Links |
|
Links |
|||
|
Stratification | ||||
|
Intro to Income Inequality in the US | ||||
|
Intro to Wealth Inequality in the US | ||||
|
Social Mobility | ||||
|
A Comparison of Race, Gender, & Class Stratification | ||||
|
Types of Societies that vary on Stratification | ||||
|
Weber on Stratification | ||||
|
Class | ||||
|
Marxian Definition of Class | ||||
|
Composite Definition of Class | ||||
|
Subjective Definition of Class | ||||
|
Power |
|
|||
|
e. Wealth and Income | ||||
|
C. Wright Mills' Power Elite Theory | ||||
|
Domhoff's Power Elite Theory | ||||
|
Domhoff on the Three Key Interest Group Coalitions | ||||
|
An Analysis of the Three Key Interest Group Coalitions | ||||
|
A Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory by Farley | ||||
|
Occupational Prestige | ||||
|
Poverty | ||||
|
Intro to the Consequences of Poverty | ||||
|
Causes of Poverty | ||||
|
Class & False Consciousness | ||||
|
- Horatio Alger Myth | ||||
|
Out of Wedlock Births | ||||
|
Unemployment | ||||
|
Deindustrialization | ||||
|
Low Wages & the Minimum Wage | ||||
|
Govt Economic Policy | ||||
|
Welfare to Work | ||||
|
Functionalist View on Poverty | ||||
|
Davis & Moore on the Functionality of Poverty | ||||
|
Critique of Davis & Moore | ||||
|
Conflict View on Poverty | ||||
|
The Empirical Evidence on the Functionality of Stratification |
|
Global Stratification |
|
|
International Comparisons of Mobility | |
|
Global Social Stratification | |
|
Global Poverty | |
|
Cross National Comparisons of Poverty | |
|
The Causes of Global Poverty | |
Global Stratification Theory | ||
|
Modernization Theory | |
|
Dependency Theory | |
|
Critical Review of Stratification Theories | |
|
World Systems Theory |
|
|
|
|
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Video: SES 5:21 |
|
||||
Stratification is the social process where scarce social & physical resources such as wealth, income, power, status, etc. are non randomly distributed among members, groups, classes etc. of society | |||||
Stratification is the study of how resources are distributed among society | |||||
Summary: Different ranking systems, based on the distribution of different scarce resources, have been referred to by sociologists as Stratification | |||||
Various analytical constructs posit FOUR differing bases for stratification | |||||
Weber recognized that most societies have three major dimensions of stratification |
|
||||
Organizational theorists maintain that organizational influence has unique stratification properties | |||||
Type of Strat Dimension of Strat Definition | |||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
For Weber, there is a strong interaction of class, status, power & influence | |||||
Weberian Theory holds that our system of stratification restrains both the masses & the elites | |||||
For Weber, status, power, & income all are part of stratification | |||||
Weber found that status, power, income, stratification, the individual maximization of wealth, poverty, inequality, etc. are all a function of the interaction of status, power, & class which are determined by the interaction, of not only the economic system, but also the religious, cultural & social systems | |||||
In the Protestant Ethic & the Spirit of Capitalism, (PESC) Weber studied cultural values as they related to religion in a wide variety of past societies | |||||
See Also: Weber's PESC | |||||
Weber found that through most of human history, people did not value maximizing personal wealth & comfort | |||||
Values in most preindustrial societies centered on spiritual life, interpersonal relations, community, & tradition | |||||
Weber links the spread of a norm of maximization w/ the individualistic values of Protestantism & argues that by promoting individualism, Protestantism created a cultural atmosphere in which capitalism flourished | |||||
In the PESC, Weber found that the norm of maximization is not universal, it has existed only in some societies through history | |||||
In the PESC, Weber found that the culture & values of a society may make it more or less conducive to capitalism | |||||
Weber's position in the PESC is consistent w/ those who believe capitalism needs the norm of maximization, of personal greed, in order to fully develop | |||||
While some have countered Weber in the PESC by arguing that the norm of maximization is a product of modernization & industrialization, not capitalism, Weber saw Protestantism, capitalism & industrialism as all contributing to the set of values that includes maximization | |||||
Lenski believed that the low technology of primitive societies resulted in stratification based only on status | |||||
Lenski & Weber believe that the development of society resulted stratification based on income, power, & status | |||||
Lenski & Weber believe that status has always been an aspect of stratification, but it cannot be the basis of economic & power stratification | |||||
Status, as a sole indicator, is important primarily in highly integrated society with a high level of consensus such as monasteries or Japan |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Marx made important, early contributions to social sciences understanding of class |
|
||||
For Marx, class is a function of the structure of the economic base |
|
||||
The structure of the economic base is a function of the means of production & the relations of production |
|
||||
Therefore, class, as a function of the base & the means & relations of production, impacts all aspects of society |
|
||||
Thus, for Marx, a society's class structure impacts the very nature of that society |
|
||||
There were no classes during the hunter gatherer era |
|
||||
During the ancient empires, there were various formulations of class structure |
|
||||
W/ reference to class, Marxists note that: | |||||
- Rome had the ruling elite, the military, the estate class, the urban class, & slaves |
|
||||
- in the feudal era the class structure consisted of the aristocrats, the church leadership, the knights, the serfs |
|
||||
- in modern society, the most common formulation of class structure is the upper class, the upper middle class, the middle class, the working class, the lower class |
|
||||
Marx analyzed several classes, but during his time, only the bourgeoisie, the owners of capital, & the proletariat, those who do not own capital but work for those who do, were important for structuring the nature of society |
|
||||
Marx also analyzed the decline of the aristocracy, and the impact of the petite bourgeoisie, the lumpen proletariat, and others |
|
||||
The petite bourgeoisie are the small business owners | |||||
Marxists exclude the petite bourgeoisie from the ruling class because while small business creates the majority of new jobs, major corporations produce the vast majority of income | |||||
A contemporary social theorists, Domhoff, notes that the structure of capitalism & the economy has changed, & thus he includes the petite bourgeoisie, small business, as one of three major players in society today, the other two being the corporate coalition, & the labor liberal coalition | |||||
See Also: Domhoff: | |||||
For Marx, the primary factor in understanding class structure is ownership of the means of production |
|
||||
Salaried employees may earn a lot of money, but they do not belong to the ruling class because they do not gain the benefits of wealth produced by the labor of others |
|
||||
When Marx wrote, his analysis of class was more accurate than it is now because today people w/ a high salary have a life style that is very different from that of the people earning the minimum wage |
|
||||
Non owners may earn as much as several hundred thousand dollars, and today most people at those levels also are paid in stock, making them owners |
|
||||
Non owners who earn the minimum wage, e.g. $5.50 an hour, have a yearly income of $11,000 & therefore have a lifestyle that puts them in a different class than high salaried workers |
|
||||
|
Wide disparities in income for non owners did not exist during Marx's time because there was no middle class |
|
|||
|
Marxists argue that Marx's original class structure is valid because | ||||
|
a. those who have high salaries, while having a high standard of living, have a standard of living that is far below the upper class & corporate executives | ||||
b. those who have high salaries do not receive most of their income from the work of others, though they do have authority over others | |||||
In 1998 the top 1% owned 42% of all stock & the top 10% owned 84% of all stock |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
The composite definitions of class address the problems of Marxian definitions of class which focus only on workers & owners whereby workers have divergent interests, styles of life, etc. |
|
||||
An example of weakness in the Marxian definition of class is that high salaried workers earn several hundred thousand dollars a year; the blue collar worker w/ a high school education earns $40,000; the teacher w/ a masters degree earns $22,000; the lower level worker earns $5.50 an hour for $11,000 a year, & all would be part of the proletariat, i.e., the same class |
|
||||
Workers, at all levels of the economic system, have a different style of life, authority level, autonomy & freedom on the job, etc. & so should be examined as distinct classes |
|
||||
A composite definitions of class accounts for many factors which construct class rather than merely ownership of the Means of Production as is the case for the Marxian definition of class |
|
||||
A composite definitions of class accounts for wealth, income, prestige, education, job status, etc. |
|
||||
The composite definitions of class arose from the work of Weber who believed that the social dimensions of economic class, status, & authority could be accurately used to determine a person's life chances |
|
||||
Weber believed that the aggregation of the groups of people by life chances created the nature of a society |
|
||||
W. Lloyd Warner, et al, wrote Yankee City (1949) in which they define class based on wealth, income, prestige, possessions, lifestyle, & community participation | |||||
Warner, et al, created a six level class structure based on a composite definitions of class with six classes |
|
||||
Warner's six level class structure included the upper upper class, the lower upper class, the upper middle class, the lower middle class, the upper lower class, & the lower lower Class |
|
||||
For Warner, 3% of the population fell into the upper upper & the lower upper class |
|
||||
For Warner, 40% of the population fell into the upper middle & the lower middle classes |
|
||||
For Warner, 40% of the population fell into the upper lower & the lower lower classes |
|
||||
Today there is a shrinkage of the lower classes & a growth of the middle classes as blue collar employment declines, but the middle class has less income & authority than in the past |
|
||||
For decades, the wealthy elite has changed little in size |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
The subjective definition of class defines class as being based upon people's self definition of their & other's class |
|
||||
The subjective definition of class has the advantage that people can accurately define the intricacies of their life on such factors as prestige, authority on the job, lifestyle, etc. |
|
||||
The subjective definition of class has the disadvantage that people frequently define themselves as middle class within a range of salary of several hundred thousand dollars to the minimum wage, from corporate lawyer to blue collar worker |
|
||||
Farley found that 50 to 60% of people define themselves as middle class, 30 to 40% define themselves as working class, and few people define themselves as upper or lower class |
|
||||
The subjective definitions of class of Americans is the similar to that of people in the industrialized nations in Europe & Japan and developing nations such as China |
|
||||
The tendency for people to define themselves as middle class is stronger than in Europe because there, because of the political power of the working class, more people are willing to define themselves as working class |
|
||||
In all nations, those w/ high income, a college education, & a white collar education label themselves middle class |
|
||||
In all nations, those w/ below average income, a high school education or less, & a blue collar education label themselves working class |
|
||||
W/ respect to the subjectiveness of class, men define themselves based on their own characteristics |
|
||||
W/ respect to the subjectiveness of class, women define themselves more accurately in that they base their class on their own characteristics as well as that of their significant other |
|
||||
One feature that makes subjectiveness of class important is that many people have status inconsistencies, ranking high in one area & low in another |
|
||||
People w/ status inconsistencies will define themselves based on a characteristic that they have that is most similar to their family of origin, thereby downplaying personal characteristics that are divergent from their family of origin |
|
Links |
|
Links |
||||||||||
|
- Video: Power 0:29 |
|
||||||||||
POWER IS THE ABILITY OR AUTHORITY TO ACT OR DO SOMETHING, OR TO HAVE SOMETHING DONE, OR CONTROL SOMETHING OR SOMEONE | ||||||||||||
Review: Stratification is the social process where scarce social & physical resources such as wealth, income, power, status, etc. are non randomly distributed among members, groups, classes etc. of society | ||||||||||||
Power is the ability to affect the actions of others | ||||||||||||
The political scientist Robert Dahl ( 1957 ) defined power as the ability of a person or social formation (group) to get another social formation to act or believe in a particular way that they would not have done before | ||||||||||||
Power may be exercised on many levels such as
a. the individual level b. the group level c. the organizational level d. the societal level |
||||||||||||
Most theorists believe power is meaningless unless it is used | ||||||||||||
For most social theorists, there is an interaction among class, status, & power | ||||||||||||
The study of power was first made important by Hobbes | ||||||||||||
For Hobbes & many others, power involves force or coercion, the threat of aggression, etc. | ||||||||||||
POWER IS OFTEN SEEN AS POLITICAL POWER WHERE THE COERCION IS POLITICIZED, & THIS IS EASILY CONFUSED W/ POLITICAL AUTHORITY OR INFLUENCE | ||||||||||||
For Weber, power is exercised through the political system & organizations | ||||||||||||
For Weber, the political dimension is the most important because this is where Weber puts "inevitable" organizational struggle | ||||||||||||
The power dimension of stratification is based on political position | ||||||||||||
For Marx, power is exercise through the economic system & orgs | ||||||||||||
Marx holds that the class / economic dimension is the most important, i.e. the basis & conduit more the primary exercise of power in society | ||||||||||||
Parsons holds that the status dimension is the most important, i.e. the basis & conduit more the primary exercise of power in society | ||||||||||||
Others argue power is exercised through all social structures, including
|
||||||||||||
Power, in modern societies, is exercised through social structures primarily through influence, but also through authority, orgl politics, control of information, control of wealth, & even force & coercion | ||||||||||||
|
Most social theorists agree that in most situations, there is no fixed amount of power | |||||||||||
LEGITIMATE POWER IS POWER THAT PEOPLE ACCEPT AS PROPER | ||||||||||||
Legitimate power is power that people agree that the people exercising the power have the right to do so or groups accept as proper | ||||||||||||
Legitimate power is often attached to a position in society; i.e. teachers have power in the class room, police in the street, parents in the home; & each of these people would not have power in the others' sphere | ||||||||||||
|
There are SIX basic sources of power including | |||||||||||
1. Authority | ||||||||||||
2. Politics: voting, elections, etc. | ||||||||||||
3. Force & Coercion | ||||||||||||
4. Control of Information | ||||||||||||
5. Wealth & Income | ||||||||||||
6. Influence | ||||||||||||
There is a subtle distinction btwn power based on authority, politics, force, coercion, expertise, information, wealth, income, or influence, but the types of power often interact or reinforce each other | ||||||||||||
NOT IN NOTES: | ||||||||||||
See Yukl's 3 forms of power in CSU responses Orgl Psych |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Stratification is the social process where scarce social & physical resources such as wealth, income, power, status, etc. are non randomly distributed among members, groups, classes etc. of society | |||||
Power is the ability to affect the actions of others | |||||
There are SIX basic sources of power | |||||
1. Authority | |||||
2. Politics: voting, elections, etc. | |||||
3. Force and Coercion | |||||
4. Control of Information | |||||
5. Wealth and Income | |||||
6. Influence | |||||
5. Wealth & Income as a Source of Power | |||||
WEALTH GENERATES POWER VIA THE MEDIA, POLITICS, AFFECTING LEGISLATION, EXEC DECISIONS, ETC. | |||||
Money may be translated into political power by: | |||||
a. giving access to the media | |||||
b. getting elected which often costs millions of dollars | |||||
c. influencing elected officials through campaign contributions and through support that money can buy from the public | |||||
But wealth is no guarantee to power | |||||
Billionaires Ross Perot ( new money ) & Steven Forbes (old money ) have repeatedly run for President, & while they lost, both have had significant influence on national politics | |||||
While the majority of people in Congress are millionaires, & thus "naturally" understand & represent the interests of the wealthy, most do not have enough money to self finance their campaigns & thus must appeal the the middle, upper middle, & upper classes for money & to all classes for votes | |||||
Self financed Congressional campaigns are becoming ever more common | |||||
Marx & Weber both wrote extensively on the relationship btwn economics & politics | |||||
FOR MARX, WEALTH CREATES POWER BECAUSE THE ECON SECTOR IS WHERE WE REALIZE OUR CREATIVE GOALS, & THE RELATIONS OF PRODUCTION SHAPE OUR CONSCIOUSNESS | |||||
|
Marx believed that wealth determined power & thus he is often thought of as an economic determinist | ||||
Those who own the means of production determine virtually all characteristics of society, because: | |||||
a. the economic or work process shapes human existence more than any other type of process & therefore it shapes the way we think about the world: our world view, our ideology, the way we feel & think | |||||
b. the owners of the means of production have power to shape it, thus they shape the relations of our lives, our world view | |||||
Karl Marx saw wealth & power as essentially the same | |||||
WEBER HELD THAT LIFE CHANCES WERE MORE IMPORTANT IN DETERMINING POWER THAN WEALTH | |||||
Weber thought that wealth & power were distinct: one does not guarantee the other | |||||
Class mobility had increased in Weber’s time & there was a middle class | |||||
PLURALISTS SEE MANY FACTIONS COMPETING FOR POWER | |||||
Pluralists believe that power is divided among many competing groups | |||||
Pluralists believe that no single group can gain too much power | |||||
Pluralists believe that if one group does begin to gain too much power, other groups will form alliances against it | |||||
Pluralists believe that there is a "balance of interests | |||||
For pluralists, there are EIGHT major players in society, including: | |||||
1. business | |||||
2. labor | |||||
3. govt | |||||
4. ethnic groups | |||||
5. racial groups | |||||
6. regional groups | |||||
7. religious groups | |||||
8. political groups | |||||
|
9. other special interest groups |
|
|||
|
For pluralists, a veto group is an interest group that possesses the power to block policy changes or proposed laws that threaten their interests |
|
|||
Veto groups are strong enough to prevent change, but not strong enough to bring about change alone | |||||
|
For pluralists, a swing group is a small group who allies with other group to bring about a change |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Power elite theory has been formulated by C. Wright Mills & William Domhoff |
|
||||
|
Power elite theory is similar to pluralist theory, except that while pluralists hold that "the balance of interests" is intact, the power elite theorists hold that the balance of interests have failed |
|
|||
The power elite: |
|
||||
- are a small, very wealthy group |
|
||||
- foster a society where office holders have only the appearance of power; i.e., they are puppets |
|
||||
- exercise real power & decision making behind the scenes |
|
||||
- influence political leaders by foundations & public policy institutes which they fund | |||||
- struggle among themselves in what are often similar to "palace intrigues" |
|
||||
- in terms of class, are made up of the active, influential, powerful, members of the upper class & the corp. mgrs. | |||||
Power is gained: |
|
||||
- almost exclusively via corporate wealth |
|
||||
- via interlocking directorates, which are overlapping positions of power on corporate boards |
|
||||
- though the concentration of wealth via state capitalism |
|
||||
- via overlapping positions of power in govt, including the executive branch, the civil service, and the military | |||||
- by controlling the rules and regulations of state capitalism |
|
||||
- by keeping other classes pluralistic, i.e. fragmented |
|
||||
The power elite are largely the result of "cultural lag" and are fundamentally anti democratic and anti equalitarian |
|
||||
The group dynamics of the power elite demonstrates domination by a small leadership group |
|
||||
|
The control exercised by a small elite is not so much the characteristic of organization, but rather the result of a great concentration of wealth, which leads to a concentration of power |
|
|||
Control of corporations by the ruling elite rests on the ownership of large blocks of stock | |||||
P-E theory notes that the richest 1% of the US population owns over 50% of the stock (Gilbert & Kahl, 1982) | |||||
P-E theory notes that the richest 1% also owns over 28% of total wealth (Census, 1993e) | |||||
The ruling elite is a virtually closed social group w/ tremendous power | |||||
For Domhoff & P-E theory, the ruling elite attend exclusive preparatory schools, colleges, clubs & resorts, & intermarry largely w/ other members of the ruling class (Domhoff, 1983) | |||||
For Braun & P-E theory, While there are exceptional self made tycoons whose lives parallel the famous rags to riches novels by Horatio Alger, in reality, the heads of the largest corporations are almost exclusively born into their class position (Braun, 1991, 1997) |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Project: Key Interest Groups |
|
||||
- Project: Key Interest Groups in the Envl Debate |
|
||||
THE KEY INTEREST GROUPS INCLUDE CORPORATIONS, SMALL BUSINESSES, & LABOR / LIBERALS | |||||
According to Domhoff, 1983, there are three main interest groups trying to influence policy at the national level: the corporate coalition, the small business coalition, & the labor / liberal coalition |
|
||||
In 1990, there were more than 6,800 congressional lobbying groups in the US, however most of them tend to represent certain groups of interests, such as Domhoff three key interest groups |
|
||||
In 2005, there were more than 14,000 registered lobbying groups in Washington, DC, averaging just over two employees each for a total over 30,000 lobbyists (many lobbying firms are small) | |||||
In 2005, there were approximately 30,000 members of Congress & staff members, making the ratio of lobbyists to officials on the Hill nearly 1 to 1 | |||||
In the early 90s the total value of earmarks added to bills was under $100 mm, while in 2005 the value was over $32 bb | |||||
A. THE CORPORATE COALITION INCLUDES THE LARGEST CORPS IN THE WORLD, MANY HAVING MORE ECON POWER THAN THE MAJORITY OF NATIONS | |||||
The corporate coalition include multinational corporations from around the world |
|
||||
Also included in the corporate coalition group are policy foundations & research institutes that do not call themselves lobbyists, but claim to operate on the behalf of "good govt" or the "national interest" |
|
||||
Examples of conservative policy foundations include the Ford, Rockefeller, & Carnegie Foundations, the Committee for Economic Development (CED), the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission, & the Business Roundtable |
|
||||
Conservative policy foundations lobby for policies that promote free trade & polices that allow multinationals to operate in the world economy w/ minimum restrictions |
|
||||
The North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA), the General Agreement on Trade & Tariffs (GATT), the US govt's support for the Maquiladores program are examples of the efforts of the policy institutes allied w/ the multinational corporations |
|
||||
B. THE SMALL BUSINESS COALITION INCLUDES ALL SMALL BUSINESSES, WHICH MAY BE WORTH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, INCLUDING MANY PROFL ORGS | |||||
The small business coalition includes the Chamber of Commerce & national orgs of professions that operate as small businesses such as the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Dental Association (ADA), & the Farm Bureau |
|
||||
The small business coalition is more conservative that the corporate coalition |
|
||||
The small business coalition concentrates on opposition to govt regs of business |
|
||||
The small business coalition is less involved in foundations & research institutes than corporate coalition |
|
||||
The small business coalition does support the American Enterprise Institute & the Hoover Institute |
|
||||
C. THE LABOR / LIBERAL COALITION INCLUDES ORGANIZED LABOR AS WELL AS OTHER SOC MVMTS SUCH AS THE CIVIL RIGHTS MVMT, WOMEN'S MVMT, ENVL MVMT, & MORE | |||||
The labor / liberal coalition is a loose coalition & is the most diverse, & thus the most divided of the coalitions |
|
||||
The labor / liberal coalition includes organized labor, feminists, the civil rights movement, the envl mvmt, et al |
|
||||
Specific orgs w/in the labor / liberal coalition include the AFL CIO, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Urban League, the National Association for Women (NOW), the National Education Association (NEA), the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, the Ralph Nader based orgs, et al |
|
||||
Domhoff developed an analysis of the key interest groups that shows that, indeed, contrary to what pluralists believe, one group controls the govt, benefits from govt policy, & wins controversial issues | |||||
See Also: A Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory by Farley |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
|
Domhoff developed an analysis of the key interest groups that shows that, indeed, contrary to what Pluralists believe, one group controls the Govt, benefits from govt policy, & wins controversial issues | ||||
|
a. Who Governs? |
|
|||
|
The corporate coalition is well represented by national elected officials & appointees as seen in the fact that in 2000, |
|
|||
|
- nearly half of the 100 US Senators are millionaires, while only 1 to 2% of population are millionaires |
|
|||
|
- women, African Americans Latinos, etc. are underrepresented in the both houses of Congress |
|
|||
|
- nine of 100 Senators were women (9 %), and 56 of 435 Representative (12.9%) while women make up 51% of the population |
|
|||
|
- there are no African Americans in the Senate & only two held office in the 1900s, while Blacks make up 13% of the population |
|
|||
|
- there are 38 Black Representatives (9%) |
|
|||
|
In 1996, there were 17 Hispanic Representative (3.9%) while Hispanics make up 13% of the population |
|
|||
|
The representation in the federal legislative branch of women, Blacks, & Hispanics, despite being low, is at near record highs |
|
|||
|
The executive branch and advisory groups who govern behind the scenes are even less diverse than Congress |
|
|||
|
The majority of professors who served on the President's Science Advisory Commission of 16 years had been on the boards of corporations |
|
|||
|
Stryker found that when social scientists' support the interests of the wealthy, their work becomes institutionalized, but when they oppose such interests, their role is usually eliminated |
|
|||
|
A critique of the who governs analysis is that millionaires do not agree on social policy, as illustrated by Ted Kennedy & George Bush |
|
|||
|
Thus, the pluralist Dahl argues that there is no power elite, while Domhoff & Mills would argue that there is such a large amount of consensus in govt that there is a corporate coalition which rules |
|
|||
|
Dahl would also note that politicians must pay attention to their constituents if they expect to be elected & reelected |
|
|||
|
b. Who Benefits? |
|
|||
|
Measuring who benefits from govt policies is very difficult & is thus the area of focus of the disciplines of social stratification, demographics, & others |
|
|||
|
Examining the stratification of wealth & income gives one indication of who benefits from govt. & corp. policy | ||||
|
Examining the incidence of taxes & payments by the fed, state, & local govts. gives one indication of who benefits from govt. & corp policy | ||||
The military industrial Congressional complex ( MICC ) | |||||
Domhoff & power elite theorists believe that the US military policy benefits the corporate coalition | |||||
A larger share of the US fed budget goes to defense than in other industrialized countries | |||||
10 of the largest 50 corps rely primarily on sales to the military | |||||
Critics, including Domhoff, argue that military spending is greater than is needed for national defense, & has two other purposes | |||||
Defense spending is oversized because the military industrial Congressional complex (MICC) lobbies for it so that they may profit from it | |||||
Defense spending is oversized because the the corporate coalition benefits from a US, global military presence | |||||
|
Star Wars / SDI was funded even though the scientific consensus was that it is unfeasible at this time |
|
|||
|
As the movie the "Lord of War" depicts, the largest small arms dealers are the US, UK, Russia, France & China | ||||
Small arms are more deadly than WMD, killing more people each yr than all the WMD put together | |||||
|
In many wars, arms dealers & the nations who are the largest arms dealers, arm both sides of a conflict as seen in the recent Balkans War, the two wars against Iraq, the Iran Iraq war, the Israeli Arab conflicts, & more |
|
|||
Taxfare & Welation | |||||
|
Domhoff & power elite theorists believe that the US Tax policy benefits the corp coalition |
|
|||
|
Wealth & income are more unequally distributed in the second half of the 20th century |
|
|||
The concepts of taxfare & welation denote that the tax code benefits the UC & that the welfare system does not provide an adequate safety net to allow someone to get an education & a job get out of poverty | |||||
Corp welfare includes the subsidies that go to businesses | |||||
|
The effective rates of taxation for those in the higher income brackets have fallen |
|
|||
|
Tax reform in the 1980s under President Reagan cut taxes 7% for the middle class & 31% for the upper class |
|
|||
Under the 1980s Reagan tax reform, those earning $100K to 2 mm got a got a tax cu of $7,000 while homes w/ incomes below $10,000 got a $37 tax cut |
|
||||
Under the 1980s Reagan tax reform, the tax burden was shifted from corporations to individuals in that the share of taxes paid by corporations fell from 21% to 17% | |||||
Since the Reagan era, the capital gains tax has been reduced | |||||
c. Who Wins? | |||||
Domhoff found that when there is substantial disagreement btwn the corporate coalition, the small business coalition, & the labor / liberal coalition, the corporate coalition almost always wins | |||||
Doctors & hospitals were unable to stop healthcare cost controls desired by corps in the 1980s | |||||
Early in the Clinton Administration, universal healthcare as supported by the labor / liberal coalition was defeated by the combination of the corporate & the small business coalitions | |||||
The corporate & the small business coalitions are the most likely allies to each other of the three coalitions | |||||
The passage of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 was the only clear defeat for the corporate coalition, & it has been significantly weakened over the decades by the Taft Hartley & other Acts | |||||
The small business coalition appears to have veto power in that the labor / liberal coalition can do little w/o its support, & while the corporate coalition can act alone, it is much more successful if it has the small business coalition on its side | |||||
The labor / liberal coalition is the least powerful in that it can pass little on its own, & it has the power to veto actions of only the small business coalition | |||||
The power of the labor / liberal coalition increases during times of social conflict when people are disillusioned w/ the status quo of the corporate coalition & are more likely to become involved | |||||
Domhoff believes the labor / liberal coalition is the weakest because it has: | |||||
a. a looser & more diverse coalition which makes it less unified | |||||
b. fewer economic resources | |||||
c. less access to govt officials | |||||
|
d. very rare common interests w/ the other two coalitions |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Project: Comparing Pluralism & Power Elite Theory |
|
||||
Pluralist theory holds that society is composed many competing groups, none of which dominates | |||||
Power elite theory holds that society is composed of one group which dominates, & various other relatively unorganized groups which have little or no power in society | |||||
Power elite theory holds that society is composed of conflicting groups, including the: |
|
||||
- power elite which is made up of "old money," multinational corporation, powerful political leaders, powerful military leaders, et al |
|
||||
- many other highly fragmented groups, none of which manages to challenge the power of the P-E |
|
||||
Theorists such as Mills & Domhoff believe that the power elite dominates many spheres of society | |||||
Farley compares pluralist theory & power elite theory by asking Domhoff's questions of Who govern? Who benefits? & Who wins? |
|
||||
In the 70s there were 2000 interest groups, & in the 90s there were over 6800 interest groups |
|
||||
For Domhoff, society is composed of 3 key interest groups, including: | |||||
- multinational corporate interest groups |
|
||||
- small business interest groups |
|
||||
- the labor liberal coalition |
|
||||
For Domhoff, national level politicians & their appointments serve the interests of the 3 key interest groups |
|
||||
Congress consists of 30 to 40% millionaires & this trend continues |
|
||||
Who benefits from national policies? |
|
||||
Nat policies have resulted in a budget deficit for every year in the past 40 years (except for a few yrs at the end of the Clinton admin) |
|
||||
A deficit occurs when income (in the form of taxes) is not enough to cover govt expenditures (such as spending on social security, the military, etc.) | |||||
The national debt grew to over $8.5 T or $28,000 for every American in the mid 2000s | |||||
Who benefits from the national debt? | |||||
Defense spending has stayed high, at 30 to 50%, of the budget since WW II resulting in what President Eisenhower warned the public as the military industrial Congressional complex ( MICC ) | |||||
Those who hold govt bonds benefit from national debt in that they have a very secure place to store an immense amount of wealth | |||||
Who loses? | |||||
Those who pay the interest on the debt lose, & those whose programs are cut to fund the interest on the debt lose | |||||
Who wins or loses in relation to federal taxation? | |||||
A progressive tax is one designed so that the proportion of income paid in taxes increases as income increases | |||||
A regressive tax is one designed so that the proportion of income paid in taxes decreases as income increases | |||||
A flat tax is one designed so that the proportion of income paid in taxes is the same regardless of income | |||||
The US has a progressive income tax, on paper, with 5 tax brackets ranging from | |||||
17% 23% 27% 32% 33% | |||||
Many feel that the US tax system is regressive because the higher tax rates were lowered under Reagan, 1986 | |||||
In 1986 tax reform lowered taxes for the lowest & highest tax brackets & either raised taxes or left them the same for the middle three brackets |
|
||||
|
Most analysts agree that overall the fed tax system is flat or regressive because of taxes such as: |
|
|||
- payroll taxes such as social security & unemployment taxes | |||||
- sales type taxes such at gas taxes & others | |||||
- tax deductions such as interest for 2 homes, capital gains, & others | |||||
- though tax deductions, they remain an important loop hole for the wealthy | |||||
- because capital gains taxes have been reduced, they are an even more important loop hole for the wealthy | |||||
- though personal exemptions have slightly increased, they are a small factor in the tax system compared to tax rates & deductions | |||||
In sum it is a judgment call on whether the modern Western society is more pluralist, i.e. democratic, or more power elitist, i.e. corporatist in judging whether the tax system is unfair, the power of interest groups, the concentration of wealth, the control of the econ, the amount of poverty, the importance of the national debt, etc. | |||||
If one tends to think that the central features of the structure of society are formulated to favor no one, then pluralism exists; while if one believes that the central features of the structure of a society are formulated to favor the rich & powerful, then power elitism exists | |||||
Another important question is judging the control of society is whether one cares which class dominates in that some believe the upper class should dominate, while others believe the middle class should dominate | |||||
In general the middle class has the most equality it that lower middle class, middle class, & upper middle class people all treat each other fairly & the range of income, power & wealth is a few million dollars | |||||
In general the middle class has the highest level of racial & gender tolerance in that in the middle class all people are more accepted than in the lower or upper classes |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Poverty is the condition of having an extremely low income & standard of living, either in comparison w/ other members of society (relative poverty), or in terms of the ability to acquire basic necessities (absolute poverty) | |||||
Poverty is the condition of being poor w/ respect to money, goods, or means of subsistence or a deficiency in money, property, etc. | |||||
|
There are TWO basic ways to measure poverty & thus there are several definitions of poverty |
|
|||
|
1. The measure of absolute poverty examines poverty based on absolute number or monetary level |
|
|||
|
The measure of absolute poverty is the method used by the US govt |
|
|||
Counting the poor is very difficult to do | |||||
Many social critics consider the Census a failure because it fails to count many of the poor | |||||
|
In the US, the poverty line is $14,763 for family of 4 in the late
1990's
Median (middle) income is $39,000 in the late 1990's |
|
|||
In the US, the poverty line is $19,800 for family of 4 in 2004
Median income is $51,000 in 2003 |
|||||
The US Poverty Line is based on research which demonstrated that the Poor spent 1/3 of their income on food | |||||
|
2. The measure of relative poverty examines poverty in relationship to the socio-economic context of a particular society |
|
|||
|
Durkheim & Merton believe that it is not poverty per se that creates stigma & crime, but poverty in the midst of wealth |
|
|||
The income gap is the amount of difference in income between two or more groups | |||||
The income gap is also known as the socio-economic gap |
|
||||
|
The income gap between the upper class, middle class & the lower class is a more accurate predictor of crime & violence than is absolute income levels |
|
|||
Research shows that overall America values do not support assistance for the poor |
|
|
the poor did work or attend school, but only some of those would legally be considered unemployed Far0506
|
|
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
It is well established that single parent, female headed families have a high risk of poverty |
|
||||
Feminists have labeled the trend of single parent, female headed families having a high risk of poverty "the feminization of poverty" |
|
||||
As the % of single parent, female headed families grew in the 1970s & 80s, so did the poverty rate |
|
||||
The rate of out of wedlock births is higher among people who are already poor or grew up in poverty |
|
||||
Many social scientists, including Wu (1996), found that both low income & declining income are associated w/ out of wedlock births for women aged 14 - 21, Black & White |
|
||||
Poverty is as much a cause as a consequence of out of wedlock births |
|
||||
Poor people have less access to birth control |
|
||||
Poor women have a small pool of employed, marriageable men |
|
||||
Women of all income levels are equally sexually active, but the longer time an unmarried spends in poverty, the greater their likelihood of out of wedlock birth |
|
||||
Poverty harms self image & giving birth is one way a woman can improve her status & self image |
|
||||
Poor people have less control over their lives & giving birth increases the control a woman has, at least in that one sphere of motherhood |
|
||||
Having a child is an age old method for the young females or males to achieve the status of adulthood |
|
||||
McLanahan & Bumpass found that the education level of the teen & of the teen's parents was the most important factor in teen pregnancy |
|
||||
|
See Also: The Social Causes of Teen Pregnancy | ||||
|
Teens in the US, of all races, are more likely to have out of wedlock births & abortions than teens in any other industrialized nation |
|
|||
|
A high rate of out of wedlock births in the US results in more US teens living in poverty than in any other industrialized nation |
|
|||
|
Over 90% of children who live in a single parent home are likely to live in poverty during some time in their first 10 yrs. of life |
|
|||
|
US teens are no more sexually active than teens in other nations |
|
|||
|
US teens are less likely to have access to, & use birth control than teens in other industrialized nations | ||||
|
Availability of contraceptives for teens does not increase sexual activity | ||||
Availability of contraceptives results in sexually active teens using more contraceptives & having less out of wedlock births | |||||
Contraceptives are less available in the US because of a generally strong prohibition against sexuality & against contraceptives themselves | |||||
Religious values do affect govt policy in all nations & hence do affect the rate of out of wedlock births as well as the outcomes of other social issues or problems |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION IS THE PROCESS WHEREBY INDUSTRIES ARE PERMANENTLY LOST IN CORE NATIONS & TRANSFERRED TO SEMI - & PERIPHERAL NATIONS TO GAIN ADVANTAGES SUCH AS LOW WAGES, LACK OF ENVL REGS, ETC. | |||||
Deindustrialization is the relative decline in industrial production & employment in core regions as a result of the development of information technology & the export of traditional industries to semi peripheral & peripheral nations | |||||
|
Deindustrialization is a decline in the importance of heavy industry as a source of employment | ||||
|
Deindustrialization is one part of globalization | ||||
Because of more efficient operations, lower wages, lower environmental regulations, lower labor laws, etc. many nations produce cars, TVs, etc. at lower cost | |||||
In search of lower wages, & other competitive edges, US corporations have moved assembly operations to third world countries | |||||
An example of deindustrialization is seen in that thousands of manufacturing jobs have shifted from the US to northern Mexico | |||||
In 1988, of the 1,400 manufacturing jobs in Mexico, near the US border, 90% were in American owned corporations | |||||
|
The closing of industrial jobs resulted in 38 mm jobs lost in the US, which were shipped to foreign nations |
|
|||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION IS ONLY ONE PHASE OF CREATIVE DESTRUCTION IN THE ECONOMIC CYCLE |
|
||||
A dictum of economics is that the old economic system must be phased out in order to build a new economy |
|
||||
The transformation of one economic base to another necessitates destruction of old economies & ways of life & the development of the new economy |
|
||||
Usually, such a major social change as an economic transformation is not universally welcomed |
|
||||
But economic transformation must happen in the development of any economy |
|
||||
An example of an economic transformation is
- ag to natural resource extraction - natural resource extraction to manufacturing - manufacturing to hi tech - deindustrialization |
|||||
Some economies develop strategies to attempt to skip stages of econ development | |||||
The US economy shifted, or transformed, because international competition caused a shift in the global economic structure |
|
||||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION IS THE PART OF GLOBALIZATION WHERE CORPS SHIFT PRODUCTION TO 'A MORE FAVORABLE BUSINESS ENV' | |||||
The global economic structure changed because | |||||
- the US lost its competitive edge in manufacturing to Japan, South Korea, & Germany |
|
||||
- the US won the competition in hi tech & hi income services |
|
||||
- the US responded to its lost edge in manufacturing w/ downsizing, lean manufacturing, deindustrialization, etc. |
|
||||
|
- of an increase in automation which allowed corporations to create efficient, global enterprises | ||||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION IS A BENEFIT TO THE UC WHEN THEY GAIN WAGE & OTHER ADVANTAGES & A DEVASTATING COST TO ALL OTHER CLASSES WHEN THEY LOOSE THEIR LIFE'S CAREER | |||||
Deindustrialization did not adversely impact the upper classes very much because the wealthy were not rooted to manufacturing because they could shift assets to the new economy & to foreign, US owned production | |||||
Deindustrialization did not adversely impact the lower classes very much because they were not primarily dependent on manufacturing jobs for their income | |||||
Deindustrialization impacted the middle & working classes more than any other because they were dependent on manufacturing jobs as their primary source of employment & could not easily shift to other occupations |
|
||||
Wkrs could not easily shift to other occupations because there were not enough other, well paying jobs, & because there was not enough training available for displaced workers to upgrade their skills to fit the new, high tech economy | |||||
|
The deindustrialization that began in the 1980s & continues in the 2000s created three shifts in the middle & working classes including the: |
|
|||
|
a. shrinkage of skilled blue & white collar jobs |
|
|||
b. expansion of low skilled, low pay service jobs in peripheral industries | |||||
c. expansion of professional & managerial jobs in the upper range of middle class pay structure | |||||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION RESULTED IN THE SHRINKAGE IN THE MIDDLE CLASS, & GROWTH IN THE LOWER & UPPER CLASSES | |||||
From 1988 to 1993, the US lost 2 mm skilled & semi-skilled jobs in manufacturing, mining & construction, & gained 1.3 mm service jobs paying $215 per week or $10,750 per year |
|
||||
In 1993, 18% of all fully employed workers earned wages below the poverty line, which was a 50% increase since 1979 |
|
||||
|
In 1994, 72% of new jobs were managerial & professional, 25% of the workforce was mgr / prof ( 34 of 132 mm ), & 12% of workforce was manufacturing ( 17 of 132 mm ) |
|
|||
By eliminating higher paying jobs, deindustrialization has resulted in growing inequality & rising poverty since the late 1970s | |||||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION HAS DEVASTATED CENTRAL CITIES, ESP THE MFR CITIES IN THE MIDWEST & NORTHEAST, OFTEN CALLED THE "RUST BELT" | |||||
Blacks & Hispanics in the inner cities are hardest hit because it is difficult for them to move to other areas because of costs & segregation | |||||
A study by Rosenbaum & Meaden, 1993, demonstrated that when poor Blacks in Chicago were given the chance to move to the suburbs, their employment rose relative to those who stayed in the inner city | |||||
As a result of deindustrialization & job losses in the inner city, poverty has been concentrated in these areas | |||||
Deindustrialization has resulted in the degradation of the inner cities | |||||
DEINDUSTRIALIZATION HAS PARALLELED & FOSTERED THE GROWTH OF THE SERVICE ECON | |||||
Manufacturing job losses have been offset by growth in jobs in the services & administrative sectors | |||||
But jobs in the services & administrative sectors have not created enough jobs to replace all of those which were lost to deindustrialization | |||||
Jobs in the services & administrative sectors require higher education & so were not available to displaced workers from the manufacturing sector | |||||
Jobs in the services & administrative sectors paid less & so swelled the ranks of the working poor | |||||
|
Deindustrialization had a major, negative impact on unions & organized Labor | ||||
|
Industrial work, the old bastions of unions have been the hardest hit | ||||
The union's center was in industrial blue collar jobs, which were the jobs hardest hit by deindustrialization | |||||
The new sectors of the economy, the service economy, female & minority dominated employment sectors had never been unionized | |||||
Unions have learned new tactics, positions to gain the support of minority, female, & service sector workers | |||||
Since deindustrialization, the growth in the Labor Movement has come from the public sector & the service sector |
|
||||
The US has lowest unionization rate of any modern, industrialized nation |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
- Supplement: Articles on the Living Wage Debate |
|
||||
IN THE US, BUT NOT MOST OTHER CORE NATIONS, A FULL TIME WKR MAY NOT BE ABOVE THE POVERTY LINE | |||||
In 2000, 12% of poor people worked full time |
|
||||
The number of of the working poor more than doubled since 1978, because the minimum wage rarely increases at the rate of inflation |
|
||||
In 2001, the minimum wage was $5.15 / hr. or $10,712 / yr. |
|
||||
In 2003, the minimum wage is $5.50 / hr. or $11,440 / yr. |
|
||||
The minimum wage will does not provide a living above the poverty line for a couple & is more than $7,000 below the poverty line for a family of four |
|
||||
Because of low pay, many military families live below the poverty line & are eligible for food stamps & welfare |
|
||||
The minimum wage & military pay are political footballs & therefore they have not been raised regularly to adjust for inflation |
|
||||
In 1996, the minimum wage had only 2/3s of the purchasing power that it did in 1968 | |||||
MIN WAGE PROPONENTS HOLD THAT IT COULD BE USED TO ELIMINATE POVERTY; OPPONENTS HOLD THAT IT IS UNFAIR TO BUSINESS & IT SLOWS JOB GROWTH | |||||
Opponents of the minimum wage believe that it costs small & corporate business too much money, resulting in fewer low wage jobs, & thus ultimately hurting the people it is supposed to help |
|
||||
Proponents of the minimum wage believe it helps the poor, should be higher, & has little effect on the number of low wage jobs because these jobs are rarely mechanized, businesses cannot operate w/ less of these jobs, & the costs can generally be passed on the the customer |
|
||||
Because of deindustrialization & other changes in the economic structure, low wage jobs were one of the fastest growing sectors of the econ in the 1980s & 90s, & there was little growth in middle class jobs |
|
||||
|
Deindustrialization, the growth of low wage jobs, & slow growth in middle class jobs has resulted in falling incomes for the lower & middle classes, & a lower median income |
|
|||
|
In 2005, real wages for US wkrs fell 1/2 %, continuing the trend of falling wages that has characterized the 1st world wkforce since the late 1970s (except for a brief 3 yr period during the end of the Clinton Admin when wages rose) |
|
|||
WELFARE REFORM HAS MADE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE WKING POOR TO RECEIVE ANY KIND OF AID | |||||
|
A major goal of the Welfare to Work Program is to move people off of welfare to work, & to provide a living for them |
|
|||
|
The Welfare to Work Program has moved many people off of welfare, but has not provided a living for them in that they earn wages at or below the min wage |
|
|||
Welfare to Work Programs have moved many people from govt subsidies to minimum wage jobs, w/ no health benefits or chances for advancement | |||||
Jobs, w/ no health benefits or chances for advancement cannot sustain an individual or family in the long term because one cannot save for or weather any of life's emergencies or make any of life's major purchases such as an auto & home | |||||
Jobs, w/ no health benefits or chances for advancement are called dead end jobs | |||||
The living wage movement is attempting to eliminate dead end jobs by raising minimum wage to a point where one has health benefits & the possibility of saving | |||||
The living wage movement is not operating at the national level trying to get Congress to increase the minimum wage | |||||
The living wage movement is operating at the state, local, & the individual enterprise level & thus small groups of dedicated individuals are having an impact |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Since the development of Keynesian Economics, & "pump priming," the govt has the ability to significantly determine economic growth, or lack there-of | |||||
Govt economic policy has is a major factor in determining the the growth of the economy by setting interest rates, the money supply, which are called monetary policy, & govt spending & borrowing, which is called fiscal policy |
|
||||
Interest rates affect the amount of money that investors are willing to borrow to create more jobs |
|
||||
The money supply affects the amount of money that is available for investors to borrow |
|
||||
Govt policy which determines the interest rates & money supply is called monetary policy | |||||
Govt spending creates employment which pays people wages, thus directly lowering the unemployment rate & indirectly growing the economy by putting money in people's hands to spend in other businesses |
|
||||
Govt policy which determines govt. spending & borrowing is call fiscal policy | |||||
The govt has generally chosen to fight inflation rather than unemployment because the upper classes are more impacted by inflation than unemployment, though there is always significant political pressure to lower unemployment |
|
||||
Beginning in the late 1970s, govt welfare programs have been systematically cut, w/ the biggest cuts coming during the Reagan Administration, 1980-88, & welfare reform during the Clinton Administration, 1992-2000, resulting in people moving off of welfare to sub poverty level jobs |
|
||||
Military adventurism, budget deficits, & an ideology that blames the poor for the nation's problems have been the primary motivators for the reduction in aid to the poor |
|
||||
Given govt cut backs, benefits in many programs were not adjusted to inflation, the poor are no longer able to supplement their income w/ food stamps or other govt aid, people were moved off of welfare to sub poverty level jobs, & health care is less available, & day care is less available |
|
||||
Because of govt economic policy, the US, compared to other modern, industrialized nations, has not only more people living in poverty, but also has less support for the poor resulting in more hunger & sickness |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
WELFARE REFORM ESTBED LIMITS TO THE AMT OF WELFARE ONE MAY RECEIVE & GAVE THE STATES GREATER LATITUDE IN CUSTOMIZING THEIR WELFARE SYSTEMS | |||||
|
In 1992 & 1996, the Clinton Administration & a Republican Congress passed welfare reform, called the "Welfare to Work Program" |
|
|||
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) which was called Aid to Families w/ Dependent Children ( AFDC ) until the 1996 welfare reform continues to be the cornerstone of the US welfare system | |||||
Under the 1996 welfare reform: | |||||
- the Feds get out of welfare administration & hand over money to the states in one block grant | |||||
- the States get flexibility to design their own welfare programs w/o Fed involvement | |||||
- there is a five year time limits on how long someone can get welfare, & states may lower, but not raise, that limit | |||||
- people who receive welfare must accept employment | |||||
- education could be substituted for employment for only one year | |||||
- vocational education could be substituted for employment | |||||
- unemployed adults have a time limit on how long they can receive food stamps | |||||
- there is increased federal funding for day care | |||||
- there is increased access to Medicaid for the poor | |||||
|
WELFARE REFORM WAS NEEDED TO ADDRESS THE 'CULTURE OF POVERTY' PROBLEM BY GETTING PEOPLE OFF WELFARE INSTEAD OF MAINTAINING THEM ON IT |
|
|||
|
Welfare reform was instituted because the structure of the old welfare program actually causes people to stay poor |
|
|||
|
Murray, 1984, 1992, wrote that the old welfare system encouraged teens to have babies, people to be dependent on aid, have illegitimate children, be single parents, etc. rather than finding jobs & supporting themselves |
|
|||
|
Because of the socially conservative views of Murray, the frustration w/ the failures of the old welfare system, the ideology of blame the poor, the ideology of Horatio Alger, the Republicans & Democrats attempted to "end welfare as we know it" (a Clinton slogan) |
|
|||
|
EVALUATION OF THE 1996 WELFARE REFORM SHOWS MIXED RESULTS |
|
|||
|
This program has drastically reduced the number of people on welfare |
|
|||
|
In 2001, welfare to work is still considered to be a success, but there has been the worry all along that this program would not provide for the needy if the US experienced a recession |
|
|||
|
In 2003, after over two years of a mild recession, the poor are being served by thread bare charity programs, & are not that much worse off than before the 1996 welfare reform |
|
|||
THE MURRAY THESIS HOLDS THAT WELFARE CREATES OR ATTRACTS MORE PEOPLE TO 'THE FREE RIDE' | |||||
|
William Julius Wilson examined the correlation btwn the amount of welfare people receive & the number of people on welfare |
|
|||
|
If the Murray Thesis is correct, the amount of welfare & the number of people on welfare should be positively correlated |
|
|||
|
If the Murray Thesis is incorrect, the amount of welfare & the number of people on welfare should be negatively correlated |
|
|||
MOST SOCIAL SCIENTISTS HAVE DISPROVED THE MURRAY THESIS & FOUND THAT WELFARE USE GOES UP WHEN THE ECON GOES DOWN | |||||
|
Many social scientists, e.g. Wilson, Ellwood & Bane, Rank, Moffit, Jencks found little support for the Murray Thesis, indicating that the number of people on welfare depends little on how much welfare is paying & much on how the econ is doing |
|
|||
|
Wilson found that when welfare benefits are high, the econ is doing well & the govt has more discretionary income to spend on welfare, there are less people on welfare |
|
|||
|
Wilson found that when welfare benefits are low, the economy is hurting & the govt has little discretionary income to spend on welfare, there are more people on welfare |
|
|||
|
Jencks found that the availability & levels of welfare benefits had little effect on the proportion of single mothers who were employed | ||||
|
Moffit found no correlation btwn single female headed families, illegitimate children, & welfare | ||||
There have been large declines in the number of people receiving welfare, but not all of these people have jobs | |||||
70% of those who had left welfare were still off welfare in 1997 | |||||
42% of those who had left welfare were employed w/ a median pay of $6.61 & half of those had no private or govt health insurance | |||||
Overall, the earnings of former welfare recipients were only at the poverty level | |||||
The most common reason for unemployment for people not on welfare was disability, followed by care taking, not able to find a job, & lack of transportation | |||||
One third of former welfare recipients are not eating well, & there is a 17% increase in emergency food requests in 2000, & one third of them were working | |||||
Welfare assistance is less available to Blacks |
Links |
|
Links |
|||
Functionalism notes that there is poverty & stratification in every society, indicating that poverty & stratification are necessary for society to function |
|
||||
Poverty & stratification become dysfunctional when they are too great |
|
||||
Economic inequality is one of the most important causes of conflict & disorder in society |
|
||||
Those at the very bottom of the economic hierarchy often become hopeless & alienated & "drop out" |
|
||||
Merton notes that if society provides goals, such as the typical American dream, but does not provide legitimate, institutionalized means for people to reach those goals, then anomie results | |||||
Anomie resulting from the dysfunctional relationship btwn goals & means results in people choosing the path of the innovation (which includes criminal behavior), ritualism, retreatism, or rebellion | |||||
See Also: Merton's revision of anomie | |||||
Thus poverty, stratification, & inequality may be functional up to a certain point, but most societies have far more than is necessary to motivate people |
|
||||
For functionalists, there is evidence that too much poverty, stratification, & inequality can be dysfunctional even for the upper classes |
|
||||
One reason that the upper classes pursue every greater amounts of wealth is that under the present system, just as anyone can succeed, anyone can fail |
|
||||
The upper classes are motivated not only by positive goals of wealth, such as status, but also by a fear that they need more to attain economic security |
|
||||
Davis & Moore hold that poverty, stratification, & inequality exist because they meet society's needs for productivity by motivating people |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|
STRATIFICATION IS THE STRUCTURE OF SOCIAL POSITIONS | |||
Stratification is the structured process by which social groups are assigned a social position, resulting in a hierarchy & a pattern whereby scarce "resources" are distributed unequally to these social positions |
|
||
FOR DAVIS & MOORE, SOCIETY HAS ALWAYS HAD STRAT & MUST HAVE STRAT TO FUNCTION | |||
Davis & Moore hold that stratification is universal | |||
STRAT MOTIVATES PEOPLE BY REWARDING THEM FOR DOING DIFFICULT JOBS | |||
|
Davis & Moore hold that poverty, stratification, & inequality exist because they meet society's needs for productivity by motivating people |
|
|
For Davis & Moore, the jobs that are the most critical to society, e.g. corporate mgrs., doctors., lawyers, etc., require longer & more difficult training than other jobs | |||
The jobs that are the most critical to society also carry greater responsibility, are stressful, have long hours, & should have high pay | |||
In order to induce highly capable people to take these critical jobs, society must offer them greater rewards in exchange for the difficulty in getting the job & the stress incurred on the job | |||
W/o the motivation of higher pay, people would be unlikely to sacrifice current income in order to get the years of arduous training that critical jobs require | |||
W/o higher pay, everyone would choose jobs that require no training, have little stress, & run only 8 to 5 |
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
CONFLICT THEORY HOLDS THAT IN MODERN SOCIETY, POVERTY IS AVOIDABLE BUT IS MAINTAINED IN ORDER TO CURTAIL ECON POWER & ENCOURAGE SUBMISSIVENESS OF THE MID & LOWER CLASSES | |||||
While poverty, stratification, & inequality exist in all societies, the more economically developed & productive societies have less inequality than others, not more as functionalists, including Davis & Moore, hold |
|
||||
Conflict theorists believe that poverty, stratification, & inequality exists because the upper classes benefit from it & have the power to make the social system work to protect their interests |
|
||||
Poverty, stratification, & inequality cause class conflict |
|
||||
Conflict theorists believe that it is in the interest of the wealthy to keep things as they are, i.e. preserve the status quo, whereas those w/o wealth have an interest in social change |
|
||||
THE MID & LOWER CLASSES HAVE NOT OVERTHROWN THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THE IT HAS NOT COLLAPSED, IDEOLOGY, THE MID & LOWER CLASSES HAVE BENEFITED, & GOVT REG HAS REDUCED THE WEAKNESSES OF THE SYSTEM | |||||
Marx believed class conflict would lead to overthrow of advanced capitalist society as the lower classes realized its own interest & seized power |
|
||||
Overthrow of advanced capitalist society has not happened because |
|
||||
- Marx believed that overthrow would & could only happen in advanced capitalist nations, & capitalism is not at that stage yet |
|
||||
- the control of ideology by the upper classes creates false consciousness in the lower classes, i.e., the lower classes do not realize their own interests & so therefore support the upper class & the status quo |
|
||||
- the rise of the middle class has lessened the enmiseration of early, laissez faire capitalism |
|
||||
- the rise of govt regulation of the economy has lessened the enmiseration of early, laissez faire capitalism & has curbed the excesses of capitalism including bank failures & large economic swings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
THE THEORIES OF POVERTY AS APPLIED TO SEMI PERIPHERAL & PERIPHERAL NATIONS VARY WIDELY IN THEIR DIAGNOSIS OF THE PROBLEM AS WELL AS THE SOLUTIONS RANGING FROM DOING NOTHING TO MAX GOVT INVOLVEMENT | |||||
The causes of poverty in semi peripheral & peripheral nations have some similarities to the causes of pov in the core nations w/ some exceptions |
|
||||
Semi peripheral & peripheral nations do have problems like falling real wages & higher accepted unemployment as do the core nations |
|
||||
But semi peripheral & peripheral nations do not have problems w/ deindustrialization & the expansion of the service economy since in most cases their industrial base is still developing & an expansion of a service econ would be an asset for their econs as compared to a subsistence agricultural base |
|
||||
In the core nations, there are SEVEN broad theories that explain poverty, some of which are useful in explaining pov in the semi peripheral & peripheral nations, & some which are not |
|
||||
1. FUNCTIONALISM HOLDS THAT POV WILL ALWAYS EXIST & IS NECESSARY TO MOTIVATE PEOPLE | |||||
The functionalist explanation of poverty perhaps has greater explanatory power in semi peripheral & peripheral nations than in the core nations because poverty motivates people to take the more difficult jobs & to risk dangerous emmigration to core nations |
|
||||
2. CONFLICT THEORY HOLDS THAT POV IS AN INEVITABLE, DESIGNED IN RESULT OF THE SYSTEM & CURRENTLY CONFIGURED & THAT IT IS MAINTAINED BY THE INTERESTS OF THE UC ( upper class ) | |||||
The conflict theory explanation of poverty, which holds that inequality & poverty exist because the wealthy & the powerful benefit from it & have enough power to make the social system work to protect their interests, is also valid in semi peripheral & peripheral nations, & perhaps is more obvious than in the core nations because class divisions are sharper & more tradl |
|
||||
In peripheral nations the upper class lives apart from the people, & in many peripheral nations there is only a very small middle class & therefore the class division btwn the very rich & the very poor is both extreme, as well as highly visible |
|
||||
3. THE COMMON VIEW HOLDS THAT POV IS PEOPLES' OWN FAULT & THEY WOULD RATHER BE ON WELFARE THAN WORK | |||||
The common view, which holds that the poor are lazy, promiscuous & would rather "go on the dole," is not true in either the semi peripheral & peripheral nations or the core nations, but the explanation is often invoked by the upper class & their ideological proxies in both |
|
||||
4. THE DOMINANT / POPULAR VIEW HOLDS THAT POV IS 'NATURAL' IN THAT SOME PEOPLE HAVE SKILLS THAT ARE REWARDED, & OTHERS DO NOT | |||||
The dominant or popular view, which holds that individual characteristics create poverty, is not true in either the semi peripheral & peripheral nations or the core nations, but the explanation is often invoked by the upper class & their ideological proxies in both |
|
||||
5. THE CULTURE OF POVERTY VIEW HOLDS THAT PEOPLE LEARN / ARE SOCIALIZED TO A LIFE OF WELFARE RATHER THAN A LIFE OF PRODUCTIVITY | |||||
The culture of poverty view, which holds that poverty directly influences individual characteristics through the process of socialization, & also that political econ forces indirectly influence poverty, has some explanatory power in semi peripheral & peripheral nations in that tradition often supports a patriarchal support of the upper class as well as the belief system that the poor should be content in their place |
|
||||
6. THE SITUATIONAL VIEW HOLDS THAT ACCEPTING / EXPLOITING WELFARE IS A RATIONAL REACTION TO A CHOICE OF A LOUSY JOB VS. A LIFE ON WELFARE | |||||
The situational view, which holds that the poor exhibit a practical reaction to their situation, has explanatory power in semi peripheral & peripheral nations as well as core nations in that people react to relative, absolute, & below subsistence pov, generally, in similar ways |
|
||||
People in relative poverty, i.e. that have some state or charitable support, if given the opportunity, will use it as a helping hand to move out of poverty, but if limited support is not sufficient to help the people out of poverty, then they become dependent on it |
|
||||
People in absolute poverty, i.e. that have no support & are existing at a subsistence level, i.e. a level that barely maintains human life, will go to any lengths to improve their situation |
|
||||
|
People living in subsistence pov, i.e. in cases of famine, war induced destitution, envl induced destitution, etc. can only barely survive |
|
|||
7. THE STRUCTURAL VIEW HOLDS THAT POV IS AN INTENTIONAL, BUILT IN FEATURE DESIGNED TO PRESERVE THE POWER OF THE UC ( upper class ) | |||||
|
The structural view, which holds that political economic forces directly influence poverty, is also valid in semi peripheral & peripheral nations, & perhaps is more obvious that in the core nations because class divisions are sharper & more traditional | ||||
|
MANY CAUSES OF GLOBAL POVERTY ARE TECHNICAL & UNIQUE TO SEMI PERIPHERAL & PERIPHERAL NATIONS INCLUDING TECH, POPULATION, CULTURE, STRAT, GENDER, & POWER |
|
|||
|
Certain facts, which are unique to semi peripheral & peripheral nations help us to understand what accounts for severe & extensive poverty throughout much of the world | ||||
In semi peripheral & peripheral nations: |
|
||||
1. technology is limited which limits econ opportunity |
|
||||
2. population growth is dramatic which increases pressure on the env & the econ sys to provide resources & jobs | |||||
3. cultural patterns emphasize traditions which, based on patriarchy, encourage submission to the upper class patriarchs & acceptance of the status quo of a 2 class system | |||||
4. social stratification is very pronounced in that there are generally only 2 classes, the upper class & the lower class, w/ a small mid class developing in semi peripheral nations | |||||
5. gender inequalities are dramatic & patriarchy supports the status quo econ relationships, & limits the productive capacity of women, who make up over half the population | |||||
6. global power relationships handicap the poorest nations through the complex econ processes of the globalization of banking, finance, info systems, econ systems, etc. | |||||
As demonstrated by both dependency theory & world systems theory, historically, wealth flowed from poor societies to rich nations through colonialism, the process by which some nations enrich themselves through political & econ control of other nations | |||||
See Also: Global Stratification Theory | |||||
Colonialism, which often required direct military intervention, has been replaced by what has come to be called neocolonialism | |||||
Exploitation continues through neocolonialism, a new form of global power relationship that involves not direct political control but economic exploitation by multinational corporations, huge businesses that operate in many countries |
|
|
Links |
|
Links |
|||
The three theories that offer the strongest explanations for the reasons for global poverty include: |
|
||||
a. Modernization Theory | |||||
b. Dependency Theory | |||||
c. World Systems Theory | |||||
|
The Table on Global Strat Theory outlines the causes of global poverty as the uneven development of industrialization, tradition, colonialism & neocolonialism; & the role of rich nations as having the capacity to not only help poor nations, but also to exploit them | ||||
A CRITICAL REVIEW OF MODERNIZATION THEORY SHOWS THAT IT HAS THE WEAKNESS OF MODERN CAPITALISM: POVERTY AMIDST WEALTH |
|
||||
Modernization theory has been widely supported among social scientists | |||||
Mod th is the most widely practiced theory in that it principles are visible in the actions of the World Bank, other intl development orgs, private banks, & corporations |
|
||||
Mod th has heavily influenced the foreign policies of the richer nations | |||||
|
Mod theory has failed to explain why, despite the best efforts of orgs such as the World Bank, many nations have not benefited & in fact, have fallen deeper into poverty |
|
|||
It has been attacked as a thinly veiled defense of capitalism | |||||
It ignores global forces that thwart the development of the poorer nations | |||||
It largely ignores the way in which all nations are linked through the global econ | |||||
It holds up the developed world as a model that all nations should emulate, reflecting an ethnocentric bias | |||||
It blames victims for their own econ problems | |||||
A CRITICAL REVIEW OF DEPENDENCY THEORY HOLDS THAT PERIPHERAL NATIONS ARE ONLY EXPLOITED & NOT DEVELOPED BY CORE NATIONS | |||||
Dependency theory correctly emphasizes the interdependency of the world's societies | |||||
Dependency theory treats wealth as a zero sum commodity | |||||
It predicts that countries w/ the strongest ties to rich nations should be the poorest | |||||
Dep th ignores the role of tradl culture in maintaining poverty | |||||
This theory downplays the economic dependency fostered by the former Soviet Union | |||||
The policy implications of dependency theory are vague | |||||
|
Dependency theory treats wealth wrongly in that it may correctly outline the abuses of power, but fails to address the benefits it has bestowed on poor nations |
|
|||
Dependency theory is wrong in blaming rich nations for global poverty |
|
||||
Dependency theory is simplistic in that it claims the capitalist mkt system is the cause of global inequality & thereby fails to address other causes of pov |
|
||||
Rich societies cannot be held responsible for corrupt & militaristic foreign leaders |
|
||||
Dep th is wrong to claim that global trade always makes rich nations richer & poor nations poorer |
|
||||
It is not clear how many nations have been helped or hurt by mod th |
|
|
The End
|