Inequality and Poverty

Levels, againHow much mobility?

Inequality and social policy

Levels: What question is one asking?

“To what extent do people have equal opportunity” is largely a question at the macro-level about social structural constraints and rates“To what extent do people have any opportunities” is largely a question at the micro level about individual choices. E.g. the question whether “October Sky” ever happens is

different from the question whether it is as likely in a poor community in Appalachia, or in Mantua, as on the Main Line.

Or half as likely, or a tenth as likely, or a hundredth.

That people make their choices under constraints means that there are grossly different college chances in East LA and in 90210

Is there enough mobility so that it does not make sense to speak

of a vicious cycle?In the 1950’s and ’60’s Status Attainment research (e.g. Hout and others p.*346-50) argues that

The effects of family background on education, occupation and income were substantial, but

There is still enough mobility so that we do not have to talk of a “vicious cycle.”

However, in the last 20 years, most sociologists have pointed out that

1. Status attainment research looked at effects for white males not living in poverty – less than 1/3 of the work force.

2. It confused structural and circulation mobility3. It treated “pseudo-mobility” as real, and longitudinal

designs find rates of mobility less than half as large. The vicious cycle is real.

Limitations on mobility rates

The question of equal opportunities is not whether people have some opportunities and make choices.Whether people are treated the same at age 20 is not the main structural issue about equal opportunity.Inequality of opportunity usually means that different people and different groups do not get the same skills, contacts, job histories, motivations or self-presentation prior to age 20. Different constraints lead to different rates and different choices.Thus, equal opportunities may involve things such as lead paint, food, ear exams, eyeglasses, housing, reading programs, etc. at age 10The US does a terrible job at such issues, compared to other advanced industrial societies

The example of 187, againSome kids are making bad, immoral choices.All the students are multiply disadvantaged such that No one in the school is competitive with students

from 90210 Some of these effects are direct ones of school

funding, etc. Others are effects of not dealing with problems in

the community Others are indirect effects (e.g. role models,

expectations, teacher flight.All are affected by social policy, or by the absence of social policy.

The example of The Code of the Streets, again

People make choices, both in Chestnut Hill and in North Philadelphia.The different rates of choices are the result of different environments.We can choose to do something, or not to do something about those differences.To ascribe the differences to individual choices is usually a way of justifying the failure to do anything about it.

The example of The Saints and the Roughnecks, againTeachers, merchants, judges, employers, etc. really, sincerely believe that they are treating people the same, and that the “saints” are making good choices,

while the “roughnecks are making bad choices, and that people should take the consequences of

their choices.But the reality is that a biased educational, criminal justice, and social system is stigmatizing poor kids in a way that reinforces disadvantage.

But even if that is true, isn’t it demoralizing to say it?

People always have choices.It may be important to stress to any student that he or she can do well, can stay off drugs, can succeed (at the individual level of analysis).

The grossly different life chances of different groups gives a different message (at the social level of analysis.)

What is the policy issue?”

One of the reasons that it is important to look at constraints is that the policy issues usually concern whether there is equal opportunity, not whether there is any opportunity.That some people overcome disadvantages is not relevant to whether they are disadvantaged.The persistence of socially remediable inequalities of opportunity is arguably

1. Unjust2. a source of structural strain and 3. Dysfunctional – a social waste

Anticipation: the army and Colin Powell

The army and the navy followed different policies The army found huge racial disproportions at different levels.It argued that the disproportions resulted from unequal opportunities and set up compensatory educational programs.That have produced the single largest fully integrated institution in the society.

Survey questions1. Only if differences in income and social standing are large enough is

there an incentive for individual effort. 2. In the United States, there are still great differences between social

levels, and what one can achieve in life depends mainly upon one’s family background.

3. Personal income should not be determined solely by one’s work. Rather, everybody should get what he/she needs to provide a decent life for his/her family

4. In a free society it is alright if a few people accumulate a lot of wealth and property while many others live in poverty.

5. The country has many problems, none of which can be solved easily or cheaply. At the moment, do you think the federal government is spending too much, about the right amount or too little on:

1. Welfare2. Assistance to the poor.

A Simplistic theory

Disadvantaged persons and groups will adopt a functional model of inequality.Advantaged persons and groups will adopt a conflict model of inequality.It is largely true, butthere are many other forces operating on each respondent and with regard to each attitude.

Insight of functional theory:

We might want or need some kinds of inequality to the degree that the inequality serves crucial social functions.

For example it could reward people for doing important work,

or it might motivate people to gain training,

or it might reflect differences in people’s priorities

Insight of conflict theory

We might need to limit inequality to the extent that it becomes divisive, dysfunctional and/or cancerous.Many societies in the past have had to devote more and more resources to coercion and social control,because they were divided by conflicts over inequality.

An example of a question suggesting a functional

view:Only if differences in income and social standing are large enough is there an incentive for individual effort.A substantial majority of the national population agrees with that item.

CLASS?F -- Only if differences in income and social standing arelarge enough is there an incentive for individual effort. (USCLASS6)

Freq. % AGREE1) 807 59.5DISAGREE2) 550 40.5

TOTAL (N) 1357 100.0

Missing 36052

Effect of income on belief in need for incentives

INCOME by CLASS?F (Only if differences in income and social standing are large enough is there an incentive for individual effort.)

AGREE DISAGREE Missing TOTALLOW 218 140 10774 358

60.9% 39.1% 100.0%MID 360 259 13945 619

58.2% 41.8% 100.0%HIGH 172 111 10469 283

60.8% 39.2% 100.0%Miss 57 40 3681 3778

TOT 750 510 38869 1260

59.5% 40.5%

No effect of income. Why?

Effect of gender on belief in need for incentives

SEX by CLASS?F (Only if differences in income and social standing are large enough is there an incentive for individual effort.)

AGREE DISAGREE Missing TOTALMALE 356 214 17081 570

62.5% 37.5% 100.0%FEMALE 451 336 21788 787

57.3% 42.7% 100.0%TOTAL 807 550 38869 1357

59.5% 40.5%

A modest, but statistically significant, effect in which men are more likely to assert the need for inequality for incentives. Why?

An example of a question suggesting a conflict view:

In the United States, there are still great differences between social levels, and what one can achieve in life depends mainly upon one’s family background.CLASS?B -- In the United States there are still great differencesbetween social levels, and what one can achieve in life dependsmainly upon one's family background. (USCLASS2)

Freq. % AGREE1) 641 45.1DISAGREE2) 781 54.9

TOTAL (N) 1422 100.0

Missing 35987

Effect of income on belief that there is unequal opportunity

INCOME by “what one can achieve in life depends mainly upon one’s family background”

AGREE DISAGREE Missing TOTALLOW 209 174 10749 383

54.6% 45.4% 100.0%MIDDLE 277 363 13924 640

43.3% 56.7% 100.0%HIGH 94 191 10467 28

33.0% 67.0% 100.0%Missing 61 53 3664 3778

TOTAL 580 728 38804 1308

44.3% 55.7% There is a strong effect. Rich people are far less likely to believe that what one can achieve in life depends mainly upon one’s family background

Another conflict view:And substantial minorities even agree that :Personal income should not be determined solely by one’s work. Rather, everybody should get what he/she needs to provide a decent life for his/her family

CLASS?E -- Personal income should not be determined solely byone's work. Rather, everybody should get what he/she needs toprovide a decent life for his/her family. (USCLASS5)

Freq. % AGREE1) 479 33.9DISAGREE2) 936 66.1

TOTAL (N) 1415 100.0

Missing 35994

The main policy disagreement:

There is almost an even split on the issue:

WLTH POV -- AGREE OR DISAGREE: -- In a free society, it is all right if a few people accumulate a lot ofwealth and property while many others live in poverty. (WLTHPOV)

Freq. % AGREE1) 524 38.4NEITHER2) 264 19.3DISAGREE3) 578 42.3

TOTAL (N) 1366 100.0

Missing 38860

Effect of income on view that accumulation of wealth and poverty is

consistent with freedomINCOME by WLTH POV

AGREE NEITHERDISAGREE Missing TOTALLOW 103 54 184 10791 341

30.2% 15.8% 54.0% 100.0%MIDDLE 168 85 199 14112 452

37.2% 18.8% 44.0% 100.0%HIGH 189 82 127 10354 398

47.5% 20.6% 31.9% 100.0%Missing 64 43 68 3603 3778

TOTAL 460 221 510 38860 1191

38.6% 18.6% 42.8% Upper income respondents are substantially more likely to believe that freedom is consistent with the accumulation of wealth and poverty. 17% more likely – about 12 rather than about 1/3 – Why?

Effect of gender on view that accumulation of wealth and poverty is

consistent with freedomSEX by WLTH POV

AGREENEITHER DISAGREE TOTALMALE 273 03 225 601

45.4% 7.1% 37.4% 100.0%FEMALE 251 161 353 765

32.8% 21.0% 46.1% 100.0%TOTAL 524 264 578 1366

8.4% 19.3% 42.3% Men are substantially more likely to believe that freedom is consistent with the accumulation of wealth and poverty. 13% more likely – about ½ rather than 1/3 – why?

Effect of race on view that accumulation of wealth and poverty is consistent with

freedomRACE by WLTH POV

AGREE NEITHERDISAGREE TOTALWHITE 457 198 420 1075

42.5% 18.4% 39.1% 100.0%BLACK 50 39 128 217

23.0% 18.0% 59.0% 100.0%

TOTAL 507 237 548 12929.2% 8.3% 42.4%

White respondents are substantially more likely to believe that the accumulation of wealth and poverty is consistent with freedom 20% more likely; a factor of two. Why?

Policy issues: “welfare”The idea of welfare and the pursuit of welfare was overwhelmingly positively charged at the time of the New Deal As part of the American Dream and the American

Creed - the ideal of a society of equal opportunity.It has a powerful negative charge today.This largely depends on the word: the idea of aid to the poor, particularly poor children, is still positively chargedWhile the idea of “welfare” has a powerful “negative charge. “why?

The ideology of welfare:

When asked about “welfare” more than half the population say we are spending too much:

WELFARE $ -- Spending on welfare (NATFARE)

Freq. % TOO LITTLE1) 4596 18.9RIGHT2) 7274 29.9TOO MUCH3) 12454 51.2

TOTAL (N) 24324 100.0

Missing 15902

The issue of welfare and of aid to the poor:

But when asked about “assistance to the poor” nearly 2/3 say we are spending too little and 11% say we are spending “too much”

WELFARE $2 -- Spending on assistance to the poor (NATFAREY)

Freq. % TOO LITTLE1) 7667 63.6RIGHT2) 3008 25.0TOO MUCH3) 1380 11.4

TOTAL (N) 12055 100.0

Missing 28171

How did welfare get redefined 1970 - 2000

Some sociologists believe that the main issue has been “The Color of Welfare” (Quadagno) i.e. racial stereotyping of welfare recipients, combined with institutional racism.

Some sociologists believe that it is based on a set of myths about welfare.

It is also part of the overall shift to the market and to Social Darwinist ideas.