Even if not technically correct, I'd argue the New York identity and affiliation leans petite bourgeoisie, especially with other evidence of jet settery here https://www.economicmodeling.com/ and here https://www.ncronline.org/authors/clare-coffey
She doesn't really provide labor as a service as much as she's paid to nod along and court favor among the favored.
"Yes man" (or woman/person) is a very labor-aristocratic job. It's still based on actually doing something rather than ownership or arranging to extract labor value from others yourself.
Now, that "something" really leans into the "aristocratic" side in this case, it makes econ professors look like normal proles by comparison, but it's still a type of labor.
I do wonder what the boundary is where "failson did the dishes so gets trust fund access" is on one end of it and "kissing ass to get paid more than they're worth" is on the other.
Even if not technically correct, I'd argue the New York identity and affiliation leans petite bourgeoisie, especially with other evidence of jet settery here https://www.economicmodeling.com/ and here https://www.ncronline.org/authors/clare-coffey
She doesn't really provide labor as a service as much as she's paid to nod along and court favor among the favored.
"Yes man" (or woman/person) is a very labor-aristocratic job. It's still based on actually doing something rather than ownership or arranging to extract labor value from others yourself.
Now, that "something" really leans into the "aristocratic" side in this case, it makes econ professors look like normal proles by comparison, but it's still a type of labor.
Well all right then. :the-more-you-know:
I do wonder what the boundary is where "failson did the dishes so gets trust fund access" is on one end of it and "kissing ass to get paid more than they're worth" is on the other.