Weber believed it was linked to the type of job people could get, Weber thought differently to Marx about this, as marx believed it was due to owning factories or other resources, and weber thought it was due to skills and qualifications. Weber’s idea of class influenced the ideas of other sociologists, such as goldthorpe (1980). Goldthorpe derived a stratification scale which includes the Weberian concept of market position. This was felt by sociologists to be a more accurate technique of studying stratification, as a pose to just studying peoples jobs. Weber was skeptical about the possibility of the working class bonding together for revolutionary purposes, for example becoming class-conscious because of differences in status would always undermine any common cause.
They feared once these principles were established they could be extended to ‘soak the rich’ and even out the unfair distribution of wealth in Edwardian Britain. The land taxes were especially controversial, as they would not actually produce a great deal of tax revenue. The Lords denounced this proposal as a ‘class war’. The Lords believed it was their duty to restrain governments from making sweeping changes the electorate had not voted on. A final less important reason was that the Lords believed that it was the fault of the poor that they were destitute in the first place.
It is the universal whore, the pander between men and peoples.’ Karl Marx, ‘the economic and philosophical manuscripts’ (1844). This is saying that money makes society function, it not only binds us together, but separates those who have it and those who don’t. - The issue of storytelling, how stories are received, who they serve, is an important theme in Othello - Individuals create stories about themselves to establish an identity  sometimes our stories are imposed on us - Othello states he ‘Saw the handkerchief’ (Act 5, Sc2, Ln66), but what he really saw was a mute fact – facts are meaningless until placed into context – Othello used the wrong story to interpret what he saw. He takes Iago’s lies as facts, believes everything else - Marxism emphasizes the link between power  storytelling  economics. Eg.
Birling tries to intimidate Inspector Goole by boasting about his status and the type of people he knows, for example when Birling mentions the engagement between Sheila and Gerald Croft - a name made famous by 'Croft's limited', Birling brings this up to intimate the Inspector as Birling expects his status to buy him away from trouble and put him above the law. Birling becomes impatient easily and loses his temper quickly as he realises Goole doesn't want to play along with his tactics of trying to avoid confrontation about his responsibility with Eva Smith's death. He doesn't want to accept the fact he might have given a reason for her to kill herself and reckons she is the one at fault, he's pompous and sexist and abdicating his responsibility when being interviewed. Birling is also presented to expect him to gain respect and wishes for everyone to agree with his capitalist attitude. He believes himself to be superior and tries to take hold and control the interview with the Inspector when he abruptly comments on how he doesn't like his 'tone', which is ironic as Birling's 'tone' has been unacceptable and spiteful towards the inspector throughout their interview, proving his confidence and his big headed
Radicals believe that capitalist profit from consumers, who are being exploited. In relation to the bill, radicals would say it’s the capitalist who are destroying the environment and disregarding human presence all in the name of profits. Radicals would approve of the bill as it would put an end to exploitation. But it does not completely comply with their views. A radical solution doe not exist in a capitalist society, but can only work if capitalism no longer existed.
Stratification is a division of a society’s resources that benefits some people and harms others. Social position reflects the way society divides resources. Unequal rewards only serve to divide society, creating “haves” and “have-nots.” There is widespread opposition to social inequality. Using a structural-functional approach to look at the demise of the middle class would point out that the middle class is sliding backwards due to a lack of personal talent and ability. Since
Once Lawson went to Sink, it place him in a troublesome position. Since if Sink affirmed the configuration it wouldn't look great. Despite the fact that Vandivier did show the act of groupthink, the fault was continually pushed off to an alternate in this organization emergency. Vandivier was exceeding the expenses of his individual life profits family life vs. business profits when deciding his bearing of morals and choices. Disappointment of correspondence inside workers and offices was hindering and subsequently the authoritative standards ought to be modified inside the partnership.
The immigrant identity is clearly portrayed as inviting exploitation and prohibiting the family from succeeding, but the family fails to realize that the American identity is similarly problematic and offers just as little opportunity for freedom and success, but for different reasons. In short, the poison in the air is the effect of American capitalism, which implicitly pits the poor against each other in the search for work and the need to maintain that work regardless of how denigrating or dangerous it is. However, the family does not realize this at first, and fails to recognize that buying into the idea that hard work alone will bring human rights and success is just as naive and makes them just as exploitable as relying upon the goodwill of the wedding guests to help pay for the cost. When Jurgis is still naively invested in this notion, he asks “do you want me to believe that with these arms […] people will ever let me starve?” (Sinclair 23-24). Jurgis believes that his physical ability for labor will be enough to ensure his and his family's success, but this is just as foolhardy as the belief that holding on to their Lithuanian wedding tradition could shield the family from the ravages of American capitalism.
Jay Gatsby is also wealthy but would rather simply be affluent. By placing the characters in compromising situations, Fitzgerald expresses the pain and misery that can result from careless actions and heartless words. Throughout the novel, the 1920s are portrayed as a moral wasteland. The lives of the wealthy are a moral wasteland. However, this is not to be confused with the lives of the affluent.
28) In this confrontation the difference between the social classes are shown. It shows how Tom looks down on gorge just because he is poor, and how Tom thinks that because he has a higher social status and because he is rich has the power to treat him badly. Tom’s self center and prepotent attitude is shown in the dialogue, and thus representing the moral and social decay that the wealthy people had due to their excesses. In conclusion Fitzgerald exclude the middle class as a critique to the extremes in the social classes, because he wanted to show the contrast between them and the repercussions the social class had on the characters. Through the novel the duality between the rich and the poor is always present, and the effects of the extremes and the insatiable aim of wealth is represented by the valley of ashes.