1

Chapter 8

Stratification, Class & Inequality

2

Social Stratification (1)

(pp. 223-225)

• Social stratification describe structured inequalities among individuals and groups within societies

• The way society is organized in layers or strata

• Structured ranking of entire groups of people that

perpetuates unequal economic rewards and power in society

• This is based on hierarchies of groups

• Members of society have differing amounts of wealth, prestige, or power

2

Ideology: the Power Behind Stratification

3

• Ideology

• Cultural beliefs that justify particular social arrangements,

including patterns of inequality

• Every culture considers some type of inequality fair • Ideology changes with a society’s economy and technology

• Historically, challenges to status quo always arise • Social movements

3

Social Stratification (2) •

4 (pp. 223-225)

Stratified system have three characteristics • The rankings apply to social categories or people who

share a common characteristic without necessarily interacting or identifying with each other

• Men ranked differently from women, rich and poor

• Peoples' life experiences and opportunities depend

heavily on how their social category is ranked • Being black might affect your life’s chances

• The ranks of different social categories tend to change

very slowly over time

• Women have not right to vote; was slow to occur 4

Systems of Stratification (1)

5 (p. 225)

• Modern slavery

• Differences between ancient form of slavery and

American slavery • Race as a determinant • Most extreme form of legalized inequality. • Individuals are owned by others, and treated as

property. • This is ascribed • However, resistance from slaves made the system of

slave labor unstable 5

Systems of Stratification (2) •

6 (pp. 225-227)

Castes

• Hereditary systems of rank, usually religiously

dictated, which tend to be fixed and immobile (India)

• Or based on personal characteristics (South

Africa) • Race or ethnicity

• Status is given for life • Purity of caste is usually maintained by

endogamy (marriage within one social group) 6

Systems of Stratification (3)

7 (pp. 225-227)

•Castes in India

• Determines occupation and religious function • Industrialization and urbanization change castes • India’s constitution of 1949 abolished discrimination

against the Untouchables

• India had an untouchable president • Example: Hinduism in India

• Priests and scholars (Brahmin) • Soldiers and rulers (Ksyatriyas) • Artisans or laborers (Shudras) • Servants or Untouchables (Dalits) 7

Systems of Stratification (4)

8 (pp. 223-225)

•Castes in South Africa • Apartheid • Rigidly separated black Africans, Indians, colored

(people of mixed races) and Asians from whites (Afrikaners and British) • Was solely based on race • Whites represent only 15% of the total population • It was abolished in 1992 • Nelson Mandela, after being imprisoned for more than 20 years, became President of South Africa 8

Systems of Stratification (4)

9 (pp. 227-229)

• Social Class

• Social ranking based on economic position where

achieved status can affect mobility

• Boundaries between classes are not precisely defined • • • •

A class system is fluid Class positions are in some part achieved Class is economically based A class system is large and impersonal • 2007 - median income-$50,740 (½ above and ½ below) (IRS data) • 2007- 392,221 tax returns (out of 143 million tax returns or 0.27% of all) report incomes above $1 million (AGI) • About 12 million people (8.3%) report incomes below $5000 9

Models of class

10

10

From Andrew Hacker, Money

Social Polarization

11

Over 2 million people in state and federal prisons— the highest incarceration rate in the world

8 million people in gated communities in 1998

11

Income

12 (pp. 229-230)

• It refers to wages and salaries earned from paid occupation • Real income (controlled for inflation) has increased for the working population

• However, income distribution is still very much unequal • Professional and skilled workers’ salaries go up, while low skilled wages decrease (controlling for inflation) • The income gap is widening

• In 2007 (IRS data)

• Top 3% earners receive 33% of total income • Top 20% received 65% of total income • Bottom 25% received 3.1% of total income 12

13

Income Distribution, 2007 Income Distribution (AGI) in 2007 25

20

15

10

5

0

$5,000 - $10,000

$10,000 - $15,000

$15,000 - $25,000

$25,000 - $40,000

$40,000 - $75,000

$75,000 - $100,000

$100,000 - $200,000

Over $200,000

Source: Figure generated by the author using data from the IRS, 2007.

13

14

Income Distribution

14

Change in Income Inequality, 1947-1998

INCOME IN THE UNITED STATES

Asians and Hispanics were not statistically significant. (Hispanic householders may be any race.)5

Highlights • Real median household income increased 1.3 percent between 2006 and 2007, from $49,568 to $50,233 (Figure 1 and Table 1)— the third annual increase in real median household income. • Real median incomes of Black and non-Hispanic White households rose between 2006 and 2007 (Table 1)—the first real increases in annual household income since 1999. The apparent changes in median household income for

householder who was not a U.S. citizen. The 2006–2007 changes in income for all foreign-born households and those maintained by a naturalized citizen were not statistically significant.

• Between 2006 and 2007, real median income of native-born households increased 1.0 percent, from $50,466 to $50,946.6 In contrast, income declined for foreignborn households maintained by a

• Income inequality decreased between 2006 and 2007, as measured by the shares of aggregate

5 While the overall changes in per capita income and mean income are proportionate to changes in and relative sizes of component subgroups, changes in overall median income do not necessarily follow changes experienced by component subgroups because medians do not have the same mathematical properties as per capitas and means. 6 Native-born households are those in which the householder was born in the United States, Puerto Rico, or the U.S. island areas of Guam, the

Northern Mariana Islands, or the Virgin Islands of the United States or was born in a foreign country but had at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen. All other households are considered foreign born regardless of the date of entry into the United States or citizenship status. The CPS does not interview households in Puerto Rico. Of all households, 86.6 percent were native-born households, 6.4 percent were households with foreignborn householders who were naturalized citizens, and 7.0 percent were noncitizen households.

15

Median Household Income

Figure 1.

Real Median Household Income: 1967 to 2007 55,000

Recession

2007 dollars

$50,233

50,000 45,000 40,000 $38,771

35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 1959

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2007

Note: Median household income data are not available before 1967. For information on recessions, see Appendix A. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1968 to 2008 Annual Social and Economic Supplements.

16

U.S. Census Bureau

15

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007 5

16

n household or whites was 2011, as reported sus Bureau’s 12 Current n Survey. For was $39,760; for 8,521; and $40,007.

white incomes since the late both have ince 2007, the year ed the beginning of Recession. Since the difference in white incomes about $19,000 in ughly $27,000 in

awesomely lavish rewards for the tax dodging they have

chief executive compensation actually ran higher than

their corporations do.

the company’s entire federal corporate income tax bill.

In fact, corporate tax dodging has gone so out

Corporate outlays for CEO compensation —

of control that 25 major U.S. corporations last year paid

despite the lingering Great Recession — are rising.

their chief executives more than they paid Uncle Sam in

Employment levels have barely rebounded from their

CEO income vs. Average workers’

17

federal income taxes.

CEO-Worker Pay Ratio 344-to-1

350

325-to-1 299-to-1

300 263-to-1 250 200 150 100 50

2007

2008

2009

2010

Sources: Associated Press S&P 500 compensation survey and U.S. Department of Labor.4

17

3

Top Marginal Tax Rate, 1916-2013

18

21

PEW RESEARCH CENTER

18

19

Median Adjusted Household Income by Race/Ethnicity of Householder, 1967-2011 in 2012 dollars $90,000 $80,000

Asian

$70,000 $60,000

$68,521

White

$67,175

Hispanic

$40,007

$50,000 $40,000

$39,760

$30,000

Black

$20,000 $10,000 $0 1967

1975

1983

1991

1999

2007

2011

19

Note: White, black and Asian householders include only those who reported a single race. Native Americans and mixed-race groups not shown. Data for whites, blacks and Asians from 1971 to 2011 include only non-Hispanics. Data for whites and blacks prior to 1970 include Hispanics. Comparable data for Hispanics not available prior to 1970. Data for Asians not available prior to 1987. Asians include Pacific Islanders. Income standardized to a household size of three. For details, see http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/11/07/the-rising-age-gap-in-economic-well(pp. 230-233) being/4/#appendix-a-data-sources-and-methodologyappendix.

Wealth (1)

Source: Pew Research Center tabulations of the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement (IPUMS)

•

n black household PEW RESEARCH to CENTER It refers all assets individual own: cash, 2011 was 59% of savings, and checking accounts, stocks, hite household bonds, real estate etc… his represents a modest increase from 1967, when median black income was 55% of me. Since then, black income has ranged from 54% of white incomes to 65% (in Income forlow theunemployment). wealthy is generated through ing a period of economic growth and The racial income gap has investments the poor are working somewhat since 2007,their when black income waswhile 63% of white income.

• •

e gap between whites and Hispanics has widened since 1970, when Hispanic median In 2004, income was 68% that of whites. In 2011, Hispanic income 60% of white income, • Top 20% had 85 % of the totalwas wealth has not changed since 2007. Comparative income data for Asians is available only 20

d income statistics are adjusted so that they are in 2012 dollars and are scaled to a three-person household to ferences in household size. For details, see http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/11/07/the-rising-age-gap-in-being/4/#appendix-a-data-sources-and-methodology.

20

Wealth (2)

•If you exclude cars and homes, the difference

between the wealthiest and the poorest is even greater

•Minorities have considerable less wealth than whites • Median net worth for African Americans in 2009

(compared to 2005) was $5,677 ($12,124) and $6,325 ($18,359)for Hispanics while for Whites it was $113,149 ($134,992)

•Race and wealth 23

• When controlling for education, whites still held 3 times

PEW RESEARCH CENTER

as much wealth as black college graduates 21

pical white a net worth of ared with $6,446 holds, $7,843 for eholds and $91,203 eholds. The figures also known as sed on assets s in Census om the Survey of ogram

en black and white wn somewhat since year for which data ble. In 1984, black d a median net 9% that of white mpared with 7% in narrowed he 1990s: In 1995, h was 14% of white

21 (pp. 230-233)

22

Median Net Worth of Households, by Race/Ethnicity, 1984 to 2011 In 2012 dollars $140,000 $120,000 $100,000

$91,405

White

$80,000 $60,000 $40,000 Hispanic

$20,000 $0 1984

$7,843 $6,446

Black 1988

1992

1996 22

2000

2004

2008 2011

Note: White and black householders include only persons who reported a single race. Native Americans and mixed-race groups not shown. Blacks and whites include Hispanics. Sources: Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). For 1984 to 2004: various U.S. Census Bureau P-70 Current Population Reports. For 2009 and 2011 U.S. Census Bureau net worth tables: http://www.census.gov/people/wealth/

Wealth (4)

PEW RESEARCH CENTER

23

(pp.230-233)

•“it takes money to make money” •Half of the wealth that one accumulates can be

traced back the progenitors orth also is notably smaller than whiteto net worth, and the gap has widened over the typical Hispanic household had 13% of the wealth of the typical white Slavery, GIhad Bill9%ofof1945, among created 2011, the typical Hispanic household the wealth of theothers, typical white disparities in the of wealth between ures for Asian wealth are available only sincecreation 2004; in 2011, the typical Asian Whites and racial and ethnic minorities eholds had about equal net worth.

•

•Wealth creates privileges and in consequence affect individuals and groups’ life chances 23

Wealth (5) www.pewresearch.org

Figure 2: Net worth and financial wealth distribution in the U.S. in 2004

24

24

Education

25 (p. 233)

•Education is a critical factor for somebody’s vertical mobility

• It predicts income, occupation and wealth later

in life

• Racial disparities still exist and explain racial

disparities in wealth • Wealth is generated over time and passed down to the

•

next generation However, racial/ethnic groups have not had the same opportunity to do so 25

The Upper Class

26 (pp. 235-236)

•In 2007, there was

• 17 million millionaires, and 203 billionaires

•They usually represent “old money”, wealth has

been passed down from generations to generations such as the Rockefellers

•They are also the “new rich” such as Bill Gates

(worth $57 billion in 2007 or the wealthiest man in the world) • Wealth has not yet been passed down to the next

generation

26

Who are the Wealthiest Americans?

27

27

The Middle Class

28 (pp. 236-237)

•Social class most people tend to identify with •People tend to think most people are close to their

level and few people want to identify as either poor or rich

•The Upper middle class

• Lawyers, doctors, professors • The children are likely to receive good college

education

•The lower middle class • Trained office workers

• Secretaries, high school teachers, nurses etc… 28

Who Earns What?

29

29

The Working Class

30 (p.237)

•Income is just enough to pay the rent or the

mortgage, to put food on the table and perhaps enjoy some vacation

•The working class is racially diverse •Children will graduate from high school and might look for a job right away

•It is not a politically active group 30

The Lower Class

31 (pp. 237-240)

•They live mostly in the cities •They occupy semiskilled or unskilled manufacturing positions

•They are mostly working part-time or it is fairly unstable

• Many live in poverty

•A higher percentage of the lower class is nonwhite, which is higher than in any other social classes

• They do not participate in political life, and they seldom vote 31

The “Underclass” (1)

32 (pp. 240-241)

•Within the lower class, sociologists talk about the “underclass” as people who are below the class system

• They are defined as lacking the proper behaviors

(work ethic, motivation) of mainstream America • They are mostly African Americans and are

trapped in the cycle of poverty • They are the poorest of the poor • They are mostly single-mothers with children and

living on welfare 32

The “Underclass” (2)

33 (pp.240-241)

•While they are described as victim of the culture of

poverty, many external social factors have contributed to many people entering this social class

•Globalization had led to higher unemployment rates

among the poor as unskilled jobs have moved in poor countries

•Lack of good education and training •Government programs have been cut making it even harder to escape poverty

33

Social Mobility

34 (pp. 243-249)

•Mobility

• Movement with respect to social class as a result of changes in occupations, wealth and income

•Exchange mobility

• If you had a perfectly equal society (with equal opportunities)

then those who are the most talented would move up and the less talented would move down

•However, since there is no such thing as perfectly equal society, so we talk about structural mobility

• Upward mobility is possible by the expansion of better paid

positions at the expenses of lower-paid positions

• Upward mobility depends on prosperity 34

American Dream: a reality?

35

35

Measuring Poverty

36 (p. 249)

•Absolute poverty

• Lack of resources that lead to hunger and physical

deprivation • People are undernourished • Mostly occur in poor countries

•Relative poverty

• Deficiency in material and economic resources

compared to the some of the population • Being poor as a comparison with the standards of living

of the majority • Lack decent housing and healthy living conditions 36

Who are the Poor? (1)

37 (pp. 250-256)

•The working poor are those work full-time but whose income is not high to lift them out of poverty

•Minimum wage of $7.25/hr (2009)equates $15,080 a year (Federal minimum wage)

• Can you live anywhere with such an income? Is

minimum wage living wage?

•They also lack education, healthcare, and they Living Wage Calculator - Living Wage Calculation for Los Angeles County, California

7/3/10 1:13 PM

might be supporting families with this meek income Living Wage Calculation for Los Angeles County, California

37

The living wage shown is the hourly rate that an individual must earn to support their family, if they are the sole provider and are working full-time (2080 hours per year). The state minimum wage is the same for all individuals, regardless of how many dependents they may have. The poverty rate is typically quoted as gross annual income. We have converted it to an hourly wage for the sake of comparison. Wages that are less than the living wage are shown in red.

Search Home | About

Who are the Poor? (2)

38

For other family configurations that aren't shown here, we've provided a spreadsheet to help with adapting the results below.

One Adult

One Adult, One Child

Two Adults

Two Adults, One Child

Two Adults, Two Children

$11.99

$21.75

$17.14

$26.92

$34.07

Poverty Wage

$5.04

$6.68

$6.49

$7.81

$9.83

Minimum Wage

$8.00

$8.00

$8.00

$8.00

$8.00

Hourly Wages Living Wage

Living wage in Pasadena, CA, per size of household, Penn State University, 2010

Typical Expenses These figures show the individual expenses that went into the living wage estimate. Their values vary by family size, composition, and the current location.

One Adult

One Adult, One Child

Two Adults

Two Adults, One Child

$237

$386

$458

$607

$756

$0

$622

$0

$622

$1,102

Medical

$93

$185

$187

$278

$370

Housing

$1,041

$1,300

$1,041

$1,300

$1,300

$277

$476

$553

$753

Monthly Expenses Food Child Care

Transportation Other

Two Adults, Two Children

$953

$200

$392

$399

$592

$785

Monthly After-Tax Income That's Required

$1,847

$3,362

$2,638

$4,152

$5,264

Annual After-Tax Income That's Required

$22,170

$40,341

$31,655

$49,826

$63,171

Annual Taxes Annual Before Tax Income That's Required

Typical Hourly Wages

$2,770

$4,895

$3,986

$6,176

$7,704

$24,940

$45,235

$35,642

$56,002

$70,876

38

http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/counties/06037

Page 1 of 2

Who are the Poor? (3)

39

The United States has the highest child poverty rate of any industrialized country Child Poverty in Rich Nations (UNICEF, June 2011)

39

Who are the Poor? (4)

Child Poverty in Rich Nations (UNICEF, June 2011)

40

40

2007). The poverty rate in 2008 was statistically unchanged for Blacks (24.7 percent).

poverty increased to 12.7 percent from 12.5 percent in 2003. •

In 2008, 39.8 million people were in poverty, up from 37.3 million in 2007—the second consecutive

•

33 OMB determined the official definition of poverty in Statistical Policy Directive 14. Appendix B describes how the Census Bureau calculates poverty.

The poverty rate in 2008 (13.2 percent) was the highest poverty rate since 1997 but was 9.2 percentage points lower than in 1959, the first year for which poverty estimates are available (Figure 3).

in 2008—up from 10.9 percent in 2007), while it remained statistically unchanged for people 65 and over (9.7 percent).35

34 The 2008 number is not significantly different from 1993, 1962, 1961, 1960, and 1959 estimates. 35 Unrelated individuals under 15 are excluded from the poverty universe; therefore, there are 442,000 fewer children in the poverty universe than in the total population.

Poverty in the U.S., 1959-2008

41

Figure 3.

Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate: 1959 to 2008 50

Recession

Numbers in millions, rates in percent

45 Number in poverty

40

39.8 million

35 30 25 20 Poverty rate 15

13.2 percent

22

10

King’s Dream Remains an Elusive Goal; Many Americans See Racial Disparities 5 0 1959

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2008

Note: The data points are placed at the midpoints of the respective years.

when Asian income was about equal to white income. In 2011, Asian income was ite income. 41

icans are times as ite Americans verty, o the 2012 ent Survey. 3 tes, 10% were 1, compared blacks, 25% s and 12% of

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1960 to 2009 Annual Social and Economic Supplements.

42

Poverty, Race & Ethnicity (1)

Persons in Poverty by Race/Ethnicity, 1974-2011

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2008 13

U.S. Census Bureau

(%) 40 % Black

35 30 25

Hispanic

28 25

20 Asian

15

12 10

10 White

5

0 rends, the 1974 1982 1990 42 1998 2006 2011 poverty gap Note: For 2002-2011, whites, blacks and Asians include only persons who reported a de, although it single race; for 2001 and earlier years, respondents (including those who may be of more than one race) were allowed to report only one race group. Blacks and Asians ed somewhat include Hispanics for all years. Asians include Pacific Islanders prior to 2002. Data for Asians not available prior to 1987. Native Americans and other groups not shown. d-1970s, as (p. 253) Source: U.S. Census Bureau Historical Poverty Statistics ty rose http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/people.html Table 2 increaseCENTER in the proportion of the poor is due to the living conditions PEW black poverty • AnRESEARCH encountered by females ghtly. In 1974, • Growing rates of divorce, separation, single-parent household make life s were poor more difficult for women 30% of blacks. The black-white gap has not changed markedly since 2007.

Feminization of Poverty

43

• Single-parent household are more likely to be poor than married couples

• Innarrowed 2002, 41.4% of Latinas and 41.3% African-American single-female ic-white poverty gap has somewhat since 1974, when Hispanic poverty household were in poverty compared to 26.2% of white single-female es white poverty, compared with 2.6 times in 2011. The Asian-white poverty gap headed households rowed somewhat; Asians are 1.2 times as likely as whites to be in poverty now, • Vicious circle of hardship with 1.9 times as likely •inChildcare 1987, the first yearnot foreverybody which data available. is expensive, canbecame find affordable one • Being on welfare might become preferable than working full-time

because childcare is too expensive

• If she works, she might lose welfare and eventually fall back where she

are based on data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau uses a set of money income started economically vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the d, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty.43The official poverty thresholds do not vary but they are updated for inflation using Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). The official poverty definition uses money axes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps).

Perspectives on Stratification (1) (pp. 260-261)

www.pewresearch.org

•Conflict theory

• Stratification exists because it benefits individuals

and groups with power, who use their power to perpetuate the advantages they receive and the disadvantages others receive

•Marxists believe that social relations depend on who controls the means of production in a capitalist system

• Economic system in which means of production are

largely in private hands, and where the main incentive for economic activity is the accumulation of profits 44

44

Perspectives on Stratification (2)

45

(pp. 260-261)

•The bourgeoisie compete with others to maximize profit. Since the price of raw materials doesn’t change, workers are squeezed (exploited) to overproduce in exchanged for subsistence wages

•A surplus value (source of profit) is extracted from the labor of workers, and used at the discretion of the capitalist • Inequality in an inherent part of this economic system

45

Perspectives on Stratification (3)

46

•False consciousness

• Attitude that does not reflect its accurate position • Tend to blame selves for condition (individual

explanation)

• Believe in meritocracy (“work hard, get success”) • American Dream or ideology of deception

• Since all ideas, culture, and relations stem from the mode,

means, and relations of production, workers come to believe the ideas which are produced by those who control the means of production. • These “false” ideas are meant to prevent the workers from realizing their true power, from becoming a class for itself 46

Perspectives on Stratification (4)

47

•Class and class conflict are at the center of society • Classes rooted in the mode of production (in the

economic base)

•Classes can become real groups and real agents of history

•Classes begin as objective similarity and evolve to shared consciousness • Class-in-itself: false consciousness • Class-for-itself: class consciousness 47

Perspectives on Stratification (5) (pp. 261-262)

• Max Weber says that stratification has many

dimensions, and no single characteristic (such as income for instance) defines people’s position

• Class is only one of several types of stratification

groups (The importance of class can be reinforced or undermined by status groups and parties) • Social class • Status (prestige) • Power (party) 48

48

Perspectives on Stratification (6)

49

(pp. 261-262)

• Social class

•(i) a specific causal component of actors life chances •(ii) which rests exclusively on economic interests and wealth •(iii) is represented under conditions of labor and commodity markets •Weber did not believe that class interests necessarily led to uniformity in social action •Weber challenges the Marxian notion of the material basis of social action (class consciousness)

• Status (prestige)

•While class groups do not constitute communities, according to Weber, status groups normally are communities

•Status is defined as the likelihood that life chances are determined by social honor, or, prestige. Status groups are linked by a common style of life, and the attendant social restrictions.

•Wealth is not necessarily the primary cause of status, though it is generally associated with it

•Wealth is a key determinant of the lifestyle differences upon which status depends • Power (party) •Class and status interests interact in the realm of the legal order, the arena of politics •Political power is, obviously, often based on class and status interests •Parties are the organizations of power. 49

Perspectives on Stratification (7)

50

(p. 262)

• Davis & Moore (1945) • Inequality makes people work harder • Ensures that each social position is filled by people

with appropriate abilities • Rewards are based on the importance of the job and

the qualifications of the people (pays for extra education and for unpleasant jobs) • Stratification exists because it is beneficial for society

50

Perspectives on Stratification (8)

51

(p. 262)

• Functionally-important positions require advanced training, skill, or special talents

• Society needs to motivate people to to through that training and/or to develop skill and talent

• The way society does this is by attaching the highest rewards to the functionally most important positions

• Circularity in the argument that highly rewarded positions are the most important • How do you know that they are the most important? • Because they are the most highly rewarded? 51

Perspectives on Stratification (10) •Replaceability

• The highest rewards go to people who are least replaceable.

• Doctors are capable of filling any position in a hospital (from janitor, to orderly, to nurse, to surgeon), yet no other position has this absolute advantage (the ability to do everything as well as or better than anyone else in the organization). • Is it easy to find a 1st grade teacher? • Can a person with a Ph.D. be absolutely better at teaching 1st grade?

• Ignores power differentials. Since people seek rewards, they tend to abuse power and exploit others (giving them less than they deserve for their work) 52

52

Perspectives on Stratification (11) • Criticism

• Many people of high ability are not rewarded,

while many people are rewarded for doing things that are not functionally important to society

• Replaceability can be manipulated, and scarcity

can be socially produced

• Example: athletes vs. janitors 53

53