Chapter 6 – Stratification, Class, Inequality

Concepts

• Structured Inequalities: Social inequalities that result from patterns in the social structure.  Some of the most common patterns of inequality we find are structured around variables of class, race and gender.
  • However, structured inequalities exist around many other less obvious variables such as age, region, religion, etc.  
  • It is useful to think about what structured inequalities are NOT.  The inequalities that emerge in society from differences in talent and effort would not be considered structured inequalities.  Thus, if there are two actors, and actor A is more successful because she is clearly more talented than actor B, then that inequality is not necessarily a structured inequality. 
  • However, many inequalities that we find in society are not due to talent or effort.  
  • For example, people who are born poor have less opportunities than people who are born rich. 
  • Thus, these are the “patterns” that we refer to when we speak of structured inequalities.  It is a “pattern” that people from less privileged backgrounds have a harder time finding success than those with more privilege.  
• Social Stratification: The existence of structured inequalities between groups in society in terms of their access to material or symbolic rewards. 
  • If you look at the issue of class, the higher and upper classes have more access to money and respect than people in the lower classes.
  • Along race, we find that whites receive more respect and money than blacks and latinos.  Along gender lines, men are more privileged than women.
  • However, these types of stratification usually interact and intersect with one another in very complicated ways.  Thus, society is not simply divided into poor people and rich people; race and class interact with one another.  So, people of color make up a bigger proportion of the poor and white people tend to make up a bigger proportion of the rich, upper classes.  There are two major systems of stratification we’ll study here.  Caste and class.  
• Caste systems: A social system in which one’s social status is held for life.  Slavery in the U.S. is a caste system.  
  • If you were born a slave, you would be a slave for the rest of your life.  Then our Jim Crow system of segregation was also a caste system.  The characteristic that distinguishes a caste system is the ability to move from one strata of society to another. 
• Class systems: Class systems allow individuals to move among classes.
  • Thus, in the U.S., we currently have a class system in which different sectors in society have more money and power than others.  
  • Unlike caste systems, in class systems, people may move from one stratum to another.  Thus, if a person works hard and becomes successful or wins the lottery, they would move from a lower stratus to a higher stratus. 
  • Class systems are mainly based on differences in wealth, income, education and occupation.  Let’s explore the first two. 
• Wealth: money and material possessions held by an individual or a group.  This includes cash, real estate, cars, businesses, stocks, jewelry, clothes, etc. 
• Income: the money received from paid wages, salaries, or earned from investments.  

Income and Wealth Inequality

• Two of the main concepts we look at when we are studying class inequality are income and wealth.
• Income refers to money received from wages, salaries and investments.  It is the flow of money that a person receives on a somewhat regular basis.  This is different from wealth.  
• Wealth are money and material possessions held by an individual or group.  
• Thus, if you’re a worker, the paycheck you receive is income, and then you use that money to buy a table; that table is now part of your wealth.  
• We tend to confuse the two, but as we shall see, wealth inequality is much, much more drastic and scary than income inequality.  
• Income inequality has increased in the last decades.  
• A study by the Harvard Business School was done asking people what they would like wealth inequality to be, what they thought it was, and that was compared to the actual distribution.  
• These researchers from Harvard and Duke University found that people’s beliefs about wealth inequality and the actual distribution of wealth were radically different.
• Wealth inequality is much, much bigger than income inequality.  The main reason for this is that wealth inequality grows generation after generation as wealth is passed down from parents to children.  Thus, children of parents with wealth can inherit homes, money and other valuable assets.  Homes are the main form of wealth that gets passed down from generation to generation.  This is very, very important because real state is property that consistently gains value in the long run.  Most of the things you own today will be worth less tomorrow.  Real state actually tends to appreciate with time in the long run. 

Karl Marx and Max Webber

• When Karl Marx analyzed society during the industrial revolution, he saw many people work in factories in grueling working conditions; for this work, they did not receive very much pay. 
• Marx concluded that one’s class position in society depended on one’s relationship to the means of production.  
• The means of production are the means whereby the production of material goods is carried on in a society.  The means of production of Marx’s main  focus were the factories.  However, the means of production also include farms, schools, movie studios, restaurants, digital start-up companies, etc.  
• Marx believed that two main classes were created around the means of production: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
• The bourgeoisie owned the means of production: the schools, farms, etc.  The proletariat did not have anything except their labor to sell, so they worked the means of production.
• Today, the bourgeoisie would be called the capitalists and the proletariat would be called the workers.  
• This relationship is exploitative.  The bourgeoisie get rich by selling the products made by the workers and paying the workers as little as they possibly could.   The proletariat do not have many opportunities to do anything else other than work long hours in difficult working conditions for little pay.  
• In order to be able to measure this exploitation, Marx identified the concept of surplus value.  It starts with the general idea that all value is created by workers.  
• Let’s look at an example of a cook in a restaurant.  This cook creates value in the form of burgers, and these burgers are sold for a profit.  For the sake of the example, we’re going to ignore the details regarding the cost of the meat, bread, rent for the location, etc.  If a cook at a restaurant makes 10 burgers every hour and each burger sells for $10, then that cook created $100 worth of value.  But this cook makes $12/hour.  So the cook gets paid $12 and the owner keeps the other $88.  Thus, in one hour, the cook created $100 in value, got paid $12 and the owner took $88.  Here the surplus value is $88.  It is the value that the worker created that she didn’t receive in return.  
• Marx believed that the exploitative nature of capitalism in which workers were exploited by their employers would lead to the downfall of capitalism.  He believed capitalism was inherently flawed and was unsustainable.  The workers, tired of the exploitation and wanting a better life, would revolt and overthrow the capitalists and would take control of the means of production.  They would own the factories, schools, farms and would run those businesses with the owners.  At the end of the day, the workers would receive all the income from the business leaving no surplus value.  Remember, surplus value is that which is taken by the bourgeoisie.  If there’s no bourgeoisie, there’s not surplus value, and there’s no exploitation.  

Max Weber

• Max Weber disagreed with Karl Marx’s dichotomous analysis of classes.
• Weber thought that Marx was too reductionist, making everything about economics, exploitation and the relationship to the means of production.
• Instead, Weber believed there were other factors to take into consideration when identifying the different classes in society.  In particular, he paid attention to status and power.
• Status is the social honor or prestige a particular group is accorded by other members of a society.
• Weber thought that status also was an important part of social class.  The Pope, for example, is the chosen leader of the Roman Catholic Church.  He doesn’t own the means of production, but he is still high in status.  He can have meetings with presidents of countries and other important figures.  The Pope, Weber would argue, is part of the upper classes in society.  However, this is not based on his money or his relationship to the means of production.  Instead, it is based on the honor bestowed to him in leading an entire religious community.
• Another good example is a comparison between President Barack Obama and President Donald Trump.  Obama’s stake in the upper classes is based on his role as president, senator, lawyer, and community organizer.
• In contrast, Trump’s stake in the upper class, until he became President, was based on his ownership of means of production (his companies). Obama and Trump would both be considered members of the upper class, but for different reasons.  

Social Mobility

• The American Dream is built on the idea that social mobility is possible for anyone who works hard.
• Social mobility refers to the movement of individuals or groups between different social positions.  Most often we would think of a person moving from a working class background to a middle class background, for example.  
• Social mobility can also be downward when someone loses their job, for example.