In Capital in the Twenty-First Century Thomas Piketty among other things traced the history of the distribution of income between those whose income is derived from capital and those whose income is derived from other sources, notably labour, and forecast that in the absence of shocks such as world war or economic depression this distribution was likely to become more and more unequal in the future.

Unless all individuals derive their income from capital and labour in equal proportions, which in practice is never the case, this implies that the distribution of income between individuals too will become more and more unequal. This in turn implies that the distribution of wealth between individuals will become more and more unequal, unless those whose income is derived from capital as opposed to other sources save a lower proportion of it, which is hardly ever the case.

Such evidence as is available, and there is a lot more than there was even as short a time ago as ten years, suggests that in most countries the distribution of wealth between individuals became more and more unequal between the eighteenth century and 1913 and less and less unequal between 1913 and the 1970s, and that it has become more and more unequal between the 1970s and the present time.

The distribution of wealth between individuals is everywhere much more unequal than the distribution of income, with a Gini coefficient in the countries for which it has been calculated currently averaging about 0.65. Is such a high and currently increasing inequality in the distribution of wealth sustainable?

It is commonly believed that there is a positive correlation between inequality and economic growth, a belief exemplified in the title of Arthur Okun’s book Equality and Efficiency: The Big Trade-Off. The basis of this belief is the view that a greater degree of inequality provides a greater incentive for those responsible for economic growth to exert themselves.

Since it is conceivable that people are more interested in their absolute income and wealth than in their relative income and wealth, it could be argued that they will accept increasing inequality provided that economic growth is fast enough for their absolute income and wealth to grow.

However, the belief that at there is a positive correlation between inequality and economic growth is misguided. There are both theoretical and empirical reasons for rejecting it.  

It is true that here are a number of theoretical reasons for thinking that more inequality promotes economic growth. For example, where there is relatively great inequality large set-up costs will be easier to meet, the savings of the rich will provide more funds for investment, and the poor will lack the resources, such as education, needed to disrupt economic activity effectively, even if they wished to do so.

However, there are also a number of theoretical reasons for thinking that more inequality hampers economic growth. For example, credit market imperfections particularly affecting the poor will reduce their ability to contribute to economic growth, remedial transfer payments and the associated tax finance will distort economic decisions, as will lobbying activities by the rich to prevent such redistribution, and socio-political unrest will reduce productivity.

There is no a priori reason to believe that either one of these sets of influences dominates the other.

Quite a number of empirical studies have sought to determine whether or not there is a correlation between inequality and economic growth. Most of these studies have come to the conclusion that the answer depends on circumstances, such as whether the country is rich, middle-income or poor, or within a country, whether the question relates to high income people or to low income people. On balance, the empirical evidence suggests that if anything the correlation between inequality and economic growth is negative.

So a capitalist economy is not faced with the dilemma that it must choose between inequality and low economic growth.

However, perceived inequality in the distribution of income and wealth may have been one of the reasons why in 2016 so many in two countries voted for radical political change, the British voting for ‘Brexit’ and the Americans voting for Donald Trump as President.

And if the distribution of income and wealth between individuals becomes more and more unequal in the future, as Piketty’s analysis indirectly implies, the survival of capitalism is called into question.


About the Author

This article was produced by Edward Elgar Publishing‘s blog which is filled with debate, news, updates and views from their authors and their readership. see more.

Recently Published

Key Takeaway: DeepSeek, a Chinese AI lab, disrupted the artificial intelligence industry by developing a model rivaling OpenAI’s ChatGPT-4 at a fraction of the cost. Founded by a former hedge fund manager, DeepSeek focused on efficiency and optimized algorithms for less powerful hardware. The company’s open-source approach has forced Chinese competitors to lower their own […]
Key Takeaway: Quantum computing, a groundbreaking idea over 40 years ago, aims to process information using quantum mechanics. Qubits, which can embody 0, 1, or a blend of both, enable quantum systems to explore vast arrays of solutions simultaneously. Quantum entanglement, a phenomenon where qubits become intertwined, allows quantum computers to perform intricate calculations that […]

Top Picks

Key Takeaway: Attosecond science, a field that earned the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2023, uses ultra-short laser pulses to observe and manipulate matter on timescales previously thought impossible. This breakthrough has implications across various sectors, including computing, renewable energy, medicine, and beyond. Attosecond science harnesses the energy of laser light to emit rapidly moving […]
Key Takeaway: The blue sky is a result of Rayleigh scattering, a process where shorter wavelengths of light scatter more than longer wavelengths. The atmosphere is composed of nitrogen and oxygen molecules, which interact with sunlight to create a spectrum of colors. This scattering process, which is governed by physics and chemistry, is the primary […]
Key Takeaway: South Korea’s cultural exports have surged to unprecedented heights, with the latest season of “Squid Game” solidifying its position as a global entertainment powerhouse. The “Korean Wave” or Hallyu, which includes TV series, movies, animation, and music, has generated approximately US$3.7 billion annually for South Korea through exports, consumer spending, and tourism. The […]
Key Takeaway: A study published in Nature Astronomy found a strong consensus among scientists that extraterrestrial life exists in the universe. The survey, which involved 521 astrobiologists and 534 non-astrobiologists, found that 86.6% agreed or strongly agreed that some form of extraterrestrial life exists. The study also found that 67.4% of astrobiologists and 58.2% of […]
Key Takeaway: Researchers are using genome-scale metabolic models (GEMs) to study the complexities of microbial life, offering innovative solutions to climate change and space challenges. GEMs simulate the vast network of metabolic pathways within living organisms, allowing scientists to test and predict microbial behavior across diverse environments. They provide a detailed framework for understanding organisms’ […]

Trending

I highly recommend reading the McKinsey Global Institute’s new report, “Reskilling China: Transforming The World’s Largest Workforce Into Lifelong Learners”, which focuses on the country’s biggest employment challenge, re-training its workforce and the adoption of practices such as lifelong learning to address the growing digital transformation of its productive fabric. How to transform the country […]

Join our Newsletter

Get our monthly recap with the latest news, articles and resources.

Login

Welcome to Empirics

We are glad you have decided to join our mission of gathering the collective knowledge of Asia!
Join Empirics