The Concepts of Efficient Wealth Redistribution - Annotated Bibliography Example

Consequences of wealth inequality in history Bardhan, P., Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2000). Chapter 10 Wealth inequality, wealth constraints and economic performance. Handbook of Income Distribution, 1, 541-603. Bardhan, Bowles and Gintis discuss the concepts of efficient wealth redistribution, the inequality, risk aversion, common pool resources, the team production and mutual monitoring (Bardhan, Bowles & Gintis, 2000). Wealth distribution affects the income streams, bargaining situations, exploitation of common resources and the capital cost of a given population (Bardhan, Bowles & Gintis, 2000). In addition, in contractual agreements, there is preclusion of the distribution of assets, especially when behaviors like hard work and risk-taking are not subject to the complete contract. This article provides a thorough examination of concepts in wealth inequality. The research is very objective and well documented. The article, being 14 years old, is quite old and some information may be outdated, as researchers have done more research on the particular subject. Since wealth inequality is a broad topic, the article has really helped me in understanding the concepts of wealth inequality, in addition to narrowing it down. This is because there is a direct linkage that characterizes income inequality and wealth inequality. Cagetti, M., & Nardi, M. D. (2006). Wealth Inequality: Data and Models. Macroeconomics Dynamics, 12(2), 285-313. Cagetti and Nardi describe the wealth distribution and concentration in the United States. Moreover, the authors provided the percentages of the economy held by the rich and poor. They showed the different economic models that represent factors affecting wealth inequality. The paper is very reliable considering that the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank provided it. Cagetti and Nardi are very objective when it comes to the research done. The authors documented the facts very well. This resource is very helpful. Cagetti and Nardi have been able to use economic models to describe the wealth inequality. They did this very well considering that it is a very challenging task. Keister, L. A. (2000). Race and Wealth Inequality: The Impact of Racial Differences in Asset Ownership on the Distribution of Household Wealth. Social Science Research, 29(4), 477-502. The article describes the racial differences in wealth ownership. The authors use data from surveys to model asset ownership. Its purpose is to find which race is more likely to purchase high-risk assets that have high-returns. The authors used simulation models to show the effects that the difference in ownership has on the wealth distribution. Keister further explores ways on how to reduce inequality in wealth distribution in the future. The resource is a bit outdated. The current economy is not the same as it was 14 years ago. Hence, things have really undergone dynamic changes due to technological knowhow and other aspects that characterize unpredictability of an economy. The asset ownership by different races is not the same as it was 14 years ago. The article fits in my research perfectly as it provides a better understanding of wealth inequality in terms of racial differences. Kraus, M. W., & Callaghan, B. (2014). Noblesse Oblige? Social Status and Economic Inequality Maintenance among Politicians. Plos ONE, 9(1), 1-6. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085293 The article describes the high levels of economic inequality in the US. Kraus and Callaghan try to predict varied behaviors exhibited by politicians in supporting the economic inequality. The authors consider the implications of the relationships between economic inequality support and the social status of the support. Kraus and Callaghan are very objective when it comes to describing the support provided by the different politicians from the two political parties. Moreover, the article is up to date. It is a chorally peer-reviewed article. The article is relevant to my research on the support provided by the government and politicians in order to reduce the wealth inequality. Lysandrou, P. (2011). Global Inequality, Wealth Concentration and the Subprime Crisis: A Marxian Commodity Theory Analysis. Development & Change, 42(1), 183-208. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7660.2010.01680.x Lysandrou describes the demand for securities as the reason behind the financial crisis. He further identifies private wealth as the key to the demand’s build up. He argues using Marx’s insight of crisis. The effects of exploitation surfaced ‘above’ in the capital market space in form of excess demand for security debt because they were prevented from surfacing ‘below’ in the GDP space where it surfaced in the form of excess supply of the material goods. The article is reliable as it is peer-reviewed and current. Moreover, the research is objective. Besides is very helpful as it describes the wealth inequality at a global level and the reasons behind the financial crisis. This ranges from the developing to the advanced regions whereby in each there is disparity in terms of wealthy. Rahman, K. (2012). Democracy and Productivity: The Glass-Steagall Act and the Shifting Discourse of Financial Regulation. Journal Of Policy History, 24(4), 612-643. doi:10.1017/S089803061200022X Rahman describes the discourse that surrounds the Glass-Steagall Act, which is the New Deal legislation in the US. The government passed the act to separate investment banking from commercial banking. It emerged in the 1980s and 1990s to shift the banking government regulations to deregulation for achievement of economic productivity. The article further explains the roles played by Senator Glass and President Roosevelt in passing the act. The journal is reliable and current as it is a current source. The author is very objective and he has documented the facts very well. It is a scholarly article. The article fits in my research as it helps in understanding the separation of the banking industry, which led to investment banking as a single entity. The author links investment banking to the acquisition of assets. Yunker, J. A. (2010). Capital wealth taxation as a potential remedy for excessive capital wealth inequality. Journal Of Post Keynesian Economics, 33(1), 83-104. Yunker shows that an inheritance and chance model is successful in the prediction of the wealth capital distribution in the United States. This is an indication from the data obtained from the Survey for Consumer Finance (2004). The author further describes the role of estate taxation using model of simulation meant to show when and how taxation can reduce the capital wealth inequality. The author documented the facts very well and the research is objective. He published the resource less than four years ago, thus most of the information is up to date. The article fits in my research because it describes the effects of taxation on reduction of capital wealth inequality. Wolff, E. N. (2013). The Asset Price Meltdown, Rising Leverage, and the Wealth of the Middle Class. Journal Of Economic Issues (M.E. Sharpe Inc.), 47(2), 333-342. doi:10.2753/JEI0021-3624470205 Wolff examines the trends of wealth from early 1980s to 2010. In 2010, the wealth had plummeted by around 47 percent from 2007. The rise in equality and sharp fall of the median net experienced in the four years are due to high advantage of the middle class and the importance of homes. The journal is current and very reliable. The research is very biased and the facts are very well documented showing statistics of the rise in wealth equality over the years. Moreover, the research is objective. The article is very helpful as it shows that even though currently there is wealth inequality, the equality has risen over the years. Wei-Bin, Z. (2013). A Synthesis of the Uzawa-Lucas Model with the Walrasian-General- Equilibrium and Neoclassical-Growth Theories. Ekonomski Anali / Economic Annals, 58(199), 7-38. doi:10.2298/EKA1399007Z Wei-Bin presents an economic model that is dynamic, for the accumulation of human capital and wealth with endogenous education. This is an extension of a heterogeneous model for the household economy known as the Uzawa-Lucas model. The article shows how to learn the economy using education. Different households differ in their level of incomes and ability to save. The author further describes how simulation models show the points of equilibrium. The authors further demonstrate the changes in prosperity and the effects of productivity on the education sector. The article is reliable as it is peer-reviewed and the information is current. The models are well illustrated and documented besides backed by valid facts whose authenticity is undeniable. The resource is helpful in demonstrating the reasons behind the unequal distribution of wealth and the effects of the education sector in the overall economy. These aspects feature due to their immense contribution to a given state’s economy. Norton, M. I., & Ariely, D. (2013). Americans desire for less wealth inequality does not depend on how you ask them. Judgment & Decision Making, 8(3), 393-394. Norton and Ariely explains the ignorance displayed by citizens when it comes to the political and economic realities of their countries. Even in America, the citizens were not aware about the wealth distribution in their country. However, Americans still desire a better distribution of wealth, which is equal not only to certain ethnic but also to everybody. The article is current, the research is subjective and the authors documented the facts very well. Moreover, the article is peer reviewed. The resource is very helpful to my research as it describes the American’s ignorance when it comes to distribution of wealth and their desires for equitable distribution of wealth. Read More