Liberals are for the middle class. Conservatives are for the rich. NDP are for the poor.
It concerns all the Empire and all class of persons being rich or poor.
Travellers were separated into three classes: first, second and third class: 689 first, 674 second and 1, 026 third respectively. x
Not at all. However, the spread between rich and poor is much more pronounced. In the USA or UK or Canada, there are rich people and poor people but generally the rich are reasonably rich and the poor still usually have a roof over their heads, or, even if homeless, are able not to starve because of a welfare state. However, in India the rich tend to be very very rich, whilst the poor are very very poor - and there are a lot more poor people than in western countries, so, on average, India can be thought of as a poor country although there are many living there who are very rich.
India is a poor country ,because most of the Indians suffering with extrem poverty they live on foot paths ,they have no clothes to wear , still so many villeges did;NT access drinking water ,primary education ,and health facilities.
She was not rich but I don't know if she was poor or middle class but I think it's middle class
Liberals are for the middle class. Conservatives are for the rich. NDP are for the poor.
middle
Rich
poor or middle class
There is rich, middle class, and poor. I, myself, am middle class.
She was neither rich nor poor, she was in a middle-class family.
was benjamin banneker rich or poor or middle class
Middle Class.
he was middle class
His family was middle class moving to upper middle class.
both and middle class. you get people on benefits (poor) working class (middle class) and people with really good jobs are quite rich. you can work both down and up.