Graph of the week: The Great Gatsby curve

I've posted this curve in my previous blog:
Source: Alan Krueger: "The Rise and Consequences of Inequality in the US"
(FYI: The Great Gatsby is a famous novel by an American author Scott Fitzgerald describing the decadence of the US upper classes in the "roaring 20-ies". There is (another) movie released about the book recently, staring Leonardo Di Caprio).

The source is Krueger's presentation from January last year at the Center for Economic Progress. You can see the slides here. The curve depicts a relationship between inequality (measured by the Gini index) and intergenerational earnings elasticity (if it's more elastic then people find it harder to move between income classes). The US, even though it's positioned pretty high (relative to other developed nations), is projected to be even higher if 2010 Gini were to be taken into account. This means that among the developed countries the US is by far the worst in its high inequality and its lack of upward social mobility, a phenomenon that is both worrying and puzzling for a country that once strived as the land of opportunity (and still is for many). 

But even more interesting than the curve itself was this graph pointing out to the reasons why inequality is said to have expanded in the past few decades:
Source: Alan Krueger: "The Rise and Consequences of Inequality in the US"
The primary reason is said to be technological change. Long behind are reasons such as international trade, minimum wage decreases, decline in unionization and rising immigration. All of these causes certainly did contribute (some more than others in my opinion) to the rising gap between incomes, but technological progress, and more importantly the failure to adapt ones skills to this progress made the situation worse.

The culprit for higher inequality, in my opinion, can be found in the interaction of several factors. Rapid technological progress in the past 30 years resulted in a typical creative destruction process where new jobs and careers made certain types of old jobs obsolete (automated work). Some of these obsolete jobs were outsourced to Asia (even though one phenomenon followed the other, this doesn't imply a direct link of causality; one has to test this hypothesis to see if it holds). In addition, a lot low-skilled labour entered the market (mostly via higher immigration) who failed to adapt to the changes and were left stranded either at lower paid jobs or long-term unemployed. Poor education played an important role as well, while stagnating wages in the "dying" sectors only widened the gap. On the other hand, the innovative part of the equation was working quite well taking advantage of the new technological wave, thus further raising the income of the top 10% (hence the great disparity between college and non-college degree workers). Its not hard to imagine how these two pulling forces (one downwards, one upwards) managed to widen the US inequality gap. 

But none of the aforementioned factors can be held responsible for the lack of social mobility. Furthermore, is low social mobility a consequence of higher inequality, or a cause? Or is it both? As some sort of a negative self-enforcing spiral. Whatever the reason, this is the axis of the curve that the US should worry about. The inequality issue is a result of a changing economy. Social mobility problems lie elsewhere. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Short-selling explained (case study: movie "Trading Places")

Image
After seeing the movie "Trading Places" (1983), starring Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd, for the thousandth time during the holiday season, I decided to write a quick post explaining what happened at the end of this movie that gets so many people puzzled (including me for the first couple of times I've seen it). This entertaining 80s comedy can actually teach you more about finance and trading than any other Hollywood movie (not counting documentaries), including the infamous "Wall Street" (1987), starring Michael Douglas as the ruthless Gordon Gecko, and especially the latest Scorsese film "The Wolf of Wall Street" (2013). Anyway, we all know the story from Trading Places. Dan Aykroyd plays a snobbish investor Louis Winthorpe ("the Third"), while Eddie Murphy plays a street con artist Billy Ray Valentine whose lives get reversed as a result of a bet between two cruel millionaires, the Duke brothers. The Dukes own a commodities bro
Read more

Economic history: mercantilism and international trade

Image
All too often during poor economic times many debunked economic fallacies of the past get reinvented. The reason is simple: a search for ideas and solutions alternative to the "mainstream" (however we define it) allows those who succumb to these fallacies to repeat the ancient errors classical economics was hoping to get rid of. The short-termism of politics plays a crucial role in the process of persistent perpetuation of such fallacies. This is why in times like these it is essential to go back in economic history and debunk some of the ideas that tend to surface repeatedly. In the following couple of posts, I attempt to do just that.  Misunderstanding trade  One of the most misunderstood areas of economics is international trade. More precisely, the idea that if we were to boost net exports - by subsidizing exports and constraining imports - we can achieve higher GDP growth. If one looks at the simple arithmetic of a standard Keynesian macro model: Y=C+I+G+NX, the
Read more

Rent-seeking explained: Removing barriers to entry in the taxi market

Image
The taxi market is undoubtedly one of the best examples of something economists like to call rent-seeking . What does this phenomenon stand for and why do economists (particularly political economists) devote a lot of attention to it?  The classical definition was given by Gordon Tullock back in his  1967  seminal paper "The welfare cost of tariffs, monopolies and theft" , even though the phrase itself was coined by Anne Krueger in 1974 .  Rent-seeking is a process of gaining private benefits through the political process (by lobbying or logrolling for example). It implies gaining protection for a certain privileged group, which in return promises political support, large campaign contributions, or even bribes. This protection varies from giving a monopoly status to a certain company, regulating market entry than hampers competition (such as introducing licences to specific occupations), imposing tariffs to import goods to protect the domestic industry, handing out su
Read more

Graphs (images) of the week: Separated by a border

Image
Usually comparing countries or regions requires looking at GDP growth data, GDP per capita, living standards, relative income or even the happiness index. But even a simple areal glimpse at the borders separating two systems can be more than enough to conclude which country is richer, healthier, more educated and on average more prosperous. It tells us that the causes of between-country differences have to be more than just climate, geography, culture or mentality. Particularly when the same nation is separated by nothing more than a border depicting the striking differences in political systems of the two countries (a classical example here are East and West Germany, but an equally good example can be North or South Korea).  As a result I found that the following set of images paint a better  picture  on between-country differences   than any existing data on global inequality.  The first one is from a  blog post I encountered on the Why Nations Fail blog, comparing the citi
Read more