Search results

Inequality and poverty have returned with a vengeance in recent decades. To reduce them, we need fresh ideas that move beyond taxes on the wealthy. Anthony B. Atkinson offers ambitious new policies in technology, employment, social security, sharing of capital, and taxation, and he defends them against the common arguments and excuses for inaction.

"Governments all round the world are facing problems with their public finances. At a time of austerity, how much should spending be cut and how much should taxes be raised? Does the national debt represent a burden for future generations? Should taxes on the rich be raised? This book examines how the tools of public economics can be applied to answer such key questions and to suggest alternatives to the austerity policies currently being pursued. The fiscal problems faced are not simply the result of the post-2008 economic crisis but reflect a deep-seated fault line in modern economies. There has to be fiscal consolidation to provide for an ageing population, increased investment in education, and climate change. The book describes how public economics can help us think about alternative ways of meeting this challenge. It casts doubt on conventionally held views, such as those concerned with top tax rates, the undesirability of taxing capital income, the targeting of child benefits, and the merging of income tax and social security contributions. The final part goes beyond national boundaries and considers global public economics, focusing on the pressing problem of financing development. The conclusion of the book is that there are significant choices to be made. Not all austerity packages are the same: there are alternatives. It would be possible to raise taxes more and to cut spending less. It is important to consider the full range of possible policies. In considering these alternatives, modern public economics provides a useful framework, but it has major limitations. Economists are too often prisoners within the theoretical walls they have erected and fail to see that important considerations are missing. Economists have paid too little attention to the ethical basis underlying their policy recommendations"--

First published in 1976, the essays in this volume are concerned with the distribution of income and wealth. The papers were first presented at the Royal Economic Society's conference in 1974, which examined the evidence concerning the personal distribution of earnings, compared the distributions apparent in different periods and societies, and studied the association between personal attributes and income. The contributions, from internationally-renowned authors, reflect these areas, and address the questions surrounding inequality, the taxation of wealth and capital transfers that remain rel

The Pareto distribution has long been a source of fascination to economists, and the Pareto coefficient is widely used, in theoretical and empirical studies, as a summary of the degree of concentration of top incomes. This paper examines the empirical evidence from income tax data concerning top incomes in theUK, contrasting the dramatic changes that took place in the twentieth century, after 1918, with the much more modest changes in the preceding nineteenth century. Probing beneath the surface, the paper identifies a number of features of the evolution of theUKincome inequality that warrant closer attention. These include the changing shape of the upper tail, where there is a link with Pareto's theory of elites, the need for a richer functional form to describe top incomes, and the limited evidence at the top of the distribution for a Kuznets curve in nineteenth century Britain.

This paper examines the distribution of top incomes in 15 former British colonies in Africa, drawing on evidence available from income tax records. It seeks to throw light on the position of colonial elites during the period of British rule. Just how unequal were incomes? How did the position of the rich in the colonies compare with that of the rich in the United Kingdom? It investigates how income concentration evolved in the last years of colonial rule, as the British government became more concerned with development, and establishes the degree of inequality at the time of independence in the late 1950s and early 1960s. What was the colonial legacy? How far did colonial inequality persist post-independence?

Economists frequently make judgments about economic welfare, but there is today little discussion of the foundations of welfare economics. It is assumed either that there is unanimity of interests, or that there is general acceptance of utilitarianism. This means that economics cannot address many key policy issues and that important differences in ethical views cannot be recognized. This paper argues that it is a legitimate exercise of economic analysis to examine the consequences of different ethical positions, taking case studies of employment as a macroeconomic objective, and the role of capabilities in the measurement of economic performance.

Internationally comparable data are essential to our understanding of income inequality & its impact on our societies. The Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) has played a key role in raising to a new level such comparative analysis, & its collection of microdata has been used by a wide range of social scientists. The contribution of LIS over the past 20 years can be seen from the fact that there is now a broadly agreed picture of the differences in income inequality across OECD countries (Section 1). The present importance of LIS lies in the need to keep the picture up to date in a rapidly changing world, & in the sensitivity of analysis to data quality & comparability (Section 2). Looking to the future, it is argued that LIS will continue to be crucial, but that more needs to be done in creating long-run annual time series & in modeling the impact of policy (Section 3). 1 Table, 5 Figures, 55 References. Adapted from the source document.