Redistribution to the Rich and the Poor: The Grants Economics of Income Distribution by Kenneth E. Boulding, Martin Pfaff

Challenge ◽  
1973 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-65
Author(s):  
Lynn Turgeon
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich

The effects of debt restructurings on income inequality in the developing world

2021 ◽  
pp. 135406612110014
Author(s):  
Glen Biglaiser ◽  
Ronald J. McGauvran
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Panel Data ◽  
Income Inequality ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
Government Spending ◽  
Tax Reform ◽  
Social Spending ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich ◽  
The Impact

Developing countries, saddled with debts, often prefer investors absorb losses through debt restructurings. By not making full repayments, debtor governments could increase social spending, serving poorer constituents, and, in turn, lowering income inequality. Alternatively, debtor governments could reduce taxes and cut government spending, bolstering the assets of the rich at the expense of the poor. Using panel data for 71 developing countries from 1986 to 2016, we assess the effects of debt restructurings on societal income distribution. Specifically, we study the impact of debt restructurings on social spending, tax reform, and income inequality. We find that countries receiving debt restructurings tend to use their newly acquired economic flexibility to reduce taxes and lower social spending, worsening income inequality. The results are also robust to different model specifications. Our study contributes to the globalization and the poor debate, suggesting the economic harm caused to the less well-off following debt restructurings.

scholarly journals Dynamics of reallocation within India’s income distribution

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anand Sahasranaman ◽  
Henrik Jeldtoft Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Distribution Data ◽  
Recent Past ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Theoretical Predictions ◽  
Cast Doubt ◽  
Service Sectors ◽  
The Rich

AbstractIt is well known that inequality has been rising in India in the recent past, but the assumption has been that while the rich benefit more than proportionally from economic growth, the poor are also better off than before. Our modelled outcomes (using the RGBM framework) cast doubt on this proposition. We find that the income share dynamics are consistent with a negative reallocation since the early 2000s, i.e., the Indian income distribution possibly entered a regime of perverse redistribution of resources from the poor to the rich. Our model suggests that the historically low-income shares of the bottom decile (~ 1%) and bottom percentile (~ 0.03%) are possibly due to a decline in real incomes in the 2000s. We find qualified support for these theoretical predictions using income distribution data. We characterize these findings in the context of increasing informalization of the workforce in the formal manufacturing and service sectors as well as the growing economic insecurity of the agricultural workforce in India. Significant structural changes will be required to address this phenomenon.

Redistribution to the Rich and the Poor. The Grants Economics of Income Distribution.

1973 ◽  
Vol 83 (331) ◽  
pp. 956
Author(s):  
A. B. Atkinson ◽  
K. E. Boulding ◽  
M. Pfaff
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich

scholarly journals Inequality and Growth: Why Differential Fertility Matters

2003 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 1091-1113 ◽  
Author(s):  
David de la Croix ◽  
Matthias Doepke
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
Differential Effect ◽  
Empirical Relationship ◽  
Differential Fertility ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Fertility Differential ◽  
Education Decisions ◽  
Average Education ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Mean Preserving Spread

We develop a new theoretical link between inequality and growth. In our model, fertility and education decisions are interdependent. Poor parents decide to have many children and invest little in education. A mean-preserving spread in the income distribution increases the fertility differential between the rich and the poor, which implies that more weight gets placed on families who provide little education. Consequently, an increase in inequality lowers average education and, therefore, growth. We find that this fertility-differential effect accounts for most of the empirical relationship between inequality and growth.

scholarly journals How the Rich Are Different: Hierarchical Power as the Basis of Income Size and Class

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blair Fix
Keyword(s):  
Numerical Model ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Individual Income ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich

This paper investigates a new approach to understanding personal and functional income distribution. I propose that hierarchical power --- the command of subordinates in a hierarchy --- is what distinguishes the rich from the poor and capitalists from workers. Specifically, I hypothesize that individual income increases with hierarchical power, as does the share of individual income earned from capitalist sources. I test this idea using evidence from US CEOs, as well as a numerical model that extrapolates the CEO data. The results indicate that income tends to increase with hierarchical power, as does the capitalist composition of income. This suggests that hierarchical power may be a determinant of both personal and functional income.

scholarly journals Economic Development Paper

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Annisa
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Development ◽  
Income Inequality ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
High Growth ◽  
Relative Poverty ◽  
Low Level ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Distribution Of Income

The main problems in economic development are increasing economic growth, eliminating poverty and eliminating poverty. In some destination countries it is sometimes a dilemma between emphasizing economic growth or reducing inequality in income distribution (Deininger and Olinto, 2000). High growth does not necessarily guarantee that the inequality of income distribution will be low.Poverty and income inequality are two things that are being intensely emphasized by the government's growth. Inequality is closely related to poverty because fundamentally inequality is an indicator of relative poverty, namely the gap between the rich and the poor. The low level of inequality, or the more even distribution of income, is certainly one of the important agendas of economic development.To measure economic inequality can be seen using the Gini ratio. Gini ratio is an indicator of income distribution level indicated by a coefficient of zero to one, which means the higher the coefficient, the more uneven distribution of income of the population.

scholarly journals Feeling Uncomfortable: Young People's Emotional Responses to Neo-Liberal Explanations for Economic Inequality

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Smart
Keyword(s):  
Income Distribution ◽  
Economic Inequality ◽  
Great Part ◽  
Emotional Responses ◽  
Consumption Patterns ◽  
Fair Result ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Group Interviews ◽  
Different Levels

People's emotional and political responses to economic inequality are shaped by their beliefs about and interpretations of that inequality. Drawing on a series of group interviews with a total of 110 11 - 16 year olds across eight schools I show that participants spoke about economic inequality in terms of rich and poor, but tended to place themselves in the middle of the income distribution. Despite this self-placement, they often felt very strongly about experiences where economic inequality was visible in consumption patterns. Participants interpreted economic inequality using ideas of neo-liberal meritocracy to explain that the existence of economic inequality was the fair result of different skills or effort among the rich and the poor. But at the same time they used a more egalitarian interpretation to claim that that rich and poor were the ‘same kind of people’ and that luck played a great part in the different levels of wealth and possessions. This led them to argue that everyone should be treated the same and granted the same respect, regardless of whether they were rich or poor. These egalitarian sentiments were also drawn on to propose strategies to minimise situations where rich and poor might be treated differently, or to manage the difficult feelings and lack of respect that participants associated with situations of economic inequality. These proposals did not challenge the existence of economic inequality, but focussed on the justice of how people with different levels of wealth or possessions should be treated.

Editor's Note

2004 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. i-iii
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Education ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Ethnic Origin ◽  
Fair Use ◽  
Good Education ◽  
The Poor ◽  
The Rich

In this election year, 2004, people are grappling with the various forces that make up these United States. What forces encourage inclusion and which exclusion? Who is to be included and who excluded? Is this to be a country with wide discrepancies between the rich and the poor? Is this to be a country where public education is poorly funded and a good education depends upon private resources? Are we going to forget that discrimination on the basis of gender, race, ethnic origin, and economic status still exists and needs to be perpetually, vigilantly addressed? There is a deep division in the country over the proper and fair use of our resources that constitutes concern in all our citizens

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document