Inequality is one of the major problems in the whole world which is not only in the developed countries, but also in the developing and the third world countries. Inequality is a problem that is more visible among the developing and third world countries with the majority of the people being poverty ridden while only a few people amassing much wealth. This problem is, however, not synonymous with the underdeveloped countries as the developed countries also face the same problem with a few people owning the capital while the rest makeup the working class. This paper examines the different sociological perspectives and looks at inequality from a sociological perspective. The paper also looks at income inequality and its relationship to the social problems from the different sociological perspectives. Economic insecurity and social satisfaction are also important aspects in inequality and also the cultural capital that are all examined using the theoretical perspectives of sociology in order to clearly examine and understand inequality in the world today.

Inequality takes many forms in the society today however; this paper focuses first on status or prestige as one of the many dimensions of inequality. Status is one of the dimensions that motivate the actions of people in the society as it is in our innate nature as human beings to be above the rest and high status. Status as a sociological dimension can be well understood through the use of the sociological perspectives. There are three main sociological perspectives: the functionalist perspective, the conflict perspective and the symbolic interactionist perspective which are used to describe the social behavior and social class of people (Townley and Mike, 2006). This paper, however, uses only the functionalist perspective and the conflict perspective. The functionalist school of thought is mainly based on the works of Herbert Spencer and Emile Durkheim (Townley and Mike, 2006). The functionalists describe the society as a system that consists of different parts that must together in peace if the society is to work together and grow together. They assert that the society is made up of differently interconnected aspects for instance the father is the head of the family then there is the mother and finally the children which makes that family a society. It follows that if the children were to head the family than the society would be dysfunctional (Lawler, 2008). A dysfunctional society is one that is plagued with given elements that disrupt the social stability of a community or society. A functional society is one that has elements that contribute to social stability. Looking at status using this sociological perspective one finds that functionalists are of the view that for a society to live in harmony and enhance social stability status and prestige must exist (Lawler, 2008). The functionalists assert that the status is essential in a community to ensure that we have the people who are our leaders, and those that everyone looks up to (Townley and Mike, 2006). Although status is unintended and, therefore, latent, it is an important aspect in our social lives and community for stability. For instance, a five star hotel charges expensively in order to increase its profits but in turn its employs many employees in the process because the people going to such hotels need to feel prestigious and have a higher status than the rest. Status is, therefore, important to improve the economy and also the living conditions of other people in the community (Heiner, 2010). It may be latent as it is not intended, but it ends up improving the society and enhancing stability in the society.

As opposed to the functionalist perspective which views the society as a composition of different parts working together the conflict perspective looks at which groups have power and greatly benefit from a given a particular social arrangement. The conflict school of thought origins can be traced to Karl Marx who asserted that every society goes through stages of economic development. The conflict school of thought asserts that societies evolve from on form to another creating a class of people, for example, if a society moves from an agricultural to industrial the priorities also move to making profits and, therefore, a capital system. It goes on to explain that this gives rise to a capital system which is made up of owners of capital and the workers who earn wages. The conflict perspective views the society as a division of two groups the powerful and owners of the capital or the “Haves” and the “Have Nots” (Lawler, 2008). This means that the status and prestige mainly consist of the powerful society or the owners of capital. This is, therefore, essential in any society as the division is critical in any society if the society is to develop. The working class may be exploited by the owners of capital, but they create the jobs for the people that help in acquiring their needs (Lawler, 2008). Looking at both schools of thought status is an integral part of the society as one group benefits from the services of the other both functionally and also in a conflict perspective.

Inequality in income has been cited as a source of health problems with societies that have a level of income unevenly distributed having poor population health. Research conducted reveals that there is a tendency of social problems such as mental illness, violence, imprisonment and poor school performance for children in societies where there are great disparities in the income distribution (Wilkinson, 2009). This compounds the status and prestige in a society perfectly as the prestigious or high status members of the society are able to access better health facilities and equipment while the rest of the society members languishing in poverty only get access to basic health care which is not sufficient for all conditions (Wilkinson, 2009). It is clear that the bigger the inequality gap in society the more health problems there are other factors that affect the lower income groups. Given the status of an individual the apartment or house he lives in is well ventilated and heated, in addition the, level of risk involved in their work is also low which makes the level of health risk high for the working class high hence the high level of health problems among their populations. There is also a factor of stress and status whereby the high status people in the society do not suffer from any form of stress as they are satisfied with the life and conditions they live in. For the working class, the opposite is true with the majority of the people suffering from stress even while at the hospital as they contemplate the condition of living for their loved ones while they are recuperating in hospital (Reed and Maria, 2005). All these factors contribute to the health problems in the population among countries that have large income disparity which are all compounded by the status of the people. The functionalists may argue that there needs to be a disparity in income for there to be people who are to serve the others in the hospitals, but there needs to be harmony in the society (Vegal, 2009). The levels of income disparity need not be and also the healthcare provision needs to be accessible by all members of the society. The conflict perspective views this as the division of the two groups in the society the “Haves” and “Have Nots” (Wilkinson et al, 2009). They assert that the larger the gap, the more the negative effects which are augmented by the health problems in the society in this case.

The inequality and disparity in terms of different class and status in the society are also clear in the economic insecurity and social stratification. Economic insecurity entails the risk of loss by the workers and households in a given society due to the unpredictability and volatility of the economy (Brown et al, 2010). Household and the workers usually get their incomes from the firms that are in most cases owned by the owners of capital. Their incomes are, therefore, highly volatile since, in most cases, they fluctuate depending on the owners of the capital (Western et al, 2012). Looking at the household level one understands the micro economic level which can be used to stabilize the economic well-being of the people. It is at the micro-level that one understands the risks and challenges faced by the households and, therefore, the problem of inequality can be addressed by examining these factors (Western et al, 2012). The functionalists assert that the households must exist to provide the labor for the firms that make the society exist in harmony. However, the school of thought is also of the view that there should be income security for the households as the owners of capital should also ensure that they contribute to the stability of the society by ensuring that the job and income do not fluctuate irregularly. The functionalists also say that the households are responsible for consuming the majority of the goods and services produced by the firms and, therefore, the status of the household and owners of capital must be maintained. The conflict perspective theorists view this as another case of division in the two groups, in the society where there are the owners of the capital exploiting the services of the households. Factors such as poor health, insecurity, and unemployment lead to income losses as the people invest a lot in the mitigating factors, and they end up losing many their incomes (Western et al, 2012). As a way of ensuring that there is harmonious existence in the society under the functionalism the firm should put up mechanisms to ensure that the households and the workers are well catered for, and they do not use most of their income on the mitigating the adverse effects. This may take the form of health benefits and insurance for its workers, provision of security around the area where the company is located, provision of education for the workers and their children in order to empower the society (Brown et al, 2010). The conflict perspective theorists, on the other hand, advocate for improvement in the standard of living to bridge the huge gap between the two groups and improve the status of the households and workers. Karl Marx adds that the level of income should be set in a way not to increase the gap but to ensure that the firm and the households. The theorists, however, said that the gap between the two groups widens with increased technology and the transformation of the society into a more capitalist society.

The disparity evident in the incomes and the adverse effects of this disparity have necessitated researchers to do extensive research into the cause of inequality in the society today looking at the different aspects that lead to the huge gap. While looking at the cause of inequality one needs to look at inequality in wages, wealth and opportunities (Neckerman, 2007). The wage inequality is compounded by looking at the lower tail inequality and the upper tail inequality trends over the recent past. Whereas the lower tail inequality trends does not change or widen the upper tail inequality trend grows bigger (Neckerman, 2007). The status and the prestige are the motivating factors which lead to a rise in the upper tail inequality trends. The people on the high status are motivated to achieve more and become more prestigious and, as a result increase their efforts and improve their level of wages and incomes (Sen, 2007). The lower tail has no influence on their level of wages as these are dictated by their employers and, as a result an improvement in the level wages is not feasible thereby the gap does not rise. This is also true for wealth inequality as the owners of capital can be able to change the level of wealth while the households and workers cannot (Ryscavage, 2004). Wealth is accumulated over years for a period when one might need the property or money to engage in a given venture. For the lower-tail people, the resources and income that they earn is usually used in the day-to-day acquisitions and activities and, therefore, they do not accumulate much wealth (Neckerman, 2007). The high status people in the society, however, have more than they need for their daily activities and, as a result accumulate much wealth (Hurst, 2002). This creates a huge gap in the wealth between the two groups of people in the society. There are also unequal opportunities in the society as a high status people and their children (Neckerman, 2007). Due to the level and form of education the poor and the rich people give to their children the poor families are more likely to remain poor and the rich families remain rich which is known as status quo (Neckerman, 2007). The status of the two groups is deemed to be continuing with the gap widening as the rich people are able to amass more wealth at the expense of the poor families thereby the gap widens. Inequality in the society, therefore, leads to an advantage for the rich families, and a disadvantage among the poor which is reinforced by economic inequality passed on to the next generation.

Inequality is an aspect that cannot be completely eliminated as there will always be a gap between the rich and the poor. According to the functionalists’ perspective, inequality is necessary in the society as one group must complement each other which mean that if all people were rich who would be working in the industries in order to grow the economy and the status? This does not, however, mean that the disparity should lead to other social problems such as health and insecurity as the functionalists advocate for the owners of capital to do their part in ensuring the workers and the households are well catered for in a society in order to foster growth and well-being of all the people. The conflict perspective also sees inequality as a societal reality which will continue into the future and asserts that the more the economy is capital intensive, the more the disparity. They also champion for an equal distribution of resources and opportunities to all to foster stability in the society, and although the status quo must be maintained there should be satisfaction for the two groups.

Bibliography

Brown, Clair, Barry J. Eichengreen, and Michael Reich. Labor in the era of globalization. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

Heiner, Robert. Conflicting interests: readings in social problems and inequality. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Hurst, Charles E.. Social inequality: forms, causes, and consequences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2002.

Keister, Lisa A.. Wealth in America: trends in wealth inequality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Lareau, Annette, and Elliot B. Weininger. “Cultural Capital In Educational Research: A critical assessment.” Theory and Society 32, no. 5/6 (2003): 567-606.

Lawler, Steph. Identity: sociological perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2008.

Neckerman, Kathryn M., and Florencia Torche. “Inequality: Causes And Consequences.” Annual Review of Sociology 33, no. 1 (2007): 335-357.

Parker, Karen, and Albert Fishlow. Growing apart: the causes and consequences of global wage inequality. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1999.

Reed, Deborah, and Maria Cancian. “Sources of Inequality: Measuring the Contributions of Income Sources to Rising Family Income Inequality.” Review of Income and Wealth 47, no. 3 (2005): 321-333.

Ryscavage, Paul. Income inequality in America: an analysis of trends. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, 2004.

Sen, Amartya K.. “From Income Inequality to Economic Inequality.” Southern Economic Journal 64, no. 2 (2007): 383.

Townley, Charles, and Mike Middletown. Sociological perspectives. London: Association for the Teaching of the Social Sciences], 2006.

Vegal, Denny. Inequality in health some theoretical and empirical problems. Stockholm: Institutet för social forskning, 2009.

Western, Bruce, Deirdre Bloome, Benjamin Sosnaud, and Laura Tach. “Economic Insecurity and Social Stratification.” Annual Review of Sociology 38, no. 1 (2012): 341-359.

Wilkinson, Richard G., and Kate E. Pickett. “Income Inequality and Social Dysfunction.” Annual Review of Sociology 35, no. 1 (2009): 493-511.

CLICK BUTTON TO ORDER NOW