Suchergebnisse

This paper shows that higher levels of perceived wage inequality are associated with a weaker (stronger) belief into meritocratic (non-meritocratic) principles as being important in determining individual wages. This finding is robust to the use of an instrumental-variable estimation strategy which takes the potential issue of reverse causality into account, and it is further corroborated using various complementary measures of individuals' perception of the chances and risks associated with an unequal distribution of economic resources, such as their perception of the chances of upward mobility. I finally show that those individuals perceiving a high level of wage inequality also tend to be more supportive of redistributive policies and progressive taxation, and that they tend to favor the political left, suggesting a feedback effect of inequality perceptions into the political-economic sphere. Taken together, these findings suggest that high levels of perceived wage inequality have the potential to undermine the legitimacy of market outcomes.

This paper shows that higher levels of perceived wage inequality are associated with a weaker (stronger) belief into meritocratic (non-meritocratic) principles as being important in determining individual wages. This finding is robust to the use of an instrumental-variable estimation strategy which takes the potential issue of reverse causality into account, and it is further corroborated using various complementary measures of individuals' perception of the chances and risks associated with an unequal distribution of economic resources, such as their perception of the chances of upward mobility. I finally show that those individuals perceiving a high level of wage inequality also tend to be more supportive of redistributive policies and progressive taxation, and that they tend to favor the political left, suggesting a feedback effect of inequality perceptions into the political-economic sphere. Taken together, these findings suggest that high levels of perceived wage inequality have the potential to undermine the legitimacy of market outcomes.

A critique of the APSA Task Force on Inequality & American Democracy report challenges claims that the US is experiencing a reinforcing cycle of political & economic inequality. Attention is called to countertendencies & opportunities to lessen the forces that create inequality in voice, governance, & public policy. It is maintained that political scientists must focus more on the internal dynamics/processes of groups like the Sierra Club which have the potential to create a more engaged & mobilized base. State & local factors that produce or exacerbate inequality are explored, especially the concentration of Latinos & African Americans in low-income urban areas; the ineffectiveness of policies designed to address problems of low-income minorities; & the impact of large-scale immigration. Emphasis is placed on the capacity of churches to teach the skills of participation & the importance of the "war of ideas." It is concluded that discussions about inequality must move beyond the realm of government responsibility to cultural outlets that will encourage people to imagine new forms of democratic engagement. 20 References. J. Lindroth

Contents -- Contributors -- Acknowledgments -- Part I: Introduction: Foundations of a Prismatic Metropolis -- Chapter 1: Analyzing Inequality in Los Angeles // Lawrence D. Bobo, Melvin L. Oliver, James H. Johnson Jr., and Abel Valenzuela Jr. -- Chapter 2: A Demographic Portrait of Los Angeles County, 1970 to 1990 // David M. Grant -- Chapter 3: Racial Attitudes in a Prismatic Metropolis: Mapping Identity, Stereotypes, Competition, and Views on Affirmative Action // Lawrence D. Bobo and Devon Johnson -- Part II: Opportunities Divided: Race, Space, and Gender in Los Angeles

The international is already constituted through the legitimation of specific forms of inequality. This paper explores four: (1) worldwide patterns of economic inequality; (2) the principle & historical experience of the "great powers" as a guarantee of international "order"; (3) the capacities of specific kinds of political community to participate in the modern system of states; & (4) the constitutive value field in which the international is judged as the negation of the positive values ascribed to statist forms of political community. It does so in relation to claims about freedom, scale, & the necessary practices of modern discrimination. This exploration leads to the conclusion that the primary significance of claims about new inequalities in an international context is that they express the increasing difficulty of thinking about equality/inequality in political terms, let alone of responding adequately to the "violences" & injustices that might be attributed to multiple kinds of inequalities in various settings. Adapted from the source document.

Since Aristotle, a vast literature has suggested that economic inequality has important political consequences. Higher inequality is thought to increase demand for government income redistribution in democracies and to discourage democratization and promote class conflict and revolution in dictatorships. Most such arguments crucially assume that ordinary people know how high inequality is, how it has been changing, and where they fit in the income distribution. Using a variety of large, cross-national surveys, we show that, in recent years, ordinary people have had little idea about such things. What they think they know is often wrong. Widespread ignorance and misperceptions of inequality emerge robustly, regardless of the data source, operationalization, and method of measurement. Moreover, we show that the perceived level of inequality – and not the actual level – correlates strongly with demand for redistribution and reported conflict between rich and poor. We suggest that most theories about political effects of inequality need to be either abandoned or reframed as theories about the effects of perceived inequality.

This paper distinguishes between income inequality and standard of living inequality. It examines the case where the utility of individuals is positively affected by a private good and a public good. We show that a wealthy individual will bear the financial burden of financing the public good, which increases the utility of the poor and reduces utility inequality. Moreover, at certain levels of inequality in income, it turns out that an individual whose share in income has decreased will not experience a reduction in utility as a result of the reduction in income. This may explain why within certain ranges of income inequality there is no attempt on the part of either the wealthy or the poor to struggle for income redistribution.

Abstract: This article explores the relationship between liberal democracy and socioeconomic equality, both on a theoretical and a practical level. It recounts both liberal and non-liberal arguments why democracies should or should not worry about de facto inequality, and then goes through a series of consequentialist arguments about why, alternatively, democracies should either worry about high persistent levels of inequality, or conversely, why attempts to remedy inequality through social policy is likely to have deleterious political or economic effects.