<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
>

<channel>
	<title>World Socialist Party (US) &#187; Class</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wspus.org/category/class/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wspus.org</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:07:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<!-- podcast_generator="podPress/8.8" - maintenance_release="8.8.5.3" -->
	<copyright>Copyright &#xA9; World Socialist Party (US) 2010 </copyright>
	<managingEditor>joinwspus@wspus.org (World Socialist Party (US))</managingEditor>
	<webMaster>joinwspus@wspus.org (World Socialist Party (US))</webMaster>
	<category>posts</category>
	<ttl>1440</ttl>
	
	<itunes:subtitle></itunes:subtitle>
	<itunes:summary></itunes:summary>
	<itunes:keywords></itunes:keywords>
	<itunes:category text="Society &amp; Culture" />
	<itunes:author>World Socialist Party (US)</itunes:author>
	<itunes:owner>
		<itunes:name>World Socialist Party (US)</itunes:name>
		<itunes:email>joinwspus@wspus.org</itunes:email>
	</itunes:owner>
	<itunes:block>no</itunes:block>
	<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
	<itunes:image href="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4016/4261195043_233c9929ca_o.jpg" />
		<item>
		<title>Manufacturing the News</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2011/11/manufacturing-the-news/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2011/11/manufacturing-the-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Nov 2011 01:28:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ROEL</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[World Socialist Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News manufacturing report media organized shapes status quo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=2299</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[UPLOADED FOR JOE R. HOPKINS, AUTHOR] Mark Fishman, associate professor of sociology at Brooklyn College, City University of New York, investigated routine news production by examining the work practices of reporters and other news workers. His research findings were published by the University of Texas Press in 1980 in a book entitled Manufacturing the News. At the beginning of his book, Fishman touches on the practical mode of social reproduction by quoting from W. I. Thomas, The Child in America (1928): &#8220;Our picture of how the world works is integrally tied to how we work in the world. By acting in accordance with our conception of the way things are, we concertedly make them the way they are, whether we are treating pieces of paper as money, conducting a routine conversation, or electing a president&#8221; (p. 3). The research setting &#8220;At the time of the study (1973-74), the Purissima Record held a virtual monopoly over news consumption in both the city of Purissima (population 75,000) and its metropolitan environs (population 150,000). The paper&#8217;s daily circulation of 45,000 approximated the number of households in the metropolitan area&#8230; Its news department consisted of 57 full-time reporters, editors, and photographers&#8211;at least four times [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2011/11/manufacturing-the-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Class against class</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2011/06/class-against-class/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2011/06/class-against-class/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 22:55:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>SPGB</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=2277</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s exploitation that causes workers’ problems. On an ultra-simplistic level we could say that capitalism in the persona of capitalists uses capital (in its basic form, money) to make a profit. By utilising capital in the form of property, equipment, machinery, investment or speculation the capitalist needs to employ members of the working class in order to increase the original capital for the benefit of the capitalist. This can only be done if the workers agree knowingly or unknowingly to their own exploitation. Why exploitation? In the monetary world society we live in everyone has a need for money on a regular ongoing basis in order to secure the essentials of life. By accepting employment workers undertake to work (knowingly or unknowingly) part of the time for their own remuneration and part of the time in order to meet the capitalist’s need for reinvestment in their business and to augment their accumulation of profit. There are three elements to the capitalist’s expectation in relation to employees. First, workers must be paid sufficient remuneration to keep them returning to work; the terms and conditions of work may change depending on the available source of labour. Second, the capitalist’s own ongoing costs [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2011/06/class-against-class/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Not So Socially Mobile</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/08/not-so-socially-mobile/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/08/not-so-socially-mobile/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 20:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Suzy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1647</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;poverty status at birth is linked to worse adult outcomes&#8221; An estimated 14.1 million Americans under age 18 are poor. The longer a child is poor, the worse his or her adult outcomes. Childhood poverty rates, according to the U.S. Census Bureau says the report, have ranged between 15 and 23% over the past four decades. Children who are born into poverty have much higher rates of economic and educational difficulties in their adult years. According to a study from the Urban Institute &#8220;Childhood Poverty Persistence&#8230;&#8221; by Ratcliffe and McKernan, 49% of American babies born into poor families will be poor for at least half their childhoods. •13% of all children (40% of black children and 8% of white children) are born poor. •37% of children live in poverty for at least a year before reaching age 18. •10% of children spend at least half their childhood years (9 years or longer) in poverty. •Black children are 9 times more likely than white children to be poor for at least three-quarters of their childhoods; 18% versus 2%. •69% of black children and 31% of white children who are poor at birth stay poor for least half their childhoods. No related [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/08/not-so-socially-mobile/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Life is sweet for the rich</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/07/life-is-sweet-for-the-rich/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/07/life-is-sweet-for-the-rich/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:38:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Suzy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1609</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From MarketWatch.com Tiffany &#38; Co says sales at its flagship New York store jumped 26% in the first quarter. International luxury goods giant Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy whose brands range from Fendi to Givenchy to Moet &#38; Chandon Champagne, plus, of course, Vuitton bags says U.S. sales boomed 20% in the first quarter, including a remarkable 58% boost for sales of jewelry and expensive watches like Tag Heuer. the Swiss watch federation says exports of luxury watches (those $2,000 &#8220;timepieces&#8221;) to the U.S. rose 12% in May and are now ahead 9% for the year. Super-luxury goods purveyor Richemont which owns such brands as Cartier, Dunhill, and Van Cleef &#38; Arpels says U.S. sales are up. The Sunseeker Club in New York, America&#8217;s biggest dealership in the multi-million dollar British luxury power boats say business is strong again. Those who have the money to spend, they say, are spending it. The truth is, this is a great time in which to be rich. According to consultants Cap Gemini, the wealthy saw their net worth bounce back sharply last year. And while those with $1 million or more did pretty well, the real story was the boom among the ultra rich: [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/07/life-is-sweet-for-the-rich/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Suffer, little children</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/05/suffer-little-children/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/05/suffer-little-children/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 01:42:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>SPGB</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1552</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One thing I am certain of is that I would give my life for my children, such is the power of my feelings for them. I did not take to the nappy changing or the enforced insomnia and as they grew older I resigned myself to the fact that during their teens I was embarrassment personified to them; so much so that I had to drop them a few hundred yards from the school gates in case &#8216;someone might think they knew me&#8217;. I tried to explain that for the past fourteen years their mother had led me to believe that I was their father, particularly in financial matters, so it was not unreasonable to conclude that I did know them. They have now reached their twenties and, it would be fair to say, have come a full circle and I don&#8217;t think I would be unduly flattering myself if I say that they are slightly proud of me. Given the bond between parents and their children why is it, then, that those who have power and control over our society fail to comprehend that the untold damage wrought on our fragile environment will be there as a legacy for [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/05/suffer-little-children/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Growing inequality in the US</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/05/growing-inequality-in-the-us/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/05/growing-inequality-in-the-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 05:11:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>SPGB</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1532</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We have previously reported on the fantasy and myth of the American Dream , most recently here , and again we find ourselves reading another article , this time from the Economist , highlighting the increasing inequality and decreasing social mobility in the United States. The American dream was simple: work hard and move up. In early 2009 71% still agreed that hard work and personal skill are the main ingredients for success. Compared with people in other rich countries, Americans tend to accept relatively high levels of income inequality because they believe they may move up over time.But now in a new poll 36% of respondents said they had less opportunity than their parents did, compared with 39% who thought they had more. Half thought the next generation would have a lower standard of living, double the share that thought living standards would rise.In education , rich, stupid children are more likely to graduate than poor, clever ones. Between 1947 and 1973, the typical American family’s income roughly doubled in real terms. Between 1973 and 2007, however, it grew by only 22% — and this due to the rise of two-worker households , working wives , or , mom [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/05/growing-inequality-in-the-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On Becoming Rich</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/04/on-becoming-rich/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/04/on-becoming-rich/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 03:26:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>FN Brill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1513</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[“The problem with IQ is that it’s just not very important in determining who’s rich and who’s poor.&#8221; Samuel Bowles head of the Behavioral Sciences Program at the Santa Fe Institute has said.“Being willing to sit in a boring classroom for 12 years, and then sign up for four more years and then sign up for three or more years after that—well, that’s a pretty good measure of your willingness to essentially do what you’re told,” Bowles says. 1.3% is the percentage likelihood that a bottom 10 percenter will ever make it to the top 10 percent. For 99 out of 100 people, rags never lead to riches. 30% is the likelihood, expressed as a percentage, that a child born to parents whose incomes fall within the top 10 percent of Americans will grow up to be at least as wealthy. 32% is the percentage likelihood that a person born into the bottom 10 percent of society will stay at the bottom. Poverty tends to persist through generations, no matter how individuals try to improve their circumstances.In a very unequal society, the people at the top have to spend a lot of time and energy keeping the lower classes obedient [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/04/on-becoming-rich/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s about all of us</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/03/its-about-all-of-us/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/03/its-about-all-of-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:51:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>FN Brill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Labor]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1462</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In an article Peter Rachleff a professor of History at Macalester College in St. Paul reminds us of some statistics concerning the USA . Between 1979 and 2005, the mean after-tax income of the top 1 percent of income earners rose 176 percent while that of the lower half rose less than 10 percent. In 1970, the average CEO earned forty times as much as the average worker. By 2010, it has become nearly 400 times. 80 percent of all the wealth in the U.S. is owned by the 10 percent at the top of our economic ladder, with some 38 percent of the wealth the property of the top 1 percent alone. The bottom 90 percent of the ladder has to share only 20 percent of the wealth. &#8220;American workers have long organized in unions to gain a share of their productivity increases, assure fair treatment on the job, expand benefits, and lay a foundation for a secure retirement&#8230;For two generations, workers purchased cars and homes, sent their children to college, and enjoyed a genuine retirement&#8230;As the unionized percentage of the workforce shrank from 30 percent in the 1950s to 20 percent in the 1980s to little more than [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/03/its-about-all-of-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Poverty on course to continue</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/02/poverty-on-course-to-continue/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/02/poverty-on-course-to-continue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:33:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>SPGB</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Halving global poverty by 2015 is one of United Nations&#8217; eight Millennium Development Goals . &#8220;Even before the onset of the current global financial and economic crisis, the world had not been on track to meet MDG 1 by 2015&#8230;Now the crisis is making attainment of that goal even more elusive,&#8221; said a UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs report entitled &#8220;Rethinking Poverty.&#8221; The number of people living in extreme poverty &#8212; on less than 1.25 dollars daily according to the World Bank &#8212; had declined to 1.4 billion in 2005 from 1.9 billion in 1981. But excluding China, the number actually rose over the same period from 1.1 billion to 1.2 billion. In Vietnam , a country of 86 million people, we read , about 7.6 million children lack adequate housing, 5 million lack basic hygiene facilities, 2.4 million have no clean drinking water and 2 million suffer from malnutrition. 20 years after the end of the apartheid regime, South Africa remains burdened with glaring social inequalities. Wealth is tilted towards the white minority and a small black economic elite, while poverty and unemployment are major problems.According to a report published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and [...]


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/02/poverty-on-course-to-continue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>1 in 4 Americans is employed to keep fellow citizens in line</title>
		<link>http://wspus.org/2010/02/1-in-4-americans-is-employed-to-keep-fellow-citizens-in-line/</link>
		<comments>http://wspus.org/2010/02/1-in-4-americans-is-employed-to-keep-fellow-citizens-in-line/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 08:19:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>FN Brill</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wspus.org/?p=1280</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An interesting article in the Santa Fe Reader. From a liberal &#8220;radical&#8221;  on the consequences of income disparity&#8230; Bowles offers a key reason why this is so. “Inequality breeds conflict, and conflict breeds wasted resources,” he says. In short, in a very unequal society, the people at the top have to spend a lot of time and energy keeping the lower classes obedient and productive. Inequality leads to an excess of what Bowles calls “guard labor.” In a 2007 paper on the subject, he and co-author Arjun Jayadev, an assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts, make an astonishing claim: Roughly 1 in 4 Americans is employed to keep fellow citizens in line and protect private wealth from would-be Robin Hoods. No related posts.


No related posts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://wspus.org/2010/02/1-in-4-americans-is-employed-to-keep-fellow-citizens-in-line/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

