134lecture32(apr01) - Stratification….Or We Are All...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Stratification….Or We Are All Equal, But Stratification….Or We Are All Equal, But Some are More Equal Than Others Some are More Equal Than Others Objectives: 1. The Meaning of Stratification: Karl Marx Max Weber 2. Causes of Stratification: Functionalism Conflict Symbolic Interaction 3. How Do Sociologists Determine One’s Social Class? Activity tto Demonstrate Stratification Activity o Demonstrate Stratification Processes: 1. Differentiation 2. Evaluation 3. Ranking 4. Rewarding Marx and Weber on Social Class Marx and Weber on Social Class Class (Marx) (Property) Status (Weber) (Prestige, Honor) Power (Weber) (Pol/Communal) Social Class Three Causes off Stratification Three Causes o Stratification Conflict: Functional: Social conflict is class related Some roles crucial and get rewarded more Rewards meaningful if unequal but Many elites inherit $ Many crucial roles not Many not rewarded e.g. nurses, teachers Class “consciousness” Class Capitalists cheat workers but Ignores the broad middle class Ignores coop. between classes Three Causes off Stratification ((cont’d) Three Causes o Stratification cont’d) Symbolic Interaction: Meaning of belonging to a class Impact of class on self concept Much stereotyping of classes but Blocked opportunities negate aspirations Stereotyping and Class Stereotyping and Class “Possible to determine a family’s social class by knowledge of family name?” SA A 2% 31% D SD 50% 18% DK 4% Stereotyping ((cont’d) Stereotyping cont’d) Families assigned to classes: (High) I (Middle) III (Low) VI 2 10 10 47 17 0 Booker T. Brown Leopold Stein 4 44 11 23 47 0 John Garcia Michael Harrison 0 45 0 14 41 0 Name Chien Yi Chung Richard O’Bannon Sum – people do stereotype others, even by family names. do Determining Social Class Determining Social Class Objective Reputational Subjective $, Education & Occupation Prestige Judges used Self evaluation Bias monitored Most Americans say M-C North Hatt Scale Why reluctant to say “upper?” What is your social class? What your Soc. 134 Survey Results Soc. 134 Survey Results USA ISU LC 5% 1% LM 21% 9% MM 57% WM 14% 32% 1% 3% W 92% 55% 96% M Examples With Prestige Scale Examples With Prestige Scale Respondents Rated Occupation Prestige As: Excellent – 100 Below Average - 40 Excellent Good – 80 Poor - 20 Good Average – 60 Average College Professor Garbage Collector Lawyer Accountant Police Officer = = = = = 90 32 89 81 70 Social Class Differences Social Class Differences iin tthe United States n he United States Objectives: 1. Consequences of One’s Social Class 2. Trends in Poverty? 3. Who is Poor Today? Major Results ffrom Social Class Research Major Results rom Social Class Research Results: Life Chances Life Style Subcultures Conservative, Self-Perpetuating Nature of Social Class Income and Wealth Gap iin tthe U.S. 1990s Income and Wealth Gap n he U.S. 1990s A. First, Consider Income of People in the U.S. If 20 Families Mirror the National Distribution of Income in the U.S., then: The Top (#1) which = 5% The top #1 (5%) earns more than the lowest 8 (40%) families Lowest 8 = 40% Income and Wealth Gap in the U.S (cont’d) Income and Wealth Gap in the U.S (cont’d) B. Now, Consider Wealth of People in the U.S.: (Wealth includes all of one’s assets) If 20 families mirror the national distribution of wealth in the U.S., then: The top #1 = 5% Top #1 (5%) have more assets than all other families combined (95%) All other families (95%) Income and Wealth Gap in the U.S. (cont’’d) Income and Wealth Gap in the U.S. (cont d) C. Summary 1. U.S. has the biggest gap between those at the top and those at the bottom in any developed country. 2. U.S. has the largest poverty rate. 3. Canada is in the middle of developed countries 4. Scandinavian countries and Japan have the least inequality. Source: Coleman and Cressey, 1995 6/E States Ranked by Rates off Hunger States Ranked by Rates o Hunger ((1999, USDA) 1999, USDA) % households hungry or near hungry: New Mexico Texas 15.1% 12.9% Florida Iowa 11.5% 7.0% North Dakota 4.6% Average = 9.7% hungry in typical state Why is rate so high in Texas, New Mexico, Florida? Trends iin Poverty iin U.S. Trends n Poverty n U.S. 1970 24.6% 1990 12.2% 2000 11.8% (“War on Poverty” years) Who IIs Poor iin U.S.? Who s Poor n U.S.? Black 23.6% Hispanic 22.8% White 7.7% Female head of household 36% Hispanic children 40% Black children 46% White children 16% ...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online