Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

n2doc

(47,953 posts)
Wed Jan 27, 2016, 10:20 AM Jan 2016

The New Inequality Debate

More mainstream economists now find that the income mal-distribution reflects the political sway of elites, not economic imperatives.

Robert Kuttner

More and more mainstream economists have lately discovered a phenomenon that their discipline too often assumes away. They have discovered power. And this fundamentally changes the nature of the debate about inequality.

In the usual economic model, markets are mostly efficient. Power is not relevant, because competition will generally thwart attempts to place a thumb on the market scale. Thus if the society is becoming more unequal it must be (a favorite verb form) because skills are receiving greater rewards, and the less-skilled are necessarily left behind; or because technology is appropriately displacing workers; or because in a global market, lower-wage nations can out-compete Americans; or because deregulation makes markets more efficient, with greater rewards to winners; or because new financial instruments add such efficiency to the economy that they justify billion-dollar paydays for their inventors.

Increasingly, however, influential orthodox economists are having serious second thoughts. What if market outcomes and the very rules of the market game reflect political power, not market efficiency? Indeed, what if gross inequality is not efficient, and there is a broad zone of indeterminate income distributions consistent with strong economic performance? What if greater liberalization of financial markets produced tens of trillions of costs to the economy, benefits that are hard to discern, and billion-dollar paydays for traders that don’t comport with their contributions to general economic welfare? Evidence like this is piling up, and hard to ignore.

ANTHONY ATKINSON'S NEW BOOK, Inequality: What Can Be Done?, is both emblem and evidence of this shift in mainstream economic thinking. Atkinson, of the London School of Economics and Oxford’s Nuffield College, is the dean of economists who study inequality. After an exhaustive compilation of data and trends, Atkinson bluntly attributes rising inequality directly or indirectly to “changes in the balance of power.” Thus, he adds, “Measures to reduce inequality can be successful only if countervailing power is brought to bear.”

more
http://prospect.org/article/new-inequality-debate-0

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The New Inequality Debate (Original Post) n2doc Jan 2016 OP
Thanks! I'm putting this on my reading list. TexasMommaWithAHat Jan 2016 #1
Know Thy Enemy - Oligarchs, Corporations, Banks And Their Media Minions And MIC Henchmen cantbeserious Jan 2016 #2
Insider knowledge/manipulation helps fuel inequality Babel_17 Jan 2016 #3
Maybe if they'd read some history... malthaussen Jan 2016 #4

Babel_17

(5,400 posts)
3. Insider knowledge/manipulation helps fuel inequality
Wed Jan 27, 2016, 12:14 PM
Jan 2016

And our system of government is all too OK with that.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»The New Inequality Debate