Risk-Aversion and Social Mobility: The Impossibility of Order-Preserving Income Redistributions
AbstractThe traditional criticism notwithstanding, we show that social mobility can, in principle, explain political income redistributions. Nonetheless, the social-mobility argument for redistribution is not satisfactory, as actual transition probabilities are not consistent with order-preserving redistributions.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by CESifo Group Munich in its series CESifo Working Paper Series with number 321.
Date of creation: 2000
Date of revision:
Political economy; social mobility; income redistribution;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Friedrich Breyer & Heinrich Ursprung, 1998.
"Are the rich too rich to be expropriated?: Economic power and the feasibility of constitutional limits to redistribution,"
Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 135-156, January.
- Breyer, Friedrich & Ursprung, Heinrich W, 1998. " Are the Rich Too Rich to be Expropriated?: Economic Power and the Feasibility of Constitutional Limits to Redistribution," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 94(1-2), pages 135-56, January.
- Thomas Piketty, 1994.
"Social Mobility and Redistributive Politics,"
94-15, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Roland Benabou & Efe A. Ok, 1998.
"Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The POUM Hypothesis,"
NBER Working Papers
6795, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Roland Bénabou & Efe A. Ok, 2001. "Social Mobility And The Demand For Redistribution: The Poum Hypothesis," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(2), pages 447-487, May.
- Bénabou, Roland & Ok, Efe A, 1998. "Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: the POUM Hypothesis," CEPR Discussion Papers 1955, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Bénabou, Roland & Ok, Efe, 1997. "Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution : the POUM Hypothesis," IDEI Working Papers 78, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised 1999.
- Joachim Wessels, 1993. "Redistribution from a constitutional perspective," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 425-448, September.
- Louis Putterman & John E. Roemer & Joaquim Silvestre, 1998.
"Does Egalitarianism Have a Future?,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 861-902, June.
- Louis Putterman & John E. Roemer & Joaquim Silvestre, . "Does Egalitarianism Have A Future?," Department of Economics 96-09, California Davis - Department of Economics.
- Giacomo Bonanno & John Roemer & Louis Putterman & Wen Hai & Shunli Yao, 2003. "Does Egalitarianism Have a Future?," Working Papers 969, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
- Meltzer, Allan H & Richard, Scott F, 1981. "A Rational Theory of the Size of Government," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(5), pages 914-27, October.
- Roemer, John E., 1998. "Why the poor do not expropriate the rich: an old argument in new garb," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 399-424, December.
- Hans Peter Gruner & Giacomo Corneo, 2000. "Social Limits to Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(5), pages 1491-1507, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Julio Saavedra).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.