As PR correctly points out class and wealth are by no means synonymous, and most at least upper middle class members in the UK (who did that song, "The Upper Side of Lower Middle Class"?) find it rather amazing that Americans do not understand this.

Class is also little to do with political beliefs - Tony Benn for example is upper class but is fairly left wing.

Speech habits have a huge amount to do with it, probably more than dress - witness the difficulty the press have understanding that Camilla is not a clothes horse, and that while TPT may be of good stock, her taste in clothes is more credit card chic than classy. "New Money" is a term of condescension. The so-called "Posh" (who is jumped up lower middle class of the worst type" nad "Becks" exemplify all that horrifies about "New Money" (and credit card chic).

Those with class of course should be gracious (so the behaviour of Charles has class, but William less so and Harry not at all, probably the wrong sort of Diana's blood showing) so they would never dream of letting those with whom they mix, if of lesser standing, know that they were thought of lesser standing.

I of course am not upper class, but at school I was close enough (in a closed society) to a few of them to understand.

The "scholarship boy" ex hypothesi is working class, usually trying to become middle class (which now is an insult from both ends of thescale whereas it used to be so only from above) so he is a class traitor from below and at best a parvenu from above.

S+R should understand that for "PLU" it is worse to be "vulgar" as Sarah Ferguson was said to be, than "common". It is the lower middle class who fear to be "common" for it is a fault into which they might slip.

Does that help to make it any clearer?