Wealth Inequality Research Paper

Paper 3 Social Stratification due to Wealth Inequality

Background The article upon which I am writing about is titled “If you thought income inequality was bad, get a load of wealth inequality”, it was published by the Huffington Post and authored by Christopher Ingraham. The article explains how a growing wealth gap between the top 20 percent of the United States population and the bottom 40 percent of the United States is the leading cause of socio-economic inequality in America. The author argues that wealth accumulated by the top earners in the United States economy is a greater source of economic inequality in America Wealth is defined by the article as how many assets an individual holds, ranging from stocks, to real-estate and cash.

The article draws from references as studies done by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on the how the measure of wealth inequality between the richest nations is exceedingly high and may eventually lead to economic stagnation and slower economic growth in a nation’s economy. The article states that the top 20 percent of the population of the United States own eighty nine percent of net worth in the country, while the bottom 40 percent own less than a percent of net worth. Net worth in the article is defined as the total value of assets after the total value of liabilities is subtracted. I will explain how social stratification between the top twenty and bottom forty percent is caused by wealth inequality through four key sociological theories and concepts.

Analysis

A: In the Structural Functionalist perspective both groups are interdependent, meaning one group cannot exist without the other. This would mean that whatever roles that the top earners play are essential for the roles of the bottom earners in this case, it means that economic inequality was a necessity for both groups to function in society, as it has a purpose for society as a whole as it

Ingraham was wealth inequality. The first inference I could make about the article was that it was informal. It addressed the audience directly in a second person perspective and presented the information using language and diction akin to a normal informal conversation between acquaintances as if the newspaper editor were a close associate of the audience. An example of this is the ninth paragraph, “But if you 've got a bachelor 's degree, a job and a house to show for it, you 're probably doing okay”. It appeared to me the article was not only for informing but also to espouse conflict theory due to the way it interchangeably used first person and second person perspective in its presentation of facts. An example of this is in the first paragraph” When we think about and discuss economic inequality in this country, we usually focus on income inequality”. This inclusive language made the editor appear to be in the same class as the audience which is obviously not in the top twenty percent earners, overall it appeared to the author believed in some form of class struggle or conflict theory.

Conclusion

C: The main idea of my paper was to explain how social stratification can also be caused by wealth inequality through different ideologies and perspectives of Sociology. My main points were how social stratification was a means to an end in each theory or perspective and the class your apart of in society may play a role in