Blog Post #6
Response Due: Friday, November 2nd
Please answer the question below: Question: Chapter 9 discusses social stratification and global inequality. If we conducted a simulation exercise in class, 15% of you would represent the high income group, 30% of you the middle income group, and the remaining 55% the lowest income group. These percentages are based on approximate real world percentages of people in these various groups. This simulation would demonstrate the vast inequality that exists in our world. The United Nations Development Program reported in 1998 that the world’s 225 richest people now have a combined wealth of $1 trillion. That’s equal to the combined annual income of the world’s 2.5 billion poorest people. Further, in 1998, 20% of the world’s people living in the highest-income countries accounted for 86% of total private consumption expenditures while the poorest 20% accounted for only 1.3 percent.
What theory or theories might a sociologist use to explain this vast disparity? What do you feel is the cause of this? What are some potential solutions which leaders in the field cite to address this problem of inequality?
posted by Danelle @ 10:33 PM
6 Comments:
Two sociological theories that may be used to describe the differences between wealthy and lower classes are Marx's conflict theory and Spencer's survival of the fittest. Spencer would argue that that the poor 55% of the world's population would be in this category due to the fact that they did not possess the means to become wealthy or that they did not deserve that role. He would say thatthe wealthy achieved their status and earned the right to consume the majority of the goods in the world by being the best of the best. Marx would say that the world's poor population were in that class because the elite controlled the world's wealth and production of goods. Thus, the elite decided what to give the lower class, when to give it, and how much of it to give. Marx would state the the poor class was poor becaus ethe wealthy wanted it that way. Possible solutions to inequality would be for wealthy nations to step up and take care of the poor. The wealthy produce enough resources on a regular basis to support less fortunate nations. Inequality would be almost non-existant if wealthy nations gave aid to the less fortunate. However, there is no profit in helping these nations so they receive little or no help.
A theory that a sociologist can use to explain this vast disparity is the World System Theory. this is defined as the connection economically and politically that ties the countries together. There are the core nations, which are the countries that started industrialization first, and then there are the semiperiphery that depend on the core nations for trade, and third there is the periphery that developed even less than the semiperiphery. Last there is the external area, which is mostlt made up of Africa and Asia. In the chapter it mentioned something about neocolonialism. this is where the most industrialized nations dominate the least industrialized nations by keeping the least industrialized nations in debt, with plenty of interest piled on top of it.
The sociological theories are Marx's conflict theory and Spencer's survival of the fittest.I think that you can become rich if you work hard. but there are always things that can stop you from being rich. Like having a kid at a young age,If you have a kid while in highschool. most kids drop out and they end up not having a highschool degree and when they get older it will be harder to get a job. If you don't work hard being in the higher class will be a hard thing to do
A sociologist could explain this vast disparity with the conflict theory. The poor people in the world struggle for scarce resources such as money, jobs, houses, etc., while the rich have a control over those scarce resources. I believe the reason for this is that, while the rich have most likely earned their wealth and status, they tend to forget that there are people out there suffering that could benefit from their achievements. It seems that some turn a blind eye to the poor, putting it off as "not their problem." Some poorer people do not strive to attain different resources. But many simply can not compete in the competitive world that we live in that emphasizes individualism and self-gratification. Some say that inequality can be lowered by the investment in human capital by business and government. This would mean that the government would invest in different areas such as education, public health, and housing. Rather than the government stepping in to help solve this problem, others argue that from the help of entrepreneurs, the inequality will be challenged in fostering economic growth that would provide jobs for the poor.
The Conflict Theory is most applicable to this situation because it clearly represents Karl Marx views on class conflict. Max Weber describes those with the three P’s; power, prestige and property as the people who are equipped with the most resources. This does not mean however that the most intelligent people are those in power, it just means that they somehow used their resources in order to gain more resources.
Tumin’s critique of Davis and Moore’s theory points out the downside of social stratification. Tumin believed that people who could possibly have contributed to society fall through the cracks and we will never know how great they were because of the social standing they were born into. I am unsure of what has caused this huge gap between the wealthy and poor. I do believe that those with more resources do have a better shot at gaining better paying jobs, higher social status, and a brighter future. I don’t think government assistance to the poor is the answer. At one time in my life I was a recipient of welfare and came to the conclusion that the government welfare system keeps people on welfare. They are penalized (money & food stamps decreased) for obtaining such things as a car so they can go to work or student loan money to go to school. The welfare system has changed drastically since I had to use it, but it really doesn’t work. I think we should help people stand on their own two feet, not penalize them for trying to do so. After all, people can’t eat with student loan money and can’t go to school with food stamps. Some of the Presidential candidates are in favor universal health care. I am in favor of universal health care and believe having this huge expense taken away from people will ultimately help them. The insurance companies are part of the problem in that they contribute to competition among hospitals and other insurance companies and its all for profit. Well, I don’t think anyone should profit so hugely off of those who need medical attention.
A sociologist might use the Karl Marx conflict theory. The social class depends on a single factor. The concept of survival of the fittest would also be something a sociologist would look at. Those with a higher income would survive more easier than someone in the lower income class. Also a sociologist could look at functionalism and see how each of the classes of income function.
Post a Comment
<< Home