Spread The Wealth Summary
Bibliography
Atkinson, Anthony B. “How to Spread the Wealth.” Foreign Affairs 95, no. 1 (2016): 29-33. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=111501181&site=ehost-live.
Atkinson, the Centennial Professor at the London School of Economics, researches with a concentration in the distribution of income and wealth. The author is progressive because he specifically states the first step to repair the damage of economic inequality is to create a more progressive income tax. Atkinson offers a new perspective to the concept of economic inequality and redistribution by offering solutions such as, raising the minimum wage, a child benefit program to decrease child poverty in the United States, and regulation on inheritance. A …show more content…
fascinating idea Atkinson presents is that it is a necessity for governments to look farther than individual wealth, but rather focus more on the position of the state in regards to liabilities and assets.
Brown-Iannuzzi, Jazmin L., Kristjen B. Lundberg, Aaron C. Kay, and Keith B. Payne. “Subjective Status Shapes Political Preferences.” Association for Psychological Science 26, no. 1 (2014). Accessed December 11, 2016. doi:10.1177/0956797614553947.
Brown-Iannuzzi (Assistant Professor at the University of Kentucky), and her team of researchers (Lundberg, Assistant Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Richmond) (Kay, Professor at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business) (Payne, a Professor of Psychology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) curated studies to test their hypothesis of the public’s attitudes towards the distribution of wealth. Their results, from two studies determining social class placement and two studies through an economic game, proved that individuals with higher subjective status (wealthy individuals a.k.a upper class) leads to less support for redistribution. It was also found, through an economic game, that people’s threshold on what counts as fair was correlated with self interest because people within the lower class, who were given the role as an upper class individual in the game, were against redistribution, but in reality the lower class individuals are pro-redistribution. However, the authors of this journal are perceived as non-partisan because the authors study the ideologies of conservatives and progressives, therefore, covering most of the political spectrum. Something interesting found within the source was people in the lower class, meaning people with lower subjective status, are seen to have a higher self-interest than people within a higher class and high subjective status.
Dawtry, Rael J., Robbie M. Sutton, and Chris G. Sibley. “Why Wealthier People Think People Are Wealthier, and Why It Matters: From Social Sampling to Redistributive Attitudes.” Psychological Science 26, no. 9 (2015): 1-25. Accessed December 11, 2016. doi:10.1177/0956797615586560.
Dawtry, a Research Officer at the University of Essex, worked along Sutton, a Professor of Social Psychology at Kent University, and Sibley, an Associate Professor in the School of Psychology at the University of Auckland, while they researched social sampling and redistributive attitudes in regards to wealth. A non-partisan perspective was used by the authors when they wrote the source because Dawtry’s studies tested across the political spectrum in order to get the most accurate results. The authors used social sampling, a sample from within your own social circle, to get an accurate read towards redistribution. Their results found that social sampling plays a big role towards redistributive policies. The researchers also found out that income clearly shaped individuals’ views on tax policy, which lead to perceived views of fairness and opposition towards redistributive tax policies. Dawtry, Sutton, and Sibley’s social sampling process connects to how Franko decided to look at redistribution. Franko viewed redistribution from a lens of the state rather than the entire country as a whole, which created a perspective that each state was its own social circle.
Franko, William W. “Political Context, Government Redistribution, and the Publics Response to Growing Economic Inequality.” Journal of Politics 78, no. 4 (August 2016): 957-73.
Franko, an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the John D.
Rockefeller IV School of Policy and Politics at West Virginia University, concentrates his research towards the cause and effects of economic inequality in the United States. In this article, the author is non-partisan because he creates an understanding of different researchers who believe redistribution if efficient, inefficient, and in between. These arguments are more thoroughly explained through three channels of research: an increase in income inequality should lead for an increase in government redistribution, Americans’ support for redistributive policies will increase out of an appetite for equality, and people should foreshadow the public’s increased support for redistribution when challenged with an increase of economic inequality. The source provides a different view towards redistribution, Franko looks at the individual states within the United States, and compares the different modes of redistribution depending on the state’s wealth, whether the state was rich or poor. This method of analysis provides further understanding of the concept of redistribution because Franko examines individual states rather than the United States as a
whole.
Smith, Noah. “The Cost of Redistributing Wealth.” Bloomberg View. Last modified November 25, 2015. Accessed December 13, 2016. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-11-25/leaving-the-justice-out-of-wealth-redistribution.
Smith, a former assistant professor of finance at Stony Brook University, is currently a Bloomberg View columnist and he also writes for his personal blog. The author is conservative because many of his blog posts consist of a Pro-Trump title, and within this piece, Smith poses an example of how trickle down economics is comparable to a leaky bucket. Smith also offers an interesting interpretation towards taxation; he believes taxation is a form of regulation than decreases economic action because taxing an investment or consumption will reduce investment and consumption. The author uses a different approach to explain his views, he utilizes pretend examples to convey his arguments, although many of his examples seem realistic.
Stiglitz, Joseph E. The Price of Inequality. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2013.
Stiglitz, an American economist and professor in the Department of Economics at Columbia University, wrote this section to mesh together psychology with modern day economics. The author forms a more progressive agenda with an ambition to create a more dynamic and fair economy. Stiglitz compares fairness to beauty, in regard that each person has their own opinion depending on the chair they are sitting in. He also outlines that the people who do not want to participate in redistribution that they reiterate the state’s defects. This concept is very interesting because other sources have not had a strict tone , but in Stiglitz’s piece, he blatantly calls out the wealthy for being selfish.
Strokes, Bruce. “The U.S.’s high income gap is met with relatively low public concern.” Pew Research Center. Last modified December 6, 2013. Accessed December 11, 2016. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/06/the-u-s-s-high-income-gap-is-met-with-relatively-low-public-concern/.
Stokes, the director of global economic attitudes at Pew Research Center, writes and analyzes the economic conditions, foreign policy, and values within the world. Stokes is considered a republican, but in this article, he writes with a non-partisan perspective to outline a large problem within the United States, the rich-poor gap. In the article, the author raises the concern that less than half of Americans acknowledge that economic inequality is even a large problem. Stokes compares the United States’ views towards economic inequality with many other countries. Australia and other European countries perspectives of economic inequality range quite differently from the United States. One fascinating example of the world’s discrepant views on economic inequality is when Stokes compares the United States economy to Chile and Australia’s economy. The author outlines that in Australia, their views on economic inequality are much more in line with their reality, whereas, in Chile, the views towards economic inequality are more emphasized than their reality.
Atkinson, Anthony B. “How to Spread the Wealth.” Foreign Affairs 95, no. 1 (2016): 29-33. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=111501181&site=ehost-live.
Atkinson, the Centennial Professor at the London School of Economics, researches with a concentration in the distribution of income and wealth. The author is progressive because he specifically states the first step to repair the damage of economic inequality is to create a more progressive income tax. Atkinson offers a new perspective to the concept of economic inequality and redistribution by offering solutions such as, raising the minimum wage, a child benefit program to decrease child poverty in the United States, and regulation on inheritance. A …show more content…
fascinating idea Atkinson presents is that it is a necessity for governments to look farther than individual wealth, but rather focus more on the position of the state in regards to liabilities and assets.
Brown-Iannuzzi, Jazmin L., Kristjen B. Lundberg, Aaron C. Kay, and Keith B. Payne. “Subjective Status Shapes Political Preferences.” Association for Psychological Science 26, no. 1 (2014). Accessed December 11, 2016. doi:10.1177/0956797614553947.
Brown-Iannuzzi (Assistant Professor at the University of Kentucky), and her team of researchers (Lundberg, Assistant Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Richmond) (Kay, Professor at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business) (Payne, a Professor of Psychology from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) curated studies to test their hypothesis of the public’s attitudes towards the distribution of wealth. Their results, from two studies determining social class placement and two studies through an economic game, proved that individuals with higher subjective status (wealthy individuals a.k.a upper class) leads to less support for redistribution. It was also found, through an economic game, that people’s threshold on what counts as fair was correlated with self interest because people within the lower class, who were given the role as an upper class individual in the game, were against redistribution, but in reality the lower class individuals are pro-redistribution. However, the authors of this journal are perceived as non-partisan because the authors study the ideologies of conservatives and progressives, therefore, covering most of the political spectrum. Something interesting found within the source was people in the lower class, meaning people with lower subjective status, are seen to have a higher self-interest than people within a higher class and high subjective status.
Dawtry, Rael J., Robbie M. Sutton, and Chris G. Sibley. “Why Wealthier People Think People Are Wealthier, and Why It Matters: From Social Sampling to Redistributive Attitudes.” Psychological Science 26, no. 9 (2015): 1-25. Accessed December 11, 2016. doi:10.1177/0956797615586560.
Dawtry, a Research Officer at the University of Essex, worked along Sutton, a Professor of Social Psychology at Kent University, and Sibley, an Associate Professor in the School of Psychology at the University of Auckland, while they researched social sampling and redistributive attitudes in regards to wealth. A non-partisan perspective was used by the authors when they wrote the source because Dawtry’s studies tested across the political spectrum in order to get the most accurate results. The authors used social sampling, a sample from within your own social circle, to get an accurate read towards redistribution. Their results found that social sampling plays a big role towards redistributive policies. The researchers also found out that income clearly shaped individuals’ views on tax policy, which lead to perceived views of fairness and opposition towards redistributive tax policies. Dawtry, Sutton, and Sibley’s social sampling process connects to how Franko decided to look at redistribution. Franko viewed redistribution from a lens of the state rather than the entire country as a whole, which created a perspective that each state was its own social circle.
Franko, William W. “Political Context, Government Redistribution, and the Publics Response to Growing Economic Inequality.” Journal of Politics 78, no. 4 (August 2016): 957-73.
Franko, an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the John D.
Rockefeller IV School of Policy and Politics at West Virginia University, concentrates his research towards the cause and effects of economic inequality in the United States. In this article, the author is non-partisan because he creates an understanding of different researchers who believe redistribution if efficient, inefficient, and in between. These arguments are more thoroughly explained through three channels of research: an increase in income inequality should lead for an increase in government redistribution, Americans’ support for redistributive policies will increase out of an appetite for equality, and people should foreshadow the public’s increased support for redistribution when challenged with an increase of economic inequality. The source provides a different view towards redistribution, Franko looks at the individual states within the United States, and compares the different modes of redistribution depending on the state’s wealth, whether the state was rich or poor. This method of analysis provides further understanding of the concept of redistribution because Franko examines individual states rather than the United States as a
whole.
Smith, Noah. “The Cost of Redistributing Wealth.” Bloomberg View. Last modified November 25, 2015. Accessed December 13, 2016. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-11-25/leaving-the-justice-out-of-wealth-redistribution.
Smith, a former assistant professor of finance at Stony Brook University, is currently a Bloomberg View columnist and he also writes for his personal blog. The author is conservative because many of his blog posts consist of a Pro-Trump title, and within this piece, Smith poses an example of how trickle down economics is comparable to a leaky bucket. Smith also offers an interesting interpretation towards taxation; he believes taxation is a form of regulation than decreases economic action because taxing an investment or consumption will reduce investment and consumption. The author uses a different approach to explain his views, he utilizes pretend examples to convey his arguments, although many of his examples seem realistic.
Stiglitz, Joseph E. The Price of Inequality. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2013.
Stiglitz, an American economist and professor in the Department of Economics at Columbia University, wrote this section to mesh together psychology with modern day economics. The author forms a more progressive agenda with an ambition to create a more dynamic and fair economy. Stiglitz compares fairness to beauty, in regard that each person has their own opinion depending on the chair they are sitting in. He also outlines that the people who do not want to participate in redistribution that they reiterate the state’s defects. This concept is very interesting because other sources have not had a strict tone , but in Stiglitz’s piece, he blatantly calls out the wealthy for being selfish.
Strokes, Bruce. “The U.S.’s high income gap is met with relatively low public concern.” Pew Research Center. Last modified December 6, 2013. Accessed December 11, 2016. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/12/06/the-u-s-s-high-income-gap-is-met-with-relatively-low-public-concern/.
Stokes, the director of global economic attitudes at Pew Research Center, writes and analyzes the economic conditions, foreign policy, and values within the world. Stokes is considered a republican, but in this article, he writes with a non-partisan perspective to outline a large problem within the United States, the rich-poor gap. In the article, the author raises the concern that less than half of Americans acknowledge that economic inequality is even a large problem. Stokes compares the United States’ views towards economic inequality with many other countries. Australia and other European countries perspectives of economic inequality range quite differently from the United States. One fascinating example of the world’s discrepant views on economic inequality is when Stokes compares the United States economy to Chile and Australia’s economy. The author outlines that in Australia, their views on economic inequality are much more in line with their reality, whereas, in Chile, the views towards economic inequality are more emphasized than their reality.