Suchergebnisse

"Macht ist im Spiel, wenn ein sogenannter Bestimmer den sogenannten Anderen gegenübersteht. Dabei werden die Bestimmer die Anderen nicht für sich einspannen können, indem sie einfach nur ihre Macht nutzen; vielmehr müssen sie geschickt von ihrer Macht Gebrauch machen. Zu diesem Zweck müssen sie ihre Autorität mobilisieren, und diese Autorität fußt auf einem gezügelten Gebrauch von Macht. Wie viel Autorität ein Bestimmer hat, hängt davon ab, ob die Anderen bereit sind, auf ihn zu hören und sich von ihm überzeugen zu lassen. Auch die anderen haben übrigens Macht - sie können dem Bestimmer nämlich die Autorität absprechen, die er für seine Führungsrolle braucht." (Autorenreferat)

A strongly recommended conclusion in sociology about trends in class inequality has been summarised by Goldthorpe as a high degree of 'temporal constancy & cross-national communality'. This conclusion, here called 'the stability thesis', was first challenged by Ringen in 1987 & again, on more methodological grounds, by Ringen & Hellevik in two papers published in 1997. These challenges resulted in a process of debate & reassessment. It is now possible to sum up & conclude. The stability thesis rests on empirical results from odds-ratio readings of mobility table data. The authority of this methodology is re-examined in terms of normative significance & statistical validity. Mobility table data which have generated stability thesis findings are re-analysed with the standard gini-index methodology in the study of inequality, then yielding different findings which contradict the stability thesis. The main conclusion is that the stability thesis can now be considered overturned.

Three limitations in standard method measurement of income redistribution are considered: (1) redistribution is seen as a matter of global rather than marginal effects, (2) structural effects on the distribution of factor income are not accounted for, & (3) cross-section & life-cycle effects are conflated. Evidence from recent research is introduced, & it is argued that standard method results are reasonably robust in spite of limitations in the methodology. A positive association in advanced industrial companies between tax/transfer policy & income inequality is contended to be a firmly established conclusion, which suggests that if government wants to modify income inequality, it has a tool for so doing in tax & transfer policy, & if it should want to reshape transfers or taxes for other reasons, it must expect distributional consequences.