UNDERSTANDING CULTURE, SOCIETY AND POLITICS

LESSON: SOCIAL INEQUALITY (QTR4/WEEK 4)

Introduction
Today, although we have the capacity to increase our ability to produce goods
has been such that it should be possible to abolish poverty. However, poverty still
persist, even in the most industrialized countries, and in the developing countries it
includes from a fourth to a half of the population.

Social stratification creates both “haves” and “have-nots.” All systems of social
inequality create poverty, or at least relative poverty, the lack of resources of some
people in relation to those who have more. A more serious but preventable problem is
absolute poverty, a lack of resources that is life-threatening.
In today’s global stratification, about 1.4 billion human beings—one person in
five—are at risk of absolute poverty. Even in the other affluent countries, families go
hungry, live in inadequate housing, and suffer poor health because of a serious lack of
resources. Social inequality focuses on the questions how poverty come about and how
we could address the problem.

What is Social Inequality

Social inequality refers to the unequal access to social, political and symbolic
capital of individuals in society. This phenomenon exists in every country whether that
country is rich or poor society. It is also considered as a dimension of social stratification
wherein individuals and institutions are categorized or differentiated into classes or
distinct groups, or socially constructed as disparate entities.
In the Philippines, the poor sector of society is often relegated into the margin of
society because they lack access to the basic services and government facilities. Unlike
the middle-class and the rich, the poor sector could hardly meet their daily needs.
Moreover, poor people have no representation in the political arena and cannot assert
their identity in the mainstream.
Furthermore, people can also experience inequality because of their race, sex,
and gender among others. Racial discriminations and its other forms and sexist remarks
against LGBT are forms of sexual inequality.

Dimensions of Social Inequality

The Philippines is highly stratified. Not only the rich have the money, but they
also receive the most schooling, enjoy the best health, and consume the most goods and
services. Such privilege contrasts sharply with the poverty of millions of families who
worry about the food they eat in everyday setting, the money for the next month’s rent,
the bills they have to pay for the water and power consumption, and the hospital bill
when a member of the family becomes ill. This is a blunt picture of the reality of social
inequality in our country.

1. Income
One important dimension of inequality is income, earnings from work or investments.

1
2. Wealth
Income is only a part of a person’s or family’s wealth, the total value of money and other
assets, minus outstanding debts. Wealth—including stocks, bonds, and real estate—is
distributed more unequally than income. Wealth are passed from one generation to the
next are likely to make this inequality even greater (Wahl, 2003).

3. Power
In the Philippines, wealth is an important source of power. The small proportion of
families that controls most of the nation’s wealth also shapes the agenda of the entire
society.

4. Occupational Prestige
In addition to generating income, work is also an important source of social
prestige. We commonly evaluate each other according to the kind of work we do, giving
greater respect to those who do what we consider important work and less respect to
others with more modest jobs.
In any society, high-prestige occupations go to privileged categories of people. In
Table 1, shows that social class is often correlated with occupation. The following
occupational prestige table gives the twenty-five occupations ranked highest and the
twenty-five ranked lowest which were rated by Philippine respondents in 1985.

Table 1. Occupational Prestige Index

25 Highest and 25 Lowest of 50 Occupations

Occupation Rank Occupation Rank

Physician, doctor 1 City treasurer 22
Bank manager 2 Musician 23
Engineer 3 Worker, electronic factory 24
Nurse 4 Jeepney driver 25
Engineering technician 5 High school teacher 26
Dentist 6 Salesman, agent 27
Corporate executive 6 Elementary school teacher 28
Lawyer 6 Sarisari store owner 29
Movie artist 7 Pottery maker 30
College professor 8 Butchery owner 31
Accountant 8 Worker, textile factory 32
Author 8 Soldier, enlisted man 32
Mayor 9 Salesgirl, department store 32
Factory manager 10 Copra merchant 33
Mambabatas (national) 11 Tomato planter 34
Catholic priest 12 Farm-owner operator 35
Chief of police 13 Bicycle mechanic 35
Department store manager 14 Waitress, waiter 36
Supervisor, government office 14 Farm tenant 36
Hacendero 14 Watch repairman 37
Kagawad (regional) 17 Farm laborer 37
Protestant minister 18 Market vendor 38
Bank clerk 19 Herbolario 39
Private secretary 20 Shoe repairman 39

2
 Army officer 21 Garbage collector 40
Source: Hunt et. al. (1987).

5. Schooling
The country has expanded opportunities for schooling, but some people still
receive much more education than others. Schooling affects both occupation and
income, since most (but not all) of the better-paying white-collar jobs shown in Table 1
require a college degree or other advanced study. Most of the lowest rank occupation
bring lower income and social prestige and less schooling.

Social Classes
Another representation of social inequality is social classes. Social class is
defined as a “broad category of people sharing the same economic position, plus similar,
life-style etc. The concept of social class is not a subject of exact measurement and
different observer may come up with different lists of classes. However, even though the
concept lacks precision, sociologist consider it meaningful because it draws attention to
the influence that economic position has on social adjustment. The social class in the
Philippines can usually be expressed in five categories even though this may seem too
elaborate a scheme for some rural barrios and too restrictive to indicate the complexity
of stratification in Manila. The nature of this category is indicated in Table 2.

Table 2. Philippine Social Class Differentials

Percentage Social Classes
Estimate
Upper Class
1%  Large landowners
 Highly successful professionals
 Big business people
 Top government officials
Upper-Middle Class
 Owners of farms over 20 hectares
 Most professionals
10 %  Operators of medium-sized business
 Middle-echelon government administrator
 Some education administrators
 Some university professors
 Bank, department store, factory managers
Lower Middle Class
 Lower-echelon government workers
20 %  Most professors, teachers
 Owners of farms of 3 to 19 hectares
 Nurses
 Some small business people
Upper Lower Class
 Factory workers
 Skilled laborers
32 %  Small farmers
 Store clerks
 Office workers

3
  Most sari-sari store operators
Lower-Lower Class
 Unskilled laborers
 Farmers with less than 1.5 hectares
37 %  Most household servants
 Landless farm labor – most tenant farmers
 Most physically handicapped
 Peddlers, scavengers
Source: Hunt et. al. (1987).

Global stratification and Inequality

Social stratification involves not just people within a single country; it is also a
worldwide pattern with some nations far more economically productive than others.
Classifying the 195 independent nations on Earth into categories ignores many striking
differences. However, various models have been developed that help distinguish
countries on the basis of global stratification. One system of classifying countries is
according to a Three Worlds Model. The revised system of classification is not based
on ideology or political structure but on the economic development of countries (United
Nations Development Programme 2010 and the World Bank 2011, as cited in Macionis
2012: 271).

1. High-Income Countries
• contain 23% of the world’s people
• receive 78% of global income
• per capita gross domestic product (GDP) greater than $12,000.
• have a high standard of living based on advanced technology
• produce enough economic goods to enable their people to lead comfortable lives
• include 72 nations, among them the United States, Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Chile,
the nations of Western Europe, Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Russian Federation, Japan,
South Korea, Malaysia, and Australia

2. Middle-Income Countries
• contain 61% of the world’s people
• receive 21% of global income
• per capita GDP is less than $12,000 but greater than $2,500.
• have a standard of living about average for the world as a whole
• include 70 nations, among them the nations of Eastern Europe, Peru, Brazil, Namibia,
Egypt, Indonesia, India, and the People’s Republic of China

3. Low-Income Countries
• contain 17% of the world’s people
• receive 1% of global income
• a per capita GDP less than $2,500, and a low standard of living. Most people in these
nations are poor.
• have a low standard of living due to limited industrial technology
• include 53 nations, generally in Central and East Africa and Asia, among them Chad,
the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, and Bangladesh.

4
Theories of Global Stratification
There are two major explanations for the unequal distribution of the world’s
wealth and power: modernization theory and dependency theory. Each theory suggests
a different solution to the suffering of hungry people in much of the world.

1. Modernization theory maintains that nations achieve affluence by developing

advanced technology. This process depends on a culture that encourages innovation
and change toward higher living standards. Walt Rostow identified four stages of
development:
• Traditional stage: People’s lives are built around families and local communities
(Example: Bangladesh)
• Take-off stage: A market emerges as people produce goods not just for their own
use but also to trade with others for profit. (Example: Thailand)
• Drive to technological maturity: The ideas of economic growth and higher living
standards gain widespread support (Example: Mexico)
• High mass consumption: Advanced technology fuels mass production and mass
consumption as people now “need” countless goods. (Example: the United States of
America)

How to address global inequalities? Rostow’s modernization theory highlights

the role of technology transfer and foreign aid. Accordingly, rich nations can help poor
nations by providing technology to control population size, increase food production,
and expand industrial output and by providing foreign aid to support economic
development.

2. Dependency theory. This views global inequality as a result of the historical

exploitation of poor nations by rich ones. It maintains that colonialism created global
inequality beginning 500 years ago, giving rise to rich nations and underdeveloped
poor nations. This process continues today in the form of neocolonialism, or the
economic exploitation of poor nations by multinational corporations. Immanuel
Wallerstein’s model of the capitalist world economy identified three categories of
nations:
• Core: the world’s high-income countries, which are home to multinational
corporations.
• Semi-periphery: the world’s middle-income countries, with ties to core nations
• Periphery: the world’s low-income countries, which provide cheap labor and raw
materials, and a vast market for industrial products

How to address global inequalities? The dependency theory claims that three
factors, namely export-orientation, a lack of industrial capacity, and foreign debt, make
poor countries dependent on rich nations and prevent their economic development.

References
Candelaria, Anne Ian, Canuday Jose Jowel, and Saloma Czarina. Understanding
Culture, Society and Politics: Teacher’s Guide. 1st ed. Pasig City: Department of

5
 Education-Bureau of Curriculum Development. 2016.

Hunt, Chester L., et. all. Sociology in the Philippine Setting: A Modular Approach
Quezon City: Phoenix Publishing House, 1987.

Macionis, John. Sociology. 14th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc. 2012.