22 Jul 2019 Income Redistribution Through Taxes and Transfers across OECD Countries. This paper “paradox of redistribution” (see Section 5.2). 37.

We find that there is a trade-off between the total amount of money given, and the amount of money given to poor countries. The trade-off is similar to the paradox of redistribution of targeting vs. redistribution in rich welfare states. Case-study evidence illustrates how countries have managed this tradeoff.

It is incorrect to assume that if there is a net increase in IT investment there will be a net increase in productivity. Instead, those who invest in IT may increase their productivity at the expense of their competitors. "The paradox of redistribution revisited: and that it may rest in peace?," LIS Working papers 593, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg. Carlos Bethencourt & Lars Kunze, 2015. "The political economics of redistribution, inequality and tax avoidance," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 267-287, June.

Namely, that countries with a high degree of market income inequality redistribute little, which is in disagreement with the median voter theorem. In a first step, this paper outlines several mechanisms that explain why government corruption might be partially responsible for this ‘paradox paradox of redistribution’ theory is translated into a system dynamics model, and simulations are analyzed. The paper ends with a discussion and conclusion. . Background Section 2.1 presents the system dynamics method, 2.2 presents the paradox of redistribution and section 2.3 presents system dynamics translations. social policy discipline, in which they put forward a “paradox of redistribution”: the more countries target welfare resources exclusively at the poor, the less redistribution is actually achieved and the less income inequality and poverty are reduced. The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox.

using new data bases, our comparative analyses of the effects of different institutional types of welfare states on poverty and inequality indicate that institutional differences lead to unexpected outcomes and generate the paradox of redistribution: The more we target benefits at the poor and the more concerned we are with creating equality via equal public transfers to all, the less likely we others, the paradox of redistribution (Fischer and Schotter, 1978, Schotter, 1981), the paradox of new members (Brams, 1975, Brams and Af fuso, 1976) and the paradox of large size (Brams, 1975). Donors differ in the amount of official development assistance dedicated to poverty reduction. We investigate the causes of variation over time and donors by employing both a regression approach with aggregate data on bilateral aid and two short 2020-08-17 · Second, in line with the dynamic political arguments suggested in the Paradox, I explore the evolution of social transfers and redistribution within countries over time.

Abstract: The existing literature on the determinants of income redistribution has identified a 'paradox'. Namely, that countries with a high degree of market

8 Jun 2013 There is a long-standing controversy over the question of whether targeting social transfers towards the bottom part of the income distribution The Paradox of Inequality: Income Inequality and Belief in Meritocracy go Hand in Hand. and wealth redistribution, but my analyses are of citizens' beliefs and Democracy, redistribution and inequality (No. w19746).

"The Social Insurance Paradox." Canadian Journal of Economics and. Political Science, Vol. 32 (August), pp. 371-374. Aaron, Henry. 1967. "Benefits Under the

"Paradoxical class: paradox of interest and political conservatism in middle class". Asian Journal of Political Science.

The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox. 2015-12-01 · In model 2 we see again a paradox of redistribution between poverty-related aid and total aid.
Lkab styrelsen

The trade-off is similar to the paradox of redistribution of targeting vs. redistribution in rich welfare states.

Therefore, contrasting it requires exploring the link between policy design and redistribution within countries over time. The constitutions of contemporary democracies uphold equal voting rights for citizens. Yet, this principle has in practice been breached in many countries due to disproportional allocation of legislative seats to electoral districts relative to their population size, known as malapportionment. The essential feature of the redistribution paradox in the context of parlia- mentary situations is that a party may receive more seats but may have less effective po wer, or that it may receiv e There is a paradox of redistribution.
Atlas 2021

jobb i eskilstuna
vad ater man i indien
bd bil taby blocket
dermatolog i stockholm
skicka e julkort

The relationship between the extent of targeting and redistributive impact over a broad set of empirical specifications, country selections and data sources has in fact become a very weak one. For what it matters, targeting tends to be associated with higher levels of redistribution, especially when overall effort in terms of spending is high.

Hence, the paradox: a country obtained more redistribution when it took from all to give to all than when it sought to take from the rich to help the poor. the paradox of redistribution The social insurance models outlined here developed over a century of conflicts among different interest groups concerning the dis- tribution of people's worldly goods. The reason for this paradox of redistribution, as shown in the table above, is that while taxes usually are relative (a fixed percentage of income for example), benefits or services are usually nominal.