Download pdf
The Similarities and Differences in China and the United States of America in Terms of Social Stratification and Governmental Solutions
- 1 School of Finance, Shanghai University of International Business and Economics, Shanghai, 201600, China
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
In the United States, the poor often consume unhealthy food due to its low cost, leading to health issues and a vicious cycle of poverty. In contrast, healthy food is more affordable in China, mitigating this particular issue. The paper discusses the formation reasons behind these phenomena and proposes policy recommendations for both governments to address social inequality. This paper also presents a comparative analysis of social stratification in China and the United States, with a particular focus on education and healthcare. It highlights the uneven distribution of quality education resources in both countries, where students from wealthier families have greater access to prestigious universities. For China, it suggests loosening restrictions on tutoring institutions while ensuring their legality and validity, and establishing more schools in less developed areas. For the United States, it advocates for more government subsidies for poor students, funding for all types of colleges and universities, food subsidies directed towards healthy foods, and regulation of hospital and healthcare industry charging practices. The findings contribute to the broader understanding of social inequality in both countries and provide a foundation for further exploration in this area.
Keywords
Social Stratification, China, United States, Education, Healthcare
[1]. T. Yang, T. Zhang (2023) Social capital meets guanxi: Social networks and income inequality in China https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2023.102094
[2]. L. Fang (2024). Institutions and Class Inequality in China’s Party-State System: An Evolution from Pre-to Post-Reform. In Global Handbook of Inequality (pp. 1-20). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[3]. G. Vidal (2021)Recession, Financial Instability, Social Inequality and the Health Crisis https://doi.org/10.1080/09538259.2021.1943933
[4]. D. Redhead (2024) Social structure and the evolutionary ecology and inequality https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.10.013
[5]. L. Elenbaas, L. McGuire, A. Ackerman, E. Kneeskern, L. Kinnard, A. Farooq, F. Law, D. Makanju, K. Ebert, & R. S. Mistry(2024) Social class group identity, intergroup attitudes, and views on social mobility and inequality in the U.K. and the U.S. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12431
[6]. C. Hass, A. Hadjar.(2024) Social Inequalities in Study Trajectories: A Comparison of the United States and Germany. Sociology of Education: 2024, Vol. 97(3) 276–296
[7]. M. Fairbrother and I. W. Martin (2013) Does inequality erode social trust? Results from multilevel models of US states and counties https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.09.008
[8]. I. Buder and J. Jennings (2020) Pandemics, Socioeconomic Gaps, and Macroeconomic Policy: The Ugly Truth Highlighted by COVID-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/07360932.2021.1997781
[9]. J. R. Posselt and E. Grodsky (2017) Graduate Education and Social Stratification https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-081715-074324
[10]. Miao, J. (2024) Socio-spatial differentiation and residential inequalities in Chinese cities https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.13174
[11]. Zhou, J., & Chen, H. (2023). Will reducing the burden of extracurricular tutoring raise fertility willingness in China? Five policy suggestions. Journal of Policy Modeling, 45(6), 1132-1147.
Cite this article
Zuo,S. (2025). The Similarities and Differences in China and the United States of America in Terms of Social Stratification and Governmental Solutions. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,88,1-6.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Global Politics and Socio-Humanities
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).