The Christian Science Monitor quiz was impressive; the quiz itself asked unexpected questions that didn't have anything to do with money, and my results were accurate. It labeled me as a "middling:" basically just middle class. It didn't tell me anything I didn't already know (except that people in lower classes are better at reading people's emotions, which is awesome), but I thought the way it defined my class was interesting and valid.
When I was little, we lived in a nice neighborhood. That's probably the closest I've ever gotten to rich, posh people. The people who lived there weren't even rich, necessarily; they just acted like it. The woman who lived two doors down from me acted a lot like the rich, conceited, entitled guy in the video. She was disliked by everyone, and she sometimes wouldn't let her hateful little brat of a daughter play with us because we weren't doing everything she wanted to do, so we were therefore treating her unfairly. I know all rich people aren't like this, but there's something to be said for the unmistakable similarities between that woman and the posh man in the video. At that same time in my life, I had a babysitter named Margaret. She ran a daycare out of her home a few miles away in the middle of her apple orchard. She wasn't rich by any means, but she wasn't nearly as bad off as that poor family in the video. Still, she's the closest thing I have to compare to those poor people. She was similar to them in many ways: she had questionable grammar (as did her husband and two sons), her family wore cheap clothes and owned cheap toys. We entertained ourselves by playing make-believe or building with legos and lincoln logs. It wasn't fancy, but we were satisfied. I think that's the biggest difference between (very) rich and poor people. Those with less learn to be satisfied with less, and those who have never had to live with less tend to only be satisfied with more.
