Social class in the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is considerable controversy regarding social class in the United States, and it remains a vaguely defined intellectual concept with many contradicting theories. To this day economists and sociologists have not devised exact guidelines for classes in the United States. With no set class boundaries, the interpretation of class and social status is largely left up to the individual.^[1] While many Americans believe in a three-class model that includes the "rich", the middle class, and the "poor", in reality American society is much more economically and culturally diverse. The differences in wealth, income, education and occupation are indeed so great that one could justify the application of a social class model including dozens of classes. To date, there remains no exact answer pertaining to the number of social classes.^[2][3] A common approach to the economic and cultural diversity of those in between the extremes of wealth—those in the vernacular statistical middle class—has been to divide the middle class. Sociologists Dennis Gilbert, William Thompson and Joseph Hickey as well as James Henslin have proposed class systems with six distinct social classes. These class models feature an upper or capitalist class consisting of the rich and powerful, an upper middle class consisting of highly educated and well-paid professionals, a lower middle class consisting of semi-professionals, a working class constituted by low-rung white collar as well as blue collar workers and a lower class which is according to Gilbert is divided between the working poor and underclass.^[2][4][5]

“

"A stratified society is one marked by inequality, by differences among people that are regarded as being higher or lower... it is logically possible for a society to be stratified in a continuous gradation between high and low without any sharp lines... in reality... there is only a limited number of types of occupations... People in similar positions... grow similar in their thinking and lifestyle... they form a pattern, and this pattern creates social class."- Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998[2]

”

According to the nominal approach, however, American society is sociologically and economically fragmented in such a manner that no clear class distinctions can be formed. This means that there are no pronounced breaks in socio-economic strata, which makes class division highly subjective and disputable.^[1] Others such as sociologist Dennis Gilbert, however, dispute the idea pointing to distinct social networks, clearly identifiable as classes. Despite the lack of distinctive class boundaries and the vast majority of Americans being under the belief that they are members of the middle class, certain general assumptions have been expressed by leading social scientists, think tanks, research institutions, and social critics.^[3] While it is generally agreed upon that American society has a highly developed and complicated class system, Americans often attempt to deny the existence of social class.^[6]

Contents 1 What is social class? 2 Income 2.1 Dual income controversy 2.2 Top percentiles 3 Education 4 Culture 5 Commonly used terminology 5.1 Upper class 5.1.1 Corporate elite 5.2 Middle class 5.2.1 Upper middle 5.2.2 Vernacular middle class 5.2.3 Lower middle class 5.3 Working class 5.4 Lower class 6 Agriculture 6.1 Farmworkers 6.2 Farmers 7 Middle class squeeze 8 Class ascendancy 9 Social class at a glance 10 Academic models 10.1 Gilbert & Kahl 10.2 Thompson & Hickey 11 References 12 Further readings 13 See also 13.1 US related topics 14 External links

[edit] What is social class?

Social class is the hierarchy in which individuals find themselves. The social class system is mainly a description of how the society has distributed its members among positions of varying importance, influence, and prestige. Those taking the functionalist approach to sociology and economics view social classes as components essential for the survival of complex societies such as American society.^[4] Class may be described as an indication of the different positions a person may occupy within society, positions which are not equal, some are more agreeable than others and satisfy the incumbent intrinsically, while other occupations are more menial, repetitive and unpleasant. Some occupations or other societal positions may be, to some extent, influential and essential to the well-being of society itself, requiring a highly qualified incumbent. Societal functions are commonly rewarded with prestige and income, which may serve as class indicator alongside the training required to obtain such a function. One should note that a person's function in society does not only refer to his or her occupational role. A skill and function as well as position can also be non-occupational such as the role of being a parent or volunteer mentor, for example, and carrying out the function of aiding in the socialization of society's newest members. Yet other positions or statuses within society, such as being the son or daughter of a wealthy individual, seem to lack many directly functional characteristics beyond guiding some social interactions which that individual may encounter. So while not all functions and positions in society are those associated with occupation, the job role remains the one of the most important status features in the United States. Social class continues to play a prominent role in the mundane lives of the members of American society. ^[4]

“

It is impossible to understand people's behavior... without the concept of social stratification, because class position has a pervasive influence on almost everything... the clothes we wear... the television shows we watch... the colors we paint our homes in and the names we give our pets... Our position in the social hierarchy affects our health, happiness, and even how long we will live." -William Thompson, Joseph Hickey; Society in Focus, 2005.[4]

”

Occupational positions do, however, form the perhaps best examples. For example occupations that feature no influence over society whatsoever, requiring only minimal qualifications on the part of prospective incumbents. It is therefore improbable to have a classless society. Social classes distribute persons so that the most qualified are able to gain positions of power and all persons fulfill their occupation duties to the greatest extent of their ability. In order to make sure that important and complex tasks are handled by qualified and motivated personnel, society offers incentives such as income and prestige. The scarcer qualified applicants are and the more essential the given task is, the larger the incentives will be, income and prestige which are often used to tell a person's social class are merely the incentives given to that person for meeting all qualifications to complete a task which is of importance to the society due to its functional value.^[7] One should note that a person's function in society does not only refer to his or her occupational role. A skill and function as well as position can also be non-occupational such as the role of being a parent or volunteer mentor, for example, and carrying out the function of aiding in the socialization of society's newest members. So while not all functions and positions in society are those associated with occupation, the job role remains the one of the most important status features in the United States. ^[4]

“

"We are proud of those facts of American life that fit the pattern we are thought but somehow we are often ashamed of those equally important social facts which demonstrate the presence of social class. Consequently, we tend to deny them, or worse, denounce them and by doing so we tend to deny their existence and magically make them disappear from consciousness."- W. Lloyd Warner, What Social Class Is In America

”

The idea of a classless society somewhat persists in the United States; which explains the notion of the vast majority of Americans who place themselves in the same class, the middle class. The truth however, is that all complex societies such as the United States need an equally complex social hierarchy. Social class itself is as old as civilization itself and has been present in nearly every society from before the Roman Empire, through medieval times, and to the modern-day United States.^[6] Even though the lack of set guidelines makes defining social class a subjective topic, there are certain prominent theories which can be used, to some extent, to outline the American class system.

[edit] Income

Main articles: Personal income in the United States and Household income in the United States

Income in the United States is most commonly measured by US Census Bureau in terms of either household or individual and remains one of the most prominent indicators of class status. As 42% of all households, 76% of those in the top quintiles, had two income earners the discrepancy between household and personal income is quite considerable. In 2005 the top 15% of income earners made $62,500 or more, while 18% of households had incomes over $100,000. Personal income is largely the result of scarcity. As individuals who hold higher status positions tend to possess rare skills or assume positions society deems very essential, have higher incomes. Overall the median household income was $46,326 in 2005^[10] while the median personal income (including only those above the age of 25) was $32,140.^[11]

Per capita household income, the income a household is able to allocate to each member of the household is also an important variable in determining a given household's standard of living. A high household income may be off-set by a large household size; thus, resulting in a low per capita household income.^[2] In 2005, the median household income per capita was $24,672.^[10]

“

"It should be stressed... that a position does not bring power and prestige because it draws a high income. Rather, it draws a high income because it is functionally important and the available personnel are for one reason or another scarce. It is therefore superficial and erroneous to regard high income as the cause of a man's power and prestige, just as it is erroneous to think that a man's fever is the cause of his disease... The economic source of power and prestige is not income primarily, but the ownership of capital goods (including patents, good will, and professional reputation). Such ownership should be distinguished from the possession of consumers' goods, which is an index rather than a cause of social standing." - Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore, Principles of Stratification.

”

As mentioned above, income is one of the most prominent features of social class, it is not one of its causes. In other words, income does not determine the status of an individual or household but rather reflects upon that status. Income and prestige are the incentives provided by society in order to fill needed positions with the most qualified and motivated personnel possible.^[7] These definitions equate class with income, permitting people to move from class to class as their income changes.

[edit] Dual income controversy

Income is one of the most commonly used attributes of a household to determine its class status. The relationship between income, which mostly arises from the scarcity of a certain skill, may however, prove to be more complex than initially perceived.^[7] While the idea is that income reflects status, household income may just be the product of two or more incomes. In 2005, 42% of all American households had two income earners. The vast majority (77%) of households in the top quintile had two or more income earners. This means that the majority of household income in the top quintile are the result of two income earners pooling their resources, establishing a close link between perceived affluence and the number of income earners in a given household.^[12][5] The question of whether or not the combination of incomes results in higher social status. Of course, there is no definite answer as class is a vague sociological concept.^[4]

“

The parade [of income earners with height representing income] suggest that [the] relationship between the distribution of income and the class structure is... blurred in the middle... we saw dual-income working class marchers looking down on single-income upper-middle class marchers. In sum, the class structure as we have defined it... does not exactly match the distribution of household income."- Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998[2]

”

Sociologist Dennis Gilbert states that it is possible for households to out-earn other households over higher class standing through increasing their number of income earners. He furthermore states that household size also played an essential role, as the standard of living for two persons living of one upper middle class personal income may very well be higher than that of a household with four members living of two working class personal incomes.^[2] The combination of two or more incomes, allow for households to increase their income substantially without moving higher on the occupational ladder or attaining higher educational degrees. Thus it is important to remember that the seemingly favorable economic position of households in the top two quintiles is in most cases merely the result of combined income.^[12]

[edit] Top percentiles

The table below features the lower thresholds for the top third, top quarter, top quintile (20%), top 15%, top 5%, top 3% and top 1.5%.^[13] It should also be noted that nearly all of those households in the top quintile and the top 15% are more privileged members of the middle class that are not actually part of the upper class.

Data	Top third	Top quarter	Top quintile	Top 15%	Top 10%	Top 5%	Top 3%	Top 1.5%
Household income
Lower threshold (annual gross income)	$65,000	$77,500	$88,030	$100,000	$118,200	$157,176	$200,000	$250,000
Exact Percentage of households (2005)	33.03%	25.13%	20.00%	15.82%	10.00%	5.00%	2.67%	1.50%
Personal income (age 25+)
Lower threshold (annual gross income)	$37,500	$47,500	$52,500	$62,500	$75,000	$100,000	N/A
Exact Percentage of individuals	33.55%	24.03%	19.74	14.47%	10.29%	5.63%	N/A

[edit] Education

Main article: Educational attainment in the United States

Tertiary education or "Higher education," is required for many middle-class professions, depending on how the term middle class is to be defined. Tertiary education is rarely free, but the costs vary widely: tuition at elite private colleges often exceeds $120,000 for a four-year program. On the other hand, public colleges and universities typically charge much less (for state residents), and many, such as the University of California system, rival the elite private schools in reputation and quality. Also, scholarships offered by universities and government do exist, and low-interest loans are available. Still, the average cost of education, by all accounts, is increasing. The attainment of post-secondary and graduate degrees is the perhaps most important feature of a middle and upper middle class person with the university being regarded as the most essential institution and gatekeeper of the professional middle class.^[15][4] Educational attainment is also directly linked to income.

In 2005, the vast majority of those with doctorate and professional degrees were among the nation's top 15% of income earners.^[16] Those with Bachelor degrees had incomes considerably above the national median while the median income for those some college education remained near the national median. According to US Census Bureau, 9% of persons aged 25 or older had a graduate degree, 27.9% had a Bachelor's degree or more with 53% having attended college.^[17][18] With 85% of the population having graduated high school, it becomes apparent that the average American does not have college degree, but is likely to have attended college for some time and has graduated high school. Overall, educational attainment serves as the perhaps most essential class feature of most Americans, being directly linked to income and occupation.^[14]

Year	Less than 9th grade	No high school diploma	High school graduate	Some college	Associates degree	Bachelor's degree or more	Bachelor's degree	Graduate degree	Masters degree	Professionals degree	Doctorate
2005	6.1%	8.4%	31.7%	16.7%	8.73%	27.9%	18.3%	9.7%	6.8%	1.6%	1.3%
Median personal income	$17,422	$20,321	$26,505	$31,054	$35,009	$49,303	$43,143	X	$52,390	$82,473	$70,853

SOURCE: US Census Bureau, 2005^[19]

[edit] Culture

Social classes feature their own sub-cultures and have therefore developed slightly different manners of socializing their off-spring.^[4] Due to class mobility individuals may also assimilate to the culture of another class when ascending or descending in the social order. One does however need to remember that all social classes in the United States, except the upper class, consist of tens-of-millions of people. Thus social classes form social groups so large that they feature considerable diversity within and any statement regarding a given social class' culture needs to be seen as a broad generalization. Since 1970 several sociologists such as Paula LeMasters and Melvin Kohl have set out repeatedly to research class based cultures. Class culture has been shown to have a strong influence on the mundane lives of people, affecting everything from the manner in which they raise their children, initiation and maintenance of romantic relationship to the color in which they paint their houses.^[4] The strongest cultural differences seem to run along the professional middle class-working class divide. A recent increase in residential class segregation and the overall tendency of individual to associate mostly with those of equal standing as themselves has further strengthened class differences.^[2][20]

Parental views are the perhaps most essential factor in determining the socialization process which shapes new members of society.^[4] The values and standards used in child rearing are commonly closely related to the parent's occupational status.^[2] Parents from the professional class tend to raise their children to become curious independent thinkers, while working class parents raise their children to have a more communal perspective with a strong respect for authority.^[2] Middle class parents tend to emphasize internal standards and values while working class parents emphasize external values.^[2] Sociologist Dennis Gilbert uses a list of values identified by Melvin Kohn to be typical of the professional middle and working class. Middle class parents values for their children and themselves included: "Consideration of Others, Self-Control, Curiosity, Happiness, Honesty, Tolerance of Nonconformity, Open to Innovation... Self-Direction." This contrast to surveyed working class individuals who reported "Manners, Obedience... Neatness, Cleanliness, Strong Punishment of Deviant Behavior, Stock to Old Ways, People not Trustworthy... Strict Leadership" as values for themselves and their children. There is a strong correlation between these values and the occupational activities of the respondents. The job characteristics of middle class respondents included: "Work Independently, Varied Tasks, Work with People or Data," versus working class parents of reported "Close Supervision [and] Repetitive Work..."^[2]

“

Not once in a professional middle-class home did I see a young boy shake his father's hand in a well-taught manly gesture... Not once did I hear a middle-class parent scornfully-or even sympathetically-call a crying boy a sissy or in any way reprimand him for his tears... even as young as six or seven, the working class boys seemed more emotionally controlled-more like miniature men-than those in the middle-class families.- Sociologist Lillian Rubin

”

Gender roles are also viewed differently by those in the higher and lower social classes. Middle class individuals, who were more open towards "Nonconformity" and emphasized individual self-direction as well as critical thinking, were also less stringent in their application of gender roles. Working class individuals, on the other hand, emphasized gender roles. While working class people have more and more assimilated to middle class culture regarding their view and application of gender roles, some differences remain. Professional class people are more likely to have an equalitarian distribution of work in their household with both spouses being equals in heterosexual marriages. According to Dennis Gilbert, "College life, generally a prologue to upper-middle class careers, delays marriage and encourages informal, relatively egalitarian association between men and women."^[2][5]

[edit] Commonly used terminology

The following are commonly used terms by social scientists and critics. It is again important to remember that each term bears the roots of several different ideologies which may conflict with each other. Overall, the use and definition of these terms often greatly varies with each speaker, due to their tastes or ideologies. Therefore the clarification of terminology is only possible as a gross generalization of what is most commonly used by research institutes as well as social critics.

[edit] Upper class

Further information: American upper class

This term is applied to a wide array of elites that exist in the United States. The term commonly includes all "blue bloods" (multi-generational wealth combined with leadership of high society) such as the Astor or Roosevelt families. There is disagreement over whether or not the "nouveau riche" should be included as members of the upper class or whether or not this term should exclusively be used for established families. Twentieth century sociologist W. Lloyd Warner divided the upper class into two sections: the upper-upper class and lower-upper class. The former includes established upper-class families while the latter includes all those with great wealth. As there is no defined lower threshold for the upper class it is difficult, if not outright impossible, to determine the exact number or percentage of American households that could be identified as being members of the upper-class(es).

Income and wealth statistics may serve as a helpful guideline as they can be measured in a more objective manner. In 2005, approximately one and half percent (1.5%) of households in the United States had incomes exceeding $250,000 with the top 5% having incomes exceeding $157,000.^[13] Furthermore only 2.6% of household held assets (excluding home equity) of more than one-million dollars. One could therefore fall under the assumption that less than five percent of American society are members of rich households.

Members of the upper class control and own significant portions of the corporate America and may exercise indirect power through the investment of capital. In recent years the salaries and, especially, the potential wealth through stock options, has greatly increased for the corporate elite. Inherited wealth leading to idleness is held in low regard and people who have it usually have prestigious occupations.^[21]

Yet another important feature of the upper class is that of inherited privilege. While most Americans, including those in the upper-middle class need to actively maintain their status, upper class persons do not need to work in order to maintain their status. Status tends to be passed on from generation to generation without each generation having to re-certify its status.^[15] Overall, the upper class is the financially best compensated and one of the most influential socio-economic classes in American society.

[edit] Corporate elite

The high salaries and, especially, the potential wealth through stock options, has supported the term corporate elite. Top executives, including Chief Executive Officers, are among the financially best compensated occupations in the United States. The median annual earnings for a CEO in the United States were $140,350^[22] (exceeding the income of more than 90% of US households). The Wall Street Journal reports the median compensation for CEOs of 350 major corporations was $6,000,000 in 2005 with most of the money coming from stock options.^[23] In New York City in 2005, the median income (including bonuses) of a corporate "Chief Operating Officer" (the #2 job) was $377,000.^[24] The total compensation for a "Top IT Officer" in charge of information technology in New York City was $218,000.^[25] Thus even below the CEO level of top corporations, financial compensation will usually be sufficient to propel a households with a mere one income earner in the top 1%. In 2005 only 1.5% of American households had incomes above $250,000 with many reaching this level only through having two income earners.^[13][8][26]

“

"Top executives are among the highest paid workers in the U.S. economy. However, salary levels vary substantially depending on the level of managerial responsibility; length of service; and type, size, and location of the firm. For example, a top manager in a very large corporation can earn significantly more than a counterpart in a small firm. Median annual earnings of general and operations managers in May 2004 were $77,420. The middle 50 percent earned between $52,420 and $118,310. Because the specific responsibilities of general and operations managers vary significantly within industries, earnings also tend to vary considerably... [the] Median annual earnings of chief executives in May 2004 were $140,350; although chief executives in some industries earned considerably more... the median income of chief executive officers in the nonprofit sector was $88,006 in 2005, but some of the highest paid made more than $700,000. "- US Department of Labor

”

Many politically powerful people make money before coming to office, but in general the political power elite have official incomes in the $150,000 to $185,000 range; members of Congress are paid $165,000, and are effectively required to have a residence in their district as well as one in Washington.^[27]

[edit] Middle class

Main article: American middle class

The middle class is perhaps the mostly vaguely defined of all the social classes.^[3] The term can be used either to describe a relative elite of professionals and managers^[15] (also called the upper middle class) or it can be used to describe all those in-between the extremes of wealth, disregarding considerable differences in income, culture, educational attainment, influence, and occupation. As with all the social classes in the US there are no definite answers as to what is and what is not middle class. Sociologists such as Dennis Gilbert, James Henslin, William Thompson and Joseph Hickey have brought forth class models in which the middle class is divided into two sections that combined constitute 47% to 49% of the population. The upper middle or professional class constitutes the upper end of the middle class on consists of highly educated, well-paid, professionals with considerable work autonomy. The lower end of the middle class, called either lower middle class or just middle class consists of semi-professionals, craftsmen and salesmen who often have just some college education and are more closely supervised.^[2][4][5]

“

"Everyone wants to believe they are middle class. For people on the bottom and the top of the wage scale the phrase connotes a certain Regular Joe cachet. But this eagerness to be part of the group has led the definition to be stretched like a bungee cord"- Dante Chinni, the Christian Science Monitor

”

[edit] Upper middle

Further information: American middle class#The Professional/Managerial middle class and The Professional/Managerial middle class

This class consists of highly educated salaried professionals whose work is largely self-directed. Many have graduate degrees with educational attainment serving as the main distinguishing feature of this class. Household incomes commonly may exceed $100,000, with some smaller one-income earners household having incomes in the high 5-figure range.^{[4] [2]} Members of this class commonly hold advanced academic degrees and are often in involved with professional organizations such as the ASA, APA, or ACTFL. Due to the nature of professional and managerial occupations, the upper middle class tends to have great influence over the course of society.^[2] Many of those occupations which are essential to the forming of public opinion such Journalists, authors, commentators, professors, scientist and advertisers are largely upper middle class.^[15] The very well educated, are seen as trend setters with movements such as anti-smoking movements, pro-fitness movement, organic food movement, environmentalism being largely indigenous to this particular socio-economic grouping. Education serves as perhaps the most important value and also the most dominant entry barrier of the upper middle class.^[20][4]

Sociologists such as Dennis Gilbert, Willam Thompson and Joseph Hickey estimate the upper middle class to constitute roughly 15% of the population. The main hallmark and most distinguishing feature of this class is its high educational attainment. Using the 15% figure one may conclude that the American upper middle class consist of professionals making more than $62,500 who commonly reside in households with a six figure income.^{[28][29] [4][30]}

[edit] Vernacular middle class

Further information: Statistical middle class
Those households located more or less at the center of society may be referred to as being part of the American middle or middle-middle class in vernacular language use. In the academic models featured in this article, however, the middle class does not constitute the majority of the population nor does it include those in the middle of society. The most prominent academic models split the middle class into two sections. Yet, it is common for the term middle class to be applied for anyone in between either extreme of the socio-economic strata. The middle class is then often sub-divided into an upper-middle, middle-middle and lower-middle class. In colloquial descriptions of the class system the middle-middle class may described as consisting of those in the middle of the social strata. Politicians and news anchors such as Lou Dobbs can be seen using the term middle class in this manner, especially when discussing the middle class squeeze.^[3][31] The wide discrepancy between the academic models and public opinions that lump highly educated professionals together in the same class with secretaries, may lead to the conclusion that public opinion on the subject has become largely ambiguous.^[2]

“

"Based on those [income data] numbers, the statistical middle class can't afford the middle-class lifestyle. I think that's why there is so much confusion about what it is and why so many people have trouble identifying themselves as anything but middle class." - Anirban Basu, chairman and CEO of Optimal Solutions Group

”

[edit] Lower middle class

Main article: Lower middle class

The lower middle class is, as the name implies, generally defined as those less privileged than the middle class. People in this class commonly work in supporting occupations and seldom hold advanced academic degrees. There is also considerable debate of whether or not this class is truly part of the middle class and whether or not its members should be identified as being working class or even poor instead of middle class.^[32]

Sociologists Dennis Gilbert, William Thompson and Joseph Hickey, however, only divide the middle class into two groups. In their class modes the middle class only consists of an upper and lower middle class. The upper middle class, as described above, constitutes roughly 15% of the population with highly educated white collar professionals who commonly make $62,500 or more and reside in households with a six figure income. Semi-professionals with Bachelor's degrees and some college degrees constitute the lower middle class. Their class models show the lower middle class positioned slightly above the middle of the socio-economic strata. Those in blue and pink collar as well as clerical occupations are referred to as working class in these class models.^[4][30]

[edit] Working class

The working class in the United States is as vaguely defined as the middle class with whom it overlaps according to some definitions. While some might argue that the working class is synonymous with the lower middle class, it may also be argued that the working class constitutes the majority of the American population (aka: the Silent majority).^[15][33] A distinctive feature of this class may include that fact that workers from this class merely take orders and are neither compensated for their ideas nor are they involved in the decision making process of the organization for which they work.^[15] Yet another more dated definition is that the working class commonly consists of blue-collar workers, while non-professional white collar workers are lower middle class. The guideline stating that working class workers are not paid to think, but rather carry out tasks persists however, through many different ideologies regarding this class. Much like the lower middle class (which may be the same class according to some theories) the working class has little economic security and is extremely susceptible to fluctuations in the economy. Currently out-sourcing and cost-cutting related lay-offs are much more a pressing issues for persons of this class, than in the higher classes.^[7]

“

"Laborers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a commodity, like every other article of commerce, and are consequently exposed to... all the fluctuations of the market... owing to the... division of labor, the work of proletarians has lost all individual character... the workman... becomes an appendage of the... easily acquired knack, that is required of him." - Karl Marx, 1848

”

While Karl Marx's statement may be over one-hundred fifty years old, it still related to modern society in that working class persons are very much prone to economic downturns. While the actual persons are not a commodity themselves, their labor is. Labor is one of the primary factors of production alongside, land, capital, and entrepreneurship.^[34] Unlike professionals, who are paid to conceptualize, create, think, and advise, working class employees usually complete assigned tasks, as they often lack the proper training necessary for more influential positions. Today, however, this division of labor is largely due to the fact that the direction of resources requires expertise that often cannot be gained without a college education. As working class persons tend to lack higher education they are commonly not qualified to design, create, or advise.^[15] Thus today's market labor division arose from necessity not political reasons. It should also be noted, that the modern working class works less than the upper middle class or the top 5%. While 81% of persons in the top quintile worked more than fifty hours a week, only two-thirds of those in the second quintile worked more than fifty hours a week.^[13]

[edit] Lower class

The term lower class is commonly applied to those at the bottom of the social hierarchy. Definitions of this term vary greatly. While Lloyd Warner found the vast majority of the American population to be in either the upper-lower class or lower-lower class in 1949, many modern-day experts such as Michael Zweig, an economist for NYU-Stony Brook, argue that the working class constitutes the majority of the population.^[33] Dennis Gilbert places 13% of households among the "working poor" with 12% being in the "underclass." Thompson & Hickey place roughly 17% to 20% of households in the lower classes. The lower classes constituting roughly a fifth to a quarter of American society consists mainly of low-rung retail and service workers as well as the frequently unemployed and those not able to work.^[2][4][5] Overall, 13% of the population fall below the poverty threshold. Hunger and food insecurity were present in the mundane lives of 3.9% of American households, while roughly twenty-five million Americans (ca. 9%) participated in the food stamp program.^[35]

[edit] Agriculture

Further information: Agricultural history of the United States  and Social class in American history

[edit] Farmworkers

The American norm has always been the "yeoman farmer" -- a self-sufficient, politically independent landowner. A main successful political goal of Jeffersonian democracy and Jacksonian Democracy was expansion of the political rights of the yeomen, and also geographical expansion of the nation to provide them farms. This culminated in the Homestead Act of 1862 which provided hundreds of thousands of free farms. Before 1865 large southern plantations used slaves. After emancipation, a system of sharecropping and tenant farming for both whites and blacks in the South provided a semi-independent status for farmers who did not own their land. In contemporary times migrant agricultural workers, mostly Hispanic, perform field and packing work.^[36]

[edit] Farmers

Only 0.7 of the population of the United States is employed in the agricultural sector.^[37] Most are proprietors of independent farms. Once the dominant American social class, this group diminished in overall numbers during the 20th century, as farm holdings grew more consolidated, farming operations became more mechanized, and the majority of the population migrated to urban areas.^[2] Today, the agricultural sector has essentially taken on the characteristics of business and industry generally. In contemporary usage, a "farmer" is someone who owns and operates a farm, which more often than not will be a sizable business enterprise; "agricultural workers" or "farm workers", who perform the actual work associated with farming, typically come out of the lower classes; indeed, they are often near-destitute immigrants or migrant farm workers. In this respect, farming mirrors big business: like any enterprise, a farm has owners (who may be a family or a corporation), salaried managers, supervisors, foremen and workers. With the number of farms steadily diminishing, the stereotypical humble homestead is increasingly the exception, for viable farming now means agribusiness; the large amounts of capital required to operate a competitive farm require large-scale organization. The large landowners in California's Central Valley, Coachella Valley and Imperial Valley fall squarely within the upper class. Among farmers, "income" in the conventional sense is not an accurate standard of wealth measurement, because many farmers typically keep their official income low by placing their assets into farming corporations rather than drawing the money directly. The stereotypical poor, marginal farmer "eking out a living" from the soil, an image deeply ingrained in most Americans' minds by folklore, films, and even history texts, has now been largely displaced by agribusiness, which has bought them out and consolidated their holdings.^[38]

[edit] Middle class squeeze

For over 100 years a common fear is that a spreading wealth gap is causing a "collapse of the middle" in American society. Thus the 1906 cartoon showing the middle class family in dire straits.

In the 21st century this fear takes the form of alarm at super salaries for celebrities and top executives, illegal immigration, downsizing in many sectors of the American economy, competition from lower-paid foreign workers and contractors, and the decline of unionized labor. The scenario most commonly recorded currently by the country's top news publications is that the statistical middle is splitting into two; a well-off, high-income middle class —the professional middle class— and a lower-income middle class. This phenomenon has lead to a two-tier labor market in which educational attainment has become the primary divide. The two tier labor market has lead to increasingly class segregated neighborhoods.^[39] It should, however, be noted that the title of "middle class squeeze" primarily affects those, who according to the academic class models featured in this article, are working class. Whether or not the middle class squeeze affects middle or working class household is subject to the speakers understanding of what is middle class.

“

"American families are smack up against the wall, financially speaking." A middle-class lifestyle, she says, is increasingly out of reach for middle-class families, many of whom are going broke trying to attain it... Compared with a generation ago, she found, today's middle-class families earn about 75 percent more (all figures are adjusted for inflation), thanks in large part to Mom's entrance into the work force. But after shelling out for four fixed expenses - mortgage, health insurance, child care or education, and car payments - today's median-income family has less left over, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than the single-income family of the 1970s. "Families are not going broke over lattes," Warren quips. "Families are going broke over mortgages."- Elizabeth Warren, Harvard Magazine.[31]

”

The rising costs of some items often deemed as ironically middle class, such as a suburban three bedroom home, a college education, and private school. Those at the middle of the economic strata have become increasingly overspent, causing them to accumulate large amounts of consumer debt.^[4] Furthermore many mid-income households now rely on two income earners instead of one. This means that the second income is no longer merely supplementary but essential in order for the household to maintain an iconic middle class standard of living. Both a decline in real wages and the rising costs of "middle class essentials" are commonly cited as reasons for increasing bancrupcy rates, overspending, and reliance on two income earners.^[31]

[edit] Class ascendancy

Class ascendancy is a central theme in American literature and culture. The more classic understanding of the American dream, however, is that each successive generation will have a higher standard of living than its predecessor. This theme is not, however, unique to American culture; literary examples from other contexts include Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice and Stendhal's The Red and the Black. Some have posited that the dream of class ascendancy is the essence of the American dream. While social class in the United States is based on a set of achieved, rather than described status, climbing the social ladder may present itself to be a difficult venture. Occupation, perhaps the most important class component, educational attainment as well as income can be earned and increased through a lifetime. It is however widely recognized that playing field is not even and that attaining a certain status within the American social structure may be easier for those who are already in relatively advantageous positions.^[4][15]

[edit] Social class at a glance

[edit] Academic models

Over the years sociologists have produced several class models pertaining to US society. Dennis Gilbert, one of the sociologists whose class model is listed below stated that "Some class models are more convincing than others because they make better use of the facts and illuminate matters that concern us... But there is really no way to establish that a particular model is 'true' and another 'false.'"^[2]

[edit] Gilbert & Kahl

Dennis Gilbert lays out a precise breakdown of American social classes, stressing that "there is really no way to establish that a particular model is 'true' and another 'false.'" He furthermore states that his "model emphasizes sources of income" and that household income, being very dependent on the number of income earners, varies greatly within each social class.^[2]

• Capitalist class; (ca. 1%) "Subdivided into nationals and locals, whose income is derived largely from return on assets." (p. 285) Yet it should be noted that the top 1.5% of households made $250,000 or more with only 146,000, 0.01% of households having incomes of $1,600,000 or more.
• Upper middle class; (ca. 14%) "...college trained professionals and managers (a few of whom ascend to such heights of bureaucratic dominance or accumulated wealth that they become part of the capitalist class)." Educational attainment is the main feature of this class. They enjoy great job autonomy and economic security. Household incomes vary greatly depending of the number of income earners. Considering US Census Bureau According to the 2005 Economic Survey, the top 15% of income earners made $62,500 or more with the top 15% of households having six figure incomes.^[40][41]
• Middle class; (ca. 30%) "...members have significant skills and perform varied tasks at work, under loose supervision. They earn enough to afford a comfortable, mainstream lifestyle. Most wear white collars, but some wear blue." In 2005 incomes for this group would have ranged from $50,000 to $90,000 for households and $27,500 to $52,500 for individuals.^[40][41]
• Working class; (ca. 30%) "People who are less skilled than members of the middle class and work at highly routinized, closely supervised manual and clerical jobs. Their work provides them with a relatively stable income sufficient to maintain a living standard just below the mainstream." Incomes in 2005 would have ranged from $10,000 to $27,500 for individuals and $20,000 to $50,000 for households.^[40][41]
• Working poor; (ca. 13%) "...people employed in low-skill jobs, often at marginal firms. The members of this class are typically laborers, service workers, or low-paid operators. Their incomes leave them wee below mainstream living standards. Moreover, they cannot depend on steady employment." In 2004 the bottom 12.2% of households made less than $12,500.^[41]
• Underclass (ca. 12%) "...members have limited participation in the labor force and do not have wealth to fall back on. Many depend on government transfers." The average household income is $12,000 a year, and the class makes up 12% of the population.

[edit] Thompson & Hickey

In their 2005 sociology textbook, Society in Focus, sociologists William Thompson and Joseph Hickey present a five class model in which the middle class is divided into two sections and the term working class is applied to clerical and pink collar workers. Their class system goes as follows:^[4]

• Upper class, (ca. 1%-5%) individuals with considerable power over the nation's economic and political institutions. This group owns a disproportionate share of the nation's resources. The top 1% had incomes exceeding $250,000, with the top 5% having household incomes exceeding $140,000. This group features strong group solidarity and is largely constituted by the heirs to multi-generational fortunes. Prominent government officials, CEOs and successful entrepreneurs are among the upper class even if not of elite background.
• Upper middle class, (ca. 15%) white collar professionals with advanced post-secondary education such as physicians, professors, lawyers, corporate executives, and other management. While households commonly have six figure incomes in this group, some one income earner households and lesser paid professionals may not. While, high educational attainment commonly serves as staple mark of this group, entrepreneurs and business owners may also be upper middle class even if lacking advanced educational attainment.
• Lower middle class, (ca. 33%) individuals who worked their way through college and commonly have a Bachelor's degree or some college education. School teachers, sales-employees and lower to mid level supervisors rank among those in this particular group. Household income is generally in the range of $30,000 to $75,000. Workers in this group are mostly white collar but have less autonomy in their work than do upper middle class professionals. Members of this class often attempt to emulate those in the two higher classes and have recently become overly indebted by their desire to have a comfortable lifestyle.
• Working class, (ca. 30%) individuals who occupy both blue and white collar occupations. Pink collar workers in predominantly female clerical positions are common in this class. Job security tends to be low for this group and unemployment as well as losing health insurance remain potent economic threats. Household incomes typically range from $16,000 to $30,000.
• Lower class, repeated cycles of unemployment, working multiple low-level part-time jobs are common among this group. Many families fall below the poverty line from time to time when employment opportunities are scarce.

One should note that the authors of this class system considered more than merely income. As a result not all upper middle class households (who constitute 15% of households) are among the 15.8% of households who had a six figure income, thus not all upper middle class households had a six-figure income. Thompson and Hickey used educational attainment, income, and occupational prestige to determine class status.^[4]

[edit] References

[edit] Further readings

• Christopher Beach; Class, Language, and American Film Comedy Cambridge University Press, 2002
• Harold J. Bershady ed; Social Class and Democratic Leadership: Essays in Honor of E. Digby Baltzell 1989
• Daniel Bertaux, and Paul Thompson; Pathways to Social Class: A Qualitative Approach to Social Mobility Clarendon Press, 1997
• Barbara Ehrenreich. Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America (2002), author disguises herself as working class
• David B. Grusky (Editor) Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective (2000)
• Alan C. Kerckhoff; Socialization and Social Class 1972, textbook
• Jim Lardner, James Lardner, David A. Smith, editors, Inequality Matters: The Growing Economic Divide In America And Its Poisonous Consequences, WW Norton (January, 2006), hardcover, 224 pages, ISBN 1-56584-995-7
• Erik Olin Wright. Classe (1997) - a detailed Marxian guide to define working class/middle class etc.
• David Popenoe, Sociology, (ninth edition, Prentice Hall, 1993 ISBN 0-13-819798-9 ) pb. pp. 232-236,
• Wealth, Income, and Power - wealth distribution in the U.S. from a Power Structure Research perspective
• Myth: Income mobility makes up for income inequality - analysis from Liberal point of view

[edit] See also

• American middle class
• Personal income in the United States
• Household income in the United States
• Affluence in the United States
• Social stratification
• Social class in American history
• Social Class
• Highest income places in the United States
• Poorest places in the United States

[edit] US related topics

v • d • e Major topics in the United States
History	Timeline ( Colonial Era • Declaration of Independence and American Revolution • Westward Expansion • Civil War • World War I • Great Depression • World War II • Cold War • Vietnam War • Civil Rights) • Foreign relations • Military • Demographic • Industrial • Postal
Government	Law ( Constitution • Bill of Rights • Separation of powers) • Legislative branch ( House • Senate) • Executive Branch ( Cabinet • Federal agencies) • Judicial Branch ( Appeals)
Politics	Political parties ( Democrats • Republicans) • Elections (Electoral College) • Political scandals • Red state vs. blue state divide • Uncle Sam
Geography	Political divisions • Territory • States • Cities • Counties • Regions (New England • Mid-Atlantic • The South • Midwest • Great Plains • Northwest • Southwest) • Mountains ( Appalachian • Rocky) • Rivers (Mississippi • Colorado) • Valleys • Islands • Extreme points • National Park System
Economy	U.S. Dollar • Companies • Wall Street • Federal Reserve • Banking • Standard of living (Personal and Household income • Homeownership) • Communications • Transportation (Cars and Highways • Airports • Railroads) • Tourism
Society	Demographics • Languages (American English • Spanish) • Religion • Social structure (American Dream • Affluence • Middle class • Poverty • Educational attainment • Professional and working class conflict) • Media • Education • Holidays • Crime • Prisons
Arts	Music ( Classical • Folk • Popular) • Film and TV (Hollywood) • Literature (American Folklore • Poetry • Transcendentalism • Harlem Renaissance • Beat Generation) • Visual arts ( Abstract expressionism) • Cuisine • Dance • Architecture
Controversies	Immigration • Affirmative action • Racial profiling • Human rights • War on Drugs • Pornography • Same-sex marriage • Capital punishment • Adolescent sexuality • Anti-Americanism • American exceptionalism • United States Mexico barrier
WikiProject United States

[edit] External links

• US Census Bureau's offical online income statistics forum
• Income distribution and income by race, US Census Bureau 2005
• Household income by educational attainment, US Census Bureau
• Personal income in 2004, US Census Bureau
• Median Family Income by Family Size (in 2004 inflation-adjusted dollars) from Census.gov
• Median Family Income by Number of Earners in Family (in 2004 inflation-adjusted dollars) from Census.gov
• Working Definitions ClassMatters.com
• How Class Works, The New York Times

Social stratification: Social class v • d • e
Bourgeoisie	Upper class	Ruling class	Nobility	White-collar
Petite bourgeoisie	Upper middle class	Creative class	Gentry	Blue-collar
Proletariat	Middle class	Working class	Nouveau riche	Pink-collar
Lumpenproletariat	Lower middle class	Lower class	Old Money	Gold-collar
	Slave class	Underclass		Classlessness
Social class in the United States
Middle classes	Upper classes	Social structure	Income	Educational attainment