SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

The Arithmetic of Inequality

Jimmy is a second grader. He pays attention in school, and he enjoys it. School records show that he is
reading slightly above grade level and has a slightly better than average IQ.
Bobby is a second grader across town. He also pays attention in class and enjoys school, and his test
scores are similar to Jimmy's.
Bobby is a safe bet to enter college (more than four times as likely as Jimmy) and a good bet to
complete it -- at least twelve times as likely as Jimmy. Bobby will probably have at least four years
more schooling than Jimmy. He is twenty seven times as likely as Jimmy to land a job which by his late
forties will pay him an income in the top tenth of all incomes. Jimmy has about one chance in eight of
earning a median income (Bassis, 1991:216).
I. Basic Definitions
A. Life Chances
 one's access to resources
 one's ability to get food and shelter
 access to social institution such as health care, education, the government, and the law (to mention a
few). 
 Social class affects one's life chances
B. What is Social Stratification?
 division of a society into layers (or strata) whose occupants have unequal access to social opportunities
and rewards.
 People in the top strata enjoy power, prosperity, and prestige
 people in the bottom strata endure
 inequality passes from one generation to the next
C. What is a Class?
 People who occupy the same layer of the socioeconomic hierarchy are known as a social class
 a large group of people who rank closely to one another in wealth, power, and prestige
II. Stratification Systems
A. Caste: Ascribed Status
 a rigid system of inequality
 position is strictly defined  There is no social mobility from one caste to another.
 Caste relationships are relatively conflict free.  The lack of conflict can be explained, in part, because
of the powerful position on the upper caste and, in part, by an ideology that justifies caste position. 
There is little deviance on the part of the lower castes because of fear of harsh punishment.
 Example:
A well-known society with a caste system is India. People are born into a caste. Caste membership
determines your occupation, social interaction, power, and education. No amount of achievement
will change your caste position.
Example: India's Caste System
Brahman Teachers and religious people
Kshatriya Warriors
Viashia Merchants and craftsman
Shudra Laborers and farmers
These people work with the dead, both animal and human. They are undertakers, butchers,
Untouchable
and leather workers.
Some argue that race and gender sometimes functions like a caste system in the United States. People are
born with their race and their gender.
 1. Endogamy
In a caste society, people have to marry within their own caste.
2. Ritual Pollution
In caste societies many members guard against ritual pollution. Contact between members of the
upper caste and the lower caste is inappropriate. Such contact is seen by the members of the
upper caste as unclean. In the Indian caste system upper caste individuals avoid even the shadow
of an untouchable. The shadow of an untouchable's house is polluting to members of the upper
castes.

B. Class: Achieved Status

The class system is an open form of stratification based primarily on economic criteria. The boundaries
between classes are more fluid than with the caste system. Individuals can move around within the class
system. Their status can improve or decline. Class membership depends, at least in part, on characteristics
which the individual can control. Keep in mind, however, that people tend to be born into class structure.
Change is difficult. Historic conditions determine social class structure. The ideology of the dominant
culture perpetuates class structure. The type of class structure which allows the greatest mobility is
generally a modern industrial society.
C. A Classless Society
In a classless society there are no economically based strata.
1. Soviet Union as an example
Not even the Soviet's claim to be a true Communist society. They only claim to be at the transition phase
between capitalism and socialism.
III. Perspectives on Class
A. Stratification: A Functionalist View
class structure is beneficial to American society
class structure is necessary. 
concern : how a society can encourage the most qualified people to do the most important jobs.   Class
structure facilitates this end.
1. Class structure provides a competitive arena
A class structure allows the best rise to the top of the social strata.
2. Class structure provides a motivating force
Fluid class structure provides motivation and an arena for individual achievement. It offers prizes
that challenge people to work hard.
3. Class structure provides opportunity
Americans believe that through hard work, all people have a crack at getting to the top. The
wealth of the few is the goal of every American. Of course, there is poverty. Poverty, however, is
simply the result of individuals not trying hard enough.

B. Stratification: A Conflict View

argues that the basis of social stratification is found in conflict over some kind of scare resources. 
stratification is not necessary, but is maintained to safeguard the ruling class's privileges
Those who find social class beneficial are those who have "made it" in the system.
Rather than stratification being a fluid system of upward and downward mobility based on ability, the
class system is actually characterized by institutional inequalities in income and wealth.  Only on rare
occasions do Americans break through the class barrier. Usually break through occurs as a result of a lucky
"roll of the dice." Few people actually succeed at social advancement through sheer hard work.
Marriage and Upward Mobility
Marriage is the quickest route out of poverty. Marriage out of poverty is no more than a lucky roll of
the dice. Generally, birth determines one's position in society. Rich fathers have rich children while
poor fathers have poor children. Changes in class position require a complex mixture of luck,
inheritance, and effort, and probably in that order of importance (see Harrington, 1984).
Example: Lotteries
 
Poverty
Poverty in the United States "officially" refers to people who fall below the "official poverty line."  In
general, however, poverty is a complex subject that depends on not only official definitions, but on
the perspectives of people as well as the physical location of people.
One common perspective on poverty is to compare the percentage (or rate) of people in poverty from
one group or another.  When one explores rates of poverty, one is often directed toward the high
poverty rates of women with children (no husband present) or the high poverty rates experienced by
people of color.
When one explores the actual numbers of poor people, one finds that the race of the majority of poor
people is white. Whites have a lower proportion of people in poverty than other racial groups, but
because there are so many more whites in U.S. society, their lower poverty rate still translates into
larger numbers of poor people.
When one investigates poverty by age, one learns that children (under age 18) are most likely to be
poor.  On the other hand, people who are 65 years old and older are least likely to be poor.  (At least
this is the perspective based on the "official definition of poverty."  Many of the elderly live slightly
above the poverty line so they are technically not poor, but they are still in need.)
The Official Poverty Line
The poverty line, the official measure of poverty in the United States, is set at three times a low-cost
food budget.  Henslin (2006:201) argues that in the 1960s, when the poverty line was determined,
poor people spent roughly a third of their income on food.  In the U.S., families who earn less than
three times the cost of food are considered "officially poor."  This status could influence the
distribution of social welfare dollars from Washington.
The poverty rate refers to the percentage of people in the united states who fall  below the poverty
line.
The entire Official poverty measure in inadequate.   Currently, poor people spend no more than a fifth
of their budget on food.  It one wanted to know the "real" level of poverty in terms of 1960s standard,
one should multiple the low-cost food budget by five, not three.  By, multiplying by three, the
percentage of the population is grossly underestimated.  As a result of underestimating poverty,
Washington makes fewer funds available to support poor people.
C. A Synthesis of Functionalist and Conflict Perspectives on Class
1. Basic Resources
The basic resources needed for the maintenance of society are allocated in much the same way that the
functionalists argue. This is efficient. He contends that all societies do this to one degree or another.
2. Surplus wealth
Surplus wealth is allocated in much the same way that the conflict theory predicts (i.e., through
exploitation and class struggle).
D. Social Mobility
Social mobility generally refers to the movement from one social class to another. There are several ways
to view social mobility in terms of class position.
1. Intergenerational Mobility
Intergenerational mobility refers to movement (up or down) the social hierarchy by family members. An
example here would be a family where the father is a trucker and the sibling becomes a doctor.
2. Exchange Mobility
Exchange mobility is where individuals change places with one another in the stratification system 
For example, if 100 working-class people move upward on the class ladder and, at the same time, 100
middle class people experience downward mobility, sociologists would consider this to be an example of
exchange mobility (Henslin, 2004:209).
3. Structural Mobility
 How fluid is the U.S. class-structure? Structural mobility occurs when the economic status of people
changes as a result of structural changes in the economy. The argument is sometimes made that the
U.S. has a very fluid class-structure. Many families have improved their class position over the past
 100 years in the U.S. Does this mean that the U.S. has a fluid class structure or does something else
explain the apparent successes that people have with regards to improvements in their well-being?  
When the structure itself changes, everyone's position changes. Structural change is an important
explanation for much of the recent improvement in the financial well being of many in American
society. As the U.S. became industrialized, the occupational structure itself was transformed.
Children, therefore, could not stay in the same occupational position as their parents.
a. The Changing Labor Structure
In 1900 17.9 percent of all laborers positions were white collar. By 1979 50.9 percent of all jobs
were in the white-collar sector. The percentage of people doing farm work on the other hand
declined from 37.6 in 1900 to 2.8 percent in 1979. Children must, therefore, take jobs in sectors
of the economy other than that which their parents worked in (From Charon, 1986:326).
IV. Analysis of Class: Karl Marx
Karl Marx studied the forces that caused the misery of the working class in 19th Century Western Europe.  The
student of Marx cannot forget that Marx is a historic figure.  He wrote in the middle 1800 when social relations
weresome what different from those found at the end of the 20th century.  At the time of Marx a handful of
wealthy capitalist exploited a large and impoverished working class. For Marx, ownership of  the means of
production was the primary factor that distinguished the different classes under industrial capitalism.  Farley
(2000) contends that during the 1800s capitalism was more exploitative than during any time in the last several
hundred years.
A. What is a Social Class According to Marx?
In Marxist terminology, "a class consists of all the people who share a common relationship to the means of
production" (Robinson, 1989:172).
1. The bourgeoisie
Those people who control the means of production (whether that means factories or slaves or land) make
up the dominant class or the bourgeoisie.
2. The Proletariat
Those who work for the dominant class (slaves, peasants, industrial laborers)are the subordinate class or
the proletariat. This relationship is both unequal and exploitative in that the dominant class takes unfair
advantage of the subordinate class.
B. Surplus Wealth
How does inequality occur in the first place? The workers produce surplus wealth.  Workers transform raw
material into finished products.  The value of the finished product is greater than the cost of  the worker's labor
and the cost of raw material.   The workers, however, do not enjoy the surplus which they have created. The
owners of the means of production (factories) are able to seize the surplus for their own benefits. Robertson
(1989:172) contends that "this, in Marx's view, is the essence of exploitation, and the main source of conflict
between the classes throughout history."  Marx would argue that in an ideal economy, the workers would keep the
surplus they have created as they transform raw material into finished products.
C. Critiques of Marx
Several features of advanced capitalist society have thrown doubt on Marx's predictions.
1. What about the middle-class?
The existence of the middle class is problematic for Marx. Not only are the middle-class a large and well-
to-do class, they generally do not work for the owners of the means of production. They often work for
their fellow citizen (as state bureaucrats) or they are self-employed.
2. Large Corporations
Marx also did not predict the rise of large corporations which are owned by thousands of people and
which are controlled by salaried managers. Ownership and control of the means of production are no
longer the same thing.
3. Men and Women of Knowledge
In post industrial society ownership may not be the most important asset in the economy. Knowledge of
how the system works may be more important. Status accrues to people with knowledge.
Contradictory Class Locations
Marx roughly divided society into two classes: the workers and the owners of production. He
 perceived these groups as having competing interests and not having much in common with one
another.
Erik Wright revised Marx's concept of social classes by suggesting that some people simultaneously
occupying more than one class. He contends that such people occupy contradictory class positions.  M
any times people cross over. An individual can begin life as a worker and later on, become a capitalist.
That former worker surely has something in common with the people he used to work with ...
certainly much more so that the capitalist who never "works (see Henslin, 2004:199)."
V. Analysis of Class: Max Weber
How does one determine social class? Often social class is thought of in terms of money and/or wealth. For
example, if one individual earns a million dollars per year while another individual earns $3,000 per year, the first
individual generally occupies a higher social position. It's important to note, however, that social class does not
have to refer to money and/or wealth exclusively. Drug dealers may have a lot of money, but they are not
members of an upper class.
Determining Social Class:
Socioeconomic Status (SES)
What is Socioeconomic Status (SES)?
Farley (2005:32) notes that nearly all societies tend to group themselves by socioeconomic status. 
SES is a concept which is rather complex.   The average citizen may tend to group people according to
simple criteria like income or wealth.  SES is a more robust concept.  Socioeconomic status (SES) calls
attention the complex nature of social class.  It is determined by an array of social and economic
indicators.  It is also subject to interpretation form various perspectives.
1. Objective Measures
There are objective measures of social class. Henslin (1999:253) suggests that researches can assign
people to various social classes based objective criteria involving wealth, power, and prestige. Some
objective indicators can include occupation, educational level, number of dependents, type of
residence, infant mortality, and life expectancy rates.
2. Subjective Measures
There are also subjective measures. Typically, determining class from a subjective point of view
involves asking someone how they perceive their class position.
3. Reputational Measures
Finally, class can be determined using the reputational method (Henslin, 1999:253). People identify an
individual's social class based on their expert knowledge of their individual's circumstances. The
reputational method is limited to smaller communities, where people are familiar with one another's
reputation.  People at each class level see class differently.  They, therefore, carry around different
personal pictures of society's classes.  People see finer divisions at their own class level, but tend to
lump together people who occupy other class levels. For example, People at the top see several
divisions of people at the top while they see one large monolithic group of people at the bottom. On
the other hand, people at the bottom see several distinctions of poor people, but only one group at
the top -- the rich (Henslin, 1999:253).
Weber offers a multidimensional class model that incorporates three distinct entities:   Economic status (wealth),
political status (power), and social status (prestige).
A. Wealth
Wealth consists of income and assets (property).
Robertson (1989:180) contends that, while the US is philosophically indebted to the notion that "all men are
created equal," the US is, in fact, a very stratified society. The US has the most inegalitarian class structures in the
industrialized world (see Long, 1993).
For the first century of nationhood in the US, a caste system was in place in the form of racial slavery. Many of the
familiar characteristics associated with the Indian caste system were in effect. Included in America's caste system
were endogamy and notions of ritual pollution. Blacks were not allowed in the same restaurants, bathrooms, and
buses as whites. Women also can be seen as occupying secondary position in a caste system. Despite the professed
 commitment to human rights, the US today contains
Prestige Ratings of Occupations 600,000 millionaires and 32 million people below the
in the United States:(1972-1982) poverty line.
These are prestige ratings of 1 to 100 that
Whoaverage
Controls Wealth in the U.S.?
Americans gave to various occupations.
Group Percent of Households Percent of Wealth Range
Rank Occupation Score
Super-Rich 0.5 % 35.1% 2.5 Million or more
1 Physician 82
Very-Rich 0.5% 6.7% 1.4 to 2.5 million
2. College Professor 78
Rich 9.0% 29.9% $206,000 to 1.4 mil
3. Judge 76
The rest of us 90.0% 28.2% Less than $200,000
4. Lawyer 76
Source: Eitzen, 1988:257
5. Physicist 74 1. Assets
6. Dentist 74 Wolff (in Skolnick and Currie, 1997:99) describes assets as
consisting of all forms of "financial wealth such as bank
        accounts, stocks, bonds, life insurance savings, mutual
fund shares and unincorporated business; consumer
95 Waiter 20
durables like cares and major appliances; and the value of
96 Farm Laborer 18 pension rights." Wolff (1997:99) continues to say that from
these sources, one should subtract liabilities such as
97 Maid/Servant 18 "consumer debt, mortgage balances, and other
98 Garbage Collector 17 outstanding debt." The upper classes control a much
greater percentage of valuable assets than income.
99 Janitor 17 Robertson (1989:180) points out that in 1973 the bottom
fifth of Americans controlled only 0.2% of all assets while
100 Shoe shiner 9
the top fifth control 76% of all assets. Further, the assets
Source: Robertson, 1989:174 controlled by the poor tend to depreciate (household
items) over time while those of the rich tend to appreciate
(real estate and stocks).
2. Income
Appelbaum & Chambliss (1997:134) defines income as "the amount of money a person or household earns in a
given period of time (usually a year)." The gap between rich and poor is also very unequal and it is increasing.
The Distribution of Income in Industrial Societies:
Household Income Per Capita
  Bottom Quintile Top Quintile
UK, 1979 5.8 39.5
Germany, 1984 6.8 38.7
U.S., 1985 4.7 41.9
Sweden, 1981 8.0 36.9
Japan 8.7 37.5
Source: WDR, 1991:263
B. Power
Power is the ability to see that one's will is acted upon. Powerful people are able to mobilize resources to achieve
their goals despite resistance from others. Henslin (1999) argues that it is an inevitable part of everyday life. Like
wealth, power is concentrated in the hands of a few. Robertson (1989:182) makes an interesting observation with
regards to minorities gaining more political power. He argues that just as Blacks, Hispanics, and Women are
beginning to votes in their respective interests, power is flowing away from public institutions and into the hands
of giant bureaucracies and influential private interest groups. Voters, after all, have only one of several possible
means of influencing decision makers, i.e., their vote.
C. Prestige
Prestige refers to the power to impress or influence. It differs from power in that it is based less on political
position. Prestige correlates with charisma. A prestigious person has a reputation based on brilliance,
achievements, or on character.
Robertson (1989:182) contends that there is much less stratification in terms of prestige in the United States than
there is in terms of wealth and power. He suggests that while prestige raking is obvious, Americans treat each
other remarkable well when compared to other countries.
VI. Maintaining Stratification
The United States has great inequality (See L.I.S. Chart). How is it possible that such an unequal system can exist?
Always, the majority are denied the wealth of a few. Revolutions, however, are rare compared to all political
activity. Two explanations seem to explain why revolutions are so rare. On one hand, the dominant class controls
resources. On the other hand, there is wide spread belief that the rule of the upper class is legitimate.
Marx notes that social institutions tend to reflect the will of the dominant class. This does not mean that the ruling
class actually plots to control institutions.
A. Social Networks
The government does not conspire to control all wealth. The rich act in their common interests by simply knowing
each other and by sharing a common agenda.
B. Legitimacy
Many see the inequitable distribution of wealth at the natural outcome of hard work, perseverance, and a little
luck.  Even the poor see the current distribution of wealth as legitimate (See Weber, 1968). The masses view the
given political economy as valid and justified.
C. Ideology
An ideology is a set of beliefs which explain or justifies some actual or potential social arrangement (See
Robertson, 1989:176). An ideology is a belief structure that confers legitimacy on a social system. 
Example: A system of beliefs that justifies a social arrangement like slavery is an ideology (Henslin, 2004, 168).
1. False Consciousness
Robertson's (1989:176) definition is "a subjective understanding that does not correspond with the objective facts
of one's situation." Karl Marx would argue that workers experience false consciousness when they mistakenly
identify with the capitalists.  The worker might believe that if he only works hard enough, he might secure a better
position in society.  The worker might blame poverty on laziness or lack if education.  They may also hold minor
positions in society, but still feel like they have "made it."  For example, a worker who has a small savings account
and who owns a few shares of stock might tend to think of themselves as an investor rather than as a worker.
Marx argues that the poor do not realize that their miseries are a shared phenomenon that results from their
oppressed status. Instead of blaming the system they blame their circumstances on fate, an act of god, luck, or
other factors beyond their control.
Henslin (2004:172) suggests that workers experience false consciousness when they identify with capitalists.
2. Class Consciousness
Class consciousness refers to "an objective awareness of the lower stratum's common plights and interests as an
oppressed group." At this point they begin to question the legitimacy of the system. They begin to build their own
ideology which justifies and supports their class interests and consequently seems revolutionary to the dominant
stratum.
VII. Portraits of the Classes
The following material is taken from Charon (1986). The percentages are rough estimates.
A. Upper Class (1 percent of total population)
The upper-class consists of relatively few individuals and families (a small executive club) with great wealth and
great power in the economy. Generally the upper-class inherits their wealth. It comes in the form of property and
other assets. While this group does not have to work, they often serve on the boards of directors of major
corporations. From this vantage point, the upper-class occupies a position from which they can have great impact
on the course of world history. The upper-class has a certain life style in which individuals are careful to socialize
only with the "right crowd."
B. Upper Middle-Class (10 Percent)
The Upper middle-class consists of "successful business people, executives, professionals, and high ranking civil
and military officials. Ownership of business as well as prestigious occupations bring wealth to these individuals.
Most have high levels of education. The wealth of this class comes from investment and savings. Unlike in the
upper class, they inherit little of their wealth. This group is very active politically and culturally.
C. Middle Class (30 percent)
The lower middle-class also consists of professionals, semi professionals and small business people. People who
make up the middle-class are less affluent and occupy fewer prestigious positions that the Upper Middle-class. The
middle class includes nurses, teachers, police officers, and social workers. The middle-class includes most of the
white collar work force and others who earn "respectable" livings. Jobs for this group are generally secure. The
middle-class is well educated. They also have great political impact. It was this group after all, who got us out of
Vietnam and who lead the California tax rebellion.
D. Working Class (40 percent)
The working class consists of skilled and unskilled workers (blue collar workers), factory workers, farm hands, sales
personnel, and low-level clerical workers. Usually these positions do not require college. Although many in this
class belong to unions, it is not, as a rule, an effective political force. Jobs performed by this group are routine,
mechanized, and closely supervised. These jobs are less secure than jobs performed by people in the middle-class.
The nature of work performed by the working-class has changed. On one hand the back breaking work that used to
characterize the working-class has evolved into less physically demanding work. Regardless, work performed at
this level is none-the-less tedious. It is also boring. The working-class is less secure now than in the past. As
corporation shift their operations offshore, jobs traditionally done by this group are now performed by Third-
Worlders.
E. Lower Class (20 percent)
The lower-class consists of the poor. The lower-class experiences high rates of unemployment and dependency on
government, employers, the state of the economy, and landlords. People from the lower-class are not likely to
succeed in the educational system. They experience prejudice from the legal system. This class seldom exerts itself
politically.
F. The Under-class (1 percent)
See William Julius Wilson (1980, 1987)

VIII. Consequences of Class Position

A. Dating and Marriage
Children tend to seek out those who act, speak, and have the same cultural values as themselves. The upper class
also arranges social events such that upper class children meet only upper class children.
B. Socialization
Class also shapes values and norms and these norms and values in turn determine how people act in social settings
like school and occupation. Middle-class children grow up valuing independence more than working-class people
while working-class people prefer conformity.
C. Health
In general the higher the social class, the greater the life expectancy. The poor are subject to more infant deaths
and disease than the upper classes. Rates of mental illness also go up as social class goes down and the poor are
less likely to receive treatment. The higher level of stress is one explanation for higher rates of mental illness.
D. Formal Education
1970 Educational levels Class correlates with education in a number of ways. Since
Upper class 88 percent attend college education is community based, class determines the quality of
teachers and curriculum. Teachers have middle class backgrounds
Lower middle 64 percent attend college and, therefore, work better with students "like themselves." The
importance of education receives greater emphasis in upper
Upper working 40 percent attend college
classes, therefore, children of the upper classes are more likely to
Lower working 15 percent attend college attend college.

(Data from Charon, 333:1986)

 E. Political Behavior and Attitudes
People who occupy higher class positions tend to act in their class interests by voting while people from lower
levels of society do not. The following material on voting patterns addresses the 1972 Presidential election (see
Charon, 333:1986).

F. Crime and law enforcement

Comparison of voting patterns with education levels People from the lower classes do not
commit crimes. However, the crimes
47 percent of those with an elementary school education or less voted. committed by the poor receive more
61 percent of those with a high school education voted attention. Poor people, who commit
crimes, are more likely to receive
79 percent of the college educated voted punishment. Nowhere is the power
differential between classes more
   
obvious than in the criminal justice
Comparison of voting turnouts with employment status system.
G. Perspective
50 percent of the unemployed voted The higher ones class, the greater is
66 percent of the employed voted ones optimism about the economy and
political order. The greater is the hope
    for personal success. People who live
in poverty, even though schools and
Comparison of voting levels with occupation status
parents teach them that they should
49 percent of laborers voted strive to rise above poverty, face
schools that can't teach them. They
61 percent of craft workers voted encounter employers that won't hire
them. They live near stores that can't
76 percent of white collar workers voted
sell to them. The poor, after all, have
different class backgrounds than their teachers. They have no skills to sell employers. They have no money with
which to buy things.