am so glad I did! I'm very taken with your comment about "clarity of purpose and intensity of life." I'm one of those people who is very intense and highly-motivated when I have a clear purpose or goal. But you hear SO much about the importance of BALANCE, so I've been doggedly pursuing balance. It's not working. I like intensity and focus.

Sorry, this has nothing to do with status symbols. They hold little appeal for me. (and this site makes typing really difficult! what's up with that?)

But I would love to have a conversation about finding that inner "balance," whether that means achieving external balance or embracing our internal makeup (which might not be "balanced/moderate" at all, and maybe doesn't have to be).

[iris lily]

O. M. G. Well.

I completely understand techies expecting techies to have something beyond a flip-phone. I would look at you cross-eyed if we hired anyone to do system, network, or programming work who relies on a flip phone. That said, I have a pay as you go flip hone, haha because you know what? I'll be retired in a couple of years and I no longer care to Keep Up Appearances.

I don't do IT, I do data. I love my data and am uninterested, nay--scornful-- of whatever various platform comes along to hold my precious data. (They cause me a lot of trouble.) But that said, I played a little techie game back in the day and had a home computer before any of my work colleagues and before any of my friends. That was back in the day when I had to sort of keep up a facade.

[bae]

I hauled out my worse-than-a-flip-phone the other day to make a call, and they all laughed at me, thinking it was some sort of antique...

Until I asked them if they had any signal...



If they'd been nicer, I would have shared the wifi hotspot I set up with it...

[Alan]

I hauled out my worse-than-a-flip-phone the other day to make a call, and they all laughed at me, thinking it was some sort of antique...

Until I asked them if they had any signal...



If they'd been nicer, I would have shared the wifi hotspot I set up with it...

I haven't seen one of those in years. We had a nice little collection of satellite phones in our office as part of our disaster recovery plan. Of course, we couldn't get a signal in a high-rise and the downtown streets were hit and miss due to their urban canyon characteristics.
Pretty cool when you're miles from the nearest cell tower though.

[bae]

Pretty cool when you're miles from the nearest cell tower though.

Or when all the cell towers and landlines have been taken out by a wee disaster, which ran for ~10 days.

Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!

[Alan]

Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!

Wow, Who Ya Gonna Call in a situation like that?