Jump to Navigation
Home

Main menu

  • Home
  • News
  • Markets Map
  • Sentiments
  • Topics
  • Data
  • Comments
  • Images
  • Blog
  • About

Secondary menu

  • Latest News
  • Top Rated
  • Most Popular
  • Archive
  • Discussions
  • Yen edges up from lows, Asian shares firmer
  • The 'Other' Way To Exit The Euro...
  • White House Damage Control Script Jeopardized By New...
  • Why Taco Bell and Popeyes Want to Sell You Breakfast
  • Drug firms 'need to consolidate'
  • What’s Important in Asia This Week
  • From the Vortex to the Leviathan: Canada's...
  • Has Hollywood Sold Out On Tibet?
  • DealBook: JPMorgan Chase Vote Tests Stockholders’ Power
  • The Top 35 Dividend Champions With Regard To Long-Term...

    Big government & equality

    Sun, 12/11/2011 - 07:59 EDT - Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Comments

    Richard Exell poses the question: can fiscal conservatives reduce inequality?
    Maybe.  For one thing, it is possible to make the tax system more progressive, for example through a progressive consumption tax, land taxes or inheritance tax. And we shouldn’t rule out the possibility of very high top tax rates. It’s also possible to both shrink the state and increase equality by cutting corporate welfare - handouts to the likes of BAe Systems, Serco, Capita, CSC and A4E.
    There is, though, something else. My chart shows that the correlation between big government and equality is weak. Yes, countries with big government spending tend to be more equal, but there’s a lot of variation around this. For example, France and Norway have similar levels of equality, but France spends 13 percentage points more of GDP. And the UK has the same inequality as Australia or Japan, but spends 10 percentage points more of GDP. Ineqyg
    In fact, it could be that the positive correlation between equality and public spending doesn’t reflect causality from the latter to the former at all, but rather an omitted variable. Countries that combine big government and equality tend to be high trust societies. It could be, then, that the same high trust that makes people supportive of redistribution - because they believe “welfare scroungers” aren’t ripping them off - also makes them support big government as they trust politicians not to waste money.
    This possibility hints at another - that perhaps it’s possible to combine small government and equality if the right cultural or institutional factors are in place. I mean, for example:
    - Strong trades unions. These not only raise the pay of the worst off, but also help restrain top pay.
    - A collectivist culture. A society that believes that corporate performance depends upon the abilities of all its employees will be more egalitarian than one which believes that organizations can be transformed by star managers.
    - Education. A highly educated workforce might be more equal, if only because it creates more competition for top jobs. There is a correlation between education levels (pdf) and equality - the egalitarian Nordics do better than the inegalitarian US and latin Americans. And the causality mightn’t be entirely from inequality to poor education. However, high educational standards are achieved not by increased spending, but by a culture which values schooling - and the UK lacks this.
    Herein, I fear, lies the big challenge for the Left. Although it is technically possible to reconcile small government or fiscal conservatism with greater equality, the UK lacks the cultural underpinnings which would permit this happy combination.

    • Original article
    • Login or register to post comments
     

    Related

    • Making Consumption Taxes More Progressive

      One issue that naturally arises on the subject of consumption taxes is whether you can’t act to make them progressive. For example, Paul Holmes says:

    • Public spending and equality

      Sunder at Next Left points out that public spending cuts might well bear harder upon the poor than the rich. This raises a question: what exactly is the link between public spending and inequality?

    • Equality vs big government

      Imagine a tax system in which the first £10,000 of income is tax-free, the next £40,000 is taxed at 20%, and incomes above £50,000 are taxed at 50%.

    • 'Inequality Rising and Permanent Over Past Two Decades'

      A new Brookings paper finds that most of the increase in inequality in recent decades is permanent:

    • Shrink the state: a leftist aim

      David Semple thinks the left should join American tea parties, which protest against high taxes. I think I agree. The desire to shrink the state should be a leftist aim. I say so for four reasons.1. Big government cannot be redistributive government. If the state is raising 40% of GDP in taxes, it must tax the worst off, simply because the rich, even in the UK and US, aren’t that rich or plentiful.

    • Defending spending cuts

      If I wanted to defend public spending cuts, I’d use this new paper from Andreas Bergh and Magnus Henrekson. In a survey of the research, they find that big government does reduce long-run economic growth. In developed economies, if the share of public spending in GDP is 10 percentage points higher, annual GDP growth is 0.5-1.0 percentage points lower.

    • Welfare states & public debt

      Low public debt requires a generous welfare state. This sounds paradoxical. But it’s not. In Fault Lines, Raghuram Rajan says that one reason why the US engages in big Keynesian counter-cyclical policy is precisely that it has a weak welfare state. The absence of significant protection against unemployment means that there’s greater demand upon governments to do something about recessions:

    • What’s a Big Government?

      By James Kwak One thing that all parties seem to be able to agree on is that big government is bad. It was President Clinton, after all, who said, “The era of big government is over.” And the current Republican budget-slashing wave seems motivated by the idea that our government is too big.

    • Enter the consumption tax

      AMERICA is in desperate need of tax reform. It needs more revenue to close budget gaps, fund social programmes, and make needed investments, but the current tax system is so complex and riddled with loopholes that efforts to boost revenues are economically costly and lead to lots of tax dodging. Economists often recommend scrapping the income tax system entirely, or shrinking its role, and replacing it with a progressive consumption tax, which is more efficient. It's a good idea, and one that's worked in other rich countries.

    • Rep Gohmert Proposes Replacing Welfare With Land Giveaways

      Via Walid Zafar, a curious proposal from Rep Louis Gohmert:

    Latest

    Why Taco Bell and Popeyes Want to Sell You Breakfast
    Why Taco Bell and Popeyes Want to Sell You...
    The 'Other' Way To Exit The Euro...
    The 'Other' Way To Exit The Euro...

    User login

    • Create new account
    • Request new password
    • Click on the icon to sign in with your social network login or enter your Bullfax.com login

    Our Blog

    • Aviva steps up drive for cost cuts
    • Food Demand, JM Financial, UK Startups Incubator and Sina in Our News for Today 05/17/2013
    • Budget black hole at heart of George Osborne’s finances

    Markets Map

    Markets Map

    Follow Us

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS
    S&P 500: 1667.47 1.02% FTSE: 6723.06 0.52% Nikk.: 15319.79 1.19% DAX: 8398.00 0.33% HSI: 23426.551 1.47% FX: EUR/GBP: 1.1833 USD/EUR: 1.2833 JPY/USD: 102.7825 Commodities: Gold: 1349.75

    Bullfax.com - Market News & Analysis 2008-2011
    Contact Us | About Us | Terms & Conditions

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS .

    Secondary menu

    • Latest News
    • Top Rated
    • Most Popular
    • Archive
    • Discussions