《财政学罗森第九版英文课件：Chap012 Income Redistribution Conceptual Issues》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《财政学罗森第九版英文课件：Chap012 Income Redistribution Conceptual Issues（17页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。
1、CHAPTER 12Income Redistribution:Conceptual IssuesCopyright 2010 by the McGraw-Hill Companies,Inc.All rights reserved.McGraw-Hill/Irwin12-2The Distribution of Income Among HouseholdsSource:US Bureau of the Census 2008bNote:These figures do not include the value of in-kind transfers.12-3Who is Poor?Gr
2、oupPoverty RateGroupPoverty RateAll persons12.5%Under 18 years17.0%White 8.265 years and older9.7Black24.5Female households,no husband presentHispanic origin21.528.3Source:US Bureau of the Census,2008a Figures are for 2007.12-4Poverty Rate(1960-2007)Source:US Bureau of the Census 2008a12-5Measuring
3、Poverty Poverty line12-6Interpreting the Distributional Data Census income consists only of familys cash receipts In-kind transfers Official figures ignore taxes Income measured annually Consumption data may provide better assessment of well-being Problems defining unit of observation12-7Simple Util
4、itarianism Utilitarian Social Welfare Function:W=F(U1,U2,Un)“Promote Greatest Good for Greatest Number”Additive Social Welfare FunctionW=U1+U2+Un Assume Individuals have identical utility functions that depend only on their incomes Utility functions exhibit diminishing marginal utility of income Tot
5、al amount of income is fixed 12-8Implications for Income InequalityPauls marginal utilityPeters marginal utilityPauls income Peters income 00MUPaulMUPeteraecdfI*bPauls incomePeters incomeTake ab from Peter and give to PaulPaul gains this much utilityPeter loses this much utilityThis is the net gain
6、to societySocial welfare maximized12-9Evaluating the Assumptions Assumption 1 Assumption 2 Assumption 312-10The Maximin Criterion Social Welfare FunctionW=Minimum(U1,U2,Un)Maximin criterion-No inequality acceptable unless it works to the advantage of the least well off Original position “behind the
7、veil of ignorance”Critique of Rawls12-11Pareto Efficient Income Redistribution Will redistribution always make someone worse off?Utility FunctionUi=F(X1,X2,Xn,U1,U2,Ui-1,Ui+1,Um)Redistribution if gain in utility from charity exceeds loss from reduced consumption Government reduces cost of redistribu
8、tion Income distribution as a Public Good Social safety net Social stability12-12Non-individualistic Views Fundamental principles specifying income distribution derived independent of tastes Incomes distributed equally as matter of principle Platos 4:1 ratio of highest to lowest income Commodity Ega
9、litarianism12-13Other Considerations Processes versus Outcomes Fairness of distribution of income judged by fairness of process that generated it Robert Nozick Society cannot redistribute income because society has no income to redistribute Mobility Corruption12-14Expenditure Incidence Relative pric
10、e effects Public goods Valuing in-kind transfers12-15In-Kind TransfersPounds of cheese per monthOther goods per month30026020150BAD21060FE1UE3420340H12-16In-Kind TransfersPounds of cheese per monthOther goods per month30013682150BAD210FE4E5420H16812612-17Reasons for In-Kind Transfers Commodity egalitarianism Reduce welfare fraud Political factors
财政学罗森第九版英文课件：Chap012 Income Redistribution Conceptual Issues
