Inequality and Stratification(Ch. 12-13)
Dr. John Bradford
Outline
I. Inequality within the USII. Global InequalityIII. The importance of EqualityIV. Theories of Stratification
INEQUALITY IN THE US
30.0
32.9
35.7
38.6
41.4
44.3
47.1
50.0
1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Percentage of Total Income Earned by the Top 10 PercentUnited States (1970-2009)
Year
Pe
rce
nta
ge
Income Inequality within the US
CEO and Worker PayCEOs' pay as a multiple of the average worker's pay, 1960-2007
Source: Domhoff 2011
Wealth and Financial Wealth Distribution 2007
Source: Domhoff 2011
Social Mobility
GLOBAL POVERTY AND INEQUALITY
Global Poverty
• World Bank defines two distinct sub-categories:1. World poverty, in which people live on less than
$365 per year2. Extreme poverty, in which individuals live on less
than $275 per year. • 600 million people estimated to live in extreme
poverty
Global Poverty: long-term trendsPeople living on less than $1 per day (millions)
1820-2000
Distribution of Global Poverty: 1970
http://www.gapminder.org/downloads/human-development-trends-2005/
Distribution of Global Poverty: 1970
http://www.gapminder.org/downloads/human-development-trends-2005/
Distribution of Global Poverty: 2000
http://www.gapminder.org/downloads/human-development-trends-2005/
Inequality within countries
Causes of Global Mortality
2/6/11
Life expectancy vs. GDP per person 2010
Map of World Happiness
Note: The happiest country on earth is Denmark!
III. WHY EQUALITY MATTERS
Inequality and Health
Inequality and Mental Health
Inequality and Drug Abuse
Inequality and Education
Inequality and Imprisonment
Inequality and Obesity
Inequality and Social Mobility
Inequality and Trust and Community Life
Inequality and Violence
Inequality and Child Well-Being
IV. THEORIES OF STRATIFICATION
Social Stratification
• Social Stratification = a social hierarchy, or evaluation-ranking-reward system.– In a hierarchy, those at the top
are not just different, they are considered better or superior.
– The definition of ‘better’ depends on the criterion of evaluation: Braver, Smarter, Stronger, Purer…
Social Stratification
• Social Stratification = – In nearly all societies, people are
evaluated on the basis of some characteristic and placed into higher or lower-ranking groups.
– Actors are sorted into social positions that carry unequal rewards, obligations, and expectations
How does inequality arise in class-based societies?
Two possible explanations:1. Individualist, or Market framework
– Hierarchies are emergent ( = unintended).– Inequality of individuals’ effort or talent lead to inequality of
status positions (income, power, prestige, etc.)– Higher ‘rewards’ for some individuals are both i) compensation
for their effort, and ii) incentives to elicit that effort
2. ‘Structural’ framework = ‘Rich Get Richer’ – Hierarchies are enacted (= imposed)– Differences in outcomes (status) not due to intrinsic individual
attributes, but to the social positions they occupy.
How does inequality arise in class-based societies?
Structural, or ‘Rich get richer’ framework: – Hierarchies are emergent, (i.e. unintended,
spontaneous) but resulting inequalities don’t reflect the efforts or talents of the individuals.
– People in higher-ranking groups receive disproportionally more rewards, and those in lower-ranking groups disproportionally fewer rewards,
– In other words, differences in social rewards are far greater than the differences in ‘talent’ upon which these rewards are ostensibly based.
‘Rich get richer’• Even assuming perfect equality of opportunity, and assuming
everyone desires to live in a society where social rewards are based on one’s talents and/or hard work, we should not expect that the differences in the social rewards received will be proportional to the differences in the talents/efforts of the individuals!
• Those with a little more ‘talent’ get disproportionately more rewards, far more than they ‘deserve’, even assuming perfect equality of opportunity!
Lots of talentNo talent
Differences in talent
Differences in social rewards
‘Rich get richer’
• Do these people have talent? (acting skill, charisma, beauty, etc.)
• If so, is the above-average wealth and fame they receive proportional to their above-average talents?
• Why are these people wealthy and famous and not you!?
‘Rich get richer’How it works:• Our evaluations of others are socially influenced: People pay
attention to how everyone else is being evaluated by everyone else.
• This amplifies underlying differences between individuals and makes the rewards allotted to them disproportional to their talents and/or efforts. – Examples: i. People who are popular tend to attract more attention than non-
popular people. Why? Because they are already popular! ii. Children with a reputation for being ‘bad’ are more likely to get in
trouble compared to a ‘good’ kid, for doing the same things.iii. Some journal articles get cited way more than others, simply
because they are more frequently cited.
‘Rich get richer’(Summary)
• The ‘rich get richer’ effect is also known as: winner-take-all effects, cascade effects, popularity tournaments, the Matthew effect, and preferential attachment.
• These are all examples of positive (reinforcing) feedback.
• Conclusion: even if there was total equality of opportunity, and everyone had identical talents, you should still expect hierarchies in class-based societies!
Michels’ Iron Law of Oligarchy• German sociologist Robert Michels
claimed in his 1911 book Political Parties that “rule by an elite or "oligarchy" is inevitable, an “iron law” within any organization.
• Democracy is a façade legitimizing the rule of a particular elite, and oligarchy is inevitable.
• Why? Large organizations require bureaucracies in order to function effectively; bureaucracy entails centralization, and centralization means that power will end up in the hands of the few.
Top Related