scholarly journals EXCHANGE MODELS FOR THE EMERGENCE OF INCOME DISTRIBUTION AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITY

Author(s):  
M. L. BERTOTTI ◽  
G. MODANESE
2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 337-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hüther ◽  
Matthias Diermeier

Abstract Can the rise of populism be explained by the growing chasm between rich and poor? With regard to Germany, such a causal relationship must be rejected. Income distribution in Germany has been very stable since 2005, and people’s knowledge on actual inequality and economic development is limited: inequality and unemployment are massively overestimated. At the same time, a persistently isolationist and xenophobic group with diverse concerns and preferences has emerged within the middle classes of society that riggers support for populist parties. This mood is based on welfare chauvinism against immigration rather than on a general criticism of distribution. Since the immigration of recent years will inevitably affect the relevant indicators concerning distribution, an open, cautious but less heated approach is needed in the debate on the future of the welfare state. In order to address and take the local concerns of citizens seriously, an increased exchange with public officials on the ground is needed.


Subject Social and economic inequality. Significance After its progress in reducing poverty, highlighted by a recent report of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Chile faces the complex and socially divisive challenge of tackling its deep-rooted economic and social inequalities. Impacts The key problem in addressing poverty will be its concentration in specific groups of the population. Some of the government’s planned reforms, such as pension reform, would help to improve income distribution. The outcome of the government’s Country Undertaking initiative will depend on its ability to implement the resulting ideas.


1980 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 457-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey G. Williamson

Although debate has raged ever since Marx and Engels openly condemned British capitalism in the 1840s, little hard evidence has been brought to bear on the issue of economic inequality. This paper estimates British earnings distributions for four years in the period 1827–1901. The evidence supports the view of increasing inequality up to mid-century and a leveling thereafter. Coupled with newly available evidence on British eighteenth- and nineteenth-century wealth and income distribution, these estimates equip us to search for explanations. A strategy for modeling British inequality history is suggested.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
efi rahmadhani

Economic growth essentially aims to improve the welfare of the community, so that increased economic growth is needed and more equitable income distribution. However, if the growth is followed by an improvement in income distribution, it will be difficult to create prosperity for the community in general, because the income distribution is uneven or does not run smoothly, so that it will automatically disrupt the Indonesian economy, and will be in poverty.But the high level of economic inequality in Indonesia has resulted in low income groups unable to access basic needs and services such as food, health and education. This can adversely affect the community and slow down the human development process, as measured by the Human Development Index (HDI). Sources of economic inequality, especially in Indonesia, are due to the implementation of the economic system of capitalism, differences in natural resource content, market fundamentalism that encourage rich people to reap the biggest profits from economic growth, increased political capture, gender inequality, low wages lifting itself from poverty, inequality of access between rural and urban areas to infrastructure, a taxation system that fails to play an important role in distributing income.One of the country's efforts to reduce inequality between regions or regions is of course through equitable development in the regions. This is related to regional development, where regional development is an integral part of national development. Thus, it is expected that the results of development will be distributed and allocated to regional levels.


1979 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 323
Author(s):  
Kenneth E. Galchus ◽  
Zvi Griliches ◽  
Wilhelm Krelle ◽  
Hans-Jurgen Krupp ◽  
Oldrich Kyn

Sociology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rense Nieuwenhuis

This article provides an overview of the emerging literature on how trends in women’s employment have affected levels of inequality between households. It also sets the stage for future research endeavors. The rise in female labor force participation, and in conjunction the rise in women’s earnings, has been one of the biggest changes in economic activity in recent decades and in many countries. These long-term trends in women’s employment and associated changes in families are discussed in the section on Family Revolution(s). As such, it is remarkable how little attention mainstream analyses of high and rising levels of economic inequality have paid to gender and women’s employment. The first section, on Economic Inequality: Horizontal versus Vertical Perspectives, sets out the distinction between two perspectives on economic inequality. The first pertains to economic differences between households across the income distribution, referred to as Vertical Economic Inequality. The second pertains to economic differences between groups, such as between women and men, referred to as Horizontal Economic Inequality. The next section, on Integrating Horizontal and Vertical Inequality, demonstrates that levels of vertical inequality are affected by horizontal inequality, in this case specifically applied to how economic differences between households are directly related to economic differences between women and men. There is by now a literature that clearly shows how the rise in women’s employment and earnings (and thus smaller horizontal differences between women and men) reduces vertical inequality between households. This has been demonstrated in a vast amount of Country-Specific Studies as well as in Country-Comparative Studies, a consensus that also resonates in a number of Research Overviews. The next section argues that although it has been convincingly demonstrated that women’s employment and earnings have had an attenuating effect on inequality between households, less is known about how and why this is the case and under which conditions. As such, it combines literature from various fields (including sociology, demography, and economics) to develop a Research Agenda to further the literature on the relationship between women’s employment and economic inequality between households. This section addresses six different questions: Who? is employed and has certain levels of earnings, and with whom do they form a household (With Whom? Homogamy and With Whom? Household Formation). These sections also cover determinants of women’s paid work, such as unpaid care- or housework. The next section covers What Income Effect? can be expected from, for instance, motherhood and housework, and whether these effects vary across the income distribution. The section on What Context? brings into focus the welfare state and public policies, and a final subsection briefly addresses the question of Which Methods? may be particularly effective to further this research agenda. This article concludes by acknowledging a few Outstanding Questions that are less developed in the literature and therefore less integrated into this article—but may nevertheless point to interesting venues for further research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document