An Overview of the Sociological Theories in "Nickel and Dimed"

All Sociological theories can be discussed through Barbara Ehrenreich’s Nickel and Dimed and much can be demonstrated. The length of this paper will have brief overviews of Nickel and Dimed while going over sociological concepts presented by sociologist such as Marx, Weber, and Wright. The author’s opinion, while present in writing, will be compared to Ehrenreich’s experiences as well. Barbara Ehrenreich is a journalist who focuses on socio- political issues and holds a Ph.D. in Biology.

The novel Nickel and Dimed is a documentation of sorts by Barbara Ehrenreich reviewing her time working minimum-wage jobs and the struggles that working a minimum-wage job brings.

Essentially, Ehrenreich finds getting by financially while working as many as two minimum-wage jobs impossible, her social standing fallen, and her stress at an all time high. The information presented in the novel put into question social and economic issues facing America while letting the reader enjoy Ehrenreich’s fantastic writing style.

The main theme’s of Ehrenreich’s novel are poverty and the failure of America’s Democratic Capitalism for the low wage worker.

As Ehrenreich states best, “Something is wrong, very wrong, when a single person in good health, a person who in addition possesses a working car, can barely support herself by the sweat of her brow…”(Ehrenreich 199).

Weber’s ‘iron cage’ concept is presented from Barbara Ehrenreich’s first job to last in her novel Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By In America. Ehrenreich is trapped in poor job after poor job being forced to quit each for a variety of reasons with no hope to move up in the corporation.

Get quality help now

writer-marian

Verified

Proficient in: Employment

4.8 (309)

“ Writer-marian did a very good job with my paper, she got straight to the point, she made it clear and organized ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Everything in Ehrenreich’s life is controlled by her keeping up to two jobs to keep her small apartment and sparse supplies. The economic situation controls more throughout Nickel and Dimed and therefore nullifies much of Weber’s ideas in that regard with religion controlling the economic system.

The people work poorly, not due to their Protestant work ethic, but because they want somewhere to sleep at night and something to eat. Weber’s theories in general fall flat and can be viewed as more archaic in comparison to the working environment of the current working poor. Many of the working poor, as viewed, probably do not know who John Calvin is nor does it matter if they do because they are used for their one simplistic purpose and nothing more. Bureaucracies are throughout Nickel and Dimed and it is evident nothing is getting accomplished for the ones working poor on the front lines.

Many things promised to Ehrenreich are not given to her and so it is that the bureaucracy controls to deny. While Ehrenreich says, “Getting “reamed out” by Ted can ruin their whole day; a morsel of praise will be savored for weeks,” (Ehrenreich,166). Why has Ted become the God of the working poor? Is something innately wrong with the situation society has produced?

Marxist philosophies also reign true and make one question the situation American Capitalism finds itself in after reading Nickel and Dimed. The mode of production is completely controlled by the bourgeois leaving the proletariat stranded switching between poor wage jobs that use them as something similar to a robot. The economic structure through Ehrenreich’s novel does seem to control all other aspects.

Ehrenreich could not find the free time to go to church. Politically, most would find themselves wanting help or, if not sticking to their original values without much exploration, family time would be diminished greatly, and most are uneducated. Surprisingly the uneducated proletariat are equaled to the educated in these remedial jobs because a Ph.D. in Biology does not help one serve food or be a higher quality maid.

Does Capitalism undermine the human condition? One will know after reading Nickel and Dimed that it is next to impossible to get by in America if you are only paid minimum wage and most of your time you spend will be working. Communism is not necessarily the answer but the question may come to the Capitalistic American mind. The introduction of principles from socialism and communism have been introduced to American Capitalism as an attempt to avoid some of the situations Ehrenreich finds herself in, but this simply does not suffice after the information given by Ehrenreich with her experience in Nickel and Dimed.

The exploitative nature of Capitalism is brought to light while serving in Florida for Ehrenreich. She attempts to switch jobs for better pay and is successful but finds that both establishments still leave her without the means necessary for her to make it by on. Ehrenreich’s body is also having a very difficult time keeping up with the workload and her age puts Ehrenreich at an extreme disadvantage for the work she has no option but to take.

Ehrenreich can afford minor pain medications but would not have been able to had she not already made her living before taking on the experiment. One cannot live comfortably on minimum wage salary and those that employ minimum wage workers tend to exploit them. Ehrenreich notices this in interactions with ‘superiors’ and with the health insurance she attempts to get through the chain restaurant she works at but can never seem to complete the form. The corporations expect you to work very hard, quit, and leave them with maximized profit which all culminates into a vicious circle.

I do not see Communism overtaking Capitalism by the proletariat in a great rebellion of some sort. The question is simply posed from an ethical stance. Is it ethical to use people as machines to maximize profit while leaving them no honest choice but to agree? No, but that does seem to be the nature of Capitalism when dealing with the working poor as displayed by Ehrenreich.

Michels idea of the few controlling the masses seems true and is very visible when considering the working poor in Ehrenreich’s novel and the C.E.O. making multimillion dollar salaries from exploitative capitalistic behaviors. While voting remains a right for every United State’s citizen one cannot say that the working poor are not excluded by their forced situation from much of the decision-making process. In their jobs, as viewed in Nickel and Dimed, from server to maid the entire lives of those working are constrained by their jobs and all else loses importance.

The experts described by Michel, however, do perpetuate power from their own organizations but not in the American Dream way. The way one is introduced to the company initially seems to be of the utmost importance. Ehrenreich is completely overqualified for every position including those of her supervisors but is still impoverished and sees no hope for moving up in the company to make her living arrangements more feasible. Holding an administrative position might be more important than capital, as explained by Michel, but I cannot stress enough how little this can matter to the working poor as they are treated like second class citizens.

These masses however are not empathetic but put into an impossible scenarios so that, potentially, others can hold power. It is also possible that everyone at the bottom of the income spectrum has become apathetic to a certain degree to the impossibility of their situation and the lack of sympathy provided to them by society. The bubble in which people find jobs at the lower end of the economic spectrum leaves a thinking mind caught there only with a sense of hopelessness nullifying any greatness they may or may not have as a human being. The fact reigns true, however, no one cares and do your job.

Neo-Marxists such as Eric Olin Wright would agree greatly with Ehrenreich’s Nickel and Dimed. The top executives control those involved in the labor through the system of Capitalism itself. The ones in control may or may not make much more money than the one’s being controlled but nevertheless seem to have lackadaisical rule with an iron fist expecting high job turnover and simply being apathetic due to the large number of potential employees.

Ralf Dahrendorf, in combining the ideas of Weberian Sociology and Marxian Sociology, offers an interesting view point when comparing with Nickel and Dimed by Ehrenreich. The Weberian Sociological concepts adopted by Dahrendorf expose the Capitalist bureaucracies in place generating large amounts of inequality as viewed through Ehrenreich’s time as a maid. The rich family that Ehrenreich finds herself cleaning for as a maid, who are potentially at the higher end of the spectrum of a corporation Ehrenreich could have been a server for, uses cameras in hopes of catching the maids stealing, expecting that the maids will steal.

This prejudice due to the tier system Capitalism that has been put into place is despicable yet ever present for the low wage worker. The power of the bureaucracies reach further, though, than Dahrendorf represents through Weber, almost to the point where those at the top tier of the bureaucracy believe the falsities they themselves created. Dahrendorf is Marxian in the extent that he holds the belief class divisions exist in society but that this division is based off of the decision-making processes within the organization.

This holds true in Ehrenreich’s novel and the dissection of. The more decision-making processes one controls the more power the person has in the organization and this is the great folly in its extremist nature in American Capitalism as expressed by the novel. Contemporary conflict theory using the ideas of Marx, Weber, and Michel ties everything together nicely and allows one to conceptualize Nickel and Dimed for its muckraking qualities. The imposition of will on the masses metamorphosizes quite well from a purity of thought issued from the American Dream to others being on top and not wanting to lose their high-tiered positioning.

Gehard Lenski would argue that those within society must work together to survive, and this is somewhat true as viewed through the lens Ehrenreich provides in Nickel and Dimed. The assumption, however, past the idea that societies do cooperate is that they will share in order to survive which may be true but is seemingly the bare minimum. When Ehrenreich took the job as a maid, she was seemingly paid handsomely, but, truly, the money was divided with her getting a very small share.

The idea of cooperation is great and is forced to a degree, but elites will seemingly levy this cooperation to their side down to the fraction so that they may benefit the most. The synthesis of functional and concept theory by Lenski is true, but the corporations hiring Ehrenreich do not give unless they must and even then only the bare amount while completely controlling the surplus. Lenski also provides seven reasons for the decline in inequality: Industrial societies are more complex than previous societies. The ones in power must rely on the subordinates. The delegation of power is suppose to diffuse power and increase employee rewards.

Increased share of surplus decreases potential worker hostility and increases economic output. If only subsistence wages were offered, the ones in charge would have no one to sell their product to. workers. Due to population growth decreasing in modern society, there are less Increasing international conflict requires the ones who rule to treat the workers well enough so that they would fight for the nation Democracy distributes power and forces the ones in charge to give up some power to avoid being overthrown by the masses.

Industrial societies made so much more money that, now, the ones in control can share a higher percentage of the wealth while still making more money. I would contend that in America, the growing middle class gobbles up too much of the overall wealth, allowing for the lowest earners to suffer from inequality. The luxuries which people must have in Capitalistic America means that there will be severely poor individuals and government benefits may not apply or help given certain very common place situations. One has the option to leave their low paying job if they wish but will often find themselves in the same situation as Ehrenreich did in switching jobs as a waitress.

The second waitress position did offer more money but in the end the job was still not enough for Ehrenreich to get by and also damaged her health (arguably due to her age). Next, as a maid, Ehrenreich sums up the experience well, “Do the owners have any idea of the misery that goes into rendering their homes motel-perfect? Would they be bothered if they did know, or would they take some sadistic pride in what they have purchased…” (Ehrenreich, 89). The vicious circle continues, and now that people can accumulate debt more readily than ever, it’s not always necessary that you have the money to spend the money so subsistence wage is not such a large issue.

The idea of eating but taking a loan at a ridiculous rate seems okay given certain situations one might find one’s self in at the lower end of the labor force. There are less workers, but less human works are needed to complete a task now due to advancements in machinery. Also, the draft will insure you fight if international conflict arises, along with the dogmatic patriotism preached in every American school from elementary onwards. Democracy does work as a regulator of power but we are in a representative democracy, and corruption is prevalent as being shown in the recent presidential race.

Democracy, much like religion, is a tool to be used by the rich to control the poor and be looked down upon by the wise. Lenski’s last point defies economic reasoning for me and I can only think of depreciation of the dollar or to what extent corporations are going to maximize profit. The outsourcing of jobs is always a terrible thing, not only because jobs are leaving America, but also because the practices used by corporations are usually too horrible for American standards. The safety standards cost money and developing countries offer many other incentives such as tax incentives. Lack of profit is okay to avoid lack of humanity.

Passive consumerism has become the modus operandi and the wage gap is too extreme for Lenski’s ideas of what is stopping inequality to be true anymore. The issue with passive consumerism in sociological terms is that the price can range widely and low wage workers wanting a product the majority can afford working the same amount of time simply cannot afford the aforementioned product. The enginuity is gone in the American due to the consumerism as well as being left with mountains of debt.

A minimum wage job at forty hours a week will not suffice for one, a spouse, and a child as was once the American Dream. If this previously mentioned strawman family existed, one spouse would have to work nearly seventy hours a week, the other forty hours, and maybe teach the child how to sell items on Ebay, assuming the adults are making minimum wage and Ehrenreich’s provided experience is correct. Humans want comfort, however, and the selling point for America was that if you had ambition, you could achieve anything and statistically this is simply not true.”Still, it is a shock to realize that ‘trailer trash’ has become, for me, a demographic category to aspire to …”(Ehrenreich, 12).

The need to become a specialized worker is resounding or else you will not have the money needed to enjoy living in the self-proclaimed greatest country on earth, America. The main theme of Nickel and Dimed are the main issues of the low wage American worker which are poverty, democracy, and capitalism. My conclusion drawn for Ehrenreich and sociological concepts given to me are simple. American Capitalism creates a large percentage of low wage, expendable workers who are abused and dehumanized.

American Democracy gives those at the bottom percent a false hope so they will continue to work if they have time for introspection while working more hours a week than should be needed. America’s economy benefits while all other aspects of America fall short. The answer is found in the pondering of sociologist, economists, politicians, anthropologists, psychologists and many more professionals but something is very wrong. As Ehrenreich preaches all too well on page 212: “There seems to be a vicious cycle at work here, making ours not just an economy but a culture of extreme inequality.

Corporate decision makers, and even more two-bit entrepreneurs like my boss at The Maids, occupy an economic position miles above that of the underpaid people whose labor they depend on. For reasons that have more to with class–often racial–prejudice than with action experience, they tend to fear and distrust the category of people from which they recruit their workers. Hence the perceived need for repressive management and intrusive measures like drug and personality testing.”

While Ehrenreich seems to come to terms somewhat by the end of the book alluding to the idea that they sky will not fall, I disagree. While I agree with Ehrenreich that happiness is most important and it can be found in the most dismal of situations, the functionality of is too obvious and too exploited. The poor are less politically and socially active. That correlates with them being less educated but also simply not having the time to vote and I see this as a kind of oppression. Relying on the old ways will not resolve this issue because the issue of poverty is evolving, and poverty in the United States is a different beast than it was in the 1950’s.

The lack of political labor parties in the United States, as opposed to many European countries, is a problem and is easily visible in Nickel and Dimed. If the poor continue their function, then poverty will continue as developed by the functional theory of poverty. The nation must democratically decide to do away with poverty. The political economy perspective seems more true and is more disturbing: there are not enough good jobs. Political economy perspective also accounts that many are not unfit for these ‘good’ jobs as well and a roll of loaded dice decides your economic placement.

Nothing is for certain, but a white college graduate has a percentage better chance to get a ‘good’ job as opposed to black college graduate. There are simply too many issues with the United States in sociological terms to be optimistic about sociological outcomes. One can only wish that poverty was a function of individual behavior so that American Capitalism could be justified, but I contend to the structural perspective of poverty and 1 out of 3 Americans are defined as low income. Poverty is too common to look past.