1. pen up something you found interesting, assuring or hopeful in the reading below.
2. pen up something you found confusing, contradictory, or you simply didn't like in the reading below.
3. pen up something that you would like to know more about from the reading below.

Social Stratification

Social stratificationis a system of ranking individuals and groups within societies. Itrefers to a society's ranking of its people into socioeconomic tiers based on factors like wealth, income, race, education, and power. You may remember the word "stratification" from geology class. The distinct horizontal layers found in rock, called "strata," are an illustrative way to visualize social structure. Society's layers are made of people, and society's resources are distributed unevenly throughout the layers.Social stratification has been a part of all societies dating from the agricultural revolution, which took place in various parts of the world between 7,000-10,000 BCE. Unlike relatively even strata in rock, though, there are not equal numbers of people in each layer of society. There are typically very few at the top and a great many at the bottom, with some variously populated layers in the middle.

Social Inequality

Social inequalityis the state of unequal distribution of valued goods and opportunities. All societies today have social inequality. Examining social stratification requires a macrosociological perspective in order to view societal systemsthat make inequalities visible.Although individuals may support or fight inequalities, social stratification is created and supported by society as a whole through values and norms and consistently durable systems of stratification.

Most of us are accustomed to thinking ofstratification as economic inequality. For example, we can compare wages in the United States to wages in Mexico.Social inequality, however, is just as harmful as economic discrepancy. Prejudice and discriminationwhether against a certain race, ethnicity, religion, or the likecan become a causal factor by creating and aggravating conditions of economic inequality, both within and between nations.

Gender inequality is another global concern. Consider the controversy surrounding female circumcision (also known asfemale genital mutilationor FGM). Nations favoring this practice, often through systems of patriarchal authority, defend it as a longstanding cultural tradition among certain tribes and argue that the West shouldn't interfere. Western nations, however, decry the practice and are working to expose and stop it.

Inequalities based on sexual orientation and gender identity exist around the globe. According to Amnesty International, a range of crimes are commonly committed against individuals who do not conform to traditional gender roles or sexual orientations (however those are culturally defined). From culturally sanctioned rape to state-sanctioned executions, the abuses are serious. These legalized and culturally accepted forms of prejudice, discrimination, and punishment exist everywherefrom the United States to Somalia to Tibetrestricting the freedom of individuals and often putting their lives at risk (Amnesty International 2012).

Global Stratification

Figure 2.(a)A family lives in this grass hut in Ethiopia. (b) Another family lives in a single-wide trailer in a trailer park in the United States. Both families are considered poor, or lower class. With such differences in global stratification, what constitutes poverty? (Photo (a) courtesy of Canned Muffins/flickr; Photo (b) courtesy of Herb Neufeld/flickr)

While stratification in the United States refers to the unequal distribution of resources among individuals,global stratificationrefers to this unequal distribution among nations. There are two dimensions to this stratification: gaps between nations and gaps within nations. When it comes to global inequality, both economic inequality and social inequality may concentrate the burden of poverty among certain segments of the earth's population (Myrdal 1970).

As mentioned earlier, one way to evaluate stratification is to consider how many people are living in poverty, and particularly extreme poverty, which is often defined as needing to survive on less than $1.90 per day. Fortunately, until the COVID-19 pandemic impacted economies in 2020, the extreme poverty rate had been on a 20-year decline. In 2015, 10.1 percent of the world's population was living in extreme poverty; in 2017, that number had dropped an entire percentage point to 9.2 percent. While a positive, that 9.2 percent is equivalent to 689 million people living on less than $1.90 a day. The same year, 24.1 percent of the world lived on less than $3.20 per day and 43.6 percent on less than $5.50 per day in 2017 (World Bank 2020). The table below makes the differences in poverty very clear.

Global stratification compares the wealth, economic stability, status, and power of countries across the world, and also highlights worldwide patterns of social inequality within nations.

In the early years of civilization, hunter-gatherer and agrarian societies lived off the earth and rarely interacted with other societies (except during times of war).As civilizations began to grow and emerging cities developed political and economic systems, trade increased, as did military conquest. Explorers went out in search of new land and resources as well as to trade goods, ideas, and customs.They eventually took land, people, and resources from all over the world, building empires and establishing networks of colonies with imperialist policies, foundational religious ideologies, and incredible economic and military power.

In the nineteenth century, the Industrial Revolution created unprecedented wealth in Western Europe and North America. Due to mechanical inventions and new means of production, people began working in factoriesnot only men, but women and children as well.The Industrial Revolution also saw the rise of vast inequalities between countries that were industrialized and those that were not. As some nations embraced technology and saw increased wealth and goods, others maintained their ways; as the gap widened, the non-industrialized nations fell further behind. Some social researchers, such as Walt Rostow, suggest that the disparity also resulted from power differences. Applying a conflict theory perspective, he asserts that industrializing nations appropriated and took advantage of the resources of traditional nations. As industrialized nations became rich, other nations became poor (Rostow 1960).

Sociologists studying global stratification analyze economic comparisons between nations. Income, purchasing power, and investment and ownership-based wealth are used to calculate global stratification. Global stratification also compares the quality of life that individual citizens and groups within a country's population can have.

Poverty levels have been shown to vary greatly. The poor in wealthy countries like the United States or Europe are much better off than the poor in less-industrialized countries such as Mali or India. In 2002, the UN implemented the Millennium Project, an attempt to cut poverty worldwide by the year 2015. To reach the project's goal, planners in 2006 estimated that industrialized nations must set aside 0.7 percent of their gross national incomethe total value of the nation's good and service, plus or minus income received from and sent to other nationsto aid in developing countries (Landler and Sanger, 2009; Millennium Project 2006).

Although some successes have been realized from the Millennium Project, such as cutting the extreme global poverty rate in half, the United Nations has now moved ahead with theirprogram of economic growth and sustainable development in their new project,Sustainable Development Goals, adopted in September of 2015.

A major concern when discussing global inequality is how to avoid an ethnocentric bias implying that less-developed nations want to be like those who've attained post-industrial global power. Terms such as developing (nonindustrialized) and developed (industrialized) imply that unindustrialized countries are somehow inferior, and must improve to participate successfully in the "global economy," a label indicating that all aspects of the economy cross national borders. We must be mindful of how we describe and delineate different countries. Over time, terminology has shifted to enable a more inclusive view of the world.

Global classification methods are not only important in understanding economic differences among countries, but also in providing ways to classify countries and identify trends in other areas. The classifications discussed below will be used in other chapters, such as the chapter on health and medicine.

Cold War Terminology

Cold War terminology was developed during the Cold War era (1945-1991), a period of geopolitical conflict between the democratic, capitalist nations of the world and the more authoritarian communist nations that were primarily controlled by the former U.S.S.R (now, in part, present-day Russia). Familiar and still used by many, it classifies countries into first world, second world, and third world nations based on their respective economic development and standards of living. When this nomenclature was developed, capitalist democracies such as the United States and Japan were considered part of the first world. The poorest, most undeveloped countries were referred to as the third world and included most of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Control of these developing countries was often contested between capitalist and communist powers, sometimes with politically and economically destabilizing results. The second world was the economically in-between category: nations not as limited in development as the third world, but not as well off as the first world, having moderate economies and living standards, and typically being aligned with the communist powers. Much of Eastern Europe, China, and Cuba are key examples. In addition to these earlier categories, sociologist Manual Castells (1998) added the term fourth world to refer to stigmatized minority groups that were denied a political voice all over the globe (indigenous minority populations, prisoners, and the homeless, for example).

Also during the Cold War, global inequality was described in terms of economic development. Along with developing and developed nations, the terms less-developed nation and underdeveloped nation were used. This was the era when the idea of noblesse oblige (first-world responsibility to help the less fortunate) took root, suggesting that the so-termed developed nations should provide foreign aid to the less-developed and underdeveloped nations in order to raise their standard of living.

Immanuel Wallerstein: World Systems Approach

Immanuel Wallerstein's (1979) world systems approach uses an economic basis to understand global inequality. Wallerstein conceived of the global economy as a complex system that supports an economic hierarchy placing some nations in positions of power with considerable resources while placing other nations in a state of economic subordination. Those that were in a state of subordination faced significant obstacles to development and self-determination.

Wallerstein proposed the following categories:

Core nations are dominant capitalist countries, highly industrialized, technological, and urbanized. For example, Wallerstein contends that the United States is an economic powerhouse that can support or deny support to important economic legislation with far-reaching implications, thus exerting control over every aspect of the global economy and exploiting both semi-peripheral and peripheral nations. We can look at free trade agreements such as the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as an example of how a core nation is able to leverage its power to gain the most advantageous position within the system of global trade.

Peripheral nations have very little industrialization; what they do have often represents the outdated castoffs of core nations or the factories and means of production owned by core nations. They typically have unstable governments, inadequate social programs, and are economically dependent on core nations for jobs and aid. There are abundant examples of countries in this category, such as Vietnam and Cuba. We can be sure the workers in Cuban cigar factories, for example, which are owned or leased by global core nation companies, are not enjoying the same privileges and rights as U.S. workers.

Semi-peripheral nations are in-between nations, not powerful enough to dictate policy but nevertheless acting as a major source for raw material and an expanding middle-class marketplace for core nations, while also exploiting peripheral nations. Mexico is an example, providing abundant cheap agricultural labor to the U.S., and supplying goods to the United States market at a rate dictated by the U.S. without the legal protections offered to United States workers.

World Bank Economic Classification by Income

While the World Bank is often criticized, both for its policies and its method of calculating data, it is still a common source for global economic data.

Along with tracking the economy, the World Bank tracks demographics and environmental health to provide a complete picture of whether a nation is high income, middle income, or low income.

High-Income Nations

The World Bank defines high-income nations as having a gross national income of at least $12,536 per capita. in 2019 (World Bank 2021). (Note that the classifications will always lag by a couple of years so that analysts can evaluate the true income of the nations.) Examples include Belgium, Canada, Japan, Oman, Puerto Rico, and the United States.

High-income countries face two major issues: capital flight and deindustrialization.Capital flightrefers to the movement (flight) of capital from one nation to another, as when General Motors automotive company closed U.S. factories in Michigan and opened factories in Mexico.

Deindustrialization, a related issue, occurs as a consequence of capital flight, as no new companies open to replace jobs lost to foreign nations. As expected, global companies move their industrial processes to the places where they can get the most production with the least cost, including the building of infrastructure, training of workers, shipping of goods, and, of course, paying employee wages. This means that as emerging economies create their own industrial zones, global companies see the opportunity for existing infrastructure and much lower costs. Those opportunities lead to businesses closing the factories that provide jobs to the middle class within core nations and moving their industrial production to peripheral and semi-peripheral nations.

Middle-Income Nations

The World Bank divides middle-income economies into two categories. Lower middle income areas are those with a GNI per capita of more than $1,036 but less than $4,045. Upper middle income areas are those with A GNI per capita between $4,046 and $12,535. Democratic Republic of Congo, Tunisia, Philippines, El Salvador, and Nepal are are examples of lower-middle-income countries. And Argentina, Mexico, China, Iran, Turkey, and Namibia are examples of upper-middle-income nations (World Bank 2021).

Perhaps the most pressing issue for middle-income nations is the problem of debt accumulation. As the name suggests,debt accumulationis the buildup of external debt, wherein countries borrow money from other nations to fund their expansion or growth goals. As the uncertainties of the global economy make repaying these debts, or even paying the interest on them, more challenging, nations can find themselves in trouble. Once global markets have reduced the value of a country's goods, it can be very difficult to ever manage the debt burden. Such issues have plagued middle-income countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as East Asian and Pacific nations (Dogruel and Dogruel 2007).

Low-Income Nations

The World Bank defines low-income countries as nations whose per capita GNI was $1,035 per capita or less in 2019. For example, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, and Yemen are considered low-income countries. Low-income economies are primarily found in Asia and Africa (World Bank 2021), where most of the world's population lives. There are two major challenges that these countries face: women are disproportionately affected by poverty (in a trend toward a global feminization of poverty) and much of the population lives in extreme poverty.

Nations' classifications often change as their economies evolve and, sometimes, when their political positions change. Nepal, Indonesia, and Romania all moved up to a higher status based on improved economies. While Sudan, Algeria, and Sri Lanka moved down a level. A few years ago, Myanmar was a low-income nation, but now it has moved into the middle-income area. With Myanmar's 2021 coup, the massive citizen response, and the military's killing of protesters, its economy may go through a downturn again, returning it to the low-income nation status.

How is global stratification measured?

Just as the United States' wealth is increasingly concentrated among its richest citizens while the middle class slowly disappears, global inequality is concentrating resources in certain nations and is significantly affecting the opportunities of individuals in poorer and less powerful countries. In fact, a recent Oxfam (2014) report suggested that the richest eighty-five people in the world are worth more than the poorest 3.5 billion combined.

Various models of global stratification all have one thing in common: they rank countries according to their relative economic status, or gross national product (GNP).

There are three primary ways to measure global stratification:

• The GINI coefficient measures income inequality between countries using a 100-point scale on which 1 represents complete equality and 100 represents the highest possible inequality. In 2007, the global GINI coefficient that measured the wealth gap between the core nations in the northern part of the world and the mostly peripheral nations in the southern part of the world was 75.5 percent (Korseniewicz and Moran 2009).
• Another model separates countries into two groups: more developed and less developed. More-developed nations have higher wealth, such as Canada, Japan, and Australia. Less-developed nations have less wealth to distribute among higher populations, including many countries in central Africa, South America, and some island nations.
• Yet another system of global classification defines countries based on the per capita gross domestic product (GDP), a country's average national wealth per person. The GDP is calculated (usually annually) one of two ways: by totaling either the income of all citizens or the value of all goods and services produced in the country during the year. It also includes government spending. Because the GDP indicates a country's productivity and performance, comparing GDP rates helps establish a country's economic health in relation to other countries. The figures also establish a country's standard of living. You can see country ratings of GDP per capita here.

Systems of Stratification

Sociologists distinguish between two systems of stratification. Closed systems accommodate little change in social position and are typically based on ascribed status or some trait from birth. They do not allow people to shift levels and do not permit social relationships between levels. Open systems, which are based on achievement, allow movement and interaction between layers and classes. These different systems reflect, emphasize, and foster certain cultural values and shape individual beliefs. Some stratification systems include slavery,caste systems, feudal/estate systems, andclass systems.

Slavery

In examining social stratification, we can begin by looking at slavery in the U.S., which was based on race and resulted in a social stratification systempeople were not enslaved because of crimes they committed, debts they owed, or lost wars.Chattel slaveryoccurs when one person owns another as property.Slaves were taken from West Africa beginning in the 17th century and brought to U.S. colonies, mostly to work as laborers in the growing agricultural economy. The system was maintained by birth, so children born to slaves were automatically slaves and considered property-or "chattel"-of the slaveowner.

While the slave trade was discontinued in 1808, slavery was not abolished until the13th Amendment was ratified in 1865 (the same year the Civil War ended), and vestiges of slavery persisted through the Reconstruction era and beyond^[1]. The racial stratification of Americans continued through Jim Crow segregation laws, which faded in the 1950s and 1960s as the Civil Rights Movement emerged, and through the convict lease system, which was also gradually phased out in the 20th century. The South African apartheid system is another example of social stratification based on race, or skin color. Apartheid officially began in 1948, and gave the minority white population political and cultural power, while oppressing Blacks, "Coloured" (i.e., people of mixed race), Indian, and Asian peoples. It did not end until 1994. Both of these systems used race to justify closed systems of stratification.

The global watchdog group Anti-Slavery International recognizes other forms of slavery: human trafficking (in which people are moved away from their communities and forced to work against their will), child domestic work and child labor, and certain forms of servile marriage, in which women are effectively property, or chattel slaves (Anti-Slavery International 2012).

Another type of slavery isdebtbondage, or bonded labor, in which the poor pledge themselves as servants in exchange for the cost of basic necessities like transportation, room, and board. In this scenario, people are paid less than they are charged for room and board. When travel is required, they can arrive indebtfor their travel expenses and be unable to work their way free, since their wages do not allow them to ever get ahead.

The Estate System

The ninth century gave rise tofeudalsocieties. These societies contained a strict hierarchical system of power based around land ownership and protection. The nobility, known as lords, placed vassals in charge of pieces of land called fiefdoms. In return for the resources that the land provided and a guaranteed place to live, vassals promised to fight for their lords.Feudalism was a closed system where land ownership was inherited. The peasants who worked the landserved lords for generations and generations as the estate system hierarchy was automatically reproduced at birth.

Like slavery in the U.S., aperson's birth determined his or her social standing. In the estate system, this meant a person could be born a peasant, a commoner, or with access to more property and opportunity, such as a member of the clergy or nobility might have.The justification for this rigid hierarchy was often based on certain religious beliefs, especially that of "divine right," or the idea that some men rule by God's will.Ultimately, the social and economic system offeudalismfailed and was replaced by capitalism and the technological advances of the industrial era.

The Caste System

Figure 1.India used to have a rigid caste system. The people in the lowest caste suffered from extreme poverty and were shunned by society. Some aspects of India's defunct caste system remain socially relevant. In this photo, an Indian woman of a specific Hindu caste works in construction, and she demolishes and builds houses. (Photo courtesy of Elessar/flickr)

Caste systems are closed stratification systems in which people can do little or nothing to change their social standing. Acaste systemis one in which people are born into their social standing category, or "caste," and will remain in it their whole lives. People are assigned occupations regardless of their talents, interests, or potential. There are virtually no opportunities to improve a person's social position.

In the Hindu caste tradition, people were expected to work in the occupation of their caste and to enter into marriage according to their caste.Endogamyrefers to the practice of marrying within one's own caste category.Accepting this social standing was considered a moral duty. Cultural values reinforced the system. Caste systems promote beliefs in fate, destiny, and the will of a higher power, rather than promoting individual freedom as a value. A person who lived in a caste society was socialized to accept his or her social standing.

Although the caste system in India has been officially dismantled, its residual presence in Indian society is deeply embedded. In rural areas, aspects of the tradition are more likely to remain, while urban centers show less evidence of this past. In India's larger cities, people now have more opportunities to choose their own career paths and marriage partners. With India's emergence as an economic power, corporations have introduced merit-based hiring and employment standards to the nation.

The Class System

A class system is an open systembased on both social factors and individual achievement.Individuals within a class systemare free to gain a different level of education or employment from that of their parents,and cansocialize with and marry members of other classes.The class system has fluid boundaries-think of "rags to riches" stories, or stories of wealthy and powerful people being brought low through criminal conviction for crimes such as fraud, insider trading, murder, or extortion.

Classis determined by wealthand income and is considered an achieved status, or one which is earned. Wealth refers to the total value of money and assets such as property and stocks, whereas income refers to the money a person earns from work and/or investments. A person can have a lot of wealth but little income (i.e., someone with a trust fund or inheritance), and conversely, someone can have a large income but very little wealth (i.e., someone who spends as much as they make, but does not purchase property or invest).

Max Weber identified the following three components in class systems of stratification: class, status, and power (1922). Class, as stated above, includes wealth and income. Status is the prestige or honor accorded to one's position and/or to one's name. Power is the ability to exert one's will over others. One can examine President Donald Trump as an individual who has reached some of the highest levels of class, status, and power. The President of the United States (POTUS) is often described as the most powerful politician in the world, and one of the main duties of POTUS is to oversee the U.S. armed forces, which itself entails an extraordinary amount of power.

Weber's views on class differed with those held by Marx, who viewed society as composed of the two classes of bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production) and the proletariat (workers).Weber thought economic position was important, but also emphasized status and power as important components for understanding the class system. An Olympic Gold Medalist for example, might enjoy a high status, and may also increase her income and wealth through endorsements with big brands like Nike or Adidas, but this does not necessarily make thempowerful.

Anothersociological perspective distinguishes the classes, in part, according to the relative power and control they have over their own lives. In this view, the upper classes not only have power and control over their own lives but their social status also gives them power and control over the lives of others. Consider the1% and the disproportionate political power that billionaires hold in making decisions that affect other peoples' lives.

The Weberian framework is particularly helpful in examining the interconnectedness of class, status, and power, and how these components influence class stratification. Consider decisions regarding health care. Most middle class jobs include health and dental insurance, which allow individuals and families to have a greater degree of control over health-related decisions. In contrast, the working class and the working poor have less control over their work or health care decisions, and often struggle to acquire and maintain access to health insurance. The lowest classes are made up of people in society who have the least amount of control over their lives.

Meritocracy

Meritocracyis an ideal system based on the belief that social stratification is the result of personal effortor demonstrated meritthat determines social standing. High levels of effort will lead to a high socio-economic position, and vice versa. The concept ofmeritocracyis an idealbecause a society has never existed where social rank was based purely on merit. Because of the complex structure of societies, processes like socialization, and the realities of economic systems, social standing is influenced by multiple factorsnot merit alone. Inheritance and pressure to conform to norms, for instance, disrupt the notion of a puremeritocracy. While an entirely untroubled meritocracyhas never existed, sociologists see traces of meritocracy throughout modern societies when they study the role of academic and job performance rating, as well as the systems used for evaluating and rewarding achievement in these areas.

Class in the United States

Upper Class

Figure 1.Members of the upper class can afford to live, work, and play in exclusive places designed for luxury and comfort. (Photo courtesy of PrimeImageMedia.com/flickr)

The upper class is considered the top, and only the elite get to see the view from there.Money provides not just access to material goods, but also access to power and status, as Max Weber described. As corporate leaders, members of the upper class make decisions that affect the job status and security of millions of people. As media owners, they influence the collective identity of the nation. They run the major network television stations, radio broadcasts, newspapers, magazines, multi-media publishing companies, and sports franchises. As board members of the most prestigious colleges and universities, they influence cultural attitudes and values. As philanthropists, they establish foundations to support social causes. As campaign contributors, they sway politicians, sometimes to protect their own economic interests.

The "Middle" Class

Figure 2.These members of a club likely consider themselves middle class. (Photo courtesy of United Way Canada-Centraide Canada/flickr)

Many people, including a majority of Americans, consider themselves middle class, but there are differing ideas about what that means. People with annual incomes of $150,000 call themselves middle class, as do people who annually earn $30,000. That helps explain why, in the United States, the middle class is broken into upper and lower subcategories.

The Upper Middle Class

Upper-middle-class people tend to hold bachelor's and postgraduate degrees. They've studied subjects such as business, management, law, or medicine.

Comfort is a key concept for this group, as they work hard and live materially secure lives. Upper-middle-class people tend to pursue careers that earn higher incomes. They provide their families with large homes and nice cars. They may go skiing or boating on vacation, and their children receive high-quality education and healthcare (Gilbert 2010).

The Average Middle Class

In the average middle class, people hold jobs supervised by members of the upper middle class. They fill administrative support positions, or work asteachers, as office or bank clerks and assistants, and are often in lower-level "white collar" jobs. Average middle class members generally hold bachelor's degrees from four-year colleges or associate's degrees from two-year community or technical colleges.

Compared to lower class work, average middle class jobs carry more prestige and come with slightly higher paychecks. With these incomes, people can afford a decent, mainstream lifestyle, but may struggle to maintain it. They generally don't have enough income to build significant savings. In addition, their grip on class status is more precarious than in the upper tiers of the class system. They tend to own their own homes but the mortgages are often more cumbersome, leaving less money for travel, investments, and private schools.

TheLower Middle Class orWorkingClass

Working-class people often hold jobs inmanual labor, or so called "blue collar" work. These jobs are often hands-on and might include physically demanding occupations such asfactory work, machine maintenance,or construction.These people work jobs that may initially require little prior skill or experience and they often perform routine tasks under close supervision. At the more advanced level, these workers may hold certifications and be qualified as better paid "skilled" workers. These jobs are sensitive to recessions and other economic downturns, as well as to global movement of production overseas and the automation of factory work.When budgets are tight, this group is often the most likely to lose their jobs.

Most often working class people have less formal education and earn less money compared to the average middle class individual.

Figure 3.Bike messengers and bike delivery people are often considered members of the working class. They endure difficult and dangerous conditions to do their work, and they are not always well represented by government agencies and in regulations designed for safety or fairness. (Credit: edwardhblake/flickr)

The Lower Class

The lower class is comprised of the working poor. Like some members of the working class, they often have unskilled, low-paying employment with hourly wages. However, their jobs rarely offer benefits such as healthcare or retirement planning, and their positions are often seasonal or temporary. They work as sharecroppers, migrant farm workers, housecleaners, entry-level retail and service staff, and day laborers. Some are high school dropouts. Some are illiterate, unable to read job ads.

How can people work full-time and still be poor? Even working full-time, millions of the working poor earn incomes too meager to support a family. The government requires employers pay a minimum wage that varies from state to state, and often leave individuals and families below the poverty line. In addition to low wages, the value of the wage has not kept pace with inflation. "The real value of the federal minimum wage has dropped 17% since 2009 and 31% since 1968 (Cooper, Gould, & Zipperer, 2019). Furthermore, the living wage, the amount necessary to meet minimum standards, differs across the country because the cost of living differs. Therefore, the amount of income necessary to survive in an area such as New York City differs dramatically from small town in Oklahoma (Glasmeier, 2020).

The underclass is the United States' lowest tier. Members of the underclass live mainly in inner cities and many are unemployed or underemployed. Those who do hold jobs typically perform menial tasks (i.e., picking up plastic bottles) for little pay. Some of the underclass are homeless. For many, welfare systems provide a much-needed support through food assistance, medical care, housing, and the like.

Class Traits

Does a person's appearance indicate class? Can you tell a person's education level based on their clothing? Do you know a person's income by the car they drive?Class traits, also called class markers, are the typical behaviors, customs, and norms that define each class. Class traits indicate the level of exposure a person has to a wide range of cultures. Class traits also indicate the amount of resources a person has to spend on items like hobbies, vacations, and leisure activities.

People may associate the upper class with enjoyment of costly, refined, or highly cultivated tastesexpensive clothing, luxury cars, high-end fund-raisers, and frequent or expensive vacations. People may also believe that the middle and lower classes are more likely to enjoy camping, fishing, or hunting, shopping at large retailers, and participating in community activities. While these descriptions may identify class traits, they are stereotypes. Moreover, just as class distinctions have blurred in recent decades, so too have class traits. A factory worker could be a skilled French cook. A billionaire might dress in ripped jeans, and a low-income student might own designer shoes.

For famous wealthy people, making choices that do not seem to align with their economic status can often lead to public commentary. Jennifer Lopez being spotted in a dress that cost less than $30 and Zac Efron shopping at thrift stores have made the news. Others, like Halle Berry and Keanu Reeves, are known for frequent use of public transportation and relatively modest living (at least when considering to their net worth). When questioned, most point to nothing more than practicality. Lady Gaga tweeted " why do people look at me like I'm crazy when i use coupons at grocery or try bargaining at retail..." (2012). And in dense, crowded cities such as Washington, Chicago, and New York, riding the trains is often faster and easier than taking a car.

Status Consistency

Social stratification systems determine social position based on factors like income, education, and occupation. Sociologists use the term status consistency to describe the consistency, or lack thereof, of an individual's rank across these factors. Caste systems correlate with high status consistency, whereas the more flexible meritocracy class system has lower status consistency.

To illustrate, let's consider Susan. Susan earned her high school degree but did not go to college. That factor is a trait of the lower-middle class. She began doing landscaping work, which as manual labor is also a trait of the lower-middle class or even of the lower class. However, over time, Susan started her own company. She hired employees. She won larger contracts. She became a business owner and earned a lot of money. Those traits represent the upper-middle class. There are inconsistencies between Susan's educational level, her occupation, and her income. In a class system, a person can work hard and have little education and still be middle or upper class, whereas in a caste system that mobility would not be possible. In a class system, low status consistency correlates with having more choices and opportunities.

LEAVING ROYALTY BEHIND

Figure 4. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle with other members of the Royal family, in 2017. One year later, the couple would wed and the American-born actress and fashion-designer would immediately become Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex, a position and title that bestows significant benefits of social class (Credit: Mark Jones/Wikimedia Commons)

Meghan Markle, who married a member of the British royal family, for years endured unceasing negative media attention, invasion of privacy, and racially abusive comments. She and her husband-Prince Harry, grandson to Queen Elizabeth-undertook a series of legal actions to push back against overly aggressive media outlets. But because of the continued harassment and disagreements with others in the royal family, Meghan and Harry decided to step down from their royal obligations and begin a disassociation from the British monarchy. In doing so, they gave up honorary positions, titles, and financial support. For Meghan, who had been born in the U.S. and had earned her wealth through a successful career, these changes may not be so jarring. Prince Harry, however, had been "His Royal Highness" since he was born; by nature of his ancestry, he was entitled to vast sums of money, property, and cultural-political positions such as Honorary Air Commandant, Commodore-in-Chief, and President of the Queen's Commonwealth Trust. Harry would also lose the military rank he had earned through almost ten years of military service, including two combat deployments to Afghanistan. Would Megxit work for him? What gave him those honors in the first place?

Britain's monarchy arose during the Middle Ages. Its social hierarchy placed royalty at the top and commoners on the bottom. This was generally a closed system, with people born into positions of nobility. Wealth was passed from generation to generation throughprimogeniture, a law stating that all property would be inherited by the firstborn son. If the family had no son, the land went to the next closest male relation. Women could not inherit property, and their social standing was primarily determined through marriage.

The arrival of the Industrial Revolution changed Britain's social structure. Commoners moved to cities, got jobs, and made better livings. Gradually, people found new opportunities to increase their wealth and power. Today, the government is a constitutional monarchy with the prime minister and other ministers elected to their positions, and with the royal family's role being largely ceremonial. The long-ago differences between nobility and commoners have blurred, and the modern class system in Britain is similar to that of the United States (McKee 1996).

Today, the royal family still commands wealth, power, and a great deal of attention. When Queen Elizabeth II retires or passes away, Prince Charles will be first in line to ascend the throne. If he abdicates (chooses not to become king) or dies, the position will go to Prince William, Prince Harry's older brother.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, meanwhile, moved to Los Angeles and signed a voiceover deal with Disney while also joining Netflix in a series production. They founded an organization focusing on non-profit activities and media ventures. Living in LA and working to some extent in entertainment, they will likely be considered a different type of royalty.