Please read the blog post:
The Logic of Stupid Poor People
which discusses why (possibly) the recent examples of folks of very modest means buying extremely expensive accessories might make sense.
If you are not familiar with the recent controversies regarding racial profiling by the Barney's chain in New York, here are the background incidents that she refers to obliquely in the first sentence:
Student sues Barneys department store, NYPD, alleges racial profiling
Again?! Suit Says Black Barneys Customer Accused Of Not Being Able To Afford $2,500 Bag
McMillan Cottom uses the concept of "acceptableness" to explain these purchases as a strategy for helping poor people navigate their way into a more secure financial and cultural position in society.
Summarize McMillan-Cottom's argument about the usefulness of such purchases.
How does the idea of acceptableness (or put another way "respectability") that she advances help explain some of the advancement strategies used by the fast food workers in "No Shame in My Game"? Your answer should address at least 2 strategies and may include "networking", "education", "pride in work", "work ethic" and "persistence"
What are some of the strengths and weaknesses of resource-sharing strategies (such as advocacy for less "acceptable" friends and family-members) that are discussed by McMillan-Cottom and that are used by the workers in "No Shame in My Game" (these include the unpaid contributions of family members, the financial and resource support of family members who are employed in well-paying jobs, and the support and guidance of managers)? Cite at least 2 examples.
How do these strategies help some fast food workers move into better-paying jobs? Why aren't all workers able to use these strategies?
What do YOU think might change the situation so that these workers would be able to find good jobs (be as radical as you want to be).