PowerPoint Presentation prepared by Terri Petkau, Mohawk College

PowerPoint Presentation prepared by Terri Petkau, Mohawk College

CHAPTER SIX Social Stratification Harvey Krahn

Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd
INTRODUCTION Will examine: Types of stratification systems Explanations of social stratification Occupations, social class, and inequality in Canada Occupational mobility in Canada Distribution of wealth in Canada Material inequality and the poor in Canada* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
Refers to persistent patterns of social inequality in a society Is perpetuated by the way wealth, power, and prestige are distributed and passed on from one generation to the next Exists in all societies* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

FEATURES OF SOCIAL HIERARCHIES
Status: Rank or position in a social hierarchy Statuses may be: Ascribed (assigned at birth), or Achieved (earned by performance)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

TYPES OF STRATIFICATION SYSTEMS
Open stratification system: Stratification system in which merit rather than inheritance (ascribed characteristics) determines social rank Allows for social change Is reflected in a meritocracy: Positions are achieved, not ascribed Characterized by equal opportunity and high social mobility (movement up or down a social hierarchy)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

TYPES OF STRATIFICATION SYSTEMS
Closed stratification system Stratification system in which inheritance rather than merit determines social rank Little social change possible Reflected in a caste system: Positions are ascribed, not achieved Characterized by little social mobility Although Canada is in principal a meritocracy, ascribed statuses still play an important role* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

CLASS AND CLASS STRUCTURE
Class: Position in an economic hierarchy occupied by individuals or families with similar access to, or control over, material resources (e.g., working class, professional class) Class structure: Relatively permanent economic hierarchy comprising different social classes Socioeconomic status: Person’s general status within an economic hierarchy, based on income, education, and occupation* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Existence of classes has been questioned recently because some scholars believe that material inequalities are decreasing Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

EXPLANATIONS OF SOCIAL STRATIFICATION
Several theories or explanations of social stratification Accounts offered by Marx, Weber, Davis and Moore, Lenski, Wright, and Parkin Understandings are mediated by time and place in which social theories developed* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

MARX ON STRATIFICATION
Writings focus particularly on 19th century European world rapidly being changed by industrial capitalism Industrial Revolution: Tremendous increase in level of economic production and degree of inequality Key concepts in Marx’s theory: Mode of production: Overall system of economic activity (e.g., slavery, capitalism)…* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Marx lived during a time when large, mechanized factory-based systems of production were emerging; cities were growing rapidly as rural peasants were being forced off the land or attracted to the city by the possibility of jobs in factories; and material inequality was extreme, as factory owners and merchants made huge profits while labourers lived in poverty Trade unions, labour laws, and other arrangements that offer some protection to workers did not yet exist Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

MARX ON STRATIFICATION
Mode of production comprises: Means of production: Technology, capital investments, raw materials used in production Social relations of production: Relationships between main classes involved in production* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

MARX: SOCIAL CLASSES Two major classes within industrial capitalism: The bourgeoisie: Owners of the means of production The proletariat: Workers who exchange their labour for a wages Secondary class: The petite bourgeoisie: Independent owners/ producers (e.g., farmers) and small business owners* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

MARX: EXPLOITATION Exploitation of wage labourers was result of surplus value: When proceeds from sale of goods produced by wage-labourers far exceed cost of wages, raw materials, etc. Surplus value then turned into profits for owners (i.e., capitalists)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

MARX: CLASS CONFLICT Class conflict: Conflict between major classes within a mode of production Is driving force behind social change Eventually leads to evolution of new mode of production Envisioned capitalism being replaced with socialist mode of production (i.e., no private property with its attendant exploitation and inequality)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Marx noted previous modes of production has collapsed and been replaced because of class conflict (e.g., feudalism had given way to capitalism) Socialist mode of production: No private ownership of property and attendant exploitation and inequality it produces Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

MARX: CLASS CONSCIOUSNESS AND REVOLUTION
Theorized workers would develop class-consciousness: Recognition by members of a class of their shared interest in opposition to members of another class Would lead to revolutionary upheaval and eventually classes society based on collective ownership of means of production (e.g., communism)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

RESPONSES TO MARX Criticized for predictions not finding support in: Later capitalist societies, which were characterized by absence of widespread class conflict, growth of the middle class, and relative decline in material inequality in 20th century Example: Western Europe and North America Later socialist systems of government, which were characterized by persistent inequality, and new hierarchy that controls political and bureaucratic apparatus Example: Russia* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

WEBER ON STRATIFICATION
Focused on determinants of power: Ability to impose one’s wishes on others Structural basis of power: Class (power derived from position in economic hierarchy) Status (power derived from culturally and socially defined position that person occupies in a group) Party (political power) Power depends on one’s location in these three structures* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Max Weber was born in Germany half a century later than Marx, in 1864 He had the advantage of seeing the direction in which more mature industrial capitalism was taking European society; he saw more complexity in social stratification system and recognized more classes than Marx The three bases of power may or may not overlap Argued that, historically, the economic dimension of stratification tends to become dominant Unlike Marx, Weber did not think that the development of class consciousness was inevitable, and did not think that class conflict would lead to the ultimate demise of capitalism Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

WEBER: SOCIAL CLASS AND LIFE CHANCES
Gave primary emphasis in social stratification to economic underpinnings Claimed there was larger variety of class positions than found in Marx’s theory Emphasized life chances: Opportunities (or lack thereof) for higher standard of living and a better quality of life that are available to members of a given class* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

DAVIS AND MOORE: FUNCTIONAL THEORY OF STRATIFICATION
Inequality exists in all societies  Must be necessary All societies have occupational roles that need to be filled, with some roles requiring more training than others (e.g., the more important roles) Greater rewards (e.g., money, prestige) necessary to encourage people to undertake extended training and fill these important roles Social inequality is therefore necessary and inevitable* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Structural-functionalist theory emphasizes consensus and shared values over conflict Theory arose in reaction to the conflict-oriented and socially radical theories of Marx (and to a lesser extent, Weber) Theory was published in 1945 and reflected the optimistic view in postwar North America that affluence was increasing, social conflict was decreasing, and a harmonious future for society was dawning Some jobs (e.g., physician) are more important than others (e.g., farmer) To motivate people to make the sacrifices necessary to train for important jobs, they must receive more rewards for their work Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

CRITICISMS OF DAVIS AND MOORE
Theory does not account for the following: Huge income and wealth inequalities Gender differences in income even if same type of work undertaken Inherited wealth Arbitrariness of denoting most important roles (e.g., movie stars, nurses, daycare workers) Criticized as justification for large inequalities* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

LENSKI: TECHNOLOGY AND STRATIFICATION SYSTEMS
Society’s technological base largely determines degree of inequality within it Owners of means of production need to rely on well-educated managerial and technical workers Reliance gives rise to workers’ demands for greater portion of the growing wealth in industrial society Employers give in to demands because they cannot produce wealth without these workers Envisioned movement towards more equal distribution of wealth* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Lenski’s theory resembled the functionalist theory of stratification – both noted that better-educated and more highly skilled workers are paid more However, unlike the functionalist approach, Lenski’s theory clearly took power differences into account, emphasizing how the extent of accumulation of wealth by elites, or the degree of material inequality, depends on the power and bargaining ability of middle-level workers Also, Lenski brought power and conflict back into his explanation of social inequality: He placed material inequalities resulting from one group’s domination of another at the centre of his model, thus coming closer to the approach taken by Marx and Weber But he did not carry through with a traditional Marxist analysis built around the relationships of different classes to the means of production Owners of means of production need rely on well-educated managerial and technical workers because of complexity of society Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

WRIGHT’S NEO-MARXIST THEORY OF CLASS
Recognized that as industrial capitalism matured, the middle class had grown and become more diverse Emphasized “contradictory class locations”: An occupational grouping with divided loyalties Also identified three classes of owners and nine classes of wage labourers* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Wright wrote in the 1970s and 1980s Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

ERIC OLIN WRIGHT’S TYPOLOGY OF CLASS LOCATION IN CAPITALIST SOCIETY
Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd In a later reformulation of his ideas, Wright (1985) argued that exploitation of one class by another can occur through control of property or the means of production (as Marx had insisted), as well as through ownership of skill or credential assets and control of high positions within organizations. Thus, he identified three classes of owners (the bourgeoisie, small employers, and the petite bourgeoisie with no employees), and nine classes of wage-labourers (nonowners), differentiated on two dimensions, the possession of organizational assets and of skill/credential assets (Wright, 1985: 88). For example, “expert managers” (e.g., engineers or lawyers in senior management positions within large companies) fill a class location characterized by extensive organizational assets and high skill/credential assets, in contrast to basic “proletarians,” who have no specific skill/credential assets and no management or supervisory responsibilities. SOURCE: Erik Olin Wright, Classes (London: Verso, 1985), p. 88. Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

WRIGHT’S NEO-MARXIST THEORY OF CLASS
Argued exploitation of one class by another can occur through: Control of property or means of production (as Marx insisted) Ownership of skill or credential assets, and Control of high positions within organizations* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

PARKIN’S NEO-WEBERIAN APPROACH
Developed Weber’s concept of social closure: Methods used by more powerful groups to maintain their unequal access to status and resources, and to exclude others from such access Two types of closure strategies: Exclusion: Organized effort of the privileged, more powerful groups to maintain their advantaged position (e.g., lawyers, members of trade unions) Usurpation: Effort of excluded groups to gain advantages and power at expense of more powerful groups (e.g., women)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Also wrote in the 1970s Like Lenski, Parkin took a keen interest in the power struggles within society between groups with more and less power However, Parkin’s neo-Weberian theory does not contain a premise of inevitability, either one of increased inequality and eventual social revolution as Marx predicted, or one of reduced inequality resulting from technological change and economic growth, as Lenski predicted Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

OCCUPATIONS, SOCIAL CLASS, AND INEQUALITY IN CANADA
Most prominent occupational shift over 20th century was decline in agricultural occupations Also decline (albeit less) in other natural resource-based occupations (e.g., forestry, fishing, mining) Increase in white-collar occupations (e.g., managerial, professional, clerical [office jobs], sales, and service categories) Have come to greatly outnumber blue-collar occupations (e.g., manufacturing, construction, transportation, and resource-based operations)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

Increase in proportion of occupations requiring higher education Rise in average incomes (until early 1980s) Occupational shifts suggest: Greater class diversity, not polarization of classes Rising standard of living for Canadian workers, not increasing poverty and exploitation* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

OCCUPATIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF LABOUR FORCE PARTICIPANTS,* CANADA, 1911, 1951, 2006 Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Table 6.1 displays the types of occupations most common at the beginning (1911) and in the middle (1951) of the last century, and at the beginning of the twenty-first century (2006). The most prominent occupational shift over the course of the century is the decline in agricultural occupations, from 34 percent of all labour force participants in 1911 to only 2 percent in 2006. We also observe a decline, albeit not as steep, in other natural resource–based occupations (forestry, fishing, mining). Manufacturing occupations increased in relative terms (from 14 percent to 17 percent) between the beginning and middle of the last century, but by 2006 had dropped to only 7 percent of the total labour force. The decline in manufacturing jobs has continued since then (Lin, 2008), intensifying further in 2009 as the Canadian economy shrank as a result of global financial and economic instability. Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

Gender-based labour market stratification has continued: Since middle of last century, proportion of women in labour force has risen But mostly in low-paid, low status “pink-collar” sector (clerical, sales, and service occupations) Large class of paid workers differentiated by: Decision-making authority Income status Occupational power* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

Dramatic decrease in proportion of self-employed Canadians over past century Increase in unemployment Part-time and temporary work more common Income growth has stopped Increase in income and wealth inequality* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Researchers still have not determined whether more Canadians are voluntarily choosing self-employment or are being pushed into it as a result of higher levels of unemployment and growing corporate and public-sector “downsizing” Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY AND STATUS ATTAINMENT
Occupational mobility: Moving up and down occupational and income ladders Intragenerational occupational mobility: Mobility within an individual’s lifetime Intergenerational occupational mobility: Process of reaching occupation location higher or lower than location held by parents Occupational status attainment: Main determinant of status of a person’s current job is status of first job (dependent on educational attainment)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Represents another important feature of stratification systems in modern societies The status of one’s father’s occupation still contributes to determining who gets better jobs (more status, higher income) For a variety of reasons (e.g., more money for higher education, more well-educated role models), children from more advantaged backgrounds can build on their initial advantages Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY IN CANADA
Globally, one of highest rates of upward mobility More upward than downward intergenerational mobility Relatively open stratification system (especially during 1970s and 1980s) Yet intergenerational transfer of advantage persists* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Factor in upward mobility: Structural mobility which results from change in shape of occupational structure (e.g., decline of agriculture, rise of white collar occupations) Is also circulatory mobility: Characterized by better qualified replacing less qualified people, as well as people moving downward With the increase in number of high status jobs, each generation had more chances than the preceding one to improve the status of their jobs Intergenerational transfer of advantage persists and takes place primarily through different levels of access to postsecondary education system Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH IN CANADA
Limited number of people continue to own or control very large portion of wealth Concentration of ownership and wealth inequality continue to increase: Wealthiest 10% of families holds almost half of all wealth in Canada CEO’s multimillion dollar compensation packages versus 11% of Canadian families with no net worth* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd We need to look carefully at the distributional side of the occupation and class structures, at “who gets what” in return for their employment, as well as the occupational and class positions that people hold In 2000, one-quarter of the companies listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange 300 Index were each controlled by a single owner holding more than 50% of the voting shares In 1999, the wealthiest 10% of families, with an average net worth of almost $1.5 million, held almost half (49%) of all wealth in Canada Families such as Weston, Thomson, Bronfman, Irving, etc., form a distinct upper class Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

INCOME DISTRIBUTION: HIGH-PAYING AND LOW-PAYING OCCUPATIONS
Upper middle class: Those with well-paid managerial and professional occupations (e.g., lawyers, dentists) Lower working class: Retail workers and those employed in service occupations (e.g., childcare and home support services) Gender differences hidden in occupational earning patterns: Females earn less than males in all occupations but earnings ratio varies considerably by occupation* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd In 2000, women’s earnings were 71% of men’s earnings Female dentists earned, on average, 64% of what their male counterparts earned Female university professors earned 80% of the earnings of their male counterparts Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

AVERAGE EARNINGS IN SIX OCCUPATIONS MOST COMMONLY HELD BY 15- TO 24-YEAR-OLDS WITH A UNIVERSITY DEGREE/ DIPLOMA AND WORKING FULL-TIME, FULL YEAR BY SEX, CANADA, 2006 Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd In terms of the 2006 census data, when we focus on only 15- to 24-year-old, full-time full-year workers with a university degree or certificate, we generally see a much higher female–male earnings ratio or, in other words, a much smaller gender wage gap (Statistics Canada, 2006b). For example, among elementary school teachers (a commonly held job among 15- to 24-year-olds with university training), in 2005 the female–male earnings ratio was 97 percent (Figure 6.2). In this occupation, women earned almost the same amount as men. Among auditors and accountants, university-trained young women actually earned more, on average, than their male counterparts. Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

INCOME INEQUALITY Since mid-20th century, little change in distribution of total income across households But increase in income inequality Decline in share of total income received by the three middle quintiles Immigrants significantly overrepresented among Canada’s working poor despite higher education and training Since 1990, average family income increased by 1%, versus 40% increase in average family debt* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd The three middle quintiles largely comprise working Canadians who would be most affected by a changing labour market in which some well-paying jobs have slowly been replaced by others that pay less and are less secure Average family income is over 150% higher now than in the mid-century, taking inflation into account, but most of the improvement took place in the 1950s and 1960s The 1980s and 1990s saw virtually no increase in the purchasing power of the average Canadian family Between 1981 and 1999, the top quintile increased its share of national income by 3.3%, nearly all of which came from the middle 60% of families; government transfer payments helped the share of the bottom quintile from falling Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

THE POOR: DEFINING AND MEASURING POVERTY
Various ways of defining poverty: Absolute poverty: Those with so little income that survival is difficult Relative poverty: Those with significantly less income than others in their society Canada’s low-income cut-off (LICO) or poverty line: Those who spend more than 55% of gross income on basic necessities* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

WHO ARE THE POOR? Proportion of poor Canadians in 2001: 14.4% Only minority unemployed or out of labour force Working poor (those employed in low wage jobs) make up large proportion of the poor Aboriginal Canadians among poorest citizens Poverty rate for single-parent families and seniors (aged 65+) living alone: Both 42% in 2001 Poverty not a static status: Sizable number move in and out of poverty each year* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd While the poverty tracks the unemployment rate, most poor people work. Therefore, not only rising unemployment but also any decline in real wages will lead to an increase in the number of people below the poverty line Unemployment rates among Aboriginal Canadians are more than twice as high as among non-Aboriginals Therefore, Aboriginals are also twice as likely to be living in low-income households 42% of single-parent families headed by a female were poor in 2001. 42% of Canadians 65 and older living alone (especially women) were poor. Poverty rate for two-parent families was 10%, while poverty rate for senior couples was 6% In 2001, 46% of single older women were in the low-income category, compared with only 33% of single older men While poverty is not a static status, a small minority do remain stuck in poverty year after year Losing a job, having to take a lower-paying job, become a single parent, or being widowed can drastically increase the chance of falling into and remaining trapped in poverty Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

INCIDENCE OF LOW INCOME FOR SELECTED FAMILY UNIT TYPES, CANADA, 1980, 1990, 2004 Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Figure 6.3 demonstrates that relative poverty among seniors has declined since 1980, particularly for elderly couples. Increased government transfer payments to older Canadians and an increase in the number of people retiring with personal pension plans and RRSPs form a large part of the explanation. In contrast, the poverty rate has not changed much for childless couples (under age 65), two-parent families with children, and non-senior (under 65) single individuals, although for the past 25 years the latter group has had a much higher poverty rate than nonseniors living as couples. In short, as labour market conditions have deteriorated and as governments have cut back on transfer payments, the working poor and the unemployed have come to make up a larger proportion of Canada’s poor (Sauvé, 2006). SOURCE: Erik Olin Wright, Classes (London: Verso, 1985), p. 88. Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

SOCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE POOR
Misconception that level of social assistance provides disincentive to work Ontario social assistance provides: Income of only 34% of poverty line for single employable adults Income of only 56% of poverty line for single parents Income of only 59% of poverty line for those with disabilities* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Also, many of those who receive assistance cannot work outside the home Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

TOTAL WELFARE INCOME ($), AS PERCENTAGE OF (PRETAX) POVERTY LINE AND OF MEDIAN INCOME Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Figure 6.4 shows that a single “employable” adult (i.e., an adult who did not have a disability, was not a senior, and was not considered unable to seek work because of family responsibilities) who was eligible for Ontario social assistance received $7204 in 2007, an amount only one-third (33 percent) of the poverty line and less than one-third (31 percent) of the median income for single adults in the province (National Council of Welfare, 2008a). Welfare recipients who had disabilities received a larger total annual transfer payment ($12 382), putting them at 57 percent of the LICO and at 53 percent of the median income for single adults with disabilities. Welfare rates for single parents with one child were somewhat higher ($16 439), an income level that placed them at 61 percent of the poverty line and at only 46 percent of the median income for all single parents in the province in 2007. As for couples with two children, their welfare rates were the highest ($21 058), since four or more people were being supported on this amount. But even when receiving this maximum amount of social assistance, the income of these Ontario families would only have been just over half of the amount required to get above the poverty line (52 percent), and only one-quarter (24 percent) of the median income for all couples with children in Ontario in 2007. In short, in Ontario and across Canada, the amount of welfare assistance provided is very low. SOURCE: Erik Olin Wright, Classes (London: Verso, 1985), p. 88. Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

MATERIAL INEQUALITY IN CANADA: A SUMMARY
Level of material inequality is relatively low compared with many other countries and with a century ago But have witnessed increases in: Corporate concentration Wealth inequality Income inequality Number of working poor Unemployment rates (long-term trend) Part-time and temporary employment Inequality in earnings (re: polarization in hours worked)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd A similar pattern has been observed in Britain and the United States This is not to suggest that a new era of massive inequalities is dawning; however, the evidence is clear that material inequalities are rising, not declining, and that society is becoming more polarized in terms of access to and control over economic resources Using Weber’s definition of class, class differences in Canada and the United States are becoming more pronounced For a decade and perhaps two, the gap between the advantaged and disadvantaged has been widening in Canada There is more wealth and income inequality and an increase in the number of poor due to high levels of unemployment and more part-time, temporary, and poorly paid jobs. Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

MATERIAL INEQUALITY IN CANADA: A SUMMARY
Reduction in employment opportunities More competitive economic environment (due to globalization) Routine layoffs and downsizing Replacement of full-time permanent jobs with part-time and temporary positions Weakened labour movement Decrease in state efforts to reduce material inequalities* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd

CONSEQUENCES OF MATERIAL INEQUALITY
Position in class structure has effect on belief systems, behaviours, voting patterns, lifestyles, and, most importantly, life chances (e.g., health, longevity, educational attainment, criminality) Increasing inequality may mean more social unrest among the poor But more opposition today from better-organized, better-funded middle class* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Children from poorer families typically do not do as well in school as more affluent children, are more likely to drop out before completing high school, and are less likely to go on to higher education Such effects of poverty are largely responsible for the perpetuation of class inequalities from one generation to the next For a variety of reasons, including better nutrition, access to better health care, and less hazardous working conditions, those who are situated higher in the economic hierarchy are typically healthier than the poor On average, the poor do not live as long as those who are better off Similarly, when dealing with the criminal justice system, those with greater access to and control over economic resources tend to fare better; the poor are consequently overrepresented in jails Life-chances are a function of position in the class structure: Those higher up in the economic hierarchy enjoy a better quality of life For society, increasing inequality may mean more unrest among the poor; but there is more opposition today from better-organized middle class than from the poor Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

RESPONDING TO INEQUALITY
Two views: Inequality is inevitable and need not be addressed (tends to be espoused by the well-off) Inequality is unjust and needs to be addressed (tends to be espoused by the poor): Socialist response: Overthrow capitalism Reformist response: Government redistribution of wealth to the poor (e.g., through pensions, minimum-wage legislation, unemployment insurance, etc.)* Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd Reactions to, and recommendations about, inequality reflect personal values and political orientation A large part of the problem lies in the fact that any serious effort to redistribute the wealth and income from the well-off to the poor would probably be opposed by the former Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

RESPONDING TO INEQUALITY: CANADA’S RESPONSE?
Canada’s “liberal” welfare policies espouse faith in power of free market to produce wealth and improve condition of poor (despite little evidence of success) Priority today given to deficit-reducing initiatives rather than reduction of material inequality Responding to inequality effectively will require willingness on part of many to accept less so that others can have more** Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd If we really want to do something about material inequality in Canada, and globally, if we want a different kind of society and a different kind of world, many of us have to be willing to accept less so that others can have more Copyright © 2011 by Nelson Education Ltd.

PowerPoint Presentation prepared by Terri Petkau, Mohawk College

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PowerPoint Presentation prepared by Terri Petkau, Mohawk College"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

PowerPoint Presentation prepared by Terri Petkau, Mohawk College

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "PowerPoint Presentation prepared by Terri Petkau, Mohawk College"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback