Does wealth inequality affect the transmission of monetary policy?

We provide evidence that higher wealth inequality between households is associated with stronger real effects of monetary policy. First, we use state-dependent local projections to show that the US and the UK exhibited stronger real effects of monetary policy in times of higher wealth inequality. Second, we measure wealth inequality within US states and document that economic activity responds more strongly to interest rate changes in states where wealth is distributed more unequally. Third, we show that ECB monetary policy has stronger real effects in Euro Area countries with higher wealth inequality.     

Expectations,capital formation,sales and capacity utilization

A model is developed and tested to relate capital formation, sales and capacity utilization in manufacturing to expected inflation and expected interest rates through anticipated real wealth effects. Expected future inflation causes purchases of storeable manufactured goods in advance and accumulations of physical capital. The former increases capacity utilization, while the latter decreases it. Expected increases in interest rates have an impact on sales and capital formation opposite to that of expected increases in prices. Finally, if expected inflation is accompanied by a propertionate increase in expected interest rates, sales decline more than capital formation, and hence capacity utilization contracts.     

Capital Gains and Income Arising from Nonrenewable Resources

Should capital gains be included in income arising from nonrenewable resources? In the present paper, I show that capital gains from a nonrenewable resource can be divided into two terms: real price change effects and real interest rate change effects. By application of sectoral income theory developed by Asheim and Wei (Environ Res Econ 42:65–87, 2009), only the former term is part of real income of the resource and the latter term should not be included. This result is significant in the sense that all change in real resource wealth can be included as part of real income only if future real interest rates are assumed to be constant. Hotelling rule always implies that capital gains from nonrenewable resources coincide with real interests on resource wealth; net investment generated from the resource cancels out current cash flow from the resource; and real income comes from price change effects.     

Macroeconomic determinants of wealth inequality dynamics

The evolution of wealth inequality over the long run depends on income growth, inflation, and interest rates. In this paper, we examine, in a dynamic setting, the effect of these three macroeconomic variables on wealth inequality in the United States over the periods 1929–2009 and 1962–2009. The results show that these macroeconomic factors explain a significant amount of the changes in wealth inequality. The results indicate that increases in inflation and income growth contribute positively to net wealth shares of adults in the bottom 50% and middle 40% of the wealth distribution, leading to decreases in overall wealth inequality. Interestingly, the results show increases in interest rates contribute to lower wealth inequality in the U.S. although this result does not hold across all the inequality measures.     

Stochastic dominance and thick-tailed wealth distributions

Right-skewed and thick-tailed wealth distributions have been documented as an empirical regularity across space and time. A key mechanism for explaining these distributional features is proportional random growth. We investigate the comparative statics of a well-defined class of random growth models when allowing for stochastically ordered shifts in the wealth return process. An order-contingent monotone comparative statics property is identified, according to which pure increases in risk (e.g. higher volatility of capital returns) foster top wealth concentration whereas first-order stochastically dominated shifts in the return process (induced by e.g. proportional capital income taxation) rather lower inequality at the upper end of the distribution. Our analysis points to the potentially ambiguous effects on top wealth inequality of introducing or modifying capital income tax treatments in the presence of stochastic returns.     

Thomas Piketty's Historical Macroeconomics: A Critical Analysis

There has been a great deal of interest in the data on income and wealth inequality collected by Thomas Piketty. This paper does not question that data; rather, it questions the framework of Piketty's analysis, both theoretically and empirically—namely the alleged upward tendency of the ratio of wealth to national income and the rise of wealth inequality. First, in the mechanism put forward, wealth can only grow as a result of savings, thus ruling out any form of price effect (as in urban land). Second, Piketty’s second law defines an asymptotical trajectory, in which variables grow in parallel, something incompatible with the rise of the ratio between two variables. In addition, Piketty’s model does not match data for the USA. The historical profile of the ratio of wealth/national income is actually the inverted image of the productivity of capital (the ratio of output/firms’ fixed capital). Doubts are also expressed concerning the dramatic fall of the ratio of wealth/national income in Europe around World War I.     

Why progressive redistribution can hurt the poor

Recent macroeconomic research discusses credit market imperfections as a key channel through which inequality retards growth: With convex technologies, progressive transfers increase aggregate output because marginal returns become more equalized across investment opportunities. We argue that this reasoning may not hold in general equilibrium. Since the investment functions are concave in wealth, reducing inequality increases capital demand and the interest rate. Hence, through the impact on capital costs, shifting wealth from the rich to the middle class depletes the poorest investors' access to credit. But because the poor face the highest marginal returns, the net effect on output may be negative. We find, however, that redistributing towards the bottom-end of the distribution has a clear positive impact. Finally, we discuss the implications of our theoretical findings for future empirical research.     

Envy and Inequality*

We present an overlapping generations economy, populated by heterogeneous agents who care about both consumption relative to others and the bequest they leave to their offspring. We show that saving and bequest rates vary across the income distribution, and we obtain several interesting results. First, envy reduces the steady‐state capital stock and increases the degree of inequality in consumption, capital ownership, and bequests. Second, if the bequest motive is sufficiently strong the equalizing effect of bequests disappears. Third, income inequality for a given cohort increases with age. Fourth, the distribution of inherited wealth becomes more unequal than that of wealth in general. Fifth, economic position becomes more persistent across generations.     

Inventory accumulation and expectations of real income,inflation and interest rates

A model is developed and tested to relate three categories of inventory accumulation to expectations of real income, inflation and interest rates through anticipated real corporate wealth effects. Expected future inflation leads firms to accumulate more inventories in advance financing them by means of ‘liquid’ assets to offset an anticipated loss of real wealth. Expected increases in interest rates have an impact on inventory accumulation opposite to that of expected future inflation. Past wealth effects are also allowed for by means of the accelerator principle. Finally, the growth rate of real income generally has a signifiant influence on inventory accumulation.     

Interest rates,distribution and capital accumulation – A post-Kaleckian perspective on the US and Germany

We analyse the effects of interest rate variations on the rates of capacity utilisation, capital accumulation and profit in a simple post-Kaleckian distribution and growth model. This model gives rise to different potential accumulation regimes depending on the values of the parameters in the investment, saving and distribution function. Estimating these core behavioural equations for the US and Germany in the period 1960–2007, we find significant and robust effects of interest payments with the expected sign in each of the equations. Our estimation results imply, both for the US and for Germany, that the effects of changes in the real long-term rate of interest on the equilibrium rates of capacity utilisation, capital accumulation and profits, are characterised by the ‘normal regime’: rising long-term real rates of interest cause falling rates of capacity utilisation, capital accumulation and profits, as well as redistribution at the expense of labour income and hence an increasing profit share in both countries.     

ESTIMATES OF HOUSEHOLD WEALTH INEQUALITY IN THE U.S., 1962–1983

The study has two major objectives. The first is to determine time trends in household wealth inequality in the U.S. over the 1962–83 period. Four concepts of wealth are analyzed: (i) total household wealth, defined as total household assets less liabilities; (ii) fungible wealth, defined as total household wealth less consumer durables and household inventories; (iii) financial wealth, defined as fungible wealth less equity in owner-occupied housing; and (iv) capital wealth, defined as financial wealth less currency, checking accounts, and time deposits. Relying on a variety of data sources, I find that wealth inequality remained relatively constant from about 1962 to 1973, fell sharply from about 1973 to about 1979, and then rose sharply between 1979 and 1983. Concentration in 1983 was greater than that in 1962 for financial and capital wealth but of similar magnitude for total and fungible wealth. The second, methodological in nature, is to analyze the effect on measured inequality of the alignment of raw survey data to national balance sheet totals. I find that the alignment process can significantly affect point estimates of household wealth distribution but does not generally affect the direction of inequality trends.     

The impact of government debt on the long-run natural real interest rate – a quantitative evaluation

Persistently low natural real interest rates are a problem for monetary policy and financial stability. I analyse to what extent a permanent increase in government debt that is financed by higher taxes could raise the long-run natural real interest rate. As a measurement tool, I use an incomplete markets model with capital and government bonds. Increasing the public debt/GDP ratio by one percentage point raises the real interest rate by between 0.4 and 1.5 basis points, depending on the degree of inequality generated by the model and the tax instrument used to balance the government’s budget constraint. I also show that the interest rate effect of a change in public debt/GDP predicted by the model is significantly smaller than its empirical counterpart for the US, due to the fact that the model understates the empirical fraction of households that are constrained in their consumption decision.     

新古典模型中收入和财富分配持续不平等的动态演化

本文讨论了当个人劳动能力和偏好存在差异的情况下,资本收入和劳动收入分配的差异如何通过遗产机制影响收入和财富分配的持续性不平等程度。论文分析表明:在偏好、个人劳动能力和个人收入的随机冲击的影响下,如果市场是完善的,整个经济系统存在收入和财富分配的稳定不平等状态,而且,这种稳定的不平等状态与初始的财富分配的不平等和一次性的产权配置都是无关的。最后,本文分析了资本收入税和劳动收入税对持续不平等程度的影响,通过分析指出:从长期来看,在劳动能力和初始财富存在差异而偏好没有差异的情况下,征收劳动收入税比征收资本收入税更有利于改善由于能力差异所造成的持续不平等。     

Redistributive Tax and Growth in a Model with Discrete Occupational Choice

An optimal redistributive tax-subsidy formula is derived for a growth model where income inequality is endogenously driven by an adult's choice of occupation between work and management. Investment in human capital is the engine of growth. The world's stock of exploitable knowledge as well as the economy's average human capital determine the potential rate of return from investment in human capital in an economy. How much available knowledge would be exploited in the economy depends on the proportion of innovators in our model. A redistributive tax reform impacts growth as well as income inequality via its influence over the occupational choice. The optimal redistributive tax rate is path-dependent in the sense that it depends on the initial wealth distribution. The normative implication of the model is that the optimal capital income tax rate could very well be positive if the initial wealth inequality exceeds a threshold. The optimal capital income tax rate depends inversely on the initial wealth inequality.     

How does wealth distribution affect firm's incentive to innovate better quality goods?

The paper contributes to the literature relating to inequality and economic growth, in particular, we investigate the effects of wealth distribution on the kind of growth driven by innovation, i.e. Schumpeterian growth. Since two types of individuals are assumed, the poor and the rich, Gini-coefficient is treated in two variables, namely the relative wealth of the poor and the population share of the poor, each having a different effect on economic performance. Particularly in the separating equilibrium, an improvement in the relative wealth of the poor impedes economic growth, but a decline in the population share of the poor enhances economic growth. Furthermore, the current paper combines the Schumpeterian quality improvement model and the neoclassic production function. Thus, the impact of wealth inequality on economic growth is through the supply of human capital as well as the demand for better quality goods. Our results suggest that empirical research on the base of Gini-coefficient cannot generate a general relationship between wealth inequality and economic growth.     

Overcoming environmental scarcity,inequality and structural imbalance in the world economy

The world economy faces two major threats: increasing environmental degradation and a growing gap between rich and poor. The root cause is that natural resources—or natural capital—is underpriced, and hence overly exploited, whereas human capital—the skills embodied in the workforce—is insufficient to meet demand. This outcome has three important consequences. First, all sectors of an economy will use too much natural resources relative to skilled labor. Second, the skilled workers throughout the economy will have higher real incomes and thus will be better off. Third, wealth inequality will increase, as the income gap between skilled and unskilled workers widens. Addressing this structural imbalance requires correcting the two underlying distortions, which are the chronic under-pricing of natural capital and the under-investment in human capital. This must be accompanied by a new suite of policies to provide improved incentives for more balanced wealth creation.     

CAPITAL AND INEQUALITY

Wealth inequality comes about mainly as a result of lifetime accumulation of capital and risky investment. Evidence from the Forbes Rich Lists show that in recent years volatility of the wealth of the richest has been very great. Randomness of returns to capital can explain a substantial part of global wealth inequality. As a consequence, inequality can best be reduced by a tax on returns to capital in excess of a normal rate of return, in addition to tax on labor earnings. (JEL D31)     

TRENDS IN HOUSEHOLD WEALTH IN THE UNITED STATES, 1962–83 AND 1983–89

Using the 1983 and 1989 Surveys of Consumer Finances, I find evidence of sharply increasing house-hold wealth inequality over this period. Whereas mean wealth increased by 23 percent in real terms, median wealth grew by only 8 percent. The share of the top one-half percentile rose by five percentage points, while the wealth of the bottom two quintiles showed an absolute decline. The Gini coefficient increased from 0.80 to 0.84. Almost all the growth in real wealth accrued to the top 20 percent of wealthholders. In contrast, the degree of wealth inequality was almost identical in 1983 as in 1962, and real wealth growth was more evenly distributed across the wealth distribution. There is also evidence that the sharp increase in wealth inequality from 1983 to 1989 was due to a correspondingly sharp rise in income inequality, the increase of stock prices relative to housing prices, and relatively slow inflation.     

巴菲特与索罗斯财富策略评析

巴菲特通过股票市场投资实体经济企业,获得财富长期稳定增长的事实,证明了马克思主义财富来源于实体经济以及实体经济对虚拟资本起决定作用的观点;索罗斯虚拟资本投机获得财富快速波动性增长的事实,则证明虚拟资本市场运作是财富的分配与再分配,虚拟资本对实体经济有反作用。