1. In the article “America's 'Complacent Class': How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation” this represents a serious issue in America today. This is a social issue because its affecting the stagnation of our society and increasing the unequal gab between the rich and the poor, leaving behind major poverty all over U.S. While the rich get richer. When the gab is so far apart, the economy can’t grow to its full potential. The 1 percenters just keep getting rich, while the rest struggle to make ends meet. The elements of social structure are thrown out of balance. The conflict is keeping people together who are less educated, lower income. When compared to keeping people together who are higher educated and higher income. It formulates race to become a major factor along with it. The social networks play a high role as well.
2. The conflict theorist would say that this is a social class issue that’s being conflicted. The idea of social stagnation staying relatively the same is a new issue in today’s society because of major tech based technology. Workers must have the proper education to be in that particular field, have a great knowledge of how to approach these kinds of jobs. They would see this issue on a macro level and state that inequality is a key factor, the power of capitalism, controlling where the money and power goes to. They would see this change as a positive and see opportunity with in it. People are shaped by coercion and authority. They do the things they do because the law will allow it or not allow it. The wealthy are able to live in more prestige neighborhoods because the power is maintained at the top and is in favor of the wealthy families through school, jobs, connections, and many more benefits.
3. I think that the stratification of people who are reluctant to move, change, and innovate can be a real cause for concern. I chose this topic because its something I can see physically happening all over Los Angeles, separate segregation in between cities and people are at an all-time high. That’s how race, education, income all stay the same. The conflict that is rising is the gap between the inequality of the poor, stagnating in the same place without much hope or opportunity to advance in wealthier locations to live. This will affect the economy, and some conflict theorist may believe higher crime rates will subsequently arise because of how far the gap of inequality is. The wealthy will stay wealthy and keep their money growing, but the poor are in some serious conflicts as this gab slowly increases. The difference of buying power, rent, and bills will be overwhelming for the less income families as we already see it in today’s society. The homeless rate has been rising and is arguably noticeable with in the past 5-10 years as we see more and more on the street. There needs to be a change to end the segregation between the very wealthy and poor, we need to work together to make this world a more productive and more sustainable place to live. Isolation between stratification will cause no future solution but only more issues.
1.) I agree with what Mark said how people with different socioeconomic statuses tend to stick together. This creates a gap between the classes where your either rich or poor, and you hang out with people in your socioeconomic group. I believe that it is really important for people from different backgrounds to come together because it shows that they realize that no one is better than anyone else. I agree with the article that America is becoming stagnant and it seems like there is less excitement and progress in our country and more people separating themselves from each other. The segregation can have a negative effect on the economy because people from different backgrounds aren't interacting, which impacts business. It is better for our society if people assimilate because then everyone offers there services to each other and can help each other and work together to create a properly functioning society. I chose to comment on this post because it can be viewed through each sociological perspective. Mark chose the conflict perspective which I thought was interesting because I would have chose the interactionist or functionalist perspective. I thought the article was interesting but could have had more information about how segregation affects the different groups of people. I think this issue is very relevant in sociology because when people start to alienate themselves from each other its a major sign that something is wrong. Parents start teaching children who they should want to hang out with from a young age, they can have a major influence on who the child decides to hang out with.Using my sociological imagination, I feel it’s important for parents to bring up their children knowing that its ok to venture outside the group and to be a part of different groups, and encourage interactions between children with different socioeconomic statuses. If people do not come together and work with one another we won't be able to get what we want, the changes that we need to live a happier, successful lives amongst one another.
2.) Using an interactionist perspective I see this issue being a problem within each individual group. The poor do not teach their children to aspire to be more than poor, and the vicious cycle repeats because its hard to aspire to be something more when the attitude of the people around you tells you you can't. The rich separate themselves from people with lower socioeconomic statuses because they think they are better. The values we teach our kids shape them, and in turn shape our future society. We need to start thinking about how we want the future for us, and for our children, because we create it. We need to be able to come out of our comfortable social environments and start experiencing other social environments. When people come together and start to communicate, we help each other, we create together, we create progress in society.
1. The article “America's 'Complacent Class': How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation” explains how certain groups within American society fall into a trap of self-segregation. People with the same socioeconomic status group together and as a result there is an emergence of rich and poor areas. Also, in the article is an interview with author Michael Cowen. He states that there has been a recent shift form the optimistic viewpoint that was dominant in the 80s and 90s to a more cynical and self-deprecating one in recent years. Overall individuals have become more and more “risk adverse” which has led to a stagnation in people’s ability to grow and move up the socioeconomic ladder. Cowen’s ideas are a social problem because they are an example of society lacking a desire to excel and take risks such as moving to a new city or changing careers. It is up to society to change the idea that it is too risky to attempt a change in career to gain a better life, and that acting like there is no way to move forward financially is detrimental to the individual and to the community. The theory of Cooley’s looking glass self is most applicable to this social issue. People act in the way they feel others see them and they are becoming more unwilling to changing how they think they are seen by others.
2. When applying the interactionalist perspective, it becomes clear society has caused people to stop seeing themselves as what they can be and instead made them see themselves as what are. In turn forcing individuals to not attempt to change and achieve more in life. Furthermore, the interactionalist would look for the reasoning behind the apparent lack of a desire to change and take risks to move up the socioeconomic ladder. Charles Cooley would say that this is a direct result of people accepting their assigned position in society because they feel they are what others see them as. In addition, interactionalists would look to find the root causes of people’s acceptance that they are assigned to a class and they are unable to change what class society says they belong to.
3. I decided to comment on this article because I agree that there needs to be a change in people’s attitudes in this country. For many years people have been lacking a sense of optimism and a desire to take calculated risks in hopes of a better life. Too often do people complain about their status, but when push comes to shove they are unwilling to get more education or try something new because it might be slightly inconvenient. The article explains this concept of “Self-Segregation” well, and exposes a real cause of the lack of economic growth in the US. This is a social issue because it is society that makes people feel like they are stuck in poverty or cannot excel. By finding the root causes of this attitude and addressing them we can move back to a more optimistic outlook on the future.
1. As I read Gregory’s response to the article, “ America’s Complacent Class: How Self Segregation is Leading to Stagnation”, I found myself thinking of different factors to this “Complacent Class” that he either didn’t examine or disagreed with. I can see the observation that we may be self-segregating to an extent, those of a socioeconomic status similar to theirs will stick together but I find myself disagreeing with Gregory’s statement, “lacking a sense of optimism and a desire to take calculated risks in hopes of a better life. Too often do people complain about their status, but when push comes to shove they are unwilling to get more education or try something new because it might be slightly inconvenient.” I think that the choices of individuals to make a better life for themselves is not as easy and two dimensional as one would think. It’s not solely out of complacency that people end up staying in the situation that they are in. I believe it is ignorant to ignore the fact that not everyone has the some opportunities as everyone else. For example a single of mother of five could be working two or more jobs to support her family with absolutely no time to spare, she may not have the opportunity or simply the time to go back to school. There are hundreds of thousands of hard working people like this in our country and to label them as complacent and unwilling to work hard is irresponsible. There is also a mention of an attitude shift from positive in the 80’s to the 90’s and cynicism in the present day. There is a difference between pessimism and a realistic view of one’s situation and world. I believe we are in a time of realistically looking at the world, which doesn’t necessarily imply everyone has given up on moving up. I chose to respond to this blog post because I felt there were things they did not consider when responding to the article, significant factors that would have likely affected their opinion and response. I think that his response was well constructed and organized but not critical enough of the original article author. With more depth into the material other factors and dimensions to the opposite point of view could have been taken into account. It’s a relevant topic in sociology for the similar reasons as the “looking glass self” theory that Gregory chose to write on. Yes, though people can see themselves as they perceive others to perceive them does not make them complacent in whatever role they’ve imagined others see them. In fact I’d argue that more people than ever are working harder to achieve their goals, whether it’s going to college or learning a new skill set, and if they’re not furthering themselves within societal ideals (education) doesn’t mean they’re not trying at all. 2. From a conflict perspective it could be said that perhaps the “complacent society” is being held down by the authority that wants to maintain power, perhaps by a bigoted leader or other authoritarian leader. This doesn’t mean to say that our current society is complacent just that if it seems we have submitted it may be for these reasons. Or perhaps that society continues to get back up after they’ve fallen down time and again but goes unnoticed as its strides are not big enough to be noticed by those who think they matter most. It could also be said that resources such as money, education, and opportunity are being withheld from the majority of society, crippling them into a situation that is difficult to rise up from.
In regards to Gregory N.’s blog about the article “America’s Complacent Class: How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation” I definitely agree with what Gregory had to say. He points out some pretty interesting notes referencing socioeconomic classes and Cooley’s looking glass theory. Gregory mentions the risk adverse concept and it stood out to me because it reminds me of me and how I’m not so eager to move up the ladder due to complacency. I chose to comment on Gregory’s entry because just like the blog post itself, they both hit me right on point on a professional as well as personal level in regards to willingness, desire, dedication, and determination to move forward in life - in general. The topic is a very essential one, especially in sociology because it addresses how the strong can eventually become the weak, but how there will be no other qualified to take that potential leaders place should he or she fall. Another way to look at this matter would be from a hypothetical perspective: what if all the youth of the nation simply decided to just stop educating themselves and/or not working, then got addicted to alcohol and illicit drugs; eventually, our future of tomorrow would slowly dissipate and there’d be no new potential leaders for our future.
From a functionalist perspective regarding the article “America’s Complacent Class: How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation”, this social issue would be a major problem because the essential primary objectives of every individual that have now been re-classified as members of this Complacent Class are no longer integrated into the original system in which each member of society serves their function of this well organized unit. In other words, if every status discontinued to follow through with their appropriate roles, then simply put there would be no society. Only anarchy, chaos, havoc, and mayhem would exist in place of what was once a society.
Mark P.
ReplyDeleteMark.P
ReplyDelete1. In the article “America's 'Complacent Class': How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation” this represents a serious issue in America today. This is a social issue because its affecting the stagnation of our society and increasing the unequal gab between the rich and the poor, leaving behind major poverty all over U.S. While the rich get richer. When the gab is so far apart, the economy can’t grow to its full potential. The 1 percenters just keep getting rich, while the rest struggle to make ends meet. The elements of social structure are thrown out of balance. The conflict is keeping people together who are less educated, lower income. When compared to keeping people together who are higher educated and higher income. It formulates race to become a major factor along with it. The social networks play a high role as well.
2. The conflict theorist would say that this is a social class issue that’s being conflicted. The idea of social stagnation staying relatively the same is a new issue in today’s society because of major tech based technology. Workers must have the proper education to be in that particular field, have a great knowledge of how to approach these kinds of jobs. They would see this issue on a macro level and state that inequality is a key factor, the power of capitalism, controlling where the money and power goes to. They would see this change as a positive and see opportunity with in it. People are shaped by coercion and authority. They do the things they do because the law will allow it or not allow it. The wealthy are able to live in more prestige neighborhoods because the power is maintained at the top and is in favor of the wealthy families through school, jobs, connections, and many more benefits.
3. I think that the stratification of people who are reluctant to move, change, and innovate can be a real cause for concern. I chose this topic because its something I can see physically happening all over Los Angeles, separate segregation in between cities and people are at an all-time high. That’s how race, education, income all stay the same. The conflict that is rising is the gap between the inequality of the poor, stagnating in the same place without much hope or opportunity to advance in wealthier locations to live. This will affect the economy, and some conflict theorist may believe higher crime rates will subsequently arise because of how far the gap of inequality is. The wealthy will stay wealthy and keep their money growing, but the poor are in some serious conflicts as this gab slowly increases. The difference of buying power, rent, and bills will be overwhelming for the less income families as we already see it in today’s society. The homeless rate has been rising and is arguably noticeable with in the past 5-10 years as we see more and more on the street. There needs to be a change to end the segregation between the very wealthy and poor, we need to work together to make this world a more productive and more sustainable place to live. Isolation between stratification will cause no future solution but only more issues.
Joseph Johnson- in response to Mark P.
Delete1.) I agree with what Mark said how people with different socioeconomic statuses tend to stick together. This creates a gap between the classes where your either rich or poor, and you hang out with people in your socioeconomic group. I believe that it is really important for people from different backgrounds to come together because it shows that they realize that no one is better than anyone else. I agree with the article that America is becoming stagnant and it seems like there is less excitement and progress in our country and more people separating themselves from each other. The segregation can have a negative effect on the economy because people from different backgrounds aren't interacting, which impacts business. It is better for our society if people assimilate because then everyone offers there services to each other and can help each other and work together to create a properly functioning society. I chose to comment on this post because it can be viewed through each sociological perspective. Mark chose the conflict perspective which I thought was interesting because I would have chose the interactionist or functionalist perspective. I thought the article was interesting but could have had more information about how segregation affects the different groups of people. I think this issue is very relevant in sociology because when people start to alienate themselves from each other its a major sign that something is wrong. Parents start teaching children who they should want to hang out with from a young age, they can have a major influence on who the child decides to hang out with.Using my sociological imagination, I feel it’s important for parents to bring up their children knowing that its ok to venture outside the group and to be a part of different groups, and encourage interactions between children with different socioeconomic statuses. If people do not come together and work with one another we won't be able to get what we want, the changes that we need to live a happier, successful lives amongst one another.
2.) Using an interactionist perspective I see this issue being a problem within each individual group. The poor do not teach their children to aspire to be more than poor, and the vicious cycle repeats because its hard to aspire to be something more when the attitude of the people around you tells you you can't. The rich separate themselves from people with lower socioeconomic statuses because they think they are better. The values we teach our kids shape them, and in turn shape our future society. We need to start thinking about how we want the future for us, and for our children, because we create it. We need to be able to come out of our comfortable social environments and start experiencing other social environments. When people come together and start to communicate, we help each other, we create together, we create progress in society.
Gregory N.
ReplyDeleteGregory N.
ReplyDelete1. The article “America's 'Complacent Class': How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation” explains how certain groups within American society fall into a trap of self-segregation. People with the same socioeconomic status group together and as a result there is an emergence of rich and poor areas. Also, in the article is an interview with author Michael Cowen. He states that there has been a recent shift form the optimistic viewpoint that was dominant in the 80s and 90s to a more cynical and self-deprecating one in recent years. Overall individuals have become more and more “risk adverse” which has led to a stagnation in people’s ability to grow and move up the socioeconomic ladder. Cowen’s ideas are a social problem because they are an example of society lacking a desire to excel and take risks such as moving to a new city or changing careers. It is up to society to change the idea that it is too risky to attempt a change in career to gain a better life, and that acting like there is no way to move forward financially is detrimental to the individual and to the community. The theory of Cooley’s looking glass self is most applicable to this social issue. People act in the way they feel others see them and they are becoming more unwilling to changing how they think they are seen by others.
2. When applying the interactionalist perspective, it becomes clear society has caused people to stop seeing themselves as what they can be and instead made them see themselves as what are. In turn forcing individuals to not attempt to change and achieve more in life. Furthermore, the interactionalist would look for the reasoning behind the apparent lack of a desire to change and take risks to move up the socioeconomic ladder. Charles Cooley would say that this is a direct result of people accepting their assigned position in society because they feel they are what others see them as. In addition, interactionalists would look to find the root causes of people’s acceptance that they are assigned to a class and they are unable to change what class society says they belong to.
3. I decided to comment on this article because I agree that there needs to be a change in people’s attitudes in this country. For many years people have been lacking a sense of optimism and a desire to take calculated risks in hopes of a better life. Too often do people complain about their status, but when push comes to shove they are unwilling to get more education or try something new because it might be slightly inconvenient. The article explains this concept of “Self-Segregation” well, and exposes a real cause of the lack of economic growth in the US. This is a social issue because it is society that makes people feel like they are stuck in poverty or cannot excel. By finding the root causes of this attitude and addressing them we can move back to a more optimistic outlook on the future.
Sierra V.W. in response to Gregory N.
Delete1. As I read Gregory’s response to the article, “ America’s Complacent Class: How Self Segregation is Leading to Stagnation”, I found myself thinking of different factors to this “Complacent Class” that he either didn’t examine or disagreed with. I can see the observation that we may be self-segregating to an extent, those of a socioeconomic status similar to theirs will stick together but I find myself disagreeing with Gregory’s statement, “lacking a sense of optimism and a desire to take calculated risks in hopes of a better life. Too often do people complain about their status, but when push comes to shove they are unwilling to get more education or try something new because it might be slightly inconvenient.” I think that the choices of individuals to make a better life for themselves is not as easy and two dimensional as one would think. It’s not solely out of complacency that people end up staying in the situation that they are in. I believe it is ignorant to ignore the fact that not everyone has the some opportunities as everyone else. For example a single of mother of five could be working two or more jobs to support her family with absolutely no time to spare, she may not have the opportunity or simply the time to go back to school. There are hundreds of thousands of hard working people like this in our country and to label them as complacent and unwilling to work hard is irresponsible. There is also a mention of an attitude shift from positive in the 80’s to the 90’s and cynicism in the present day. There is a difference between pessimism and a realistic view of one’s situation and world. I believe we are in a time of realistically looking at the world, which doesn’t necessarily imply everyone has given up on moving up. I chose to respond to this blog post because I felt there were things they did not consider when responding to the article, significant factors that would have likely affected their opinion and response. I think that his response was well constructed and organized but not critical enough of the original article author. With more depth into the material other factors and dimensions to the opposite point of view could have been taken into account. It’s a relevant topic in sociology for the similar reasons as the “looking glass self” theory that Gregory chose to write on. Yes, though people can see themselves as they perceive others to perceive them does not make them complacent in whatever role they’ve imagined others see them. In fact I’d argue that more people than ever are working harder to achieve their goals, whether it’s going to college or learning a new skill set, and if they’re not furthering themselves within societal ideals (education) doesn’t mean they’re not trying at all.
2. From a conflict perspective it could be said that perhaps the “complacent society” is being held down by the authority that wants to maintain power, perhaps by a bigoted leader or other authoritarian leader. This doesn’t mean to say that our current society is complacent just that if it seems we have submitted it may be for these reasons. Or perhaps that society continues to get back up after they’ve fallen down time and again but goes unnoticed as its strides are not big enough to be noticed by those who think they matter most. It could also be said that resources such as money, education, and opportunity are being withheld from the majority of society, crippling them into a situation that is difficult to rise up from.
In regards to Gregory N.’s blog about the article “America’s Complacent Class: How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation” I definitely agree with what Gregory had to say. He points out some pretty interesting notes referencing socioeconomic classes and Cooley’s looking glass theory. Gregory mentions the risk adverse concept and it stood out to me because it reminds me of me and how I’m not so eager to move up the ladder due to complacency. I chose to comment on Gregory’s entry because just like the blog post itself, they both hit me right on point on a professional as well as personal level in regards to willingness, desire, dedication, and determination to move forward in life - in general. The topic is a very essential one, especially in sociology because it addresses how the strong can eventually become the weak, but how there will be no other qualified to take that potential leaders place should he or she fall. Another way to look at this matter would be from a hypothetical perspective: what if all the youth of the nation simply decided to just stop educating themselves and/or not working, then got addicted to alcohol and illicit drugs; eventually, our future of tomorrow would slowly dissipate and there’d be no new potential leaders for our future.
DeleteFrom a functionalist perspective regarding the article “America’s Complacent Class: How Self-Segregation Is Leading to Stagnation”, this social issue would be a major problem because the essential primary objectives of every individual that have now been re-classified as members of this Complacent Class are no longer integrated into the original system in which each member of society serves their function of this well organized unit. In other words, if every status discontinued to follow through with their appropriate roles, then simply put there would be no society. Only anarchy, chaos, havoc, and mayhem would exist in place of what was once a society.