discuss: social stratification and social mobility are inseperable?
370798
Of  course they are not inseparable... everyone has free will and choice.  Those that are privileged certainly have an easier time attaining mobility more quickly,  but one only has to rise to the occasion.  Knowledge is quite helpful in attaining notoriety and thus mobility.  It is all up to the individual.  By the way,,, I do subscribe to the belief that success is relative... to ones beginnings.
358445
On each level theres an argument that inequality is higher depending on gender. Depending on what you are trying to analyze there will be some differences but as a general rule women will be confronted with higher amounts of inequality in each dimension than their male counterparts. In the job market women will be paid less, and have a tougher time advancing in their field across the board when looking at the dimensions of inequality. The same could be assumed along lines of prestige as most societies still have some form of male domination or patirachy even if its receding. \n\nFor most levels of analysis women will find more inequality by comparison to males across the board when looking at different dimensions of inequality
321835
The idea is that you can rise from your own economical class to an even higher social and economic class.  The idea is that hard work will indeed guarantee success in our country because we have the freedom to do so.\n\nWhile many countries have a caste system, we are without that.  People who are impoverished can go to college in our country.  People can intermarry someone of a different social class.  People can even choose to live above their means and live within a class they virtually can't pay for.  It's the freedom we have that makes this somewhat true.\n\nEach individual's dream is different however.
538697
How about marrying a woman with more than one husband? I could benefit from my brothers, have plenty of time for myself, have plenty of help in caring for my children, but I might have to wait for alone time. \nCheck out the social heirarchy of gorilla packs and chimp tribes. Other primates have this sort of arrangement too, so its definately a part of our social anscestry.
484317
I'm not going to give you an essay either. Do your own homework.\n\nNormally those with money have more social status. People like Ministers, Teachers, Doctors, often have greater social status than their income would predict as they are trusted professions.
709665
how about the percentage of unemployed college graduates.  Or the percentage of people who are in high debt trying maintain a wealthy lifestyle.  meritocracy suggests that fine items, cars, etc is the effect of hard work, etc, however if you have easy access to credit you can have all of these things (albeit, with risk but even so) without hard work.
348398
In America we have free enterprise and a class-less society. In other words, anyone can make money and be rich and be accepted here. We have no special laws for the rich and different set for the poor. Thats the American Dream. In China, Iran,Russia, and the French Revolution, they have a class society. In other words, if you were born poor, you will probably remain that way because the oppurtunities are not there for you to advance your status in life.
528663
I think it would depend on where and which school.  For example poorer areas would be higher typically than areas with higher incomes.  On average though, about 20% of the people that start highschool will not graduate.
912456
Controlled socio-engineering?  Probably.  As for how it will impact truly progressive policies... probably very little.  However, it may slow the nation's path down the drain a bit.
1163645
there is no totall freedom cause:\ninternational socity is baised  on   money, usefulness for community  and other factors which make us more and more limited,restricted and dependent ...\n\nunfortuatly that's the way it is .... and I have no answer why we shoulde live like this.it is totally ridiculous.
103556
The falling of many Middle Class People to being below the Poverty level, without changing anything in their lives has always amazed me.  Of course the amount of people in your family has to do with the level of the Poverty being set.  Think about the fact that many people are actually living the same life as they always have, same job, same home, same family and have fallen under the poverty level and not known about it. I think that would be an interesting place to start.  I believe that we think of poverty as having nothing and the government sets levels that makes many who live decent lives fall under poverty levels.  By this it is like the calling of Beverly Hills as an economically disadvantaged city because of the lack of jobs per capita in that city.  Well it is that way because the land is mainly used for individual residences and that is the way they want it, yet under government guidelines it falls into that category.  What I am saying is that you need to start with placing an actual definition of poverty and then look at the people who don't fit the category and then question why?
429724
That is not what I want. I want them to be treated as my equal, with no special privileges. That is ALL I ask. There are so many variables, and social dynamics, that that is an impossible question to answer.
898034
No.  People have differing priorities, and differing work ethics.  Some work very hard to become educated, and then work very hard at their jobs.  They earn their higher standard of living.  Others choose not to pursue education at all,  but work extremely hard to compensate, and still do well.  Others choose to focus on having children, whether or not they can support them.  Some don't work at all.\n\nIn the USA, lifestyle is very much about choices people make in their lives.  Not everyone has the same range of choices, but it is still very possible to go from rags to riches, or at least comfort and security, purely because one works hard.  \n\nThere are far too many people ready and willing to simply exist, and let others do all the work.  They are already an unfair burden to society; your proposal would guarantee their numbers would increase dramatically.  Additionally, with no hope of reward, the inventive, pioneering, adventurous spirit of so many Americans, encouraged by our current society, would be suppressed, and oppressed, in yours.\n\nI'm not advocating money as God, or capitalism over democracy.  Socialism does have it's place, in certain applications.  A equal-for-everyone health care system, for instance, or a flat tax for all Americans over the poverty level, no exceptions, would do much to solve some of the problems we face today.  Extending it to an entire social system is doomed to failure, however, for the very simple reason that all people are not created equal when it comes to their willingness to work.  Those who won't do not merit the rewards of those who will.
664608
It is a class system. In the Hindu religion the higher caste you are in the closer to Nirvana you are. Depending on how you live your life you go up or down castes until you reach the top and get to Nirvana. The fact that most people are of lower castes is justified in that most people don't live very pure lives.
840175
Groups that haven't had their rights compromised by society often negatively perceive the mechanisms used by marginalized groups to get equality.  It's understandable given that the mechanisms seem to be fostering a kind of specialness.  However, when we look at them a little more closely, these mechanisms are born from the reality of inequality and are necessary until that inequality is resolved.  Therefore, it would be ludicrous for the non-marginalized groups to demand that these same mechanisms apply to them (e.g. a white college fund, a white-rights promotion group).  Why?  Because the whole point is that the society doesn't compromise the rights of the privileged group.  With that said, because all of these things are human institutions, there will be cases where the mechanisms fail.  With respect to your experiences, we need to make sure that we analyze our thoughts and perceptions because our natural tendency as humans is to project responsibility outward and to see ourselves as victimized.  I'm not saying this is the case in your specific experiences but, given that it's a universal dynamic, it would be a positive exercise to investigate this in yourself.
994229
It's very difficult to apply one to the other. One studies the behavior of groups and the other studies that of individuals.\n\nOf course, Marx tried to do it. Clearly, his ideas have been debunked.\n\nI was a "sociologist" until taking a great microeconomics course \nat my university. The professor's depth and knowledge converted me. People act individually in groups only to pursue their own interests. They don't "groupthink" as some sociologists would have you believe.
1122424
What makes you think equality is realistic, important or even appropriate.  People have different levels of talent, abilities and, quite frankly, merit.  These things cluster in certain populations, including race.