Internal
Links

Top
Review Notes on  IS 8 & 9:  Stratification
External
Links
  Syllabus, Online Course 
Link
  Resources 
Link
 
Outline on  IS 8 & 9:  Stratification 
  
Link
 Stratification   
Link
       Intro to Income Inequality in the US   
Link
       Intro to Wealth Inequality in the US   
Link
       Social Mobility   
Link
       A Comparison of Race, Gender, & Class Stratification   
Link
       Types of Societies that vary on Stratification   
Link
       Weber on Stratification   
Link
 Class   
Link
       Marxian Definition of Class   
Link
       Composite Definition of Class   
Link
       Subjective Definition of Class   
Link
 Power 
 
Link
      e.  Wealth and Income   
Link
            C. Wright Mills' Power Elite Theory   
Link
            Domhoff's Power Elite Theory   
Link
            Domhoff on the Three Key Interest Group Coalitions   
Link
            An Analysis of the Three Key Interest Group Coalitions   
Link
            A Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory by Farley   
Link
 Occupational Prestige   
Link
 Poverty   
Link
       Intro to the Consequences of Poverty   
Link
       Causes of Poverty   
Link
             Class & False Consciousness   
Link
                 - Horatio Alger Myth   
Link
            Out of Wedlock Births   
Link
            Unemployment   
Link
            Deindustrialization   
Link
            Low Wages & the Minimum Wage   
Link
            Govt Economic Policy   
Link
            Welfare to Work   
Link
 Functionalist View on Poverty   
Link
           Davis & Moore on the Functionality of Poverty   
Link
          Critique of Davis & Moore   
Link
 Conflict View on Poverty   
Link
         The Empirical Evidence on the Functionality of Stratification   
Link
 Global Stratification 
 
Link
             International Comparisons of Mobility   
Link
             Global Social Stratification   
Link
      Global Poverty   
Link
           Cross National Comparisons of Poverty   
Link
           The Causes of Global Poverty   
  Global Stratification Theory   
Link
      Modernization Theory   
Link
      Dependency Theory   
Link
      Critical Review of Stratification Theories   
Link
     World Systems Theory   

 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on  Social Stratification:   Class, Status, Power, Influence
External
Links
  -  Video Project:  Stratification by the Standard Deviants 
Link
  -  Video: Stratification by the Standard Deviants        18 min
Link
  -  Video Project:  Social Class by the Sociological Imagination Group
Link
  -  Video: Social Class by the Sociological Imagination Group     25  min
Link
  -  Video: Health, Wealth, & Social Status 
Link
  Introduction:  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  
  The word "strata" means layers  
  There are various definitions of stratification  
  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 any social ranking system resulting in a hierarchy & an unequal distribution of different (social /physical ) goods or resources  
  Stratification is a structured process by which social groups are assigned a social position, resulting in a hierarchy  
  Stratification is a pattern whereby scarce “resources” are unequally distributed  
  Stratification is a structured social process by which social groups are assigned a social position, resulting in a hierarchy  
  Stratification is the institutionalization of  inequality: A system of social relationships that produces & reproduces inequality  
  The institutionalization of inequality means that the system is composed of a layered hierarchy that is well established & is a system of social relationships that determines who gets what & why, i.e. offers an ideology that supports an unequal distribution of resources  
  A stratification system has informal "rules," which are relatively fixed over time which are influenced by the conflict of groups in society  
  Inequality itself is not institutionalized, nor unjust, but often it does come with a hierarchy because we are social/meaning creating beings who label things as good/bad....   
  It is only when inequality is institutionalized that we call it stratification and it is only when inequality is based on ascription or when equal access to resources required to achieve in a society are controlled by those high in the stratification system that we say that a stratification system is unjust  
  Heller holds that  "The term structured indicates an arrangement of elements, the inequality is not random but follows a pattern, displays relative constancy and stability, and is backed by ideas that legitimize & justify it."  
  The study of stratification focuses on how a particular pattern of the allocation of resources is passed down from one generation to another  
  The US once had an average level of income inequality, but now it has the highest inequality of any industrialized country  
  "The central focus of stratification study is the fact that over a number of generations, those individuals who fill positions in any particular level of positional hierarchy tend to be recruited from the corresponding level of the hierarchy of individuals and subgroups"  
  "Those advantaged usually find ways to assure that their offspring will be advantaged"  
Link
 Social differentiation is often a basis for stratification, but should not be confused w/ it:  
  Social differentiation exists when a distinct group or individual has distinct social qualities & social roles  
  Social differentiation & the level of stratification has increased in our society  
  The division of labor often parallels or reflects the stratification system since different jobs often have different rewards & unequal access to resources (social, et al)  
 
 Social mobility is the degree of individual or group movement within a stratification system, up or down  
 
 Vertical mobility is movement is social mobility up or down the occupational ladder & / or the class dimension  
  Horizontal mobility is movement across positions & / or occupations of roughly equal rank  
 
 Vertical & horizontal social mobility has slowed in the U.S.
 
 
 A society is said to be stratified by ascription when people primarily receive class, status, etc. through birth and is usually based on race, sex, family, social position, etc.
 
  Typical ascriptive characteristic in the US include race, gender, name, religion, etc.  
  The concept of ascription connotes that social position is "hereditary"  
  Ascription factors play a larger part in social mobility than our value system, which is part of our ideology, would have us believe  
  A society is said to be stratified by achievement when placement is primarily due to qualities that can be controlled by individuals e.g. what job you take or what education you get  
  Achievement is the level class, status, etc. which one attains, at least partially, through something they do, i.e. through their own efforts  
  When stratification occurs through achievement, social position is “earned”  
  Typical achievement characteristics in the US include occupation, income level, marriage status, educational level, etc.  
  Achievement factors play a smaller part in social mobility than our value system (ideology) would have us believe  
  Many fundamental social problems are addressed by the study of stratification  
  The study of stratification answers the questions:
-  Why are people rich or poor? 
-  What are the problems of poverty AND wealth?
-  How far can society allow each person to determine their own social position?
-  How are the social relationships of freedom, achievement, inheritance, etc. related?.
-  How do social factors operate to influence a person? 
-  How does the combination of individual & social factors impact ones achievement level?
-  To what extent is society responsible for all people?
-  Which generation do we blame? 
-  What are the political, economic, and social forces that produce inequality and stratification? 
-  Why do people rebel or not rebel? 
-  How does U.S. stratification compare to other countries? 
-  What is the basis of power? How is it maintained? 		  
  Various analytical constructs posit FOUR differing bases for stratification including class, status, power, & influence  
  Max Weber recognized that most societies have three major dimensions of stratification, which are the economic dimension, the social prestige dimension, & the political dimension: 
 
  a.  Class is the economic dimension of stratification  
  b.  Status is the prestige dimension of stratification  
  c.  Power is the political dimension of stratification  
  The composite term that includes a person's income, wealth, occupational prestige, and educational attainment is socioeconomic status  
  d.  Influence is the organizational dimension of stratification  
  Some theorists recognize that one's influence in society today is a function of the orgs, networks, peer groups, etc. to which one belongs & that this influence is largely independent of the three dimensions of strat as delineated by Weber, et al  
Link
 There is a strong interaction of class, status, power & influence in determining ones position in the stratification system  
  The degree of inequality in the stratification system in the modern world system has increased  
  Historically there has been extensive social mobility in the US mostly from the beginning of immigration & conquest in the 1400's to the 1950s  
  There is clear evidence that upward social mobility slowed & eventually reversed from the 1960s to the 1980s  
  In the mid 1990s, there was a restart of upward social mobility  
  The restart of upward social mobility for the middle class stopped in the face of the econ "slowdown" of 2001 & has remained stopped through 2005
blank
  Review:  Socio Historical Overview:  Stage 11:  The Post-Industrial Era  

 
Top
  
Examples of Social Differentiation
      race      gender       job       clique....

 
Top
  
Examples of the interaction of class, status, power & influence

1.  In general they all vary in the same direction
     lo class = lo status = lo power = lo class ....

2.  But sometimes one dimension of stratification is out of sync
     lo class = hi status = hi power = ....
    Example:  political leader such as Lech Walensca of Poland

    hi class = lo status = lo power = ...
    Example:  Za Za Gabor:  despised actress

3.  At the extremes of any 1 dimension, unusual things happen
      Examples
     All the class (wealth) cannot directly translate into power
    Steve Forbes & Ross Perot have failed at running for President
    (This is because other billionaires are competing, through proxies, for this power)

     Example:  street person may have great power if they admit to self & others that they have nothing left to lose


 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on    Intro to Income Inequality in the US
External
Links
 
 INCOME IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT A PERSON OR FAMILY RECEIVES OVER SOME DEFINED PERIOD OF TIME, USUALLY A CALENDAR YEAR   
 
 Wealth is the total value of everything that a person or a family owns, minus any debts owed
 
  The causes of income inequality in the US are linked to two social changes including political policies, & US & world economics conditions  
  Over the long run, there has not been much change in the degree of inequality in the United States; but since the mid 1970s, the last 35 yrs., the degree of inequality has increased  
Link
 Table on % of Aggregate Family Income by Fifths,  1947 to 2000  
  An analysis of the  % of Aggregate Family Income by Fifths from 1947 to 2000 shows
   great regularity, i.e. only slow historic change
   the bottom 3 Quintiles are now doing worse,
   the fourth Quintile is doing slightly worse,
   & the top Quintile is doing better		  
  THE TOP FIFTH OF THE POPULATION EARNS AS MUCH AS THE REST OF THE POPULATION, THAT IS, 50% OF TOTAL INCOME   
  THE MIDDLE THREE FIFTHS OF THE POPULATION EARNS ABOUT 45 % OF TOTAL INCOME   
  THE BOTTOM FIFTH OF THE POPULATION EARNS ABOUT 4 % OF TOTAL INCOME   
Link
 Table on  % of Aggregate Household Income by Fifth's of the Population
 
 
 An analysis of the % of Aggregate Household income shows that on average
    the top fifth of the population earns as much as the rest of the population
    and the bottom fifth earns about 4 % of total income
 
Link
 Table on Average Household Income & Quintile & Top 5 %:  1973, 1979, 1989 ( 1989 $'s )
 
  An analysis of the Average Household Income & Quintile & Top 5 %:  1973, 1979, 1989 shows that 
- conditions became worse for all in the 1970's, but much more worse the lower class positions
- conditions became worse in the 1980's for the lowest 3 classes, but greatly improved for the top 5th & 5 %		  
Link
 Table on  % of Distribution of Families by Race & Income, 1992  &  2000  
  The Distribution of Families by Race & Income shows that 
    the distribution of income by race has a regular pattern
    in 1997 as a  % of the total of each race:
    in the lower class, there are less whites compared to more blacks & Hispanics
         they are about double the % of poor whites
    in the middle range, there are equal numbers of whites, blacks, & Hispanics
    in the upper class, there are more whites compared to blacks & Hispanics
         there are about 3 times the % of rich whites		  

 
Top
  
Table on Aggregate Family Income by Fifths,  1947 to 2000
Kerbo 0302  Kerbo 0502
 
% of Aggregate Income
Year
Lowest 5th
Second 5th
Middle 5th
Fourth 5th
Highest 5th
Top 5 %
2000
3.6
8.9
14.8
23.0
49.6
21.9
1997
3.6
8.9
15.0
23.2
49.4
21.7
1992
4.4
10.5
16.5
24.0
44.6
17.6
1990
4.6
10.8
16.6
23.8
44.3
17.4
1985
4.7
10.9
16.8
24.1
43.6
16.7
1980
5.1
11.6
17.5
24.3
41.6
15.3
1975
5.4
11.8
17.6
24.1
41.1
15.5
1970
5.4
12.2
17.6
23.8
40.9
15.6
1965
5.2
12.2
17.8
23.9
40.9
15.5
1960
4.8
12.2
17.8
24.0
41.3
15.9
1955
4.8
12.3
17.8
23.7
41.3
16.4
1950
4.5
12.0
17.4
23.4
42.7
17.3
1947
5.0
11.9
17.0
23.1
43.0
17.5
Range
3.6 - 5.4
8.9 - 12.3
14.8 - 17.8
23.0 - 24.3
40.9 - 49.4
15.3 - 21.7
Red represents the highest level achieved by a class       Blue represents the lowest level achieved by a class

 
Top
  
Table on % of Aggregate Household Income by Fifth's of the Population

 
% of Total Income
Mean Income
% of Total Income
% of Total Income
 
1992
1992
1997
2000
Highest 5 %
18.6 %
 NA
21.7 %
21.9%
Top 20 %
46.9
$ 91,494
49.4 
49.6
Fourth 20%
24.2
47,235
23.2
23.0
Middle 20 %
15.8
30,794 
15.0
14.8
Second 20 %
9.4
18,281
8.9 
8.9
Lowest 20 %
3.8 
7,328
3.6 
3.6
Kerbo 0402
  
96 mm households
Mean income $39,020
96 mm households
Mean income $51,000

 
Top
  
Table on Average Household Income & Quintile & Top 5 %:  1973, 1979, 1989 ( 1989 $'s )
SP 0403
Bottom 5th
Second 5th
Middle 5th
Fourth 5th
Top 5th
Top 5 %
Average
1973
7,099
17,779
29,051
41,763
74,068
112,876
33,953
1979
6,842
17,018
28,059
28,925
73,896
112,700
33,389
1989
6,994
17,401
28,925
43,753
85,529
138,185
36,520
% Change
  73 - 79
- 3.4
- 4.3
- 3.6
- 1.4
- 0.2
- 0.2
- 1.6
% Change
  79 - 89
- 1.5
- 2.1
- 0.5
4.8
15.5
22.4
7.6

 
Top
  
Table on % of Distribution of Families by Race & Income, 1992 & 2000
Kerbo 0402
Annual Income ( K's of $)
% of All Families
% White Families
% Black Families
% Hispanic Families
% Asian Families
under 5
3          2.9
3         2.3
7         6.1
6         3.3
3.5
5 to 10
 8          6.1
7         5.5
14        10.4
11         7.3
3.1
10 to 15
8          7.0
8         6.6
11         9.5
11         8.3
4.8
15 to 25
 15        13.4
15         13.0
18        16.5
20          18.3
10.6
 25 to 35
 13        12.5
13         12.6
14         12.9
15          14.7
9.4
 35 to 50
 16        15.5
17       15.4
15         16.8
17          17.7
13.5
 50 to 75
 18        18.9
19         19.4
13         15.2
12          17.4
20.1
 75 to 100
  9        10.4
10         11.0
5           6.5
5            7.4
12.1
100 & over
  9        13.4
10        14.2
3          6.1
4            5.7
22.7

 
External
Links

Top
Outline on an  Intro to Wealth Inequality
External
Links
 
 WEALTH IS THE VALUE OF EVERYTHING THAT A PERSON OR FAMILY OWNS, MINUS ANY DEBTS OWED 
 
  The fundamental point of an analysis of wealth inequality is that wealth is more unequally distributed than income  
  In the 00s, the top 20 % of all families hold 79% of wealth & earn 43 % of the income w/ a GDP of about $ 10 trillion in 2001  
  A survey conducted by the Institute for Social Research found that the top 0.5 % of the population owned 27 % of the wealth  
  Wealth is saved income, thus families, individuals & accumulate wealth over yrs, generations, even centuries  
  Example:  A typical middle class family owns outright a home, two cars, the beginnings of a pension fund, & maybe up to 3 months income in savings  
  From this total, subtract what the middle class family still owes mortgage payments, car payments, school loans, credit card debt, etc.  
  Wealth brings income, power, status, & independence  
  - Wealth can be used to purchase the means of production, which produces income  
  - Wealth used to purchase the means of production allows those w/ wealth to create more wealth  
  - Today the purchase of the the means of production is usually done by buying stock  
  - In the past, the purchase of the means of production was through direct ownership & control of businesses, e.g. Carnegie, Rockefeller, etc.  
  Owning or managing the means of production gives one authority & power in society because of the control of property, jobs, development, etc.  
Link
 Wealth can be transferred from generation to generation  
Link
 Wealth can be increased, lost, decreased, eroded  
  The rationalization of finance has created an equation for the creation of wealth that takes into account many factors such as rate of return, risk, inflation, liquidity, etc.  
  Rate of return (ROR) = risk X inflation x liquidity  
  ROR is the % of earnings from an investment & depending on the type of investment, ROR may be profit, interest, dividends, or capital gains  
  In finance, risk is the safety or security of the investment as well as how likely is it to profit or loss   
  Inflation is the % rise in the general price level which has the effect of devaluing many kinds of wealth  
  THE TOP FIFTH OF THE POPULATION OWNS ABOUT 85 % OF ALL WEALTH  
  THE MIDDLE THREE FIFTHS OF THE POPULATION OWNS ABOUT 15 % OF ALL WEALTH  
  THE BOTTOM FIFTH OF THE POPULATION HAS NEGATIVE WEALTH; THEY OWN LITTLE & ARE IN DEBT  
Link
 Table on the Distribution of Wealth & Income by Family Fifths:  1989, 1995  
  An analysis of wealth & income shows that 
- Wealth is much more unequally distributed than income
- The top fifth earns 49 % of the income & owns 85 % of the wealth
- The bottom fifth earns 3.7 % of the income & owns -1.5 % of the wealth, i.e. they are in debt
 
  The top 40 % of the population owns 97 % of everything  
Link
 Table on the Distribution of Household  Net Worth by Race  
  An analysis of the distribution  of household  net worth by race / ethnicity shows that the wealth gap btwn races is greater than btwn classes  
  The wealth gap, being greater among races than among classes, is largely a function of the enormous wealth of the top 20 % of the population which is mostly White males  
Link
 Chart of the Number of Billionaires:  1986, 1988, 1992, 1996  
  An analysis of the number of billionaires shows the numbers of super-rich have grown five-fold in ten years  
  In 1993, of the 101 most wealthy the U.S. had 26, Japan  had 13, & Germany had 9   
  In 1999 Bill Gates was the richest person in the world w/ $ 90 bb
Two other Microsoft exec rank 2nd & 3rd
The wealth of the Microsoft billionaires has fallen because of the decline of the stock market & the deflation of the "tech bubble"		  
Link
 Table on the % of  Wealth held by top 1 % & .5 %  from 1958 to 1995  
  An analysis of the % of wealth held by the Top 1 & .5 % from 1958 to 1995 shows that their share decreases from the 60s to the seventies   ( because of social reforms ) & then increased in the 80s & 90s (because of tax reform, welfare limits, etc.)  
  Conclusions on Wealth Inequality:
- Wealth is much more unequally distributed than income
- The top fifth earns 49 % of the income & owns 85 % of the wealth
- The bottom fifth earns 3.7 % of the income & owns -1.5 % of the wealth, i.e. they are in debt
- The wealthiest 10 % own 90 % of all stocks, bonds & trusts
- The next richest 40 % of the population owns 12 % of all stock
- 50 % of the population owns no stock
- The wealthiest of top 1 % now controls 39 % of the wealth		  

 
Top
  
Wealth can be transferred from generation to generation

In 1982 one of Reagan's tax bills reduced inheritance taxes
In 2001, Bush Jrs. proposed tax bill established a time line that will totally phase out inheritance tax

Some wealth has come down through families over centuries
     Hapsburgs of Austria
     Rothchilds of France
     Royal family of England
Catholic Church wealth has transferred over millennium


 
Top
  
Wealth can be increased, lost, decreased, eroded

But "big money" rarely is totally lost
"New Money" is lost because the families have not learned how to transfer it
They often have not diversified


 
Top
  

Table on the Distribution of Wealth & Income by Family Fifths:  1989, 1995
 
% of Wealth
% of Income
    Family Share
1989
1995
1989
1995
        Top 1 %
38 %
39  %
15 %
14 %
        Top 10 %
71
72
39
39
        Top 20 %
79
85
43
49
        Fourth 20%
15
12
24
23
        Middle 20 %
6.2
4.5
17.1
15.2
        Second 20 %
1.1
0.9
11.1
9.1
        Bottom 20 %
-0.4
-1.5
4.7
3.7
An analysis of wealth & income shows that 
- Wealth is much more unequally distributed than income
- The top fifth earns 49 % of the income & owns 85 % of the wealth
- The bottom fifth earns 3.7 % of the income & owns -1.5 % of the wealth, i.e. they are in debt

 
Top
Table on the Distribution of Household Net Worth by Race
 
1991  Median net worth
White households
$ 44,408
Black households
   4,604
Hispanic households
   5,345
An analysis of the distribution  of Household Net Worth by Race/Ethnicity shows that the income gap btwn races is greater than btwn classes.  This is largely a function of the enormous wealth of the Top 20 % of the population

 
Top
  
Chart of the Numbers of Billionaires, World Wide:  1986 - 2005
 Year
World-Wide
1986
26 billionaires
1988
53
1992
71
1996
137
1997
259
1999
299
2000
322
2001
528
2004
587
2005
691
2006
793
An analysis of the Number of Billionaires shows the numbers of super-rich have grown five-fold from 1986 to 1997, & tripled from 1997 to 2006

 
Top

Table on the % of  Wealth Held by Top 1 % & .5 % from 1958 to 1995
blank
% of wealth held by
Year
Top 1 %
Top .5 %
1995
39
NA
1989
38
NA
1972
24
19
1969
24
19
1962
26
21
1958
26
20
1956
26
 
1953
28
 
1949
21
 
1945
23
 
1939
31
 
1933
28
 
1929
36
 
1922
32
 
1900
26 - 31
 
1860
24
 
1810
21
 
An analysis of the % of wealth held by the Top 1 & .5 % from 1958 to 1995 shows that their share decreases from the 60s to the seventies   ( because of social reforms ) & then increased in the 80s & 90s ( because of tax reform, welfare limits, etc. )
Data 1995 - 1958 from  Kerbo 0402
Data 1956 - 1810 from Curran 0403

 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on  Social Mobility
External
Links
  -  Project:  Your Experience of Social Mobility
Link
  Social mobility is the frequency w/ which people move up or down in a society's economic hierarchy  
  Social Mobility is also known as socioeconomic mobility       or simply               mobility  
  Socioeconomic mobility refers to mobility in all of the dimensions of stratification:   economic, prestige, & power  
  Social scientists frequently refer to upward social mobility or downward social mobility  
  Kerbo demonstrates that the US class structure is very stable; i.e., there is not great mobility
 
Percent of Income Earned by Lowest & Highest Quintile
 
1947
1970
1992
 Lowest Fifth 
5  %
5 % 
4 %
 Highest Fifth 
43 %
41 %
45 %

NOTE:  The 70s were the best years for the lower class & the worst for the upper class /corporate class

  
 
 The top & the bottom of the stratification system have the lowest levels of social mobility in the US  
  An example of the low level of social mobility in the US is that one out of 10 sons of manual laborers will attain professional employment, while seven out of 10 sons of professional workers will  
 
 In the US, the middle of the stratification system has the highest level of social mobility ( i.e. low occupational inheritance w/ higher intergenerational mobility )  
  There is a strong relationship between stratification and socioeconomic mobility in that there is more mobility in societies that have more equality  
  There are six fundamental types of stratification systems, each of which dominated a particular historical period, each of which fosters a particular level of social mobility
1.  Primitive communal system ( aka hunter gatherer society or tribal society )
2.  Slavery system  (two types:  conquest & racist)
3.  Caste system
4.  Feudal system ( aka estate system )
5.  Class system  ( aka capitalist or state capitalist system )
6.  Post-industrial system ( aka global system )		  
  Each type of economic system fosters a particular level of social mobility  
  Furthermore, particular economic systems have subtypes as is seen w/ pure capitalism, state capitalism, industrial capitalism, a service economy, etc.  
  There are EIGHT characteristics of strat systems in that they may be open, closed, vertical, horizontal, exchange, intergenerational, intragenerational, & structural  
  Open stratification systems have a high level of social mobility
 
  In an open stratification system, a person's position in society is attained as a result of what the person has done  
  Achieved status has substantial influence in an open stratification system
 
  Ascribed status has little influence in an open stratification system  
  An open stratification system is the type of system where achieved statuses have substantial influence over the social status a person attains in adulthood  
  Closed stratification systems have a low level of social mobility  
  In a closed stratification system, a person's position in society is attained by birth-right, e.g., race, sex, family, etc.  
  Achieved status has little influence in a closed stratification system  
  Ascribed status has substantial influence in a closed stratification system  
  A closed stratification system is the type of system where ascribed statuses largely determine a person's life chances  
  Vertical social mobility is movement up or down the stratification system, i.e. to a better or worse position; i.e. from working class to middle class from corporate class to upper middle class  
  Vertical mobility is the movement form one occupational position to another of higher or lower rank  
  Vertical mobility describes upward or downward movement in the standard of living as measured by income, prestige, autonomy, etc.  
  Conditions affecting vertical mobility include disability, formal demotion, lay-off, bumping, downsizing, closing, etc.  
  The greater the degree of vertical mobility, the more open the class system, the greater the vertical mobility, the closer the society is to the value of equal opportunity  
  An example of upward vertical example is movement from police officer to public school teacher  
  Horizontal social mobility is movement across positions of roughly equal rank  
  Horizontal social mobility is the mobility that most people experience
It is primarily from one type of job to another while a person's income, status, power, influence stay relatively the same
Of course people hope to do better on all dimensions as they advance their career, but few achieve enough to change class		  
  Horizontal mobility is the movement from one position to another of equal rank in the occupational structure  
  Examples of horizontal mobility include 
- moving from supervisor to manager or gaining seniority & status on the job
- the Electrician who leaves job w/ GM for job w/ Boeing even though it may include a sizable raise who is thus still a member of the middle class		  
 
 Exchange mobility, aka churning, denotes a type of social mobility where there is little societal social mobility, but high levels of individual social mobility
 
 
 Exchange mobility, aka churning occurs when someone's absolute position changes in relation to others
 
 
 Exchange mobility, aka churning, denotes relatively equal amounts of upward & downward social mobility, which often gives the illusion of upward class mobility
 
 
 The concept of exchange mobility, aka churning, denotes that
 
  - there are many people moving up the socio-economic scale as there are moving down the socio-economic ladder  
  - while it appears as if many people are moving up the socio-economic ladder, in reality those moving up are replacing those moving down  
  - people fall in and out of each class ( churning ) because of continuing economic competition  
  - once a person is poor, the chances are good that they will get out of poverty, but not very far  
 
 The concept of churning describes the fact that while a particular number of people may experience upward vertical mobility in a given year, usually nearly an equal number of people experience downward vertical social mobility
 
 
 The media & our ideology reflects upward class mobility ( things are improving ) therefore we are more likely to see the upward mobility & ignore the downward mobility
 
 
 Churning is also created by simultaneous status churning & by horizontal mobility  
  While the US has a poverty rate of 15 %, in a ten year period, 25 % will be in poverty at least once  
  43 % to 60 % of the poor do not move out of poverty for any length of time & thus, 67 % to 40 % do get out for at least a while  
  Thus, at least 17 mm adults & children are chronically poor & 33 mm fall in & out of poverty or rise into the Working Class or higher  
  It is the group of poor who rise into the working class who could significantly benefit by structural changes  
  Intergenerational mobility is the attainment by people of a socio-economic status that is higher or lower than their parents  
  W/ Intergenerational mobility, there is a changing proportion of higher & lower class families  
  When sociologists compare a person's status with that of his or her parents, they are looking at intergenerational mobility  
  Upward intergenerational occupational mobility occurs when a person's occupation/class as compared to parents, is higher  
  Intragenerational mobility compares the occupational position of a person over an extended period of time  
  Intragenerational mobility compares a persons 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. jobs  
  Upward intragenerational occupational mobility occurs when a person's occupation/class as compared to contemporaries, is higher  
  Mobility in the US is slightly above average for industrialized country, but it is less than most people assume   
  There is a direct relationship btwn stratification and mobility as seen in the fact that only one out of 10 sons of manual laborers will attain professional employment, while seven out of 10 sons of professional workers will attain professional employment  
  The top & the bottom of the stratification system have the lowest levels of social mobility in the US  
  From the view point of inflow & outflow mobility, low social mobility is created by high occupational inheritance & low intergenerational mobility  
  Thus, the top & bottom of the stratification system have high occupational inheritance & low intergenerational mobility  
  In the US, the middle of the stratification system has the highest level of social mobility  
  In the US, the middle of the stratification system has low occupational inheritance & high intergenerational mobility  
  Structural mobility is a type of mobility where classes of people improve their socio-economic position  
  Structural mobility occurs when there has been a growth in the economy of better paying, more pleasant, higher status, white collar jobs, and a decline in the number of blue collar jobs  
  Structural mobility describes ability to move to different occupation; such as from industry to service, & results from large scale changes in the economy  
  The occupational opportunity structure is dependent on structural mobility, the health of economy, immigration, etc.  
  In the industrialized modern nations, structural mobility occurs because of an increased proportion of jobs in the higher status, white collar categories  
  Growth in the economy of better paying, more pleasant, higher status, white collar jobs, & a decline in the number of blue collar jobs increases structural mobility  
  Structural mobility is the opposite of exchange mobility  
  The US has a strong value that there is a high level of social mobility, but in reality there is a high level of exchange mobility & little structural mobility  
  Although the US has little more mobility than most other industrialized societies, Americans believe & feel that there is a lot of mobility & that America is the land of opportunity where everyone who works hard can get ahead
 
  Historically, the US experienced positive structural mobility, but there have also been periods of negative structural mobility
 
  The historic eras which marked changes in structural mobility include:
-  "the land grab" in the mid 1800s
-  after the Industrial Revolution & the legalization of unions
-  in the 1930's, the Great Depression
-  after WW2 
-  after the Vietnam War
-  the Reagan Era 1980s & early 1990s
-  from the early 1990s to 2001
-  today?		  
 
 The US experienced positive structural mobility until "the land grab" was completed in the mid 1800s & then there was a long period of exchange mobility 
 
  After the Industrial Revolution & the legalization of unions, the working class gained & experienced positive structural mobility  
  In the 1930s, the US experienced negative structural mobility as a result of the Great Depression  
  After WW2, the US experienced positive structural mobility as a continuing result of industrialization, the Labor Movement & Pax American  
  After the Vietnam War, from the mid 1970s until the early 1990's the US experienced negative structural mobility  
  From the early 1990s to 2001, the US experienced slight positive structural mobility but mostly exchange mobility  
 
 70 % of Americans agree that "America is the land of opportunity where everyone who works hard can get ahead"
 
  80 % agree that "people who grew up in rich families have an average or better than average chance of getting ahead"  
  50 % believe that blacks, women, & working class families have an "average or better than average chance of getting ahead"  
  But the groups of blacks, women & working class families have a poorer than average chance of getting ahead  
 
 The Horatio Alger Myth is the belief that anyone, no matter how poor, can succeed on a grand scale  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on a   Summary:  A Comparison of Race, Gender, & Class Stratification
External
Links
  Stratification based on the ascribed characteristics of race & gender remain important, influential factors even in modern societies whose primary method of stratification is achievement, i.e. the merit system
 
  Women & racial or ethnic minorities receive lower pay & work at lower status jobs than white males
 
  In 1994, median incomes of year round, full time workers for both black males & white females were about three quarters of white males 
 
  In 1994, median incomes of year round, full time workers for both black females & Hispanic males were about two thirds of white males & other groups had even lower incomes
 
  Race & gender bias compounds inequality in modern societies
 
  While wealth is more unequally distributed than income, the ownership of major wealth is even more stratified by race & gender than income
 
  The over-whelming majority of income producing wealth remains in the hands of a small proportion of the white, male population
 
  Median wealth of Whites is six to ten times that of Blacks & Latinos and the disparity is even greater for income producing assets
 
  Relative to the rest of the population, during the 1980’s, poor blacks have become poorer  
  The average Black life expectancy is lower than that of whites  
  Mexican Americans & Puerto Ricans have experienced severe discrimination & disproportionate poverty  
  Among Asian Am's, the level of educational attainment is the highest of any racial or ethnic group in Am society  
  Edl levels among Jewish Am's are above the national average  

 
External
Links

Top
Outline on the Types of Stratification Systems
External
Links
  There are six fundamental types of stratification systems, each of which generally dominated a particular historical period:
1. Primitive communal system ( aka hunter gatherer society or tribal society )
2. Slavery system  (two types:  conquest & racist)
3. Caste system
4. Feudal system ( aka Estate System )
5. Class system ( aka Capitalism System )
6. Post-industrial system ( aka The Global System )		  
  1.  The primitive communal system has the highest level of equality  
  When examining hunter gatherer societies & other early human social systems anthropologists generally agree that, compared to today, there was a very high level of equality  
  During the pre empire era, circa 10 K BC - 3 K BC, inequality/stratification begins  
  During the pre empire era, patriarchal gender relations first developed  
 
 2.  Slave system
 
  Historically, many types of slave systems have existed  
  Slave systems before the middle ages were generally less stratified & had more social mobility than did later slave systems  
  3. The caste system has a  legally or formally defined stratification system based on groupings assigned by birth that are unchangeable
 
  Examples of the caste system include ancient & modern India, ancient Japan, ancient China  
  There is the least amount of  socioeconomic mobility found in the caste system
 
  India's caste system is based on religion and has existed for thousands of years  
  Many countries, like the US & Malaysia, have never had a caste society  
  4.  In the estate or feudal system, status & class is determined on the basis of land ownership & / or formal title  
  Examples:  Europe in the Middle Ages
                 Russia in the late 1800's
                 Rural Mexico today		  
  The estate system has the highest level of inequality  
  The estate system has slightly more mobility than the caste system and usually breaks down as a society begins to urbanize  
  5.  In the class system, ( aka capitalist system ) status is influenced mostly by achieved status, i.e. the merit system  
  Examples:  western, industrialized, democratic countries today  
  In a class system, both ascribed & achieved statuses have significant effect on people's income, wealth, & social position  
  Though class systems are more open than caste systems, studies have shown that mobility is limited in class system  
  When examining the relationship between industrialization and stratification, one finds that virtually all industrialized countries distribute income more equally than most pre industrial countries  
 
 6.  In the post-industrial system ( aka the global system ) capitalist class relations exist in varying degrees of development around the world
 
  Globalization has resulted in a world-wide stratification system where entire countries are relegated to a position based on global social forces  
  Generally, western industrial democracies have a high level of social mobility & a full range of classes  
  The developing nations are struggling to attain social mobility & build a middle class  
  Undeveloped nations, isolated dictatorships, etc. have little or no social mobility, nor a middle class  
  Both developing & undeveloped nations have difficulty developing because of the developed nation's advantages in competition & sheer size 
 
Link
 The Chart on the Characteristics of the Types of the Stratification Systems examines the 6 Fundamental Types of Stratification Systems & the Characteristics of Stratification Systems
 
  Each type of stratification system may be analyzed along FIVE characteristics of stratification systems:  
  1.  Normativity is a characteristic of a strat system which examines the amount of mobility that the society's ideology accepts & thus ranks a society as open or closed  
  2.  The method of placement, i.e. ascription, or achievement, mixture is a characteristic of a strat system which describes the social processes through which rank in a society is established  
  3.  The method of legitimization, i.e. tradition, ideological, religion, or legal, is a characteristic of a strat system which describes the social processes through which rank in a society is justified  
  Tradition, ideology, religion, legal rationalization, are all methods of legitimation in stratified societies, all of which are embedded in our culture & social structure  
  4.  The form of inequality, i.e. status, class, or power, is a characteristic of a strat system which describes the three types of rank recognized in most societies  
  5.  The level of inequality is a characteristic of a strat system which describes the amount or quantity of stratification in a society  
  The level of inequality is:
- low in primitive communal societies
- high in slave, caste & feudal societies
- medium in class societies		  

 
Top
  
Charton the Characteristics of the Types of the Stratification Systems
PW
Type of 
System		 Normativity Ranks
(Mobility)		 Method of 
Placement		 Legitimization
(ideology)		 Basis of 
Ranking		 Level of
Equality
Primitive 
( Hunter Gatherer)		 open achievement tradition status highest equality
Slavery generally closed ascription legal/racism economic (class) hi inequality
Caste closed ascription religion status hi inequality
Feudal generally closed generally ascription legal/religious economic highest inequality
Class open mostly achievement legal economic/
bureaucratic (power)		 low to medium
Post-industrial open mostly achievement legal economic/
bureaucratic (power)		 low to high

 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on  Weber on Social Stratification:   Class, Status, Power, Influence
External
Links
  -  Video:  SES         5:21
Link
  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  
 
a.  Class Economic Placement in the strat system is determined by income & wealth
 
 
b.  Status Prestige Placement in the strat system is determined by cultural determinations of prestige, honor, charisma, etc.
 
 
c.  Power Political Placement in the strat system is determined by political determinations of control or authority over others
 
 
d.  Influence Organizational Placement in the strat system is determined by organizational determinations of control or authority over others
 
  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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on the Introduction to the  Stratification of Social Class
External
Links
  -  Video:  EO. Wright on Social Class             4:49
Link
  -  Video:  Class          27:05
Link
  -  Video:  Standard Deviants on Class          6:20
Link
  -  Project:  Your Experience of Class
Link
  A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF CONFLICT THEORY IS THAT THERE IS CLASS CONFLICT IN SOCIETY 
Link
  Class analysis is not class bashing or conspiracy theory  
  The form of society is shaped by the conflict btwn the groups in society  
  Different groups have conflicting basic self interests & these groups are called classes  
  A CLASS OF PEOPLE HAS SIMILAR INCOME, WEALTH, STATUS, & RELATION TO THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION   
  Sociologist refer to a group of people who are similar in terms of level of income or wealth as a social class  
  A class is a social grouping of people w/ similar socio economic status & relationship to the means of production in any type society  
  A class is a group of people who are similar in terms of level of income or wealth  
  For Kerbo, a class is a grouping of people w/ similar positions & similar political & economic interests  
  The class dimension of stratification is based on economic position  
  Class analysis is widely utilized in the social sciences  
  The sociological definition of social class indicates that there are many definitions, which are labeled in many different ways and have unclear boundaries  
  For Marx, there is class conflict in society:  The form of society is shaped by the economic base, as well as by conflict btwn groups in society  
  According to Marx, the most important aspect of the definition of class is a person's relationship to the means of production & most people are either workers, or they have ownership of the means of production  
  For Marx, a class is a group that has a conflicting basic self interest as compared to another group / class & the primarily conflict in society is economic  
 
 Marx's class analysis holds that     " All history is the history of class struggle "  
  There were only two primary classes in Marx's day  
  One problem with the Marxian definition of social class is that it places a salaried person receiving $125,000 a year in the same social class with someone working for the minimum wage  
 
 Weber believes that class is determined by a person's relationship to means of production, as well as one's life chances, & capital ownership ( status & power )  
 
 Groups (classes) conflict because of  competition over scarce resources
 
  HISTORICALLY, THERE WERE 6 TYPES OF SOCIETIES, EACH W/ DIFFERENT SETS OF CLASSES   
 
 There are SIX types of society/stratification systems, each w/ its own unique class structure  
 
 An example of a stratification system w/ a unique class structure is a feudal, agricultural society, where the landowners are the ruling class, who were made up of royalty / aristocrats.  The catholic church clergy made up another class and the subordinate class consisted of serfs, peasants, tenant farmers
 
 
 An example of a stratification system w/ a unique class structure is the pure capitalism that existed in Marx's day, the mid 1800s, where there were only two classes: the owners who were known as the bourgeoisie, & the workers who were known as the proletariat
 
  THE MOST COMMON CLASS FORMULATION TODAY INCLUDES THE LOWER CLASS, WKING CLASS, MID CLASS, UPPER MID CLASS, & UPPER CLASS   
 
 Today, more classes are recognized than in Marx's time
 
Link
 Table of Various Formulations of Class
 
Link
 Table of Nine Classes in the Modern Industrialized Nations ( Primarily the US )
 
Link
 What are these classes based on?
 
 
 The lower class accounts for 10 to 20 percent of the population, this group is struggling to make it, lives around the poverty line, depending on employment, health, marital status, etc. 
 
  Most homeless people are adult males  
 
 The working class accounts for 30 to 35 % of the population, & works at blue collar or clerical jobs and has income below the average level of $51,000 for a family  
  Sociologist Herbert Gans is a conflict theorist who in “The Functions of Poverty” makes the point that a good many Americans (the non poor & often the wealthy) benefit from the continued existence of widespread poverty  
 
 The lower middle class accounts for 25 to 35 % of the population, this group holds the lower status white collar jobs, many of which may not require a college degree, and has income around the median level of $51,000 for a family
 
 
 The upper middle class accounts for 15 to 20 % of the population & is made up of better paid mgt. & professional employees, and has income above the median level of $51,000 for a family
 
 
 The upper class makes up about 2 to 5 % of the population and some have assets well in excess of $1 million
 
  The corporate class is more likely to have made their wealth by their own efforts rather than from the ownership of capital  
  The upper class may consist of some of the new rich  
  The new rich experiences status inconsistencies because they are educated but cannot earn the incomes to live up to their expectations  
 
 The elite class makes up about 1 % of the population & many have assets well in excess of $1 million
 
  The elite social class includes both the "old rich" and the "new rich"  
 
 In 2001 the 400 wealthiest families ranged from $600 mm to Bill Gates w/ $54 bb, i.e. $54,000 mm
 
 
 The old rich gain prestige from their name alone & have been wealthy for generations
 
 
 Some of the old rich include the Rockefellers, the Fords, the Carnegies, the Danforths, Steve Forbes, & others  
 
 The new rich gain prestige from being "self made"
 
 
 Some of the new rich include Bill Gates, Sam Walton, Steven Jobs, Ross Perot, & others  
  CLASSES MAY BE BASED ON OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURES, AUTHORITY STRUCTURES, OR PROPERTY   
  Kerbo believes that class divisions are based on THREE major criteria which overlap to a certain degree  
  a.  Class is based on a person's position in the occupational structures  
  b.  Class is based on a person's position in the authority structures  
  Authority structures are systems which determine how many people a person must take orders from versus how many people a person can give orders to  
  When normal people are accorded the power to protect & maintain their political & economic interests, even when their interests conflict w/ other groups, they exercise that power  
  c.  Class is based on a person's ownership of property  
  Ownership, in the modern world includes not only land, but also
- stocks
- bonds
- intellectual property
- patents
- copyrights
- proprietary knowledge		  
  Given that the US is an industrial capitalist nation, typical listing of class divisions are made primarily in terms of occupational & economic divisions  
  Classes are often labeled differently by different analysts, depending on the questions they are asking  
 Link
 Table  The Convergence of Occupation, Bureaucratic & Property Divisions of Five Class Categories  
  For many analysts, the major conflict in society is between the owners & the workers  
  Class analysis examines the exact mixture of achievement versus ascriptive factors that determine where people end up in the econ hierarchy  
  Class analysis asks many fundamental questions about the role of economic stratification in society, such as:  
  a. 'what is the most important criteria in distinguishing classes?'  
  b.  'how many classes exist?'  
  c.  'to what extent do individuals recognize the divisions of class?'  
  d.  'do class divisions still exist in the US & other industrialized nations?'  
  e.  'are racism & other forms of discrimination based primarily on class, status, power or race stratification?'  

 
Top  
Table of Various Formulations of Class
PW
Bourgeoisie UC Upper Class Capitalist Class   Elites
  MC Upper Middle Class Higher Nonmanual Class Higher White Collar Class  
Proletariat LC Lower Middle Class Lower Nonmanual Class Lower White Collar Class White Collar
    Working Class Skilled Manual Class Skilled Blue Collar Class Blue & Pink Collar
    Lower Class Unskilled Manual Class Unskilled Blue Collar Class  
          The Poor

 
Top
  
Table of Nine Classes in the Modern Industrialized Nations ( Primarily the US )
PW
  
1. Upper Class
 ( Old Money )		 Families high in property ownership w/ high authority flowing from said ownership;
e.g.:  the old established families: Rockefellers, DuPonts, Mellons, Fords, Carnegie		  
2. Corporate Class
 ( New Money)		 Families w/ high authority & power in major corporations in government usually w/o extensive ownership in these corporations
Examples:  corp. presidents, vice presidents, & top board members
Most analysts agree that the UC is shrinking while the corp class is growing		  
3. Upper Middle Class Families w/ relatively little property but high to middle positions in occupation (nonmanual labor) and authority
Examples:  lesser corporate managers, doctors, lawyers....		  
4. Middle Class Families w/ relatively little property but  middle positions in occupation (nonmanual labor) and authority
Examples:  lesser corporate managers, doctors, lawyers & major office workers, clerks, salespeople		  
5. Lower Middle Class Families w/ relatively little property but middle to low positions in occupation (nonmanual labor) and authority
Examples:  office workers, clerks, salespeople		  
6. Skilled Working Class Families w/ little or no property middle to low positions in a skilled occupation often based on manual labor w/ little or no authority
Examples:  Plumber (blue collar)		  
7. Unskilled Working Class Families w/ little or no property who are in middle to low positions in an unskilled occupation often based on manual labor w/ little or no authority
Examples:  Fast food worker (white collar), construction laborer (blue collar)		  
8. Lower Class Families w/ no property & no authority who are often unemployed, & may receive enough $ to stay in a home through the family, welfare, social sec, disability, crime, etc.  
9. Destitute Families w/ no property & no authority who are often unemployed, who do not receive enough $ to stay in a home  

 
Top  
Table: The Convergence of Occupation, Bureaucratic & Property Divisions of 5 Class Categories
Kerbo 0305
 
Positions in Three Main Types of Institutional Structures
Class Categories
Occupation
Bureaucratic Authority
Property Relation
Upper Class
High
High
Owner
Corporate Class
High
High
Nonowner
Middle Class
High to Mid Level
Mid Level
Nonowner
Working Class
Mid Level to Low
Low
Nonowner
Lower Class
Low
Low
Nonowner

 
Top  
What are these classes based on?
Broadly speaking, classes are based on your economic position in society

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the   Marxian Definition of Class
External
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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Composite Definition of Class
External
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
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Subjective Definition of Class
External
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
 

 
External
Links

Top
Outline on the Stratification of Power
External
Links
 
 -  Video:  Power             0:29 
Link
  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 
1.  peer networks  6.  the military 
2.  the family / gender  7.  charity 
3.  religion  8.  education 
4.  work /economy  9.  the media 
5.  govt  10.  leisure / recreation 
 
  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   
Link
 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  

 
External
Links

Top
Outline on  Power as Wealth & Income
External
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
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Power Elite Theory
by C. Wright Mills
External
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)  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on     William Domhoff:  Power Elite Theory     19  - 
External
Links
Link
 -  Biography & Major Works  
  For Domhoff power is a construct in that it cannot be measured directly  
  Domhoff asks three questions to determine who has power:  a.  Who governs?  b.  Who benefits?  c.  Who wins?  
  a.  Who governs? 
 
  Broad based Social Groups who are well represented among elected & appointed office have power & use it to govern
 
  b.  Who benefits from governmental decisions?
 
  Social groups who consistently have govt actions favor their interests have power
 
  c.  Who wins when social controversies arise?
 
  For Domhoff, the social groups who consistently win have power
 
  For Domhoff, the top 5% of the population, i.e. the elite class, and the next 5% of the population, i.e. the corporate class, consistently have representatives in govt, have govt actions favor their interests, & win controversial issues
 
  Pluralists hold that different groups, at different times, have high scores high on representation in govt, have govt actions favor their interests, win controversial issues
 
  Domhoff also uses the reputational approach where he examines how people repeatedly exercise power
 
  W/ the reputational method, as used by Domhoff, one asks significant people who they believe is powerful
 
  The reputational method, which Domhoff uses, has the weakness that people do not always know who has power and that asking people who has power leads them to assume that someone has power
 
 
 According to Domhoff, 1983. there are three main interest groups trying to influence policy at the national level:   corporate coalition, a small business coalition, and a labor / liberal coalition  
  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  

 
Top
  

William Domhoff

Began as a interest in the muckrakers
Received a Ph.D. in Psychology, focused on dream research
Became interested in Power Elite Theory as a result of
    his in law family
    the Civil Rights Movement
    E. Digby Baltzell's Philadelphia Gentlemen.  (1958)
    Also was influenced by Mills, Paul Sweezy, Robert Dahl

 
Top    
Major Works by Domhoff

Who Rules America.  1967
The Higher Circles.  1970
The Powers That Be.  1979
State Autonomy or Class Dominance.  1996
Black in the White Establishment.  1991  Co-author
Diversity in the Power Elite.  1998
Who Rules America.  2001


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the   Key Interest Groups by Domhoff
External
Links
  -  Project:  Key Interest Groups 
Link
  -  Project:  Key Interest Groups in the Envl Debate 
Link
  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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on an   Analysis of Key Interest Groups
External
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 then, the capital gains tax was 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 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, and 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  
  a.  it is a looser & more diverse coalition which makes it less unified  
  b.  it had fewer economic resources  
  c.  it had less access to govt officials  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on a  Comparison of Pluralist Theory & Power Elite Theory
External
Links
   -  Project:  Comparing Pluralism & Power Elite Theory 
Link
  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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Occupational Prestige
External
Links
  -  Project:  Occupational Prestige 
Link
  -  Supplement:  Harris Interactive on Prestige, 1998 
Link
  -  Supplement:  Harris Interactive on Prestige, 2002 
Link
  -  Supplement:  WSJ  Presigious Occupations, 2006 
Link
  Occupational Prestige (OP) is the status, honor, or level in a hierarchy given to individuals in an occupation 
 
  Like class, OP is largely a subjective quality, but social scientists have quantified it through surveys 
 
  OP & class interact in that the level a person attains in one partially determines the level a person attains in the other 
 
  Thus, in general, the higher a person's class, the higher their occupational prestige, & vice versa 
 
  A person's occupation has many social ramifications beyond its immediate instrumental & economic consequences   
  Social scientists consider occupations as a proxy for one's position in the social class structure  
  People of similar occupations, beside having similar incomes & work experiences often pursue similar patterns of leisure & consumption, share distinctive lifestyles, & are perceived in similar fashion by other members of society (Trice, 1993)  
Link
 There are many different scales used to measure prestige & status, each of which varies in application to a particular social group, validity, reliability, etc.   
  Occupational classifications by the Census, i.e., the Census Classification Systems (CCS), the UN's International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) system, the Dept. of Labor's Dictionary of Occupation Titles (DOT), etc. all utilize the rough ordering provided by skill & prestige  
  The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) carried out early research on occupational prestige (North & Hatt, 1947; Hodge, Siegel, & Rossi, 1964)  
  NORC survey respondents ranked occupations by the standing that members would have in the community, ranking occupations along a 100 pt. scale resulted in a high for Supreme Ct. Justices w/ a score of 89 to shoe shiners w/ a low of 27  
  Treiman, 1997, notes that similar scales have been developed in many countries, & the findings in one country tend to approximate those in other countries  
  While OP is subjective, it has remained constant over time, demonstrating the regularity & strength of social qualities, structures, culture, etc.
 
Link
 See the Table on Occupational Prestige Ratings:  US Compared to 60 - Country Average
 
  OP ratings stay constant except that new occupations arise & take their place in the hierarchy, & as occupations disappear
 
  OP ratings are constant even among many industrialized nations
 
  Even some less industrialized countries such as China, have similar Occupational Prestige Ratings as the US
 
  OP ratings show that, globally, people agree that higher prestige jobs should be paid more
 
  However, it is not clear whether higher prestige in an occupation causes higher pay, or whether higher pay causes people to rate jobs as having higher prestige
 
  Parsons & the functionalists believe that higher prestige in an occupation causes higher pay
 
  Marx & the conflict theorists believe that higher pay causes people to rate jobs as having higher prestige
 
  The determinants of OP include the:
 
    - level of pay
 
    - educational requirements
 
    - amount of physical labor required by the job
 
  Occupational prestige, education, & income tend to be closely related, but there are exceptions  
  An exception to the correlation of occupational prestige, education, & income can be seen in members of the clergy who are typically highly educated, have relatively low pay, & have high prestige  
  Indicators of socio economic status (SES) often predict the general status of an occupation based on income & education  
  Duncan, 1961 & Stevens & Cho, 1985 have developed scales to measure SES  
 
 The highest ranked jobs include professional occupations which are widely associated high incomes & high levels of income
 
 
 Today the "classic," & oldest professions include:  doctors, professors, lawyers, & accountants  
 
 New professions include airline pilots, architects, dentists, etc.  
 
 Many occupations have risen in prestige & pay to be called semi professions, including firefighter, police, veterinarians, etc.  

 
Top
  
Table on Occupational Prestige Ratings:  US Compared to 60 - Country Average
Far0506
OCCUPATION
60 COUNTRY AVERAGE
US
University Professor or Dean
86
82.4
Physician
78
 81.5
University Professor
78
78.3 
 Physicist
76
73.8
 Member, Board of Directors
75
71.8
 Lawyer
73
75.7
 Architect
72
70.5
 Dentist
70
73.5
 Chemist
69
68.8
 Sociologist
67
65.0
 Airline pilot
66
70.1
 High school teacher
64
63.1
 Clergy member
60
70.5
 Personnel director
58
57.8 
 Artist
57
57.0
 Classical musician
56
55.0
 Social Worker
56
52.4
 Journalist
55
51.6
 Professional nurse
54
61.5
 Secretary
53
45.8
 Actor or actress
52
55.0
 Union official 
50
41.2
 Real estate agent
49
44.0
 Professional athlete 
48
51.4
 Farmer
47
43.7
 Motor vehicle mechanic
44
35.8
 Policeman / woman
40
47.8
 Railroad conductor
39
40.9
 Telephone operator
38
40.4 
 Jazz musician
38
37.2
 Carpenter
37
42.5
 Dancing teacher
36
32.3
 Firefighter
35
33.2
 Sales clerk
34
27.1
 Truck driver
33
31.3
 File clerk
31
30.3
 Assembly line worker
30
27.1
 Construction worker
28
26.2
 Gas station attendant
25
21.6
 Waiter
23
20.3
 Janitor
21
16.1
 Farm worker
20
21.4
 Garbage collector
13
12.6
 Shoe shiner
12
   9.3 
Note:  In a limited number of instances, there were slight differences in job titles btwn the world average and the US average.  The closest job title was used.

Source:  Occupational Prestige in Comparative Perspective by Donald J. Treiman, 1977, Academic Press. 

 
Top
  
Table on Names & Types of Prestige, Status, etc. Scales

Miller DC (1983). Handbook of research design and social measurement. 4th ed. Newbury Park, Calif. : Sage Publications.
UTA location & call number: Central Library H 62 .M44 1983 

Search the full Tests and Measures in the Social Sciences: Tests Available in Compilation Volumes.
Help   Go to: List of all Keywords, Collections examined 
To obtain any of these resources, you can:
1. Check the library closest to you to determine if it has the source volume;
2. Contact YOUR library Interlibrary Loan department or other services available at your institution.

O.D. Duncan’s socioeconomic index (1961)
Reiss AJ; Duncan OD; Hatt PK; North CC
Pg280-282, 290-300 

Siegel’s (NORC) prestige scores (1971)
Siegel PM
Pg282-286, 290-300 

Treiman’s standard international pestige scale (1977)
Treiman DJ
Pg286-287, 290-300 

 Nam Powers socioeconomic status scores (1975)
Nam CB; LaRocque J; Powers MG; Holmberg
Pg287-290, 290-300 

August B Hollingshead two factor index of social position (1965)
Hollingshead AB
Pg300-308 

Revised occupational rating scale from Warner, Meeker, and Eell’s Index of status characteristics (1949)
Warner WL; Meeker M; Eells K
Pg309-313 

Alba M Edwards social economic grouping of occupations (1934)
Edwards AM
Pg313-315 

Hemphill’s index of group dimensions (group dimensions descriptions questionnaire) (1956)
Hemphill JK
Pg316-324 

From:  http://libraries.uta.edu/helen/test&meas/Table%20of%20contents/Miller1983_contents.htm


 
Internal
Links

Top
  Outline on  Poverty
External
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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on the  Consequences of Poverty - Intro
External
Links
  JOB LOSS, LOWER INCOME, HIGHER PRICES, ETC. ALL IMPACT THE POOR MORE THAN ANY OTHER CLASS   
 
 Life is more difficult for poor people in that they are ill more often, receive poorer & more limited medical care, live shorter lives, more mental illness, more likely to be a victim of crime, more likely to die in infancy, & are less happy
 
 
 The children of the poor have a greater risk of dying in infancy, a greater risk of getting in trouble w/ the law, a greater risk of teenage pregnancy, a lower quality education, less likely to complete high school
 
 
 The poor spend more of their income on food & housing than the non poor & yet they are inadequately fed & housed, more likely to live in overcrowded housing
 
 
 Because the poor cannot afford adequate housing, they often live in crime prone areas & are thus more likely to become the victims of crime
 
 
 Because the poor are often afraid to venture out, & cannot afford adequate heating or air conditioning, they are more likely to die in fires from substandard heating, from the cold, & from heat stroke
 
 
 Because the poor cannot afford adequate housing, they often live in environmentally degraded areas & are thus more likely to become the sick from pollution
 
  CHURNING IN THE CLASS SYSTEM MEANS THAT MANY PEOPLE FALL INTO POVERTY, & THEN WORK THEIR WAY OUT, ONLY TO FALL BACK AGAIN   
 
 Estimates of the homeless in the US vary widely, & were an issue of contention in the 1990 & the 2000 census
 
 
 In 1990, the Census counted 230,000 homeless
 
  The Census found that in the 1990s over 1 mm were homeless at some time even though we were in the middle of an economic boom  
  In 1989, the Urban Institute estimated there were 600,000 homeless  
  Up to 7% of the population experience homelessness some time in their lives  
  In 2002, nearly one quarter of those w/ household income under $25,000 have no health insurance  
  In 2002, the uninsured rate for children of all classes was 11.6%, indicating that far less than that % have no insurance in the middle & upper classes while far more than that % have no insurance in the lower class  
  DESPITE BEING ONE OF THE RICHEST NATIONS, THE US HAS CHRONIC POVERTY LEVELS IN THE TEENS % OR HIGHER  
Link
 Figure on the Percent of Population Living in Poverty:    1959 - 2005
 
 
 An analysis of the Figure on the Percentage of Population Living in Poverty from 1959 - 2002 shows that there are TWO recent political factors that have affected the poor
1.  The Poverty rate fell in the 60s & 70s due to steady expansion of LBJ's War on Poverty
2.  Poverty rates steadily increased in 1980's due to conservative shift of Reaganomics
 
 
 13.1 % of the population lives at or below the poverty line in 2003, resulting in over 38 mm people living in poverty
 
  In 2005, 37.0 million people were in poverty, not statistically different from 2004  
  Poverty rates remained statistically unchanged for 
Blacks (24.9 percent) &
Hispanics (21.8 percent) btwn 2004 & 2005		  
  In 2005, the poverty rate decreased for non Hispanic Whites (8.3 percent in  2005, down from 8.7 percent in 2004)  
  In 2005 after 4 years of consecutive increases, the poverty rate stabilized at 12.6 percent in 2005; higher than the most recent low of 11.3 percent in 2000 & lower than the rate in 1959 (22.4 percent), the first year for which poverty estimates are available  
  The poverty rate in 2005 for children under 18 (17.6 percent) remained higher than that of adults (18 to 64 year olds) (11.1 percent) & that of seniors (people 65 & older) (10.1 percent; all were not statistically different from 2004  
 
 In 2005, the number in poverty remained statistically unchanged from 2004 for children (under 18) and adults (18 to 64 years old) (12.9 million & 20.5 million, respectively)  
 
 In 2005, the number of seniors (65 and older) in poverty increased; 3.6 million in 2005, up from 3.5 million in 2004
 
  The overall US poverty rate is over twice ( 2.2 ) that of other industrialized nations  

 
Top
Figure:  Percent of Population Living in Poverty:    1959 - 2002
Year
% at or below Poverty Line
as defined by the US Census
1959
    23 %
1960
22
1965
17
1970
13
1975
12
1980
17
1985
15
1990
12
1995
16
1997
14
2000
13
2001
11.7
2002
12.1
2003
13.1
2004
12.6
2005
12.6

 
Top

Internal
Links
Outline on the  Causes of Poverty
External
Links
Link

IS07s
  -  Project:  Poverty:  Theory & Experience
Link
3 SC
  -  Project:  Video:  The New Poor
Link
  
  -  Video:  The New Poor 2:30
Link
  
  There are FOUR economic conditions that affect the poor
a.  falling real wages
b.  higher accepted unemployment
c.  deindustrialization
d.  expansion of service economy		  
PW
FB MC TF \/
Link
 Today, there are SEVEN broad theories that explain poverty
1.  The functionalist explanation of poverty holds that poverty motivates people to take the more difficult jobs
2.  The conflict theory explanation of poverty is 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
3.  The common view holds that the poor are lazy, promiscuous & would rather "go on the dole"
4.  The dominant or popular view holds that individual characteristics create poverty
5.  The culture of poverty view holds that poverty directly influences individual characteristics through the process of socialization, and also that political economic forces indirectly influence poverty
6.  The situational view holds that the poor exhibit a practical reaction to their situation
7.  The structural view holds that political economic forces directly influence poverty		  
Kerbo0409
ES
  In the recent past, Social Darwinism held that the poor were not as evolutionarily developed as successful people    
  1.  The functionalist explanation of poverty holds that poverty motivates people to take the more difficult jobs    
  The functionalist view of poverty was best developed by Kingsley Davis & Wilbert Moore in 1945 in an article entitled "Some Principles of Stratification"
Link
  
  Davis & Moore's argument, in brief , is that    
  a.  the most critical jobs require more difficult training, & are more difficult in general    
  b.  In order to get people to take the difficult jobs, like being a doctor, we need to pay more for that job, & less for the easy jobs, such as street sweeping    
  2.  The conflict theory explanation of poverty is 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    
  Conflict theorists hold that it is in the interest of the wealthy to keep things as they are; i.e. preserve the status quo    
  Conflict theorists hold that it is in the interest of the poor to pursue social change    
  Conflict theorist note that the poor have not pursued social change, & the system has not changed because    
  a.  capitalism has raised the standard of living for those in the industrialized world    
  b.  the democratic reforms of the "trust-busters," the New Deal, et al, have curtailed the excesses of capitalism    
  c.  democratic reforms have added rights & power to those at the bottom of the system in the form of civil rights, the Labor Movement, etc.    
  3.  The common explanation of poverty holds that the poor are lazy, promiscuous & would rather "go on the dole"  
Kerbo0409
  The common view today generally encompasses THREE  factors     
  a.  Poor people are simply lazy    
  b.  Poor people have loose morals causing too many children & out of wedlock pregnancy, both of which cause poverty  
Kerbo0409
  Poor people do begin sexual activity earlier, but overall they are no more promiscuous  
Kerbo0409
  Poor women have a small pool of "marriageable men," thus poor women have more sex & babies out of wedlock, but at the same overall level  
 
  c.  The welfare dependency view of poverty is that poor people would rather "go on the dole" than work  
 
 Link
 An Analysis of the Pie Chart on the Work Status of Poor People in 2000 demonstrates over 50% of the poor did work or attend school, but only some of those would legally be considered unemployed  
 Far0506
  The concept of exchange mobility explains how new people keep falling into poverty  
 
  The western value of individualism holds each person is responsible for their own lot in life & thus western culture generally supports the belief that the rich are rich because they work hard, are skilled, etc., while poor are poor because they are lazy, unskilled, etc.  
 
  Individualism also holds that the individual is more important that the group & therefore the govt should not infringe upon the rights of individuals to pay taxes to pay welfare for a group of poor people  
 
  The US has the strongest value of individualism, compared to any other nation, which comes from
- our frontier ideology
- our perception & reality of the US as a land of opportunity
- the belief that anyone can get ahead in the US		    
 
 In general, in the US, people do blame the poor for being poor & for many other social problems
 
 
 
 About half of the U.S. population believes that the poor lack thrift, do not give enough effort, have loose morals, or are drunks    
 Link
 The Table on Comparative Attitudes Toward Inequality & Govt Involvement in the Economy to Reduce Inequality demonstrates that the US has the most unfavorable attitudes toward inequality, tending to blame the poor, & for govt involvment in reducing inequality  
ConPovAdv
 Link
 The Table on General Subject & Funding of Poverty Research in Major Sociology Journals:  1965 to 1975 & 1984 to 1994 demonstrates that the social sciences focus on poverty is high regardless of low govt funding for those studies  
ConPovAdv
 
 And the poor themselves often hold demeaning beliefs about other poor people    
 
 The negative view of the public toward the poor is reflected in our acceptance of higher inequality as seen in little consistent support for govt action to reduce unemployment and income inequality    
 
 4.  The dominant or popular view holds that individual characteristics create poverty & the strongest argument in the dominant view is that the poor are biologically or genetically inferior
Link
Kerbo0409
04DomPop
CausesPov
  5.  The culture of poverty view holds that poverty directly influences individual characteristics through the process of socialization, and also that political economic forces indirectly influence poverty
Link
 05CulPov
  6.  The situational view holds that the poor exhibit a practical reaction to their situation
Link
 06SitCausePov
  7.  The structural view holds that political economic forces directly influence poverty
Link
07StrucCausePov
FB MC TF /\

 
Top  
Table:  Comparative Attitudes Toward Inequality & Govt Involvement in the Economy to Reduce Inequality
Question 
Hungary
Austria
  Italy 
W. Ger
 Switz.
Netherlands
  UK 
Australia
  US 
1. Govt should provide a guaranteed income
78 %
54
67
50
42
48
59
38
18
2. Govt should provide job for all who want one
90
77
82
74
48
74
58
40
44
3. Govt should send poor children to college
72
78
90
85
81
84
83
74
75
4. Govt should reduce the income gap
77
77
81
56
41
64
63
44
28
5. People have equal opportunity to get ahead
18
na
na
55
na
na
42
na
66
6. Upper limits should be placed on incomes
58
na
na
32
na
na
39
na
17
7. Hard work brings a better life
na
na
na
43
na
na
38
na
60
Table  9 - 5:  Comparative Attitudes Toward Inequality & Govt Involvement in the Economy to Reduce Inequality demonstrates that the US has the most unfavorable attitudes toward inequality, tending to blame the poor, & for govt involvment in reducing inequality

 
Top  
Table:General Subject & Funding of Poverty Research in Major Sociology Journals:  1965 to 1975 and 1984 to 1994
Kerbo0409
Subject of Research Article
Total by Category
% of all Poverty Articles
Total by category receiving 
govt or foundation funding
% of total funding 
going to category
ccccccccccccc
1965-1975
1984-1994
1965-1975
1984-1994
1965-1975
1984-1994
1965-1975
1984-1994
1. Amount of poverty
1
4
2
19
0
1
0
8
2. Characteristics of the Poor
39
5
58
24
18
5
55
42
3. Political or economic causes of  poverty
7
4
10
19
2
1
6
8
4. Poverty Programs
19
5
28
23
13
5
39
42
5. General or Theoretical discussion
1
3
2
14
0
0
0
0
Totals
67
21
100
99
33
12
100
100
Table 9 - 6:  General Subject & Fundingof Poverty Research in Major Sociology Journals demonstrates that the social sciences focus on poverty is high regardless of low govt funding for those studies

 
 
 
Top  
Pie Chart on the Work Status of Poor People in 2000
An Analysis of the Pie Chart on the Work Status of Poor People in 2000demonstrates over 50% of
    the poor did work or attend school, but only some of those would legally be considered unemployed
Far0506

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on an  Intro to Class & False Consciousness
External
Links
  -  Project:  Class & False Consciousness
Link
  CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS OCCURS WHEN GROUPS ACCEPT THE IDEOLOGY RELEVANT TO THEIR OWN INTERESTS 
 
  Class consciousness is when subordinate groups do not accept the ideology of the dominant group, but accept ideology relevant to their own interests
 
  Class consciousness is when a group of people embrace a culture / life- style that represents their own interests
 
  An example of class consciousness is that the rich believe in their own superiority & the natural inferiority of the poor
 
  An example of class consciousness is that the middle class believe in equal opportunity for all & not in the superiority of the rich & not in the natural inferiority of the poor
 
  FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS OCCURS WHEN SUBORDINATE GROUPS ACCEPT THE IDEOLOGY OF THE DOMINANT GROUP & BELIEVE THINGS THAT ARE NOT IN THEIR OWN INTEREST 
 
  False consciousness is when a group of people embrace a culture / life-style that harms their own interests
 
  For Marx, when non upper class people accept the world view of upper class, they have false consciousness
 
  An example of false consciousness is that the middle class indulging in consumerism, believing the rich are deserving, the poor are not deserving
 
  An example of false consciousness is that during the 1972 Presidential race, McGovern, the Democratic candidate, proposed limiting inheritance to .5 mm & this position was opposed by the vast majority of people even though over 90%  wouldn't be affected
 
  Class consciousness occurs when a group of people w/ a common self interest correctly perceive that interest & develop beliefs, values, & norms consistent w/ advancing that interest
 
  The concepts of class & false consciousness do not denote correct & incorrect consciousness  
  Historically, the class & false consciousness Ideologies of some groups have been accepted as wrong by most observers  
  Marx saw the workers, i.e. the proletariat, as the only group capable of class consciousness
 
  False consciousness is the beliefs, values, etc. that work against a group's / class' self interest
 
  Both workers & owners can experience false consciousness
 
 
 Many theorists believe this is the common condition today
 
 
 For Marx, we have either class or false consciousness  
 
 For Marx, class consciousness develops out of working class experience/context  
  An important aspect of class is the extent to which a society has members who are aware of, & identify w/ the social classes to which they belong  
  Americans are less class conscious than people in other societies  
  Nearly all Americans think of themselves as "middle class" or "working class"  
  In many societies, the wealthy readily identify themselves as upper class  
 
 There are FIVE reasons the US has no class consciousness
1.  The culture & ideology of the US is that of equal opportunity
2.  The media & all social structures support the Horatio Alger Myth
3.  The US has a relatively weak Labor Movement & no Labor Party
4.  Education is tied to social class in the US
5.  The US once had more structural mobility
 
 
 1.  THE CULTURE & IDEOLOGY OF THE US IS THAT OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY 
 
  As a result of  the US's foundation on the counter value of rebellion against title & monarchy, & the dissemination of the Horatio Alger Myth, the US's ideology mystifies class status  
  American's prefer not to openly acknowledge their class status  
  Americans prefer to believe that people have similar statuses & similar situations in life; that we are all pretty much alike  
 
 2.  THE MEDIA & ALL SOCIAL STRUCTURES SUPPORT THE HORATIO ALGER MYTH 
 
  America's entertainment media, education system, all sectors of society, support the belief that anyone who tries can succeed, & that love will easily overcome social class differences btwn people  
  Examples of media support of false consciousness:  
  Pretty Woman  
  Dirty Dancing  
  White Palace  
  The Horatio Alger Myth supports false consciousness, preventing people from acting in their own interests  
      See Also:  The Horatio Alger Myth  
  The widespread presence of the Horatio Alger Myth, & similar ideological components in Am culture illustrates that it is in the class interest of the wealthy to promote the image of Am as a society where class doesn't really matter & where anyone can "make it"  
 
 When people perceive that there is not equal opportunity, they criticize the system & support change
 
  When people have false consciousness, when they believe that anyone can succeed, they accept the system as fair & legitimate  
  As long as people have false consciousness, believe in the fairness of the system, they will not demand changes that threaten the wealthy & the powerful  
  It is in the interest of those w/ wealth, including ownership & control of the media, to promote the Horatio Alger Myth, the ideology that the system is open & fair  
 
 3.  THE US HAS A RELATIVELY WEAK LABOR MOVEMENT & NO LABOR PARTY 
 
  There is evidence that people who question the ideology of fairness are treated more harshly in the US than elsewhere  
  For example Sexton, 1991, demonstrates that Labor Unions & Labor organizers were, & are, repressed more harshly in the US than in Europe  
  In the 1930s, the US used the military, police & private security companies to interfere w/ strikes, often w/ the use of violence & the hiring of strikebreakers was common  
  Today, the US has the most restrictive labor laws of any industrialized country, & has the least amount of both physical & labor rights protection  
  In Canada, all public employees have the right to organize, bargain, & strike, while in the US they may not strike, taking much power away from organization & bargaining  
  In the US, companies can refuse the contract of a newly certified union, demanding a recertification  
  In Canada, to form a union, unions need only submit signed cards from a majority of workers  
  While the process of using signature cards to obtain union certification is legal in the US, in practice, signature cards & most certification elections are contested  
  The lack of a Labor Movement means there has been no Labor Party in the US, resulting in a general weakening of the political left  
  Canada & most European countries have a major labor or "social democratic" party  
  In Canada & Europe income & vital services such as health care are more equally distributed  
  4.  EDUCATION IS TIED TO SOCIAL CLASS IN THE US   
  Because most educational systems are funded by state & local taxes, usually property taxes, educational systems are much more effective in more wealthy regions, enhancing their class consciousness  
  The upper class sends their children to private school, enhancing their class consciousness  
 
 5.  THE US ONCE HAD MORE STRUCTURAL MOBILITY, WHICH MEANT THAT CLASS RELATIONSHIPS, & HENCE CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS, WAS LESS APPARENT TO PEOPLE & ALSO LESS NECESSARY   
 
 The US had a rapidly expanding economy through the 1950s, providing ever more, higher paying jobs lessening the need for class consciousness  
  As the rest of the world has moved to a modern, industrial economic base, the US faces more global competition, resulting in less economic expansion increasing the need for class consciousness  
  Less economic expansion creates less jobs, which creates less structural mobility making class consciousness more necessary  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the Horatio Alger Myth
External
Links
  The Horatio Alger Myth is the belief that anyone, no matter how poor, can succeed on a grand scale
 
  Americans generally believe that they have considerable social mobility  
  The Horatio Alger myth is the belief in social mobility  
  The Horatio Alger myth is an important part of Americans' ideology, of their false consciousness  
  Horatio Alger lived from 1832 - 1899 and wrote novels for boys
 
  Alger was born in Revere, MA
 
  Alger's stories were about boys who rose from poverty to wealth & fame through hard work, virtuous living, & luck
 
  Alger's novels reinforced an image of the US as a land where dreams could come true
 
  In Alger's novels, anyone could get rich, attain high social position, & power
 
  AKA rags to riches
 
  Alger wrote more than 130 books which sold about 40 mm copies
 
  Alger was one of the most influential writers in the US
 
  Ragged Dick      ( begun in 1867 )
Luck and Pluck  ( begun in 1869 )
Tattered Tom     ( begun in 1871 )
 
  1866 - 1896 Alger devoted much of his time & money to helping a home for orphans & runaway boys in NYC
 
  Alger used his experiences w/ the children as material for his novels
 
  The Horatio Alger myth is culturally embedded in the US
 
  70% of Americans believe that "America is the land of opportunity where everyone who works hard can get ahead" (Kluegel & Smith, 1986, p. 44)
 
  Over 80% of Americas believe that "People who grew up in poor families have an average or better than average chance of getting ahead" 
 
  Over 50% of Americans believe that Blacks, women, & working class families also have a good chance to get ahead
 
  The Horatio Alger myth is a myth because all of these groups have a considerably poorer than average chance of getting ahead, yet most people believe otherwise  
  The result of a culture embedded w/ the Horatio Alger myth is that people generally oppose efforts to reduce poverty because they incorrectly place most of the blame on the poor people themselves  
  The widespread presence of the Horatio Alger myth, & similar ideological components in Am culture illustrates that it is in the class interest of the wealthy to promote the image of Am as a society where class doesn't really matter & where anyone can "make it"  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on   Out of Wedlock Births
External
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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Unemployment
External
Links
  -  Project: Video: Risky Business:  Family Crisis:  Unemployment
Link
  -  Video: Risky Business:  Family Crisis:  Unemployment     9:25 & 13:31
Link
  BEING OUT OF WORK IS NOT THE SAME AS BEING UNEMPLOYED BECAUSE THE LATTER IS AN OFFICIAL GOVTL DEFINITION   
  Unemployment is defined as the percentage of the labor force officially determined to be w/o work, & looking for work in a given month
 
  The labor force is defined as anyone who is 16 or older who is not institutionalized  
  In general, the labor force makes up about half of the total population
 
  See Also:  Worker & Labor Force as Units of Analysis for more on the definition of the labor force  
  In order to be considered in the unemployed category by the govt., people must be in the labor force & are  
  a.  employed neither part time nor full time for pay or trade  
  b.  actively seeking work during the four weeks preceding the govt. survey of the labor force  
  c.  currently available to take work  
  d.  not out of work longer than 6 mos.  
 
 Specifically, many groups of people are not considered to be part of the workforce, including students, those employed part time, prisoners, those considered to be incompetent (children, the mentally ill, etc.), the retired, the chronically unemployed, etc. because these people are not considered to be part of the labor force
 
  The unemployment rate (UR) is the number of unemployed people divided by the number of people in the labor force, multiplied by 100, to give a percentage  
  UR = (unemployed/labor force) X 100  
  A rise in the UR often indicates that the business cycle is about to enter a downturn; conversely, a decline often indicates economic improvement  
  The UR is higher in economically depressed areas & lower in prosperous areas, so URs indicate local labor market conditions  
  FRICTIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT IS THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE OF PEOPLE BTWN JOBS   
 
 Frictional unemployment is considered to be the unemployment that results from unavoidable delays btwn jobs takes time to find a new job  
 
 Economists estimate that frictional unemployment is estimated,  to be 3% though some estimates are lower  
 
 Frictional unemployment could be reduced by programs to match job openings more quickly w/ qualified candidates  
  During WW 2, unemployment fell to 1.6%, which is considered by some to be a more realistic minimum level of frictional unemployment  
  STRUCTURAL UNEMPLOYMENT IS LONG TERM OR BUILT IN UNEMPLOYMENT   
  Structural unemployment is the chronic gap btwn the number of jobs in the economy & the number of people seeking work  
  Structural unemployment results from economic shifts or the chronic shortage of jobs  
  During good times, a boom, a growth phase, structural unemployment makes of the biggest share of unemployment  
  In 2003 - 2004, a new & unique economic phenomenon, the "jobless recovery," manifested high economic growth rates (over 8%) but continuing high rates of unemployment, over 6%  
  Economists hope that the jobless recovery will be a short lived economic phenomenon, & not a new, higher level of structural unemployment   
  CYCLICAL UNEMPLOYMENT IS THAT WHICH IS AFFECTED BY ECON BOOMS & BUSTS   
  Cyclical unemployment is the component of unemployment that results from economic downturns  
  In a recession, depression or any economic downturn, cyclical unemployment makes up the biggest share of unemployment  
  Cyclical unemployment results from economic downturns  
  In his conception of the Sociological Imagination, C. W. Mills notes that unemployment is a public issue, but in most cases people individualize it, making it appear as a personal trouble  
  Unemployment is often a public issue, not a personal trouble  
  For Mills, the most important distinction btwn a public issue & a personal trouble is that the former requires a social solution, i.e. one person cannot resolve the issue, while w/ a personal trouble, the resolution lies solely w/ the individual  
  Different classes, occupations, races, genders, groups are affected differently by unemployment  
  UNEMPLOYMENT RATES HAVE BEEN 'POLITICAL FOOTBALLS' WHEN THEY WERE MANIPULATED TO MAKE A POLITICIAN LOOK GOOD   
  The Reagan administration increased allowable frictional unemployment, thus making unemployment appear lower  
 
 President Reagan shortened the time one can be out of work & still be considered to looking from 1 yr. to 6 mos. 
 
 
 Anyone who does not find a job in 6 mos. is considered to be chronically unemployed & is not considered to be part of the workforce
 
  As useful as labor force statistics are, the definitions used by the govt. are troublesome to many observers  
  Labor force participation, unemployment, etc. all include only those who produce goods or services for sale in the market  
  Labor statistics exclude many people who perform useful services outside the market economy, notably, homemakers & volunteers  
  When a homemaker reduces home work & takes a job, the person who is hired to help out around the home is counted in the labor force  
  DISCOURAGED WORKER IS THE OFFICIAL DESIGNATION FOR ONE WHO IS OUT OF WORK, BUT NOT CONSIDERED TO BE UNEMPLOYED   
  Discouraged workers are those persons in the labor force who are not counted as unemployed because they have been unemployed for such a length of time, as determined by the govt., that they are no longer considered available for work  
  Hodson & Sullivan point out that some workers stop looking for work because they believe no work is available  
  In December of 2003, only 1,000 new jobs were created in the economy, & it is estimated that 150,000 new jobs must be created each month just to keep up w/ labor force growth, but over 200,000 unemployed workers were moved from the official rolls of the unemployed to the category of discouraged workers & thus unemployment fell from 5.9% to 5.7%  
  Discouraged workers are officially removed from the labor force & are categorized as not in the labor force (NILF)  
  The BLS estimates that there were 600,000 discouraged workers in January of 1994  
  The BLS estimates that there were 200,000 discouraged workers in September of 2000  
  By excluding discouraged workers from the labor force, the official unemployment rate is too low in that it under represents the number of people who are out of work & would like a job  
  Those receiving unemployment insurance benefits are not used to estimate the unemployment rate because not every worker receives unemployment insurance benefits  
  See Also:  Unemployment Compensation  
  THE US ECON ALWAYS RESULTS IN UNEMPLOYMENT, CREATING JOB INSECURITY & A WKFORCE THAT IS UNABLE TO MAKE DEMANDS ON MGT BECAUSE THEY HAVE LITTLE ECON SECURITY   
Link
 The Table on a Summary of Historical Unemployment Rates shows that the US has accepted ever higher rates of unemployment as normal  
 
 During the 1940s, 50s, & early 60s unemployment was low, usually below 5%
 
  During the late 60s & 70s the US experienced "stagflation" denoting that the economy experienced stagnation, i.e. high unemployment sometimes above 10%, & simultaneous inflation
 
  In the recession of the early 1980s, unemployment reached over 10%
 
  One reason unemployment rose in the 70s & 80s is that the baby boomers reached working age & more women left home making & entered the workforce  
  Other reasons that unemployment rose in the 70s & 80s is that deindustrialization began, the Vietnam War was winding down, the oil crisis, shifts in the timber & farm industries, etc.  
  Women entered the workforce because under emerging gender norms, they were now allowed to, & because it became necessary for most families to have two incomes in order to maintain their standard of living  
  In the recession of the early 90s, unemployment reached over 8%
 
  From 1993 to 2000, the nation experienced its longest single period of growth, w/ unemployment falling to 4% by 2000
 
  In 2000, only 4% of poor people were unemployed, which was the lowest in many years
 
  The nation has been in a minor recession since late 2000 until 2004 w/ unemployment reaching nearly 6%
 
  WHILE MANY FEEL THE POOR ABUSE THE WELFARE SYSTEM, THE ECON CREATES A CLASS OF WKING POOR WHO CANNOT MAINTAIN A SUSTAINABLE LIFESTYLE & THUS FALL OUT OF WK INTO WELFARE   
Link
 An Analysis of the Pie Chart on the Work Status of Poor People in 2000 demonstrates over 50% of the poor did work or attend school, but only some of those would legally be considered unemployed  
  In 2003, the unemployment rate in the US is over 5%
 
  In 2003, there are signs of a recovery in that economic growth is increasing, but the unemployment rate is not falling, resulting in the phenomenon of a "jobless recovery"
 
  Unemployment is a major hardship for all classes except the upper class & the corporate class in that all of the middle class, & below, experience lay offs or downsizing
 
 
 When experiencing job loss, the middle classes experience a fall in their standard of living, being forced to live off of savings, or the sale of family assets such as the car or home
 
 
 When experiencing job loss, the lower classes experience poverty, having few assets to sell
 
 
 Most economists believe that increasing unemployment lowers inflation, thus there is a trade off btwn unemployment & inflation
 
  THE GOVT HAS A LOT BUT NOT TOTAL CONTROL OF UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, & CHOOSES TO KEEP RATES AT RELATIVELY HIGH LEVELS   
 
 Unemployment hurts primarily the middle & lower classes, while inflation hurts primarily the upper classes  
  Many social theorists believe that the economy is designed to limit inflation at the expense of high unemployment  
  Unemployment rates are deliberately regulated by the govt by TWO major processes, including monetary policy & fiscal policy  
  Monetary policy is set by the Federal Reserve Bank who determines the interest rates & amount of $ in the economy  
  See Also:  The Federal Reserve Bank      http://www.federalreserve.gov/otherfrb.htm
Link
  Traditional economics sees an unsolvable conflict btwn interest rates, inflation & unemployment  
  Interest rates & unemployment vary inversely:  improvement in one, degrades the other  
  While high interest rates, inflation & unemployment do have all classes, they impact different classes differently  
  Unemployment does more harm to lower classes than it does to the upper classes  
  The Fed is commonly know at "the inflation fighter"  
  Fiscal Policy is set by the President & the Congress who determine the amount of govt spending  
  Foreign trade policy addresses imports, exports, tariffs, deindustrialization, but not unemployment  
  Some trade policies, such as NAFTA, provide for limited retraining if one can demonstrate that their job was lost due to NAFTA  
  THE CONTINUOUS HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT RATES HAVE BEEN CALLS ED INDUSTRIAL RESERVE ARMY, DENOTING THE ECON INSECURITY & SUBMISSIVENESS IT FOSTERS IN SOCIETY   
  Marx's concept of the industrial reserve army denotes that people in occupational structure can be laid off to protect profits, & rehired in booms  
  An industrial reserve army is an army of the unemployed which functions to keep wages low  
  The US has no domestic industrial policy, which is a set of policies & regulations that coordinate monetary policy, fiscal policy, business regulations, industrial development, worker training, worker retraining, etc.  
  In relation to unemployment, many social scientists believe that the published/official rates of unemployment is influenced by the public policy process, & is usually lower than the actual rate  
  For example, in 1988 there were 6.7 mm people actively seeking work but unable to find it resulting in an official unemployment rate of 5.5%  
  In 1988, the workforce of 121.8 mm also had 5.4 mm people who desired work, and were available to start work immediately, but were not actively looking for work because they were in school, ill or disabled, were keeping house, or were convinced they could not get a job  
  Adding in all the categories of the unemployed, which govt. economists exclude, results in a 10.5% unemployment rate in 1988  
  Statistics on categories of people who are unemployed but not listed as such may be found in the US Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)  
  UNEMPLOYMENT AFFECTS THE MIDDLE & LOWER CLASSES THE MOST   
 Link
 The Table on Occupational Differences in Unemployment shows that unemployment is distributed unequally across occupational groups  
  Unemployment is unequally distributed across social groups  
  The unemployment rate for blacks & Hispanics is about twice that for whites  
  Youth unemployment among 16 - 19 yr. olds is two to three times as high as the overall rate  
  Unemployment among minority youths reached 30% to 40% in the early 1990s  
Link
 The Table on the Changes in US Unemployment Rates demonstrates that unemployment is a chronic problem in the US & that different groups experience different rates of unemployment   
Link
 The Table on Unemployment in Europe shows that unemployment is a chronic problem in many industrialized nations  

 
 
Top
  
Table on a Summary of Historical Unemployment Rates
HS 0205
  
  1950s   3 % Post war consumer boom  
  1960s   3 to 6.8 % Johnson's War on Poverty
VN War begins		  
  1970s   5 to 8.5%  unusual situation of "stagflation" VN War ends  
  1980s   almost reached 10 % Reagan recession
Tax cuts
Deficit spending
Military build-up		  
  1990s   drops from 10 to historic low:  4 % Welfare reform
Limited defense spending		  
  2000s   begins w/ historic low:  4 % Is the info econ immune to recession?  
  2003   reaches a high of 6.2% Term "Jobless Recovery" is coined  

 
Top
  

Table on Occupational Differences in Unemployment
HS 0205
Year
1992
1998
Overall US Unemployment Rate
7.4 %
4.5 % 
Professionals & Managers
3.1
1.8
Clerical Workers
5.7
3.7
Craft Workers
8.8
4.2
Service Workers
8.1
6.7
Machine Operators & Laborers
11.0
6.7
Construction Laborers
22.9
14.2
The Table on Occupational Differences in Unemployment shows that Unemployment is distributed unequally across occupational groups
Census, 1993e

 
Top
  
Table on the Changes in US Unemployment Rates
HS 0205
Year
All Civilian Workers
Whites
Blacks
Hispanics
Unemployed over 17 Weeks
1948
3.8 %
3.5 %
--
--
0.5 %
1949
5.9
5.6
--
--
1.1
1950
5.3
4.9
--
--
1.3
1951
3.3
3.1
--
--
.5
1952
3.0
2.8
--
--
.4
1953
2.9
2.7
--
--
.3
1954
5.5
5.0
--
--
1.3
1955
4.4
3.9
--
--
1.1
1956
4.1
3.6
--
--
.8
1957
4.3
3.8
--
--
.8
1958
6.8
6.1
--
--
2.1
1959
5.5
4.8
--
--
1.5
1960
5.5
5.0
--
--
1.4
1961
6.7
6.0
--
--
2.2
1962
5.5
4.9
--
--
1.6
1963
5.7
5.0
--
--
1.5
1964
5.2
4.6
--
--
1.3
1965
4.5
4.1
--
--
1.0
1966
3.8
3.4
--
--
.7
1967
3.8
3.4
--
--
.6
1968
3.6
3.2
--
--
.5
1969
3.5
3.1
--
--
.5
1970
4.9
4.5
--
--
.8
1971
5.9
5.4
--
--
1.4
1972
5.6
5.1
10.4 %
--
1.3
1973
4.9
4.3
9.4
7.5 %
.9
1974
5.6
5.0
10.5
8.1
1.0
1975
8.5
7.8
14.8
12.2
2.7
1976
7.7
7.0
14.0
11.5
2.5
1977
7.1
6.2
14.0
10.1
2.0
1978
6.1
5.2
12.8
9.1
1.4
1979
5.8
5.1
12.3
8.3
1.2
1980
7.1
6.3
14.3
10.1
1.7
1981
7.6
6.7
15.6
10.4
2.1
1982
9.7
8.6
18.9
13.8
3.2
1983
9.6
8.4
19.5
13.7
3.8
1984
7.5
6.5
15.9
10.7
2.4
1985
7.2
6.2
15.1
10.5
2.0
1986
7.0
6.0
14.5
10.6
1.9
1987
6.2
5.3
13.0
8.8
1.7
1988
5.5
4.7
11.7
8.2
1.3
1989
5.3
4.5
11.4
8.0
1.1
1990
5.5
4.7
11.3
8.0
1.2
1991
6.7
6.0
12.4
9.9
1.9
1992
7.5
6.7
13.9
11.1
2.6
1993
6.9
6.2
12.8
10.2
--
1994
6.1
5.5
11.3
9.0
--
1995
5.6
4.9
10.4
9.3
--
1996
5.4
4.7
10.5
8.9
--
1997
4.9
4.2
10.0
7.7
--
1998
4.5
3.9
8.9
7.2
--
The Table 5.5 Changes in US Unemployment Rates demonstrates that unemployment is a chronic problem in the US & that different groups experience different rates of unemployment
US Dept. Labor, BLS, 1989b, Handbook of Labor Statistics.  Washington, DC:  US GPO, p. 64.  Also, Census, 1993e, Statistical Abstract of the US, 1993.  Washington, DC:  US GPO, p. 413

 
Top
  

Table on Unemployment in Europe
HS 0205
Year
1992
1998
Overall US Unemployment Rate
    7.4 %
     4.5 %
Italy
6.9
12.3
UK
8.8
  
Netherlands
7.0
  
Norway
2.8
  
Sweden
2.6
  
France  
11.8
Germany  
7.5
The Table on Unemployment in Europe shows that unemployment is a chronic problem in many industrialized nations
Census, 1993e

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Deindustrialization
External
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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Low Wages & the Minimum Wage
External
Links
  -  Supplement:  Articles on the Living Wage Debate 
Link
  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   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Government Economic Policy
External
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 
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Welfare to Work Program:  The 1996 Welfare Reform
External
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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Functionalism on Poverty
External
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
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on an  Intro to Davis & Moore on Stratification
External
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  

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Critiques of Davis & Moore
External
Links
  -  Project:  What influences career choice?
Link
  Melvin Tumin, 1953, 1970, holds that 
 
  - the jobs that Davis & Moore believed were so critical may not be as important as common low level jobs
 
  Historical Demographers have demonstrated that garbage collectors & sewage maintenance workers are more critical for public health that are doctors
 
  Critics of Davis & Moore note that workers are just as necessary as managers
 
  Critics of Davis & Moore note that it is difficult to see how inherited wealth could motivate people
 
  Wealth is more unequally distributed than income & a large share of wealth is inherited rather than earned
 
  In 1989, about half of the wealthiest 400 US people inherited, or invested inherited wealth to become wealthy
 
  Parental income impacts a person's ability to obtain an education 
 
  If Davis & Moore were correct, poverty, stratification, & inequality would be the main factors determining one's ability to get an education, & not parental wealth
 
  Even middle class wealth is important for the parent's ability to give an education to their children
 
  - the training required to get critical, better paying jobs is far from unpleasant, in that many people enjoy education
 
  Contrary to what Davis & Moore hold, the process of training & education gives one prestige
 
  - the critical, better paying jobs have considerable non material rewards such as autonomy, a sense of accomplishment, prestige, etc.
 
  Contrary to what Davis & Moore hold, many jobs require high levels of training but pay relatively little
 
  Critics of Davis & Moore note that social workers, professors, teachers require more training but pay less than many jobs available w/ a high school education
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Conflict Theory on Poverty, Strat, & Inequality
External
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
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Empirical Evidence on the Functionality of Stratification
External
Links
  The empirical evidence on the functionality of stratification indicates that some inequality & stratification are functional as a motivation to induce people to take the critical, complicated occupations, & to take uncritical, simple occupations
 
  The empirical evidence on the functionality of stratification indicates that too much inequality & stratification are dysfunctional in that they induce the rich to strive for ever greater wealth at the expense of others & in that the poor suffer, become alienated, & drop out or turn against the system
 
  The empirical evidence on the functionality of stratification indicates that inequality & stratification is perpetuated by the concentration of wealth in the upper classes & the issue becomes whether there is too much stratification for society to function optimally
 
  THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE:
 
  Abrahamson hypothesized that if stratification & inequality were operating correctly then military jobs should pay more in times of war & less in times of peace
 
  Abrahamson found no support for the functionality of stratification & inequality in that military pay generally increases during peace-time & decreases during war-time because of budget constraints  
  The level of inequality is highest in the poorest countries
 
Link
 An analysis of Table: Inequality & Productivity in Selected Industrial Countries in 2000, shows that there is no relationship btwn inequality & productivity demonstrating the dysfunctionality of high levels of stratification & inequality
 
  The level of inequality in industrialized countries is not related to efficiency & job allocation  
 
 Drs.' & other professionals' pay & numbers in the occupation are related to the control of the profession by professional associations not by unpleasantness
 
 
 The worth of jobs appears to be most closely related to
 
  - the fickleness of society  
  - how much $ it can make for a corporations ( pet rocks, etc.)  
 
 The level of freely available education is directly related to social equality in that the upper classes have a strong educational system while the middle & lower classes have a weak educational system
 
 
 In modern, industrialized nations, education, govt economic policies, & the structure of the economic sector are more strongly related to productivity than are inequality & stratification
 

 
Top
  

Table:  Inequality & Productivity in Selected Industrial Countries in 2000
Far1006
Country
Inequality, 2000:
Ratio of Income of Top 10% to that of Bottom 20%
Productivity, 2000:
Per Capita Gross Nation Income
Average Growth:
Annual Growth in Gross Domestic Product, 1996, 1999, 2000
Japan
2.05 : 1
$34,210 
  2.4%
Sweden
2.09 : 1
26,780
3.0
Denmark
2.14 : 1
32,020
2.3
Belgium
2.16 : 1
24,630
2.4
Finland
2.16 : 1
24,900
4.6
Norway
2.25 : 1
33,650
3.0
Italy
2.51 : 1
20,010
1.8
Germany
2.89 : 1
25,050
1.8
Canada
3.17 : 1
21,150
3.6
Netherlands
3.44 : 1
25,140
3.7
France
3.49 : 1
23,670
2.4
Switzerland
3.65 : 1
38,120
1.5
UK
4.14 : 1
24,500
2.6
US
5.87 : 1
34,260
4.1
Red indicates the highest factor,  Green indicates the lowest factor
An analysis of Table 6 - 4 shows that there is no relationship btwn inequality & productivity demonstrating the dysfunctionality of high levels of stratification & inequality
Source:  From World Development Indicators by World Bank, 2000

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Global Stratification
External
Links
  -  Supplement:  Info on Global Strat.   http://www.sdsmt.edu/online-courses/is/soc100/Glob_Strat.htm
Link
  Since the world is so globalized now, to understand the full dimension of poverty & strat, one must also explore global strat 
 
  Global strat examines the patterns of social inequality in the world as a whole 
 
  From the global perspective, the distribution of wealth is extremely uneven as compared to inequality in the core nations 
 
  TERMINOLOGY 
 
  Different types of terminology have been used by scholars to divide the nations of the world into several broad categories based on their level of econ development 
 
  The three worlds model was the original model used to categorize nations on their level of econ development   
  In the three worlds model the 3 categories of global econ dev include: 
a.  the first world, which includes primarily rich industrial nations 
b.  the second world, which includes primarily less industrialized socialist nations 
c.  the third world, which includes primarily non industrialized poor nations 		  
 
 The traditional typology of the first, second, & third world is no longer as valid as it once was though most social scientists still use a 3 tier scale 
 
  The three reasons the three worlds model does not work today are that 
a.  it grew out of cold war politics
b.  changes in Eastern Europe & the Soviet Union collapse means the category of the second world is less distinctive than it once was 
c.  the model inaccurately lumped together more than 100 nations as third world 		  
 
 A revised system of classification involves the categories of high income countries, middle income countries, & low income countries 
 
  In terms of development, a global classification of core, semi peripheral, & peripheral nations is often used denoting those nations at the core of the global econ, those nations which are partially linked to the global econ, & those nations w/ the least interaction w/ the global econ 
Link
 The Pie Chart of % of Global Income shows that the richest quintile of the world earns 80 % of all income while the poorest quintile earns only 1 %, demonstrating that worldwide the poor are poorer, the middle class is smaller, & the rich are the richest, as compared to the income strat of most core nations 
Link
 The Table on Economic Development shows that world economic development, in terms of income, is split roughly btwn core, semi peripheral, & peripheral nations, or roughly, btwn north & south 
  Global social, & political & econ stratification (inequality) is far greater around the world than in the US   
  HIGH INCOME, CORE NATIONS   
  The high income nations are the relatively rich, industrialized nations 
 
 
 High income nations include most of Western Europe, Canada, the US, Japan, Australia, & New Zealand 
 
  In high income countries, a highly productive econ provides people, on average, w/ material plenty   
  25% of Earth's land area & lie mostly in the No Hemisphere & in general all the core nations are in the north   
  Significant cultural differences exist btwn core & other nations in that in general there is more democracy & civil rights in core nations   
  All core nations produce enough economic goods to enable people to lead comfortable lives, though the US has the highest poverty rate, w/ about 1/3 in poverty   
  People in core nations enjoy 79% of the world's total income   
  Production in the core nations is “capital intensive” in that all businesses use a large proportion of technology, machinery & other labor saving devices   
  The econs of the core nations are based on factories, big machinery, & advanced technology   
  MIDDLE INCOME, SEMI PERIPHERAL NATIONS 
 
  The middle income countries are characterized by per capita incomes btwn $2,500 & $10,000 per yr 
 
 
 Middle income nations have experienced some industrialization, but agriculture remains important in their economies 
 
  Middle income nations, including most of Latin America & Asia, are less economically productive, w/ a standard of living about average for the world as a whole but far below that of the US   
  Semi peripheral nations also have a significant share of poor people who are barely able to feed & house themselves   
  While not as developed as the core nations, industrial jobs are common in the semi peripheral nations   
  In semi peripheral nations 1/3 rd of people live in rural areas   
  In semi peripheral nations, the poor, lack access to schools, medical care, adequate housing, & safe drinking water to a greater extent than in the core nations   
  The former Soviet Union & Eastern Europe were socialist economies which still make up the majority of the second world tier   
  The second tier of econ dev makes up 55% of world's land area & home to 70% of humanity   
  Societies are densely populated compared to high income countries   
  Being second tier, does not mean that the econs of semi peripheral are all small   
  China, w/ nearly 1/4 of the world's population, 1.3 bb, has the largest corps of any nations, w/ 6 of the top 10 corps   
  The cultural class btwn modernization & traditionalism is the greatest in semi peripheral nations   
  The nascent middle class is exposed to the democracy & civil rights of people in the core nations, but traditions often force people to live w/ less freedom   
  Pollution & destructive economic practices are the norm in semi peripheral nations, both which take a high toll in human & other forms of life   
  LOW INCOME, PERIPHERAL NATIONS 
 
 
 People in US w/ income below the poverty line live far better than the majority of the people on the planet   
 
 The low income countries are primarily agrarian societies w/ little industry 
 
 
 Most of the people are very poor in peripheral nations 
 
 
 These countries are found in Central & E Africa & in Asia 
 
 
 In the low income countries of the world, poverty is severe & widespread 
 
 
 Although small numbers of elites live very well in the poorest nations, most people struggle to survive on a small fraction of the income common in the US 
 
  Peripheral nation are agrarian & face severe poverty   
  Most people in peripheral nations follow cultural traditions though like in the semi peripheral nations, more people are becoming aware, & fighting for the democracy & freedoms of the core nations   
  In 2007, the people of both Pakistan & Myanmar made global news when they fought repressive, traditional regimes for democracy & civil rights   
  Peripheral nations have limited industrial technology   
  In peripheral nations, people's lives are shaped by hunger, disease, & unsafe housing   
 
 People in rich nations have difficulty grasping the extent of human poverty & famine 
 
 
 Pollution & destructive economic practices are the norm in peripheral nations, both which take a high toll in human & other forms of life 
 

 
Top
  
Pie Chart of % of Global Income

Calculated by the Macionis based on UN Development Program
The Pie Chart of % of Global Income shows that the richest quintile of the world earns 80 % of all income while the poorest quintile earns only 1 %, demonstrating that worldwide the poor are poorer, the middle class is smaller, & the rich are the richest, as compared to the income strat of most core nations

 
Top
  
The Table on Economic Development

Based on data from UN Development Program (2005)
The Table on Economic Development shows that world economic development, in terms of income, is split roughly btwn core, semi peripheral, & peripheral nations, or roughly, btwn north & south

 
Top

Internal
Links
Outline on  International Comparative Income Inequality / Mobility
External
Links
  DATA SHOWS THAT ON MOST INDICATORS OF INCOME, THE US RATES BEHIND MOST INDUSTRIAL NATIONS   
Link
 Table:  Income Inequality in 15 Industrialized Countries   
  An analysis of the Income Inequality in 15 Industrialized Countries shows that 
- the US has more income inequality than other industrialized countries 
- the US has the lowest amount of money going to the lowest 10 % 		  
Link
 Table:  Hourly Pay for Production Workers in 13 Industrial Nations in 1999   
  An analysis of Hourly Pay of Production Workers in 13 Industrial Nations shows that the US ranks 9th of 13 and pays a below average wage of $19.20 which is $1.05 below the average   
Link
 Table:  Comparative Income Inequality of Leading Industrial Nations: Shares of Pretax Household Income   
  An analysis of the Comparative Income of Leading Industrial Nations shows that the US has the smallest share of income going to the lower 20%, and nearly the largest share of income going to the upper 20%, resulting in the upper 20% earning over 15 times what the lower 20% earn, with an average of 8% for the Leading Industrial nations   
Link
 Table:  Comparative Income Inequality in the 1990s   
 
 An analysis of Table:  Comparative Income Inequality in the 1990s shows that the top 10% of people in the US earn by far the greatest percentage of median income, while the bottom 10% earn the smallest percentage of median income, giving the US the highest Gini Coefficient 
 
 
 Since the 1980s the US has had the highest level of income inequality 
 
  From the Table on the Comparative income inequality in the 1990s: 
-  the lowest levels of income inequality are found in Japan 
-  in the US, the highest 5th earn 12 times the mean income of the lowest 5th 
-  in Japan, the highest 5th earn 4 times the mean income of the lowest 5th 		  
 
 The US has attained its highest level income inequality in the 1990s 
 
  From Table 2 - 5  Comparative Income Inequality in the 90s: 
-  in the US the bottom 10% earn only 36 % of our average income 
-  the rich earn 2.1 times the our average income 		  
 
 Austria is in the middle of the ranking of the industrialized nations income distribution 
In Austria the bottom 10 % earn 56 % of their average income 
The rich earn 1.9 times their average income 
 
Link
 The Bar Chart on Income Inequality in Selected Nations shows that the US has about double the income inequality of other core nations & about half the income inequality of peripheral nations   
  Many low & middle income countries have greater econ inequality than the US   
  The US has more economic inequality than most high income nations   
Link
 The Bar Chart on Income & Population Shares of Core, Semi Peripheral, & Peripheral Nations shows that the middle & low income countries, while having over 90 % of the population, earn less than a quarter of global income   
  The relative share of income is such that for every dollar earned by people in low income countries, people in high income countries earn $53   
Link
 The Table on the Wealth & Well Being in Global Perspective demonstrates that the quality of life generally parallels per capita income   
Link
 Table:  Comparative Employee & Executive Incomes, 1992   
 
 An analysis of Table:  Comparative Employee & Executive Incomes, 1992, shows that US CEOs earn more than any others, and American workers earn less than any other workers except the British   
  US workers are paid less than all workers except British workers   
  US White Collar Workers & Mgrs are paid 3rd in the G 7  
  American CEOs are paid at the highest rate in the G 7; over twice the rate of the bottom, the Japanese; & over 10 % higher than 2nd place, France  
  The gap btwn the Top & Bottom workers is the highest in America & lowest in Germany  
Link
 Table:  Comparative Top Corp Exec Salaries, 1997  
  An analysis of   Table: Comparative Top Corp Exec Salaries, 1997  shows that most nation's top executives earn half, or less, of what American executive earn  
  US corp executives earn almost double that of other industrial nation's executive
US executives earn almost 3 times that of Japanese executives
 
  THE US HAS GREATER INEQUALITY OF INCOME & WEALTH, BUT ALSO HAS SLIGHTLY GREATER SOCIAL MOBILITY  
  In general, there is little different in the amount of mobility among modern, class societies  
  Among modern, class societies, mobility from low statuses to high statuses is the exception rather than the rule  
  Among modern, class societies, movement within the middle classes is more common  
  A slightly greater percentage of people in the US move from manufacturing to the professions than in other industrialized countries  
  The slightly greater social mobility in the US reflects slightly higher structural mobility owing to white collar job growth, rather than high exchange mobility (i.e., the upward social movement of people compared to their parents)  
  Great Britain & Brazil have the least social mobility among industrialized nations  
  The US & Japan have similar rates of social mobility, but different measures of mobility yield different results  
  Poland, Hungary, and the US have similar mobility  
  The US & Canada, compared to Sweden & Norway, have slightly more mobility in occupational status, but much less mobility in terms of gaining business ownership  
  Thus, the US has only slightly greater social mobility than other industrialized nations  
  Yet, because of the US culture & its embodiment of the Horatio Alger Myth, & "the land of milk & honey," "streets paved w/ gold" etc., people remain relatively satisfied w/ current policies, refusing to support tax policies that redistribute more wealth or policies to reduce poverty  
  CONCLUSION:  WHILE IN THE 60s THE US HAD AVERAGE INEQUALITY OF WEALTH & INCOME, TODAY THE US HAS HIGHER INEQUALITY   
  During the 1960s: 
-  the US was ranked midway in income inequality compared to other industrial nations
-  France had the highest inequality income inequality
-  Germany, England & Australia had the lowest inequality		  
  As can be seen by the tables & figures on income inequality presented here, the US is now ranked as having among the highest levels of income inequality of the industrial  nations  
Link
 The Bar Chart on the World's Increasing Economic Inequality demonstrates that the gap btwn the richest & poorest people in the world is twice as big as it was a century ago  

 
Top
  

Table:   Income Inequality in 15 Industrialized Countries
IS 09
Country & Year
% of Income
Received by
Lowest 20 % homes
% of Income
Received by
Highest 10 % homes
Ratio of 
Highest 10 % 
to Lowest 10 %
United Kingdom, 1988
4.6
25.3%
6.0
Switzerland, 1982
5.2 
29.8
5.7
US, 1985
4.7
25.0
5.3
France, 1989
5.6
26.1
4.7
Italy, 1986
6.8
25.3
4.4
Canada, 1987
5.7
24.1
4.2
Denmark, 1981
 5.4
 22.3
4.1 
Germany, 1988
 7.0
 24.4
3.5
Finland, 1981
 6.3
 21.7
 3.4
Norway, 1979
 6.2
 21.2
3.4 
Netherlands, 1988
 2.7
 21.9
 2.7
Belgium, 1978-1979
 7.9
 21.5
2.7 
Spain, 1988
 8.3
 21.8
2.6 
Japan, 1979
8.7 
22.4 
2.6
Sweden, 1981
 8.0
 20.8
 2.6
Average
6.6
23.1
3.6
An analysis of the Income Inequality in 15 Industrialized Countries shows that 
      - the US has more income inequality than other industrialized countries
      - the US has the lowest amount of money going to the lowest 10 %

 
 
Top
  

Table:  Hourly Pay for Production Workers 
             in 13 Industrial Nations in 1999
Kerbo 0502
Nation
Hourly Wages
Spain
$ 12.11 
Canada
  15.60
Great Britain
  16.56
France
  17.98
United States
  19.20
Japan
  20.89
Netherlands
  20.94
Sweden
  21.58
Austria
  21.83
Denmark
  22.96
Switzerland
  23.56
Norway
  23.91
Germany
  26.18
Average
  20.25
An analysis of Hourly Pay of Production Workers in 13 Industrial Nations shows that the US ranks 9th of 13 & pays $19.20 which is $1.05 below the average

 
Top
  

Table:  Comparative Income Inequality of Leading Industrial Nations:
                      Shares of Pretax Household Income, 1986
Kerbo 0402
Nation
Highest 20%
Lowest 20 %
Ratio
US
46
3
15.3
France
47
7
6.7
Britain
46
6
7.7
Canada
41
5
10.2
West Germany
38
5
7.6
Sweden
37
4
9.3
Netherlands
37
6
6.2
Japan
36
8
4.5
Average
41
5.5
8.4
An analysis of the Comparative Income of Leading Industrial Nations shows that
-  the US has the smallest share of income going to the lower 20%,
-  & nearly the largest share of income going to the upper 20%,
-  resulting in the upper 20% earning over 15 times what the lower 20% earn,
-  w/ an average of 8% for the Leading Industrial nations

 
 
Top
  
Table: Comparative Income Inequality in the 1990s
Country
% of median 
of bottom 10 %
% of median 
of top 10 %
Ratio of top 10% 
to bottom 10%
Gini coefficient
US
36 %
208 %
5.78
.343
UK
44
206
4.67
.335
Japan
46
192
4.17
.315
Australia
45
187
4.3
.308
Canada
47
183
3.90
.285
Austria
56
187
3.34
NA
Germany
54
172
3.21
.261
Italy
56
176
3.14
.255
Netherlands
57
173
3.05
.249
Sweden
57
159
2.78
.229
Red numbers signify the highest level of the category
An analysis of Table:  Comparative Income Inequality in the 1990s shows that the top 10% of people in the US earn by far the greatest percentage of median income, while the bottom 10% earn the smallest percentage of median income, giving the US the highest Gini Coefficient

 
Top
  
Bar Chart on Income Inequality in Selected Nations
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (2005) and World Bank (2006)


The Bar Chart on Income Inequality in Selected Nations shows that the US has about double the income inequality of other core nations & about half the income inequality of peripheral nations


 
Top
  
Bar Chart on Income & Population Shares of Core, Semi Peripheral, & Peripheral Nations
Sources: Calculated by the author based on UN Development Program (2000) and World Bank (2001)


The Bar Chart on Income & Population Shares of Core, Semi Peripheral, & Peripheral Nations shows that the middle & low income countries, while having over 90 % of the population, earn less than a quarter of global income


 
Top
  
Table on the Wealth & Well Being in Global Perspective




The Table on the Wealth & Well Being in Global Perspective demonstrates that the quality of life generally parallels per capita income


 
Top
  
Table: Comparative Employee & Executive Incomes, 1992
Manufacturing 
Employees
White Collar
Employees
Managers
CEOs
Germany
$ 36,857
Britain
74,761
Italy
219,573
US
717,237
Canada
34,939
France
62,279
France
190,354
France
479,772
Japan
34,263
Germany
59,916
Japan
185,437
Italy
439,441
Italy
31,537
Italy
58,263
Britain
162,190
Britain
439,441
France
30,019
US
57,675
US
159,575
Canada
416,066
US
27,606
Canada
47,231
Germany
145,627
Germany
390,933
Britain
26,084
Japan
40,990
Canada
132,877
Japan
390,723
An analysis of Table:  Comparative Employee & Executive Incomes, 1992 shows that US CEOs earn more than any others, & Am wkrs earn less than any other wkrs except the British

 
Top
  
Table: Comparative Top Corp Exec Salaries, 1997
Country
Salary
% of US Salary
US
901,200
100 %
Australia
476,700
52.9 
Belgium
470,700
52.2
Canada
440,900
48.9
France
523,500
58.1
Germany
423,900
47.0
Italy
450,300
50.0
Japan
397,700
44.1
Netherlands
442,900
49.1
Spain
333,600
37.0
Sweden
340,700
37.8
Switzerland
465,200
51.6
UK
489,700
54.3
An analysis of Comparative Top Corp Exec Salaries, 1997  shows that most nation's top executives earn half, or less, of what American executive earn

 
Top
  
Bar Chart on the World's Increasing Economic Inequality
Source: International Monetary Fund (2000)


The Bar Chart on the World's Increasing Economic Inequality demonstrates that the gap btwn the richest & poorest people in the world is twice as big as it was a century ago


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Global Social Stratification
External
Links
Link

IS08f
  Social stratification is a subset of stratification in that it focuses on factors, other than strictly econ factors, such as quality of life, death rates, birth rates, medical care, cultural freedom, etc. 
 
1 SC
Mac 09 \/
FB MC TF \/
 Link
 The Table on the Wealth & Well Being in Global Perspective demonstrates that the quality of life generally parallels per capita income 
 
  
 Link
 The Map of the Median Age at Deathdemonstrates that death rates depend on factors not captured by schemas of econ development or quality of life in that death rates only approximately parallel these indicators 
 
  
  The Map on Global Death Rates identifies the age below which half of all deaths occur in any year 
 
  
  In the high income countries of the world, including the US, it is mostly the elderly who face death, that is, people aged seventy five or older 
 
  
  In middle income countries, including most of Latin America, most people die years or even decades earlier than those in the core nations 
 
FB MC TF /\
  In low income countries, especially in Africa & parts of Asia, it is children who die, half of them never reaching their tenth birthday 
 
  
 Link
 The Map of Africa’s Colonial History depicts the balkanization (division) of Africa by European powers in the 17 & 1800s which lead to societal collapse in many regions which still impacts African nations today 
 
  
  For more than a century, most of Africa was colonized by European nations, w/ France dominating in the northwest region of the continent & the UK dominating in the east & south 
 
  

 
Top
  
Map of the Median Age at Death

Source: World Bank (1993), w/ updates by the Macionis


The Map of the Median Age at Death demonstrates that death rates depend on factors not captured by schemas of econ development or quality of life in that death rates only approximately parallel these indicators


 
Top
  
Map of Africa’s Colonial History

The Map of Africa’s Colonial History depicts the balkanization (division) of Africa by European powers in the 17 & 1800s which lead to societal collapse in many regions which still impacts African nations today

 

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Global Poverty 
External
Links
 
 -  Supplement:  Beyond a Wall of Secrecy, Devastation.  The Washington Post 
 Link
 
 -  Supplement:  Mine Labor in Congo Dims Luster in Diamonds.  The New York Times 
 Link
 
 INTRO:  THE GLOBE IS STRATIFIED AMONG CORE / RICH, SEMI PERIPHERAL / DEVELOPING, & PERIPHERAL / UNDEVELOPED / POOR NATIONS 
 
 
 Low income, peripheral, nations are home to some rich & many poor 
 
 
 Most people live w/ incomes of a few hundred dollars a yr
 
 
 The burden of poverty in low income countries is greater than for the poor of the US & other core nations 
 
 
 THE SEVERITY OF POVERTY CAN BE JUDGED ON A RELATIVE OR ABSOLUTE SCALE 
 
 
 A key reason that quality of life differs so much around the world is that economic productivity is lowest in precisely those regions where population growth is highest 
 
  The distinction btwn absolute & relative poverty is the distinction btwn a simple numerical scale & a comparison   
  The measure of absolute poverty examines poverty based on absolute number or monetary level 
 
 
 The measure of relative poverty examines poverty in relationship to the socio economic context of a particular society 
 
  Absolute poverty is a particularly serious problem in the poorest nations in that many simply do not have enough to live on   
  Absolute poverty is more important in the global perspective   
  Some people lack resources that are taken for granted by others   
  Lack of resources that is life threatening   
  Lack the nutrition necessary for health & long term survival   
  While absolute poverty is more common in peripheral nations, it exists in every society; rich & poor   
  Relative poverty is more salient in the more developed countries   
  People in rich nations focus on relative poverty   
 
 CORE NATIONS ARE HIGH INCOME / DEVELOPED NATIONS 
 
 
 Reason quality of life differs so much around the world 
 
 
 Economic productivity is lowest in regions where population growth is the highest 
 
 
 High income countries have the advantage 
 
 
 SEMI PERIPHERAL NATIONS ARE MIDDLE INCOME, DEVELOPING NATIONS 
 
 
 79% of global income supporting just 18% of humanity 
 
 
 20% of global income support 70% of humanity 
 
 
 PERIPHERAL NATIONS ARE LOW INCOME, UNDEVELOPED NATIONS 
 
  Poverty in poor countries is more extensive than it is in rich nations such as the US   
 
 12% of planet's population survives w/ 1 % of global income 
 
  Low econ development & low income contributes to serious problems of hunger & starvation in these societies   
 
 Poverty in poor countries is more severe than it is in the rich countries 
 
Link
 The Map of the Median Age at Death demonstrates that while life span in the core nations is the highest, it is dramatically lower in peripheral nations, demonstrating that general econ develop directly impacts not only life chances but life span 
 
  In rich countries, most people die after 75   
  In poor countries half of all deaths occur among children under age 10   
  CHILD POVERTY IS RAMPANT IN ALL NATIONS   
  The extent & severity of child poverty is greatest in the low income countries   
  At least 100 million children in poor countries provide income for their families   
  The prevalence of absolute poverty means that children often beg, steal, sell sex, or work for drug gangs   
  To survive, children often must drop out of school, which has the effect of maintaining the cycle of poverty   
  Children are at high risk of disease & violence   
  Another 100 million children leave families to live on the streets each yr  
  Half of all street children found in Mexico City or Rio de Janeiro   
  BECAUSE OF THE INTERSECTION OF PATRIARCHY & THE CLASS SYSTEM, WOMEN EXPERIENCE MUCH HIGHER RATES OF POVERTY THAN MEN   
  Feminists have labeled the trend of single parent, female headed families having a high risk of poverty "the feminization of poverty"   
  Women in peripheral nations are at a high risk of experiencing single parenthood & poverty, resulting in a high level of the feminization of poverty   
  In the mid 2000s, 70 % of world's 1 billion people living in absolute poverty are women   
  When people are under the ultimate stress of starvation, families are likely to break down, w/ men leaving, women raising only the youngest of children, & the rest of the children fending for themselves by living in the street   
  Women in the poorer nations experience particularly severe poverty   
  In reich societies, women work is undervalued, underpaid, or overlooked   
  Women in peripheral nations commonly find work in sweatshops which make products for the core nations   
  Tradition keeps women out of many jobs   
  Traditional norms give women the responsibility for child rearing & household maintenance   
  Traditional norms give men control over 90 % of the land   
Link
 The Bar Chart on the Use of Contraception by Married Women of Childbearing Age demonstrates that contraception is not uniformly available across the globe   
  Women in poor countries receive little or no reproductive health care & limited access to birth control   
  ECONOMIC & SEXUAL SLAVERY STILL EXISTS TODAY, & IS GROWING W/IN THE GLOBAL ECON  
  Anti Slavery International distinguishes four types of slavery:   
  a.  In chattel slavery, one person owns another   
  b.  Child slavery includes abandoned children or those living on the street   
  c.  Debt bondage occurs where people are paid less than they are charged for food   
  d.  Servile forms of marriage are also considered slavery   
  ON A GLOBAL SCALE, THE RICH ARE GETTING RICHER, & THE POOR ARE GETTING POORER  
  While the rich, core nations have competed w/ each other in the last 200 yrs, the gap btwn the rich & poor has become immense 
 
  The World Bank notes that: 
 
"As late as 1820, per capita incomes were quite similar around the world, & very low, ranging from around $500 in China & So Asia to $1,000 to 1,500 in the richest countries of Europe"
(World Bank, 2000: Chapter 3, p. 45). 
 
  At the beginning of this millennium, per capital income in many core nations was $30,500 compared to $500 in many peripheral nations such as Sierra Leon, Tanzania, & Ethiopia 
 
  20 % of the world's population, i.e. over 1 bb people, live on less than $ 1 / day 
 
  Almost half of the world's population, i.e. 2.8 bb live on less than $ 2 / day 
 
  Despite high levels of extreme world poverty, many Americans cannot understand the hatred fuming toward the US 
 
  The UN est that the number of people existing on less than $ 1 / day has increased directly w/ globalization during the 1990s (UN:  A Better World for All, 2000)
 
  The first ever est of global wealth inequality indicates that the top 2 % of people in the world own over half of all the wealth, while the bottom 50 % own less than 1 % 
 
  In relation to global income, the top 20 % of people receive 150 times the income of the bottom 20 % 
 
  30 yrs ago, the top 20 % of people receive just 60 times the income of the bottom 20 % 
 
  There are 800 mm chronically undernourished people in the world, w/ another 2 bb experiencing crucial deficiencies in nutrients 
 
  UNICEF reports that malnutrition is a factor in about 55 % of the 12 mm preventable deaths among children under 5 each yr
 
  It has not been since the Mid Ages & the bubonic plague, i.e. the Black Death, that any single cause has killed children at the rate that simple poverty & malnutrition are killing children today 
 
  ON A GLOBAL SCALE, THE RICH ARE GETTING RICHER, BUT THE POOR CAN GET NO POORER  

 
Top
  
Map of the Median Age at Death

Source: World Bank (1993), w/ updates by Macionis


The Map of the Median Age at Death demonstrates that while life span in the core nations is the highest, it is dramatically lower in peripheral nations, demonstrating that general econ develop directly impacts not only life chances but life span 


 
Top
  
Bar Chart on the Use of Contraception by Married Women of Childbearing Age

Source: UN Development Program (2005


The Bar Chart on the Use of Contraception by Married Women of Childbearing Age demonstrates that contraception is not uniformly available across the globe 


 
Internal
Links

Top
Outline on a  Cross National Comparisons of Poverty
External
Links
  -  Project: Video: Famine Foretold
Link
  -  Video: Famine Foretold          5:16
Link
  COMPARED TO OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED NATIONS, THE US HAS THE HIGHEST POV RATE, & THE HIGHEST CHILD POV RATE  
  Cross national comparisons of poverty put the problem of poverty in a global perspective & allow one to see how various societies succeed & fail at alleviating & eliminating poverty  
Link
 Table:  Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations  1984 - 1987  
  An analysis of  Table on Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations, shows that the overall US poverty rate is higher than any industrialized country & the child poverty rate is much higher than any other industrialized country   
  Specifically, Table on Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations, shows that the overall US poverty rate is over twice (2.2 times) that of other industrialized nations & the child poverty rate is 2 1/2 times that of other industrialized nations  
  Comparing the US & a 3rd world country, the US poverty line equals an average income in the 3rd world
 
- Low income economies:
below
 $ 500 per yr
- Lower middle income:     500     to   2,400 per yr
- Upper middle:  2,400   to   5,500 per yr
- High: 
above
 5,500 per yr
 
  WELFARE IS HIGHER IN EURO BECAUSE:  OF THEIR HIST OF CLASS CONFLICT, 'CLASS POLITICS,' HIGHER VOTING RATES, INSTITUTIONALIZED SOC SERVICES, GREATER DEMOCRACY, A SOCIALIST IDEOLOGY  
  Welfare benefits are greater in Europe than the US for SIX reasons, including that:   
  1.  they have a longer history of more intense class conflict  
  2.  the lower class in over there has more political organization  
  3.  the lower class over there is more likely to participate in elections because their multiparty, parliamentary system give more power to weaker groups  
  4.  social services over there are institutionalized & therefore easier to defend than customs  
  5.  the greater the democracy, the greater the welfare  
  6.  socialist, capitalist, authoritarian political econ systems show structured differences in welfare benefits: nations have varying mandates to redistribute wealth  
  WELFARE IS HIGHER IN THE US THAN THE 3rd WORLD BECAUSE:  THE US LC HAS POL ORG, HIGHER VOTING RATES, INSTITUTIONALIZED SOC SERVICES, MORE WEALTH AVAILABLE, & AN IDELOLOGY OF THE ELIMINATION OF POV  
  Welfare benefits are greater in US than in the 3rd World for FIVE reasons, including that:   
  a.  the lower class over here has more political organization  
  b.  the lower class over here is more likely to participate in elections because the US is more democratic than over there  
  c.  social services over there are not institutionalized & are based on tradition & customs  
  d.  there is less money for welfare over there  
  e.  in general the culture of non-western nations supports the ideology that there is & should be poor people  

 
Top
  
TablePoverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
Kerbo 0309
 
Total Adults & Children
Children
US
   13 %
   20 %
Canada
7
9
Australia
7
9
UK
5
7
Fr
5
7
Netherlands
3
4
GDR
3
3
Sweden
4
4
Average
5.9
7.9
An analysis of the  Table on Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations, shows that the overall US poverty rate is higher than any industrialized country & the child poverty rate is much higher than any other industrialized country 
PW
An analysis of the  Table on Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations, shows that the overall US poverty rate is over twice (2.2 times) that of other industrialized nations & the child poverty rate is 2 1/2 times that of other industrialized nations
PW

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on the  Causes of Global Poverty
External
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   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Modernization Theory
External
Links
  MODERNIZATION THEORY IS A MODEL OF ECON & SOC DEV THAT EXPLAINS GLOBAL INEQUALITY IN TERMS OF TECHL & CULTURAL DIFFERENCES AMONG NATIONS 
 
  Mod theory employs the structural functional approach to examine the complex of factors that interact to produce global strat 
 
  See Also:  Functionalism   
  Mod theory employs FOUR factors in it's analysis, including: 
1.  a socio histl perspective 
2.  the importance of culture 
3.  Rostow's stages of modernization 
4.  the role of rich nations 		  
  1.  A SOCIO HISTL PERSPECTIVE NOTES THAT WE SHOULD EXPLORE WHY NATIONS ARE RICH 
 
  The development of indl tech has raised the standard of living of even poor people in high income societies 
 
  Mod theory proposes that it is affluence that demands explanation, not poverty:  i.e. why are some nations rich? 
 
  Industrialization's productivity improved the living standards of even the poorest people 
 
  2.  CULTURE IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IMPACTING WEALTH & POVERTY 
 
  Mod theory identifies tradition as the greatest barrier to econ development 
 
  Tradition is a barrier to econ development since it often opposes or breaks down tradl relationships such as male control of the family & finances 
 
  Econ dev may threaten customs related to production such as people's reliance on agriculture 
 
  Econ dev may threaten customs as it did in the US when people originally strenuously opposed working on Sundays 
 
  Lappe & Collins (1986) demonstrate that capitalist culture encourages people to think that poverty is inevitable 
  3.  ROSTOW'S STAGES OF MODERNIZATION INCLUDE TRADL, TAKE OFF, TECH, CONSUMPTION   
  According to W.W. Rostow, modernization occurs in FOUR stages, including the: 
a.  traditional stage 
b.  take off stage 
c.  drive to techl maturity 
d.  high mass consumption 		  
  a.  THE TRADITIONAL STAGE HAS NO MODERN ECON DEV  
  In tradl societies, people are socialized to honor the past   
  In tradl societies, people cannot imagine that life can or should be different   
  In tradl societies, life is spiritually rich but lacking in material goods   
  b.  THE TAKE OFF STAGE BEGINS THE BREAK W/ TRADL ECON SYS & THE DEV OF MOD ECON SYS  
  In the take off stage, people start to use talents & imagination, thus sparking econ growth   
  In the take off stage, the mkt emerges as goods are produced   
  In the take off stage, tradl bonds begin to break down, there is greater individualism, people are more willing to take risks, & the desire for material goods increases   
  c.  THE DRIVE TO TECHNOLOGICAL MATURITY INCLUDES MATURITY OF INDUSTRY   
  During the drive to tech stage, growth becomes a widely accepted idea that fuels the pursuit of higher living standards   
  The econ diversifies   
  Industrialization weakens tradl family & local community life   
  Absolute poverty is reduced in nations  
  Basic schooling for all & advanced training for some becomes more widely available   
  The social position of women steadily approaches that of men   
  d.  HIGH MASS CONSUMPTION OCCURS W/ A STRONG MID CLASS   
  Economic development driven by industrial technology raises living standards   
  Mass production stimulates mass consumption   
  People learn to “need” the expanding selection of goods produced   
  4.  THE ROLES OF RICH NATIONS ARE EXCESSIVE IN SOME RESPECTS & MODERATING IN OTHER RESPECTS   
  Modernization theory claims that high income countries play four important roles in global econ development   
  High income nations play FOUR important roles in global economic development, including: 
a.  helping control population 
b.  increasing food production 
c.  introducing industrial technology 
d.  providing foreign aid 		  
  a.  HELPING CONTROL POPULATION VIA SOCIAL & MEDICAL TECHNIQUES   
  Rich nations help limit population growth by exporting birth control tech, but some nations such as the US refuse to participate in birth control programs because of religious tradition opposing birth control   
  b.  INCREASING FOOD PRODUCTION THROUGH AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIAL TECHNIQUES   
  Rich nations export high tech farming methods, if they can make a profit doing so   
  The "Green Revolution," which is a program designed to spread agricultural tech, has had mixed success   
  c.  INTRODUCING INDUSTRIAL TECH INCREASES PRODUCTIVITY & CREATES A MID CLASS -- UNDER THE RIGHT CONDITIONS   
  Rich nations introduce machinery & info tech which raises productivity, if they can make a profit doing so   
  Industrialization shifts the labor force from farming to skilled indl & service jobs, creating some middle jobs & some subsistence jobs   
  d.  PROVIDING FOREIGN AID WHICH CAN HELP OTHER NATIONS OR CREATE DEPENDENCY   
  Investment capital from rich nations boost prospects of poor societies   
  Foreign aid help raise agricultural productivity   
  Financial & technical assistance to build power plants & factories   
  Some nations have become debtor nations to the World Bank & private banks   

 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Dependency Theory
External
Links
  DEPENDENCY THEORY HOLD THAT PERIPHERAL NATIONS ARE INTENTIONALLY KEPT DEPENDENT ON THE CORE & ARE IN EFFECT ECONOMIC COLONIES   
  Dependency theory is a model of economic & social development that explains global inequality in terms of the histl exploitation of poor societies by rich ones 
 
  Dep th employs conflict theory by examining how the upper class uses its econ, political, social, military, etc. power to maintain global domination of the core, semi peripheral, & peripheral nations 
 
  Dep th uses FOUR types of analysis including: 
 
  1.  SOCIO HISTL ANALYSIS DEMONSTRATES THAT WEALTHY NATIONS EXPLOIT POOR NATIONS 
 
  The economic success of many wealthier nations was achieved at the expense of the poorer countries beginning in the 1500s at the beginning of the colonial period 
 
  People living in poor countries are better off economically in some respects, & worse off in others as seen in an increase in indl jobs, but some of which are dangerous & do not offer a living wage
 
  Dep th is based on the idea that the econ positions of rich & poor nations are linked in that the richer nations get raw materials & cheap labor from the poorer nations in order to make a profit for themselves 
 
  Dep th holds that the prosperity of developed countries come at the expense of less developed ones 
 
  2.  COLONIALISM WAS THE MOST COMMON FORM OF INTL ECON RELATIONS 
 
  Formal colonialism has almost disappeared from the world, but neocolonialism is the essence of the capitalist world econ today 
 
  Europeans established colonies in No America, Cen Am, So Am, Africa, & Asia 
 
  The US established colonies in Alaska, Haiti, Puerto Rico, Guam, Philippines, Hawaiian Islands, Guantanamo Bay in Cuba   
  European powers dominated most of the African continent until early 1960s 
 
  For more than a century, most of Africa was colonized by European nations, w/ France dominating in the northwest region of the continent & Great Britain dominating in the east & south   
 Link
 The Map of Africa's Colonial History demonstrates the tragic effects of European colonialism on Africa   
 
 3.  NEOCOLONIALISM IS NOW THE MOST COMMON FORM OF INTL ECON RELATIONS 
 
  Neocolonialism is the policy of a strong nation in seeking political & econ hegemony over an independent nation or extended geographical area w/o necessarily reducing the subordinate nation or area to the legal status of a colony   
  Neocolonialism is a policy whereby a major power uses econ & political means to perpetuate or extend its influence over underdeveloped nations or areas   
  The essence of neocolonialism as compared to colonialism is that the former tries not to employ military power to maintain control, while the later uses military power liberally   
  Both colonialism & neocolonialism rely on covert forms of power such as econ, pol, religious, cultural, etc. to maintain power   
  As the domination by the core shifted to a system based on pol & econ power, the colonies gained independence, & estbed new, weak govts   
  According to dep th, political liberation has not meant econ independence   
  Econ relationship btwn rich & poor nations continue colonial pattern of domination   
  Neocolonialism is the heart of the capitalist world econ, meaning that the core nations are dependent on the semi peripheral & peripheral nations for vital resources such as oil, & w/o control over these nations, their core status could be endangered   
 
 Dependency involves three factors, including export orientation, low indl capacity, & foreign debt   
  a.  NARROW EXPORT ORIENTED ECONOMIES CAUSE DEPENDENCY   
 
 Poor nations develop few industries of their own & instead rely on exporting one or a few products based on extractive industry, i.e. raw materials 
 
  The reliance on narrow, export oriented econ dev results in many nations becoming dep on others because they 'have all their eggs in one econ basket,' making them highly susceptible to vagaries of the mkt   
  The reliance on narrow, export oriented econ dev results in many nations letting tradl econ activities, including farming & ranching, fail, making people dep on the import of vital food products   
 
 b.  LACK OF INDUSTRIAL CAPACITY CAUSE DEPENDENCY 
 
  Poor societies depend on selling their inexpensive raw materials to rich nations & try to buy from rich nations the few expensive manufactured goods they can afford 
 
  The lack of indl capacity results in nations being dep on others because they must rely on them to process their raw materials into useable products   
  The lack of indl capacity means that the only value the nation can get is from the extraction of the raw mat, when in fact most of the profit in a product is made not from extraction of the raw materials, but from manufacturing & selling it   
  c.  FOREIGN DEBT CAUSES DEPENDENCY 
 
  Based on mod th, the World Bank & other public & private financial instit have made billions of dollars of loans to semi peripheral & peripheral nations in order to spur econ dev  
  While their intentions may have been good, the loans made by econ dev orgs are often not monitored, resulting in the money being wasted or skimmed off via corruption   
  Because the loans by econ dev orgs often encourage econ dev in a narrow export oriented product, when the mkt for that product falters, the nation is left w/ a large debt, an econ based on one or a few products, & a weak mkt & price for their production   
  Unequal trade patterns plunged poor countries into debt causing high unemployment & rampant inflation 
 
  In the 2000s, Bono & other NGO orgs have urged the US & other creditor nations to forgive some of the poorly administered econ dev loans to the debtor nations in the semi peripheral & peripheral nations   
  4.  THE RELATIONSHIP BTWN THE RICH & POOR NATIONS IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE BOSS & THE WKR
 
  Modernization theory holds that rich societies produce wealth through capital investments & new tech 
 
  Dep th views global inequality in terms of how countries distribute wealth 
 
  Rich nations have overdeveloped themselves as they underdeveloped the rest of the world 
 
  Dep th claims that population control & agricultural dev programs actually benefit rich nations & the ruling elites & not the poor majority in semi peripheral & peripheral nations 
 
  Global poverty results from deliberate politics of the rich nations 
 
  The world produces enough food to feed the planet, but yet people starve 
 
  The contradiction of poverty amid plenty creates global strife & wars 
 
  The contradiction of poverty amid plenty stems from the rich nation policies of producing food for profit 
 
  Some of the govts of poor countries contribute to the contradiction of poverty amid plenty because they need food profits to help pay off their huge foreign debt 
 
  The capitalist corp structure of the global econ is at the core of this vicious cycle 
 
  Dep th is correct in claiming that global inequality is also a problem of distribution & politics as structured by the core nations 
 

 
Top
  
Map of Africa's Colonial History

The Map of Africa's Colonial History demonstrates the tragic effects of European colonialism on Africa


 
Internal
Links

Top
 Outline on  Global Stratification Theories
External
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   
Link
 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
 

 
Internal
Links

Top
Topics on Immanuel Wallerstein's   World Systems Theory
External
Links
  -  Project:  World Systems Theory 
Link
  INTRO:  WORLD SYSTEM THEORY HOLDS THAT GLOBAL CAPITALISM HAS BEEN DEVELOPING W/IN & BTWN NATIONS SINCE THE MID AGES   
  World systems theory ( WST ) holds that the world is made up of Interdependent systems of countries linked by political & economic competition  
  Rich nations are the core of the world econ & low income nations are at the periphery of the world econ   
  WST is similar to dependency theory in that both agree that the dependency of the peripheral nations results from:
a.  narrow, export oriented economies
b.  lack of industrial capacity
c.  foreign debt
d.  rich nations' single minded pursuit of profit.		  
  See Also:  Dependency Theory  
  WST suggests that the prosperity or poverty of any country results from the operation of the global econ system  
  The world economy: 
a.  benefits rich societies by generating profits
b.  harms the rest of the world by causing poverty
c.  makes poor nations dependent on rich ones		  
  CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WORLD SYSTEM INCLUDE GLOBAL DIV OF LABOR, THE NATION STATE, CONFLICT, INTERDEPENDENCE   
  Throughout history, each World System has had FOUR Qualities: 
a.  A world system is a broad economic entity w/ a world level division of labor
b.  A world system is a self contained social system w/ set boundaries & a definite life span
c.  A world system has systems held together by forces in tension, not consensus
d.  A world system is characterized by interdependence
 
  Today the modern world system is characterized by the relatively strong econ links btwn states, i.e. interdependence   
  THE WORLD SYSTEM IS ROUGHLY DIVIDED INTO THE: 
-  CORE (1st WORLD / DEVELOPED WORLD) 
-  SEMI PERIPHERY (2nd WORLD / DEVELOPING WORLD) 
-  PERIPHERY (3rd WORLD / UNDEVELOPED WORLD) 		  
  The most important current determinant of a state's classification w/in the world system is its ability to ensure intl econ competitiveness of its domestic companies  
 
 The world is best understood by dividing the world into THREE major sectors including the core, the semi periphery, & the periphery  
 
 1.  The core includes the major industrialized countries  
  The core is also known as the first world or the developed world  
  Core regions usually have a higher per capita income than do periphery regions   
  The core is dominate trade, technology, highest productivity   
  Domination of trade, tech, & productivity allows the core to dominate the world politically & militarily  
  The core's econ is based on services & mfr  
  The core exploits other regions via colonialism, imperialism, or hegemony  
 
 2.  The semi periphery is also known as the second world or developing countries  
  The semi periphery's economy is based primarily on mfr  
  The semi periphery can exploit the periphery, but is often exploited by core  
  Brazil is currently a semi periphery state   
 
 3.  The periphery is also known at the third world, or the undeveloped countries  
  The periphery is exploited by other regions  
  The periphery's econ is primarily based on natural resource extraction, exploitation of subsistence level labor in mfr  
  Historically, the location of the sectors of world systems have changed as states compete for dominance  
  Thus, there have been different types of core states that have dominated in different stages of world development  
  THE TYPES OF WORLD SYSTEMS INCLUDE EMPIRES, CAPITALISM, GLOBALISM, & SOCIALISM, ALL ON A WORLD SCALE   
  There are FOUR types of world systems   
  a.  An empire world system is based on political & / or military domination   
  b.  The modern capitalist world system is based on econ domination 
 
 
 Compared to the empire world system, the modern capitalist world system is more stable, has a broader base, encompasses many independent states, & has a built in process of economic stability   
  Modern capitalism began development in late 1400s 
 
  c.  The global capitalist world system is based on the globalization of econ domination   
  Some facets of global capitalism developed w/ capitalism in the 1400s but has come to dominate world events since the early 1900s   
  d.  The socialist world govt world system is a future possibility   
  SOCIO HISTORICAL PROCESSES OF THE WORLD SYSTEM   
  There are FIVE historical processes that span types & stages of world systems   
 
 1.  GEOGRAPHIC EXPANSION GENERALLY INCLUDES THE EXPANSION OF EMPIRE, COLONIES, OR MKTS   
  The histl process of geographic expansion is a prerequisite for the many stages  
  The histl process of geographic expansion is caused by people advancing their own interests  
  During geographic expansion, the world must have enough trade to advance the social systems  
  Geographic expansion is a sign in all of the stages mentioned above, though in the later stage domination shifts forms   
 
 2.  THE DIVISION OF LABOR HAS STEADILY INCREASED THROUGHOUT HIST   
  While the typical definition of the division of labor referred to the subdivision of tasks, Wallerstein sees the division of labor developing into types of labor  
  Wallerstein sees the division labor developing from the individual in Hunter Gatherer Society, to a national division of labor, to a world wide or global division of labor  
  The sociologist Emile Durkheim recognized the division labor as the major foundation of modern society  
  See Also:  Durkheim  
  See Also:  The Division of Labor  
  See Also:  The Intl Division of Labor  
 
 An example of the development of the division of labor from the individual to the national level, to the world wide or global level is that as the nation state developed, various nations took different places in a globalized division of labor   
  Even as far back as the 16th Century,  
  a.  capitalism replaced statism as the major mode of domination   
  b.  the solidarity of capitalism was based on unequal development   
  c.  some nations could exploit & some would be exploited   
  d.  the intl division of labor relegated different nations to different roles   
  e.  the roles included creating labor power, food production, raw material production, & industry   
  In the past, different areas produced different types of labor, including the: 
-  African supply of slaves 
-  Southern Europe supply of tenant farmers 
-  Western Europe supply of wage workers 		  
  The new intl division of labor is caused by the decentralization of mfring from the core countries to semi peripheral & peripheral nations   
 
 Today, different areas around the globe produce different types of labor
 
 
 PRE INDL LABOR TYPES INCLUDED FREE LABOR, FORCED LABOR, & SHARECROPPING   
 
 Until the Industrial Age, there were THREE types of labor including free labor, forced labor, & sharecropping  
  a.  The core had free labor as its primary form of labor  
  b.  The semi periphery had sharecropping as its primary form of labor  
  c.  The periphery had forced labor as its primary form of labor  
  Capitalism's strength lies in the core w/ free labor & the periphery w/ unfree labor  
  Since the Pre Industrial Age, the amount of forced labor in use has diminished  
  3.  URBANIZATION IS A DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODERN INDL WORLD   
 
 Urbanization is characterized by a continual movement to urban areas  
  The histl trend toward urbanization has reversed itself only during extraordinary circumstances such as war, plagues, famines, etc.  
  4.  DOMINATION BY THE CORE HAS ALWAYS EXISTED   
  Colonialism is domination of regions of the core, the semi periphery, & the periphery through political/military power   
  Imperialism via neocolonialism is the domination of regions of the core, the semi periphery, & the periphery through economic power   
  Hegemony is domination of regions of the core, the semi periphery, & the periphery through a combination of economic, military, financial, & especially cultural means   
  5.  THE CYCLE OF LEADERSHIP CONSISTS OF THE INTERACTION BTWN ECON, MILITARY, & POLITICAL POWER   
  The cycle of leadership has many stages, including: 
Competitive struggle --> economic power --> political power -->
military power --> expansion/hegemony --> imperial overreach -->
decline/defeat -->
begin again w/ competitive 
 struggle -->
 
  Britain maintained world domination in two successive cycles of leadership   
  The US is now considered to be the world's hegemonic power   
  The fact that the US is not militarily conquering the world brings the cycle of leadership into question   
  Japan became a member of the world system core in the mid 20th century   
  A SOCIO HISTL ANALYSIS REFLECTS PERIODS OF STABILITY & CHANGE   
  Before the Modern Era, there was the sense that history was cyclical   
  At times in history, one nation may dominate by econ, political, & military power   
  There are also periods of flux   
  This cycle first developed during Early Empire Era era & to a great extent still exists today   
  WST holds that the world system is held together by forces in tension, not consensus   
  WST sees the world in historical & developmental terms   
  Historically the world developed through these stages such as: 
   Hunter Gatherer Society 1.5 mm BP - 10 K BC 
   Pre Empire Era:  Ancient Agricultural Society 10 K BC - 3K BC
   Early Empire Era 3 K BC - 200 BC
   Roman Empire Era 200 BC - 500 AD
   Pre Industrial Society (Middle Ages) 500 - 1300
   Early Industrial Age 1300 - 1700
   Industrial Age 1700 - present
   Global Capitalism 1910 - present
   Post Industrial Society 1970 - present
 
  Starting w/ ancient agricultural societies, hearth areas developed which were early core areas   
  By the time of the Early Empire Era era,  there is full development of the core, semi periphery & periphery   
  Periods of stability include various centuries in the Egyptian Empire, Chinese Empire, the Roman Empire, & Feudal Europe   
  While much of history is characterized by change, some of the most studied eras of change include the collapse of the Roman Empire & the transition from feudalism to capitalism   
  The modern world system began in the late 15th century   

The End
 
Top