Income distribution within individual countries

A Gini index value above 50 is considered high; countries including Brazil, Colombia, South Africa, Botswana, and Honduras can be found in this category. A Gini index value of 30 or above is considered medium; countries including Vietnam, Mexico, Poland, The United States, Argentina, Russia and Uruguay can be found in this category. A Gini index value lower than 30 is considered low; countries including Austria, Germany, Denmark, Slovenia, Sweden and Ukraine can be found in this category.^[50]

Various proposed causes of economic inequality{{anchor|Causes}}

There are various reasons for economic inequality within societies. Recent growth in overall income inequality, at least within the OECD countries, has been driven mostly by increasing inequality in wages and salaries.^[7]

Economist Thomas Piketty argues that widening economic disparity is an inevitable phenomenon of free market capitalism when the rate of return of capital (r) is greater than the rate of growth of the economy (g).^[51]

Labour market

A major cause of economic inequality within modern market economies is the determination of wages by the market. Where competition is imperfect; information unevenly distributed; opportunities to acquire education and skills unequal; market failure results. Since many such imperfect conditions exist in virtually every market, there is in fact little presumption that markets are in general efficient. This means that there is an enormous potential role for government to correct such market failures.^[52]

Taxes

Another cause is the rate at which income is taxed coupled with the progressivity of the tax system. A progressive tax is a tax by which the tax rate increases as the taxable base amount increases.^{[53][54][55][56][57]} In a progressive tax system, the level of the top tax rate will often have a direct impact on the level of inequality within a society, either increasing it or decreasing it, provided that income does not change as a result of the change in tax regime. Additionally, steeper tax progressivity applied to social spending can result in a more equal distribution of income across the board.^[58] Taxes credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit can also decrease income inequality.^[59] The difference between the Gini index for an income distribution before taxation and the Gini index after taxation is an indicator for the effects of such taxation.^[60]

Education

An important factor in the creation of inequality is variation in individuals' access to education.^[61] Education, especially in an area where there is a high demand for workers, creates high wages for those with this education,^[62] however, increases in education first increase and then decrease growth as well as income inequality. As a result, those who are unable to afford an education, or choose not to pursue optional education, generally receive much lower wages. The justification for this is that a lack of education leads directly to lower incomes, and thus lower aggregate savings and investment. Conversely, education raises incomes and promotes growth because it helps to unleash the productive potential of the poor.

Economic liberalism, deregulation and decline of unions

John Schmitt and Ben Zipperer (2006) of the CEPR point to economic liberalism and the reduction of business regulation along with the decline of union membership as one of the causes of economic inequality. In an analysis of the effects of intensive Anglo-American liberal policies in comparison to continental European liberalism, where unions have remained strong, they concluded "The U.S. economic and social model is associated with substantial levels of social exclusion, including high levels of income inequality, high relative and absolute poverty rates, poor and unequal educational outcomes, poor health outcomes, and high rates of crime and incarceration. At the same time, the available evidence provides little support for the view that U.S.-style labor market flexibility dramatically improves labor-market outcomes. Despite popular prejudices to the contrary, the U.S. economy consistently affords a lower level of economic mobility than all the continental European countries for which data is available."^[63]

More recently, the International Monetary Fund has published studies which found that the decline of unionization in many advanced economies and the establishment of neoliberal economics have fueled rising income inequality.^[64][65]

Information technology

The growth in importance of information technology has been credited with increasing income inequality.^[66] Technology has been called "the main driver of the recent increases in inequality" by Erik Brynjolfsson, of MIT.^[67] In arguing against this explanation, Jonathan Rothwell notes that if technological advancement is measured by high rates of invention, there is a negative correlation between it and inequality. Countries with high invention rates — "as measured by patent applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty" — exhibit lower inequality than those with less. In one country, the United States, "salaries of engineers and software developers rarely reach" above $390,000/year (the lower limit for the top 1% earners).^[68]

Globalization

Trade liberalization may shift economic inequality from a global to a domestic scale.^[70] When rich countries trade with poor countries, the low-skilled workers in the rich countries may see reduced wages as a result of the competition, while low-skilled workers in the poor countries may see increased wages. Trade economist Paul Krugman estimates that trade liberalisation has had a measurable effect on the rising inequality in the United States. He attributes this trend to increased trade with poor countries and the fragmentation of the means of production, resulting in low skilled jobs becoming more tradeable.

Gender

In many countries, there is a gender pay gap in favor of males in the labor market. Several factors other than discrimination may contribute to this gap. On average, women are more likely than men to consider factors other than pay when looking for work, and may be less willing to travel or relocate.^[73][74] Thomas Sowell, in his book Knowledge and Decisions, claims that this difference is due to women not taking jobs due to marriage or pregnancy, but income studies show that does not explain the entire difference. A U.S. Census's report stated that in US once other factors are accounted for there is still a difference in earnings between women and men.^[75] The income gap in other countries ranges from 53% in Botswana to -40% in Bahrain.^[76]

Economic development

Economist Simon Kuznets argued that levels of economic inequality are in large part the result of stages of development. According to Kuznets, countries with low levels of development have relatively equal distributions of wealth. As a country develops, it acquires more capital, which leads to the owners of this capital having more wealth and income and introducing inequality. Eventually, through various possible redistribution mechanisms such as social welfare programs, more developed countries move back to lower levels of inequality.

Wealth concentration

Wealth concentration is the process by which, under certain conditions, newly created wealth concentrates in the possession of already-wealthy individuals or entities. Accordingly, those who already hold wealth have the means to invest in new sources of creating wealth or to otherwise leverage the accumulation of wealth, thus are the beneficiaries of the new wealth. Over time, wealth concentration can significantly contribute to the persistence of inequality within society. Thomas Piketty in his book Capital in the Twenty-First Century argues that the fundamental force for divergence is the usually greater return of capital (r) than economic growth (g), and that larger fortunes generate higher returns.^[77]

Rent seeking

Economist Joseph Stiglitz argues that rather than explaining concentrations of wealth and income, market forces should serve as a brake on such concentration, which may better be explained by the non-market force known as "rent-seeking". While the market will bid up compensation for rare and desired skills to reward wealth creation, greater productivity, etc., it will also prevent successful entrepreneurs from earning excess profits by fostering competition to cut prices, profits and large compensation.^[78] A better explainer of growing inequality, according to Stiglitz, is the use of political power generated by wealth by certain groups to shape government policies financially beneficial to them. This process, known to economists as rent-seeking, brings income not from creation of wealth but from "grabbing a larger share of the wealth that would otherwise have been produced without their effort"^[79]

Finance industry

Mitigating factors

Countries with a left-leaning legislature generally have lower levels of inequality.^[82][83] Many factors constrain economic inequality – they may be divided into two classes: government sponsored, and market driven. The relative merits and effectiveness of each approach is a subject of debate.

Typical government initiatives to reduce economic inequality include:

• Public education: increasing the supply of skilled labor and reducing income inequality due to education differentials.^[84]
• Progressive taxation: the rich are taxed proportionally more than the poor, reducing the amount of income inequality in society if the change in taxation does not cause changes in income.^[85]

Market forces outside of government intervention that can reduce economic inequality include:

• propensity to spend: with rising wealth & income, a person may spend more. In an extreme example, if one person owned everything, they would immediately need to hire people to maintain their properties, thus reducing the wealth concentration.{{sfn|García-Peñalosa|Turnovsky|2007}} On the other hand, Maialeh (2017) points out on the fact that decreasing propensity to consume when increasing income results in higher savings, which strengthen market position of the wealthy social strata even further.^[86]

Research shows that since 1300, the only periods with significant declines in wealth inequality in Europe were the Black Death and the two World Wars.^[87] Historian Walter Scheidel posits that, since the stone age, only extreme violence, catastrophes and upheaval in the form of total war, Communist revolution, pestilence and state collapse have significantly reduced inequality.^[88][89] He has stated that "only all-out thermonuclear war might fundamentally reset the existing distribution of resources" and that "peaceful policy reform may well prove unequal to the growing challenges ahead."^[90][91]

Effects

A lot of research has been done about the effects of economic inequality on different aspects in society:

• Health: British researchers Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett have found higher rates of health and social problems (obesity, mental illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use), and lower rates of social goods (life expectancy by country, educational performance, trust among strangers, women's status, social mobility, even numbers of patents issued) in countries and states with higher inequality.^[92][93]

• Social cohesion: Research has shown an inverse link between income inequality and social cohesion. In more equal societies, people are much more likely to trust each other, measures of social capital (the benefits of goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social connectedness among groups who make up a social units) suggest greater community involvement.

• Crime: In more equal societies homicide rates are consistently lower. A 2016 study finds that interregional inequality increases terrorism.^[94]

• Welfare: Studies have found evidence that in societies where inequality is lower, population-wide satisfaction and happiness tend to be higher.^[95][96]

• Debt: Income inequality has been the driving factor in the growing household debt,^[97][98] as high earners bid up the price of real estate and middle income earners go deeper into debt trying to maintain what once was a middle class lifestyle.^[99]

• Economic growth: Inequality leads to a lower level of economic growth when human capital is neglected for high-end consumption.^[100]

• Civic participation: Higher income inequality led to less of all forms of social, cultural, and civic participation among the less wealthy.^[101]

• Political instability: One study finds that income inequality increases political instability: "more unequal societies are more politically unstable".^[102]

Perspectives

Fairness vs. equality

According to Christina Starmans et al. (Nature Hum. Beh., 2017), the research literature contains no evidence on people having an aversion on inequality. In all studies analyzed, the subjects preferred fair distributions to equal distributions, in both laboratory and real-world situations. In public, researchers may loosely speak of equality instead of fairness, when referring to studies where fairness happens to coincide with equality, but in many studies fairness is carefully separated from equality and the results are univocal. Already very young children seem to prefer fairness over equality.^[103]

When people were asked, what would be the wealth of each quintile in their ideal society, they gave a 50-fold sum to the richest quintile than to the poorest quintile. The preference for inequality increases in adolescence, and so do the capabilities to favor fortune, effort and ability in the distribution.^[103]

Preference for unequal distribution has been developed to the human race possibly because it allows for better co-operation and allows a person to work with a more productive person so that both parties benefit from the co-operation. Inequality is also said to be able to solve the problems of free-riders, cheaters and ill-behaving people, although this is heavily debated.^[103]

In many societies, such as the USSR, the distribution led to protests from wealthier landowners.^[104] In the current U.S., many feel that the distribution is unfair in being too unequal. In both cases, the cause is unfairness, not inequality, the researchers conclude.^[103]

Socialist perspectives

Marxist socialists ultimately predict the emergence of a communist society based on the common ownership of the means of production, where each individual citizen would have free access to the articles of consumption (From each according to his ability, to each according to his need). According to Marxist philosophy, equality in the sense of free access is essential for freeing individuals from dependent relationships, thereby allowing them to transcend alienation.^[106]

Meritocracy

Liberal perspectives

Most modern social liberals, including centrist or left-of-center political groups, believe that the capitalist economic system should be fundamentally preserved, but the status quo regarding the income gap must be reformed. Social liberals favor a capitalist system with active Keynesian macroeconomic policies and progressive taxation (to even out differences in income inequality).

However, contemporary classical liberals and libertarians generally do not take a stance on wealth inequality, but believe in equality under the law regardless of whether it leads to unequal wealth distribution. In 1966 Ludwig von Mises, a prominent figure in the Austrian School of economic thought, explains:

The liberal champions of equality under the law were fully aware of the fact that men are born unequal and that it is precisely their inequality that generates social cooperation and civilization. Equality under the law was in their opinion not designed to correct the inexorable facts of the universe and to make natural inequality disappear. It was, on the contrary, the device to secure for the whole of mankind the maximum of benefits it can derive from it. Henceforth no man-made institutions should prevent a man from attaining that station in which he can best serve his fellow citizens.

Robert Nozick argued that government redistributes wealth by force (usually in the form of taxation), and that the ideal moral society would be one where all individuals are free from force. However, Nozick recognized that some modern economic inequalities were the result of forceful taking of property, and a certain amount of redistribution would be justified to compensate for this force but not because of the inequalities themselves. John Rawls argued in A Theory of Justice^[108] that inequalities in the distribution of wealth are only justified when they improve society as a whole, including the poorest members. Rawls does not discuss the full implications of his theory of justice. Some see Rawls's argument as a justification for capitalism since even the poorest members of society theoretically benefit from increased innovations under capitalism; others believe only a strong welfare state can satisfy Rawls's theory of justice.

Classical liberal Milton Friedman believed that if government action is taken in pursuit of economic equality then political freedom would suffer. In a famous quote, he said:

A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.

Economist Tyler Cowen has argued that though income inequality has increased within nations, globally it has fallen over the 20 years leading up to 2014. He argues that though income inequality may make individual nations worse off, overall, the world has improved as global inequality has been reduced.^[109]

Social justice arguments

Patrick Diamond and Anthony Giddens (professors of Economics and Sociology, respectively) hold that 'pure meritocracy is incoherent because, without redistribution, one generation's successful individuals would become the next generation's embedded caste, hoarding the wealth they had accumulated'.

They also state that social justice requires redistribution of high incomes and large concentrations of wealth in a way that spreads it more widely, in order to "recognise the contribution made by all sections of the community to building the nation's wealth." (Patrick Diamond and Anthony Giddens, June 27, 2005, New Statesman)^[110]

When income inequality is low, aggregate demand will be relatively high, because more people who want ordinary consumer goods and services will be able to afford them, while the labor force will not be as relatively monopolized by the wealthy.^[113]

Effects on social welfare

In most western democracies, the desire to eliminate or reduce economic inequality is generally associated with the political left. One practical argument in favor of reduction is the idea that economic inequality reduces social cohesion and increases social unrest, thereby weakening the society. There is evidence that this is true (see inequity aversion) and it is intuitive, at least for small face-to-face groups of people.{{citation needed|date=April 2017}} Alberto Alesina, Rafael Di Tella, and Robert MacCulloch find that inequality negatively affects happiness in Europe but not in the United States.^[114]

It has also been argued that economic inequality invariably translates to political inequality, which further aggravates the problem. Even in cases where an increase in economic inequality makes nobody economically poorer, an increased inequality of resources is disadvantageous, as increased economic inequality can lead to a power shift due to an increased inequality in the ability to participate in democratic processes.^[115]

Capabilities approach

The capabilities approach – sometimes called the human development approach – looks at income inequality and poverty as form of "capability deprivation".^[116] Unlike neoliberalism, which "defines well-being as utility maximization", economic growth and income are considered a means to an end rather than the end itself.{{sfn|Fukuda-Parr|2003}} Its goal is to "wid[en] people's choices and the level of their achieved well-being"^[117] through increasing functionings (the things a person values doing), capabilities (the freedom to enjoy functionings) and agency (the ability to pursue valued goals).^[118]

When a person's capabilities are lowered, they are in some way deprived of earning as much income as they would otherwise. An old, ill man cannot earn as much as a healthy young man; gender roles and customs may prevent a woman from receiving an education or working outside the home. There may be an epidemic that causes widespread panic, or there could be rampant violence in the area that prevents people from going to work for fear of their lives.^[116] As a result, income inequality increases, and it becomes more difficult to reduce the gap without additional aid. To prevent such inequality, this approach believes it is important to have political freedom, economic facilities, social opportunities, transparency guarantees, and protective security to ensure that people aren't denied their functionings, capabilities, and agency and can thus work towards a better relevant income.

Policy responses intended to mitigate

A 2011 OECD study makes a number of suggestions to its member countries, including:^[8]

• Well-targeted income-support policies.
• Facilitation and encouragement of access to employment.
• Better job-related training and education for the low-skilled (on-the-job training) would help to boost their productivity potential and future earnings.
• Better access to formal education.

The economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty recommend much higher top marginal tax rates on the wealthy, up to 50 percent, 70 percent or even 90 percent.^[124] Ralph Nader, Jeffrey Sachs, the United Front Against Austerity, among others, call for a financial transactions tax (also known as the Robin Hood tax) to bolster the social safety net and the public sector.^{[125][126][127]}

General limitations on and taxation of rent-seeking are popular across the political spectrum.^[129]

Public policy responses addressing causes and effects of income inequality in the US include: progressive tax incidence adjustments, strengthening social safety net provisions such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, welfare, the food stamp program, Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, organizing community interest groups, increasing and reforming higher education subsidies, increasing infrastructure spending, and placing limits on and taxing rent-seeking.^[130]

A 2017 study in the Journal of Political Economy by Daron Acemogu, James Robinson and Thierry Verdier argues that American "cutthroat" capitalism and inequality gives rise to technology and innovation that more "cuddly" forms of capitalism cannot.^[131] As a result, "the diversity of institutions we observe among relatively advanced countries, ranging from greater inequality and risk-taking in the United States to the more egalitarian societies supported by a strong safety net in Scandinavia, rather than reflecting differences in fundamentals between the citizens of these societies, may emerge as a mutually self-reinforcing world equilibrium. If so, in this equilibrium, 'we cannot all be like the Scandinavians,' because Scandinavian capitalism depends in part on the knowledge spillovers created by the more cutthroat American capitalism."^[131] A 2012 working paper by the same authors, making similar arguments, was challenged by Lane Kenworthy, who posited that, among other things, the Nordic countries are consistently ranked as some of the world's most innovative countries by the World Economic Forum's Global Competitiveness Index, with Sweden ranking as the most innovative nation, followed by Finland, for 2012–2013; the U.S. ranked sixth.^[132]

See also

• Accumulation of capital
• Aporophobia
• Class conflict
• Criticism of capitalism
• Cycle of poverty
• Donor Class
• Economic migrant
• Equal opportunity
• Great Divergence, disproportionate economic advancement of Europe
• Human Development Index
• Income distribution
• International inequality
• List of countries by distribution of wealth
• List of countries by income equality
• List of countries by wealth per adult
• Occupy movement
• Paradise Papers
• Rent-seeking
• Social inequality
• Theories of poverty
• Wealth concentration
• Wealth distribution

References

Further reading

Books

• {{cite book | last1 = Atkinson | first1 = Anthony B. | last2 = Bourguignon | first2 = François | author-link1 = Tony Atkinson | author-link2 = François Bourguignon | title = Handbook of income distribution | publisher = Elvesier | location = Amsterdam New York | year = 2000 | isbn = 9780444816313 }}
• Atkinson, Anthony B. (2015). Inequality: What Can Be Done? Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. {{ISBN|0674504763}}
• {{cite book | last1 = Barro | first1 = Robert J. | last2 = Sala-i-Martin | first2 = Xavier | author-link1 = Robert Barro | author-link2 = Xavier Sala-i-Martin |title=Economic growth |year=2003 | origyear = 1995 |publisher=MIT Press |location= Massachusetts | edition = 2nd |isbn= 9780262025539 }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Deneulin | first1 = Séverine | last2 = Shahani | first2 = Lila | author-link1 = Séverine Deneulin | title = An introduction to the human development and capability approach freedom and agency | publisher = Earthscan International Development Research Centre | location = Sterling, Virginia Ottawa, Ontario | year = 2009 | isbn = 9781844078066 }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Giddens | first1 = Anthony | last2 = Diamond | first2 = Patrick | author-link1 = Anthony Giddens | author-link2 = Patrick Diamond | title = The new egalitarianism | publisher = Polity | location = Cambridge, UK Malden, Massachusetts | year = 2005 | isbn = 9780745634319 }}
• {{cite book | last = Gilens | first = Martin | title = Affluence and influence: Economic inequality and political power in America | publisher = Princeton University Press Russell Sage Foundation | location = Princeton, New Jersey New York | year = 2012 | isbn = 9780691162423 }}
• {{cite book | last = Lambert | first = Peter J. | title = The distribution and redistribution of income | publisher = Manchester University Press Palgrave | location = Manchester New York New York | year = 2001 | edition = 3rd | isbn = 9780719057328 }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Lynn | first1 = Richard | last2 = Vanhanen | first2 = Tatu | author-link1 = Richard Lynn | author-link2 = Tatu Vanhanen | title = IQ and the wealth of nations | publisher = Praeger | location = Westport, Connecticut | year = 2002 | isbn = 9780275975104 | title-link = IQ and the Wealth of Nations }}
• {{cite book | editor-last = Merino | editor-first = Noël | title = Income inequality | publisher = Greenhaven Press | location = Farmington Hills, Michigan | year = 2016 | series = Opposing Viewpoints Series | isbn = 9780737775259 }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Page | first1 = Benjamin I. | last2 = Jacobs | first2 = Lawrence R. | title = Class war?: What Americans really think about economic inequality | publisher = University of Chicago Press | location = Chicago | year = 2009 | isbn = 9780226644554 }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Salverda | first1 = Wiemer | last2 = Nolan | first2 = Brian | last3 = Smeeding | first3 = Timothy M. | title = The Oxford handbook of economic inequality | publisher = Oxford University Press | location = Oxford New York | year = 2009 | isbn = 9780199231379 }}
• {{cite book |last=Schmidtz |first=David |authorlink=David Schmidtz |title=The elements of justice |year=2006 |publisher=Cambridge University Press | location = Cambridge New York |isbn=9780521539364 }}
• {{cite book | last = Sen | first = Amartya | author-link = Amartya Sen | title = Development as Freedom | publisher = Oxford University Press | location = New York | year = 1999 | isbn = 9780198297581 | title-link = Development as Freedom }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Sen | first1 = Amartya | last2 = Foster | first2 = James E. | author-link1 = Amartya Sen | title = On economic inequality | publisher = Clarendon Press Oxford University Press | location = Oxford New York | year = 1997 | series = Radcliffe Lectures | isbn = 9780198281931 }}
• {{cite book |last=von Braun |first=Joachim | last2 = Diaz-Bonilla | first2 = Eugenio | title = Globalization of food, and agriculture, and the poor | publisher = Oxford University Press International Food Policy Research Institute | location = New Delhi Washington D.C | year = 2008 | isbn = 9780195695281 }}
• {{cite book | last = Wilkinson | first = Richard G. | author-link = Richard G. Wilkinson | title = The impact of inequality: how to make sick societies healthier | publisher = Routledge | location = London | year = 2005 | isbn = 9780415372695 }}
• {{cite book | last1 = Wilkinson | first1 = Richard G. | last2 = Pickett | first2 = Kate | author-link1 = Richard G. Wilkinson | author-link2 = Kate Pickett | title = The spirit level: why more equal societies almost always do better | publisher = Allen Lane | location = London | year = 2009 | isbn = 9781846140396 | title-link = The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better }}

Articles

• {{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.jpubeco.2003.07.006 |ref=harv |title=Inequality and happiness: Are Europeans and Americans different? |journal=Journal of Public Economics |volume=88 |issue=9–10 |pages=2009–42 |year=2004 |last1=Alesina |first1=Alberto |last2=Di Tella |first2=Rafael |last3=MacCulloch |first3=Robert |citeseerx=10.1.1.203.664 }}
• Andersen, Robert (2012), "Support for Democracy in Cross-national Perspective: The Detrimental Effect of Economic Inequality," Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 30(4): 389-402.
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00352.x |jstor=25193859 |ref=harv |title=Economic Inequality and Intolerance: Attitudes toward Homosexuality in 35 Democracies |journal=American Journal of Political Science |volume=52 |issue=4 |pages=942–58 |year=2008 |last1=Andersen |first1=Robert |last2=Fetner |first2=Tina }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.2307/2937943 |ref=harv |jstor=2937943 |title=Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries |journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics |volume=106 |issue=2 |pages=407–43 |year=1991 |last1=Barro |first1=Robert J. |citeseerx=10.1.1.312.3126 }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1023/A:1009850119329 |ref=harv |title=Inequality and Growth in a Panel of Countries |year=2000 |last1=Barro |first1=Robert J. |journal=Journal of Economic Growth |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=5–32 }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1080/1354570022000077980 |ref=harv |title=The Human Development Paradigm: Operationalizing Sen's Ideas on Capabilities |journal=Feminist Economics |volume=9 |issue=2–3 |pages=301–17 |year=2003 |last1=Fukuda-Parr |first1=Sakiko }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.2307/2297811 |ref=harv |jstor=2297811 |title=Income Distribution and Macroeconomics |journal=The Review of Economic Studies |volume=60 |issue=1 |pages=35–52 |year=1993 |last1=Galor |first1=Oded |last2=Zeira |first2=Joseph |citeseerx=10.1.1.636.8225 }}
• {{cite journal |last1=Hatch |first1=Megan E. |last2=Rigby |first2=Elizabeth |title=Laboratories of (In)equality? Redistributive Policy and Income Inequality in the American States |journal=Policy Studies Journal |date=2015 |volume=43 |issue=2 |page=163-187 |url=https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12094}}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.2307/2296292 |ref=harv |jstor=2296292 |title=Alternative Theories of Distribution |journal=The Review of Economic Studies |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=83–100 |year=1955 |last1=Kaldor |first1=Nicholas }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.2753/0577-5132530606 |jstor=27896630 |ref=harv |title=Rising Inequality, Public Policy, and America's Poor |journal=Challenge |volume=53 |issue=6 |pages=93–109 |year=2010 |last1=Kenworthy |first1=Lane }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1177/0094306116681789 |ref=harv |title=Why the Surge in Income Inequality? |journal=Contemporary Sociology |volume=46 |issue=1 |pages=1–9 |year=2017 |last1=Kenworthy |first1=Lane }}
• {{Cite web |url=http://to.pbs.org/1Gq2CgY |title= In America, inequality begins in the womb |access-date= July 29, 2018 |last=Komlos |first=John |author-link= |year= 2015 |format= |website= |publisher=PBS, Making Sen$se |pages= |language= |quote= }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.0008-4085.2005.00303.x |ref=harv |title=Sex, equality, and growth |journal=Canadian Journal of Economics |volume=38 |issue=3 |pages=807–31 |year=2005 |last1=Lagerlof |first1=Nils-Petter }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1177/0263276409350283 |ref=harv |title=Neoliberalism in Action |journal=Theory, Culture & Society |volume=26 |issue=6 |pages=109–33 |year=2009 |last1=Lazzarato |first1=Maurizio }}
• {{Cite journal | last1 = Maavak | first1 = Mathew | title = Class warfare, anarchy and the future society | journal = Journal of Futures Studies | volume = 17 | issue = 2 | pages = 15–36 | date = December 2012 | url = http://www.jfs.tku.edu.tw/17-2/A02.pdf | ref = harv }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1111/j.0022-2879.2007.00029.x |ref=harv |title=Growth, Income Inequality, and Fiscal Policy: What Are the Relevant Trade-offs? |journal=Journal of Money, Credit and Banking |volume=39 |issue=2–3 |pages=369–94 |year=2007 |last1=García-Peñalosa |first1=Cecilia |last2=Turnovsky |first2=Stephen J. |citeseerx=10.1.1.186.2754 }}
• {{citation | last= Pigou | first1 = Arthur C. | author-link = Arthur Cecil Pigou | contribution = Part I, Chapter VIII: Economic welfare and changes in the distribution of the national dividend (section I.VIII.3) | editor-last1 = Pigou | editor-first1 = Arthur C. | editor-link = Arthur Cecil Pigou | title = The economics of welfare | pages = | publisher = Macmillan and Co. | location = London | year = 1932 | origyear = 1920 | edition = 4th | oclc = 302702 | url = http://www.econlib.org/library/NPDBooks/Pigou/pgEW8.html | ref = harv | postscript = .}}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.351 |jstor=25098796 |ref=harv |title=The World Distribution of Income: Falling Poverty and ... Convergence, Period |journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics |volume=121 |issue=2 |pages=351–97 |year=2006 |last1=Sala-i-Martin |first1=X. }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00018-8 |ref=harv |title=Gender Inequality and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis |journal=World Development |volume=28 |issue=7 |pages=1211–30 |year=2000 |last1=Seguino |first1=Stephanie }}
• {{cite book |doi=10.1108/S0147-9121(2011)0000032004 |ref=harv |chapter=Recent Trends in Income Inequality |title=Who Loses in the Downturn? Economic Crisis, Employment and Income Distribution |volume=32 |pages=1–50 |series=Research in Labor Economics |year=2011 |last1=Smeeding |first1=Timothy M. |last2=Thompson |first2=Jeffrey P. |isbn=978-0-85724-749-0 |editor1-first=Herwig |editor1-last=Immervoll |editor2-first=Andreas |editor2-last=Peichl |editor3-first=Konstantinos |editor3-last=Tatsiramos }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.2307/1884513 |ref=harv |jstor=1884513 |title=A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth |journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics |volume=70 |issue=1 |pages=65–94 |year=1956 |last1=Solow |first1=Robert M. |url=http://rcin.org.pl/Content/39010 }}
• {{cite journal |doi=10.1108/03068290310497486 |ref=harv |title=Income inequality between skilled individuals |journal=International Journal of Social Economics |volume=30 |issue=11 |pages=1118–30 |year=2003 |last1=Svizzero |first1=Serge |last2=Tisdell |first2=Clem }}

Historical

• Crayen, Dorothee, and Joerg Baten. "New evidence and new methods to measure human capital inequality before and during the industrial revolution: France and the US in the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries." Economic History Review 63.2 (2010): 452-478. [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joerg_Baten/publication/227350073_New_Evidence_and_New_Methods_to_Measure_Human_Capital_Inequality_Before_and_During_the_Industrial_Revolution_France_and_the_US_in_the_Seventeenth_to_Nineteenth_Centuries/links/589dc50992851c7fb4baf1e3/New-Evidence-and-New-Methods-to-Measure-Human-Capital-Inequality-Before-and-During-the-Industrial-Revolution-France-and-the-US-in-the-Seventeenth-to-Nineteenth-Centuries online]
• {{cite book | last = Hickel| first =Jason| author-link =| title =The Divide: Global Inequality from Conquest to Free Markets | publisher = W. W. Norton & Company| location =| year =2018 | isbn =978-0393651362}}
• Hoffman, Philip T., et al. "Real inequality in Europe since 1500." Journal of Economic History 62.2 (2002): 322-355. online
• Morrisson, Christian, and Wayne Snyder. "The income inequality of France in historical perspective." European Review of Economic History 4.1 (2000): 59-83. [https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/946b/9a305e390f10186d5d7bf8dc66eb380b6aec.pdf online]
• Lindert, Peter H., and Steven Nafziger. "Russian inequality on the eve of revolution." Journal of Economic History 74.3 (2014): 767-798. online
• Nicolini, Esteban A., and Fernando Ramos Palencia. "Decomposing income inequality in a backward pre‐industrial economy: Old Castile (Spain) in the middle of the eighteenth century." Economic History Review 69.3 (2016): 747-772.
• Piketty, Thomas, and Emmanuel Saez. "The evolution of top incomes: a historical and international perspective." American economic review 96.2 (2006): 200-205. online
• Piketty, Thomas, and Emmanuel Saez. "Income inequality in the United States, 1913–1998." Quarterly journal of economics 118.1 (2003): 1-41. online
• Saito, Osamu. "Growth and inequality in the great and little divergence debate: a Japanese perspective." Economic History Review 68.2 (2015): 399-419. Covers 1600-1868 with comparison to Stuart England and Mughal India.
• {{cite book | last = Scheidel| first = Walter | author-link =Walter Scheidel| title =The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century | publisher = Princeton University Press| location =Princeton| year =2017 | isbn =978-0691165028 }}
• Stewart, Frances. "Changing perspectives on inequality and development." Studies in Comparative International Development 51.1 (2016): 60-80. covers 1801 to 2016.
• Sutch, Richard. "The One Percent across Two Centuries: A Replication of Thomas Piketty's Data on the Concentration of Wealth in the United States." Social Science History 41.4 (2017): 587-613. Strongly rejects all Piketty's estimates for US inequality before 1910 for both top 1% and top 10%. online
• Van Zanden, Jan Luiten. "Tracing the beginning of the Kuznets curve: Western Europe during the early modern period." Economic History Review 48.4 (1995): 643-664. covers 1400 to 1800.
• Wei, Yehua Dennis. "Geography of inequality in Asia." Geographical Review 107.2 (2017): 263-275. covers 1981 to 2015.

External links

• Coptosia brunnerae
• Coptosia chehirensis
• Coptosia cinerascens
• Coptosia compacta
• Coptosia compacta compacta
• Coptosia compacta sancta
• Coptosia demelti
• Coptosia drurei
• Coptosia elyandti
• Coptosia fausti
• Coptosia ganglbaueri
• Coptosia gianassoi
• Coptosia kubani
• Coptosia languida
• Coptosia minuta
• Coptosia nigrosuturata
• Coptosia schuberti
• Coptosia semiannulicornis
• Coptosia tauricola
• Coptosoma elegans
• Coptotelia
• Coptotelia acrocosma
• Coptotelia allardi
• Coptotelia amphicrena
• Coptotelia bipunctalis

开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。