Chapter 14 Taught Me A Great Deal About World Stratification

The Davis-Moore thesis states that social stratification has good consequences for society. They argue societies may have different occupations or tasks that these jobs differ in their importance to society. They believed this encourages people to work harder and be more efficient in their jobs, ultimately benefiting society.

Individuals within a society are grouped into certain rankings that is based on their wealth, income, race and education known as the social stratification. Sociologist use this to determine the social standings of individuals within a society. Social stratification can also appear in much smaller groups. These groups such as the work place, schools, and businesses can “take the form of a distribution of power and authority down the ranks”. (Cole, 2017) The Caste system is also another form of stratification that one does not get a choice in. They are born into it and regardless of their talents will hold positions that are given to them their whole life. Social mobility is the ability for individuals to move about their social standings.

I greatly enjoyed reading this book and did so relatively quickly. This not only was a interesting subject manor but the author used a lot of statistics which I appreciated and it was told in a way that made you wanted to read on. I liked how he compared many of the regions

Chapter 14 was an interesting read for me because I am a millineall, having been born in 1989. I want to focus on the economic problem for millinialls. College is expensive but graduating with 26,000 dollars in debt plus another 7,000 dollars on credit cards is ridiculous. Neither of my parents are college graduates because they didn't have the money at the time and they pushed me really hard to start taking classes again. Financially it can be hard but finally earning a degree and then having a hard time finding a job and owing over 30,000 dollars is really depressing. I have a friend who has a master in accounting and has had a hard time finding work and he owes over 80 thousand dollars in stident loans. There has to be a way for us to

I found this book to be an eye opener to many things that I never really paid attitude to. We all want to believe that where we come from and who we are does not affect what we will be come. Yes all have heard it before you can be what you want to be as long as you work hard for it. But really many things that people would like to be are out of reached for the simple fact that you are not in the right class of people. Even thought

Economic stratification is the different rankings in social class are separated in different economic ways. These differences can vary from clothing, cars, perfumes, cigarette brands, etc. There are many ways you can tell what a person stratification is just by the way they look or the things they have. Usually these ranking go from lower class to middle class then the upper class. Each of these classes have very different ways of living and what they do to maintain a certain status.

In chapter nine of the class textbook, it mentions an important term called Global Stratification. Global Stratification is the arrangement of individuals and group rankings. Where an individual resides does affect their ranking because of limited access to the world’s wealth. There are three categories that people are places based on their income; High Income, Middle Income, and low income.

Social Stratification is considered to be a hierarchy of positions concerning economic production which influences the social rewards to those in the positions (Social Stratification, Definition Social Stratification, n.d.). There are two commonly known theories when it comes to social stratification, the functional theory, and the conflict theory. The functionalist believes that stratification is needed for society to enhance stability and motivate members of the society to work hard. According to the functional theory, inequality ensures that the most functionally important jobs are filled by the individual who has the best skills for the job.

America is known as the land of the free and home of the brave. When thinking of this you think about all the opportunities presented to people and all the freedom. An idea of America is that we’re a meritocracy, which means anyone can be able to to become anything they want as long as they work hard playing by the rules. Along with that many people believe that diversity will bring together the country and unite us all but that’s not the case. America is not a meritocracy.

Even without being consciously aware of it, the use of some sort of scale when interacting with others is quintessential. This is because it represents a basic need of defining the self through the means of the others; knowing one’s place in society, as well as the positions of fellow individuals, ensures an orderly functioning of said system. For the sake of this essay, the definition of social stratification as a society’s categorization of its people into rankings of socioeconomic tiers based on factors like wealth, income, race, education, and power (Pearce, 2015), will be used.

This paper will be discussing “Some Principles of Stratification” by Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore, “Classes in Capitalism and Pre- Capitalism” by Karl Marx, and “Who Rules America?” by G. William Domhoff. Davis and Moore examine stratification, social class, and positional rank and their effects on individuals and society. Marx examines inequality in society, the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed or the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, and methods of production and their effects on society. Domhoff examines the roles of corporate communities and the upper class and how they impact America.

Global stratification generally has a negative reputation. Critics see outsourcing as impacting both domestic and foreign countries in a negative way. Domestic economics falters since business is transferred to outside sources, therefore local employment suffers, prices may rise, and people may lose their jobs. Developing countries experience global stratification where, even though the imported business upgrades social conditions, social demarcation and hierarchy occurs where the labor class is exploited by newly formed elite. Nike's vice-president, however, sees outsourcing as beneficial to both local and foreign enterprise. The following essay is an analysis of both perspectives.

The purpose of this essay is to compare, contrast and critically evaluate Marxist and Weberian theories of stratification. To do this effectively this essay must explain and consider the main features, claims and perspectives of both Karl Marx and Max Weber. O’Donnell (1992) defines social stratification as “the division of a society or group into hierarchically ordered layers. Members of each layer are considered broadly equal but there is inequality between the layers.” Functionalist Durkheim (1858-1917) argued that the reason for the existence of stratification was because it was functional or beneficial to the order of society.

In Chapter one the topic that comes to my first thought is; I feel that I’ve gained a better insight to the various types of economic systems. This is an area that I feel I’ve often struggled with in many aspects. I have traveled to several places outside of the United States and have often heard of people speak of their economic system. I always wanted to understand what they were talking about and how it impacted their countries. In chapter one it gave me that opportunity. I was able to gain a better understanding of the different types of economic systems and how they functioned.

Social stratification defines any structure of inequality that persists in a society across generations. Social strata are groups of people — who belong to the same social class or have the same social level. Social strata are organised in a vertical hierarchy. In the early societies people shared a common social standing. In the hunting and gathering societies there was little stratification: men hunted for meat while women gathered edible plants. The general welfare of the society depended on the mutual sharing of goods between all members and no group emerged as better off than the others.