Does income distribution matter for effective demand? Evidence from the United States

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Brown
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Effective Demand

Inflation Inequality: Measurement, Causes, and Policy Implications

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Jaravel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
Interest Rates ◽  
Optimal Taxation ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Annual Review ◽  
Publication Date

Does inflation vary across the income distribution? This article reviews the growing literature on inflation inequality, describing recent advances and opportunities for further research in four areas. First, new price index theory facilitates the study of inflation inequality. Second, new data show that inflation rates decline with household income in the United States. Accurate measurement requires granular price and expenditure data because of aggregation bias. Third, new evidence quantifies the impacts of innovation and trade on inflation inequality. Contrary to common wisdom, empirical estimates show that the direction of innovation is a significant driver of inflation inequality in the United States, whereas trade has similar price effects across the income distribution. Fourth, inflation inequality and non-homotheticities have important policy implications. They transform cost-benefit analysis, optimal taxation, the effectiveness of stabilization policies, and our understanding of secular macroeconomic trends—including structural change, the decline in the labor share and interest rates, and labor market polarization. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Economics, Volume 13 is August 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Book Reviews

2021 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 659-661
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Income Growth ◽  
University Of Michigan

Charles Brown of University of Michigan reviews “United States Income, Wealth, Consumption, and Inequality” edited by Diana Furchtgott-Roth. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Ten papers examine income trends, consumption, wealth, and inequality in the United States, focusing on the root causes of income growth and inequality, as well as ways to measure income and income distribution.”

Economic Policy

2019 ◽  
pp. 173-195
Author(s):  
William Keech ◽  
William Scarth
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
Economic Policy ◽  
Fiscal Policy ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Productivity Growth ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Policies ◽  
Sustainable Fiscal Policy

This chapter identifies the differing policies and outcomes that Canadians and Americans have pursued with respect to economic growth, stabilization, and income distribution, and it analyzes several factors that can partially explain why divergent policy choices have emerged. The United States (U.S.) has recorded better productivity growth, while Canada has achieved a more sustainable fiscal policy, a less fragile financial sector, and more generous distributional policies. These contrasting outcomes are related to differences in size and geography, in political culture, and in political institutions. The analysis also considers how much it may be possible for each country’s policymakers to benefit from the other’s experiences. While identifying some lessons in this regard, the authors conclude that the sheer difference in the size of the two economies affects which economic policies can be expected to be effective. As a result, it is concluded that convergence in economic policymaking will remain somewhat limited.

scholarly journals Income Distribution in the United States.

1967 ◽  
Vol 130 (3) ◽  
pp. 439
Author(s):  
J. F. Brothwell ◽  
Herman P. Miller
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
The United States

Evidence on Income Inequality in the United States, 1866–1965

1969 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee C. Soltow
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil War ◽  
Income Inequality ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
Income Tax ◽  
Wealth Distribution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Turn Of The Century ◽  
Personal Income ◽  
Income Groups

It is commonly thought that income distribution among people became more concentrated after the Civil War and that this direction continued until the turn of the century. We can look methodically at the income tax distributions from the Civil War period and compare them directly with the distributions arising from the income tax after 1912. We also have some data from the abortive income tax of 1894. After examining the various blocks of evidence, the conclusion will be made that inequality among upper-income groups did not increase during this period. It is necessary to emphasize that the present investigation is one of income and not of wealth. It might have been possible for the nonhuman wealth distribution among people to remain constant or to increase in inequality while the personal income distribution was decreasing in inequality.

Zipf's Law, Pareto's Law, and the Evolution of Top Incomes in the United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 36-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuhei Aoki ◽  
Makoto Nirei
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Income Distribution ◽  
The United States ◽  
Zipf’S Law ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Productivity Shocks ◽  
Zipf's Law ◽  
Top Incomes ◽  
Pareto’S Law

We construct a tractable neoclassical growth model that generates Pareto's law of income distribution and Zipf's law of the firm size distribution from idiosyncratic, firm-level productivity shocks. Executives and entrepreneurs invest in risk-free assets, as well as their own firms' risky stocks, through which their wealth and income depend on firm-level shocks. By using the model, we evaluate how changes in tax rates can account for the evolution of top incomes in the United States. The model matches the decline in the Pareto exponent of the income distribution and the trend of the top 1 percent income share in recent decades. (JEL D31, H24, L11)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document