Contemporary China: What do you know about this?

Vector image of User:BrendelSignature's breakd...
Image via Wikipedia

China; Ten social categories (based on differences in resource ownership):

(1) state and social management class (with organizational

English: Caps according to social class 日本語: 琉...
Image via Wikipedia

resources) is about 2.1% (1-5% in the cities, 0.5% in the urban and rural integrating administrative areas); refers to the party and government, business and social groups leading executives cadres exercising real authority and the management functions in the administrative unit including: central government ministries and municipalities practical administration of the division level and above executive-level cadres; cadres in provinces and regions practical administration of the township administrative section level and above, this category is currently account for the proportion of about 2.1% in the social class structure.

(2) managerial personnel (with cultural resources or organizational resources), 1.5% (up to 9% in some cities); refers to the senior and middle management staff in the state-owned, collectives, private and joint ventures, wholly foreign-owned large and medium enterprise, this category is accounting for the proportion of about 1.5% currently in the social class structure.

(3) private entrepreneurs (with economic resources), 0.6% (private sector takes up to 3% in developed regions, 0.3%in less developed areas); the persons making profit with a certain number of private ownership of capital or investment in fixed assets, in accordance with existing policies and regulations, those include private enterprises with more than 8 employees. This category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 0.6% in the social class structure.

(4) professional and technical staff levels (with cultural resources), 5.1% (10-20% in large cities, 1.5-3% in urban fringe areas); refers to the various economic agencies (including state organs, party and mass organizations, national enterprises, collective enterprises, and various non-state, or public ownership enterprises) specializes in a variety of professional works, scientific and technical staff, this category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 5.1% in the social class structure.

(5) the staff levels (with minor cultural resources and organizational resources), 4.8% (10-15% in urban area, 2-6% in urban fringe areas); refers to full-time office staff assisting the department in dealing with day to day administrative affairs, mainly the low-level clerical staff in party and government organs in the civil service, enterprises of various ownership and mainly of primary non-professional management. This category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 4.8% in the social class structure.

(6) individual businesses (with minor economic resources), 4.2% (the actual number is more than the registered number); the persons with private ownership of small amount of capital (including property) involving in production, circulation, services and other business activities or financial bond market to make a living. Such as individual business owners or micro business (owners have sufficient capital to hire labor but also directly involved in labor and production), self-employed business people or self-employed workers (with sufficient capital to open their own business but do not employ other workers), and small shareholders, minority shareholders, owner of small rental housing, etc., this category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 4.2% in the social class structure.

(7) business services staff levels (with a small amount of the three resources), 12%; refers to the non-professional, non-manual and manual staff in the commercial and service sectors, this category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 12% in the social class structure.

(8) industrial workers (with a small amount of three resources), 22.6% (of which 30% of migrant workers); refers to the physical, semi-manual production workers, construction workers and related personnel in the secondary industry, this category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 22.6%in the social class structure.

(9) the peasant (with a small amount of three resources), (44% in 1999); one of the largest category in China, refers to farmers with the collectively owned farmland contracted to agriculture (forestry, animal husbandry and fishery) industry as the sole or main occupation, and agriculture (forestry, animal husbandry and fishery) industry as the sole source of income or principal source of income, this category accounts for about 44% of China’s total working population now.

(10) Urban and rural jobless, unemployed, semi-unemployed category (with no resources), 3.1%. refers to the working age population with no-regular employment (excluding students), this category is currently accounting for the proportion of about 3.1% in the social class structure.

Five socio-economic classes

(Classified according to family income or monthly income per capita)

(1) The upper social strata: high-level leading cadres, big business executives, senior professionals and large private entrepreneurs;

(2) Upper-middle-level cadres, middle managers of large enterprises, SMEs managers, mid-level professional and technical personnel and medium business owners;

(3) Middle-middle class: junior professionals, small business owners, officers, individual businesses, senior technicians, large agricultural operations;

(4) Lower class: individual service providers, workers, peasants;

(5) Bottom class: workers living in poverty and lack of job security, peasants and jobless, unemployed, underemployed workers

American Middle-class getting smaller by the day! Poor or Rich?

 

Shrinkage of the middle-class in America

Shrinkage of the middle-class in America

The middle-class in America is shriveling at an unthinkable rate, as a new study pulling from US Census data reveals that more families are finding themselves among the very poor or very rich.

A study this week out of Stanford University shows that only around 44 percent of families in America live in what the country considers middle-income neighborhoods, down from the 1970 statistic of 65 percent. At the same time, while only 15 percent of the country was grouped into either the lower- or upper-class four decades ago, that proportion has more than doubles with a third of America now in either end of the spectrum.

Such segregation is creating what the study’s authors are calling the birth of a “two-tiered society” in the United States, as the proportion of those that are neither the haves nor have-nots shrinks and Americans are being bundled into either one or the other with little middle ground.

“We already kind of knew that segregation by income had been going up from 1970 to 2000, though I was struck by the magnitude of that increase,” Professor Sean Reardon writes in his report. What his study reveals, however, is that the intensity of that increase was far greater than what experts had thought. “One of the striking findings in the report is that in 90 percent of metropolitan areas, income segregation went up in the 2000s.”

While the upper-class obviously benefit from their economic standing, a growing lower-class group means a larger portion of Americans than before are often unable to make-ends meet. The study also notes that upper-class Americans are increasingly migrating into new areas — either moving into the suburbs or gentrifying old areas — creating clusters of land that the growing lower-class cannot afford to live in.

This report is only the latest study in a series of analyses made available as of late which are chronicling an increasingly incredulous dividing of America. As RT reported earlier this month, 2010 US Census data shows that 20.5 million Americans — or 6.7 percent — have personal incomes that put them below half of the poverty line.

In Washington DC, more than one-in-ten of the 600,000 residents fall into that group, earning an annual income of less than $5,570 for an individual of $11,157 for a family of four. At the same time, however, the greater DC metropolitan region boasts the highest average annual income in America.