08 Jul 2015
by Jim Rose
in applied welfare economics, economic history, labour economics, politics - New Zealand, poverty and inequality, technological progress
Tags: child poverty, family poverty, Leftover Left, Max Rashbrooke, The Great Enrichment, top 1%
Max Rashbrooke has been at it again in the paper today.
Don’t these graphs show that everyone is richer in New Zealand than 30 years ago and there has been not much change in either child poverty or inequality for coming on for 20 years? The fall in child poverty started before the introduction of Working for Families.
Technological progress in the form of new goods and product upgrades are poorly captured in measures of living standards over time as is increases in life expectancies.
HT: Suffer the little children – Inequality and child poverty – Closer TogetherCloser Together.
06 Jul 2015
by Jim Rose
in income redistribution, industrial organisation, labour economics, minimum wage, poverty and inequality, Public Choice, rentseeking, survivor principle
Tags: British economy, British politics, Church of England, expressive voting, Fabian Society, hard budget constraints, Left-wing hypocrisy, living wage, market selection
05 Jul 2015
by Jim Rose
in comparative institutional analysis, constitutional political economy, development economics, economic history, growth disasters, growth miracles, poverty and inequality, Public Choice
Tags: capitalism and freedom, extreme poverty, global poverty, India, Leftover Left, The Great Escape, The Great Fact, top 1%
04 Jul 2015
by Jim Rose
in income redistribution, labour economics, politics - New Zealand, poverty and inequality, Public Choice, rentseeking
Tags: antimarket bias, Christopher Snowden, distributive justice, Eric Crampton, expressive voting, Leftover Left, moral panic, rational ignorance, rational irrationality, social justice, top 1%, Twitter left
01 Jul 2015
by Jim Rose
in gender, labour economics, labour supply, poverty and inequality, welfare reform
Tags: 1996, child poverty, economics of fertility, single mothers, single parents, taxation and the labour supply, welfare reforms
28 Jun 2015
by Jim Rose
in labour economics, politics - USA, poverty and inequality, welfare reform
Tags: British economy, Canada, top 1%
Despite 30 years of the ravages of neoliberalism, Reagan, Thatcher, and Blair, the whole lot, poverty has not gone up or down much at all.
Figure 1: relative poverty rate (% of persons living with less than 50% of equivalised disposable income), USA, UK and Canada
Source: In It Together – Why Less Inequality Benefits All – © OECD 2015
27 Jun 2015
by Jim Rose
in labour supply, politics - Australia, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, poverty and inequality, public economics
Tags: Australia, British economy, family tax credits, family taxation, in-work tax credits, social insurance, taxation and the labour supply, welfare state
Figure 1: All in less cash transfers average income tax rates at average wage, 2014
Source: OECD tax database
26 Jun 2015
by Jim Rose
in economic history, entrepreneurship, human capital, labour economics, labour supply, Marxist economics, occupational choice, politics - Australia, politics - USA, poverty and inequality
Tags: Australia, British economy, Canada, Leftover Left, top 0.1%, top 1%
Figure 1: top 0.1% share of gross income, Australia, UK, USA and Canada since 1946
Source: Chartbook of Economic Inequality.
The top 0.1% in Australia is earning not much more than it did in 1946. For most of the post-war period, the Australian top 0.1% earned less than what it earned in 1946. The only spike in the earnings of the Australian top 0.1% occurred after the top tax rate of 66% was reduced to 49% in 1986.
There were major cuts in the top tax rates in Australia,the USA and UK in the early 1980s. Figure 1 shows that these top tax rate cuts were matched with a spike in the earnings of the top 0.1% subsequent to those large tax cuts.
Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments