econintersect.com
       
  

FREE NEWSLETTER: Econintersect sends a nightly newsletter highlighting news events of the day, and providing a summary of new articles posted on the website. Econintersect will not sell or pass your email address to others per our privacy policy. You can cancel this subscription at any time by selecting the unsubscribing link in the footer of each email.



posted on 05 August 2016

Are Soaring Levels Of Income Inequality Making Us A More Polarized Nation?

from The Conversation

- this post authored by Christos Makridis, Stanford University

Political polarization today is greater than it's been in recent history - at least since the 1970s. To see that, one need only look at the current U.S. presidential election.

And whatever your political leanings, an overly divided country can hamper its progress, such as the ability to innovate or adapt to geopolitical risk.

Another trend that has emerged over the same period is the widening gap between the richest and poorest Americans. By some estimates, it's the widest it's ever been.

These two coinciding facts raise the tantalizing question: Did the rise of income inequality over the past three decades contribute to increased political polarization? Or is it the other way around? Or perhaps it's just a coincidence that they both have climbed over the same 30-40 year period?

Chicken and the egg?

Unfortunately, causality - and its direction - can be very difficult to show, although intuitively we can see how either one might affect the other.

For example, greater income inequality may generate more polarization because disparities in earnings affect our priorities. It's been argued that as we make more or less money, the issues we care about most change, as do how we feel about those issues.

On the other hand, greater polarization can generate gridlock in government, making it more difficult to pass legislation. If, for example, there are pressing issues, then greater dispersion in attitudes might make agreement more difficult. Inaction could, in theory, curtail efforts aimed at addressing inequality.

While both are plausible, my view is that the former mechanism is more likely - greater income inequality is leading to more polarization - because earnings inequality is not a transitory relationship. Rather, big differences in earnings takes years to develop, and the bulk of income inequality is explained by longer-run factors. For causality to work the other way, contemporary polarized voting patterns would have to be affecting inequality, which seems unlikely.

Furthermore, recent research in political science has also pushed back on conventional theories that polarization hinders the passage of policy.

Understanding the direction of causality is important for policy. If income inequality is the cause, we should not expect political compromises until labor force participation and competitiveness rise - reducing inequality. If polarization is the cause, then we should not expect our economy to improve until we are able to compromise.

The data suggest fewer and fewer earn more and more of our national income. Income inequality via www.shutterstock.com

Diving into the data

These questions prompted me to gather data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) and Gallup from 2008 to 2015.

The CPS is a survey frequently used by economists to understand changing demographics and employment outcomes throughout the U.S. economy with fresh snapshots every month. The Bureau of Labor Statistics uses the data to compile its monthly unemployment report.

Gallup, arguably the largest polling organization in the U.S., regularly surveys individuals on a range of issues, including their political ideology.

Before we go any further, we need to agree on some definitions. First, although political polarization does not have a uniform definition, I define it here as the fraction of people reporting that they are extreme liberal minus those reporting as extreme conservative, state by state. By taking the difference between the two opposite sides of the spectrum, the measure captures the dispersion that exist at a state level. In other words, the measure is not merely meant to pick up whether a state is Republican or Democrat, but rather the dispersion of attitudes.

Second, income inequality in economics is typically measured by the labor earnings gap between those at the top and bottom 10 percent (90-10 gap) or between the top 10 percent and the bottom 50 percent (90-50 gap). I'll be using a version of that, which employs natural logarithms, here.

What the data show

Combining all these data, I found that states showing greater degrees of political polarization are associated with higher levels of of income inequality.

In particular, a 1 percent rise in the 90-10 earnings gap is associated with a 0.18 percentage point increase in political polarization - that is, the share of individuals identifying as extreme liberals minus those reporting as extreme conservatives goes up by that amount. For the 90-50 earnings gap, it's 0.22 percentage point.

The states that have the greatest income inequality, like Washington, D.C., are also the states with the greatest polarization, according to these data. In fact, the 90-10 earnings gap over this 2008-2015 period explains approximately 27 percent of what we're seeing in political polarization.

In other words, the evidence indicates not only a strong correlation between income inequality and political polarization but also potential causality: Greater income inequality can amplify political tensions by raising polarization. These results imply that income inequality can indirectly affect economic outcomes by increasing the fraction of people who identify as extreme liberal.

This chart shows how different levels of political polarization in U.S. states are associated with higher levels of inequality, based on the earnings gap between the top and bottom 10 percent. Christos Makridis, Author provided

What could explain the economically and statistically significant relationship between income inequality and political polarization? To delve further into the possible mechanisms, I also extracted individual-level data from the American Time Use Survey, together with state-level data on unemployment rates.

The goal here is to understand how different dimensions of labor market outcomes - besides income inequality - might be related to polarization. One possibility, for example, is that the experience of underemployment generates apathy about the political and economic system. These experiences could affects individuals' views about what parties should do for them.

There are two different relationships to highlight: higher levels of polarization are associated with lower average hours worked per week as well as higher unemployment. In particular, a one percentage point rise in our polarization metric is associated with 15 hours less of work per week, on average, and 6 percent greater unemployment.

This chart shows the correlation between political polarization and how many hours people work. Christos Makridis, Author provided

This graph, on the other hand, shows the association with the unemployment rate. Christos Makridis, Author provided

The fact that areas with greater unemployment or underemployment also tend to be more polarized and, in particular, likely to lean extreme left suggests that an individual's experience in the labor market could exert a strong influence on her political ideology. In other words, poor labor market outcomes might inflict more harm on a geography than just the direct impact on individual's economic situation. They may also create a more polarized social and political environment.

With these results in mind, there are three caveats to consider. First, they are not necessarily causal. There are still statistical concerns about why we observe polarization and inequality changing in the data.

Second, while the data used here span from 2008 to 2015, the past decade may feature a very different relationship between inequality and polarization.

Third, although my measure of political polarization is reasonable and robust to an alternative definition that simply separates between extreme Democrats and extreme Republicans, it is also possible that the relationships here may be weaker or switched under alternative definitions of polarization.

Bernie Sanders supporters were strongly in favor of 'free college.' Scott Morgan/Reuters

Unintended consequences

We all realize that greater inequality has tangible implications for who wins and loses in society. However, all these pieces of evidence suggest it may also induce more extreme political attitudes and ideologies.

For example, the popularity of "free college" among Bernie Sanders supporters - and the fact that it affected Hillary Clinton's platform - reflects precisely this phenomenon, despite the fact that there was not any serious economic rationale behind it.

Political polarization can have a number of adverse consequences, ranging from difficulty in passing legislation to unpredictability in domestic and foreign policy.

Predictability is important for a number of reasons. For example, in monetary policy, having a predictable rule that governs how the Federal Reserve adjusts interest rates has been shown to positively affect economic activity (known as the Taylor Rule). Policy uncertainty can also help explain the economy's booms and busts. And, finally, predictability and continuity in policy also affect the United States' credibility abroad.

If my descriptive evidence here is right, it underscores the importance of serious policies aimed at tackling inequality in ways that raise everyone's opportunity. That means focusing on how we can make the pie bigger, rather than how to better split it up.

And, by addressing income inequality, we might also indirectly help mend some of the political fractures that have emerged in recent years.

The ConversationChristos Makridis, Ph.D. Candidate in Labor and Public Economics, Stanford University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

>>>>> Scroll down to view and make comments <<<<<<

Click here for Historical News Post Listing










Make a Comment

Econintersect wants your comments, data and opinion on the articles posted.  As the internet is a "war zone" of trolls, hackers and spammers - Econintersect must balance its defences against ease of commenting.  We have joined with Livefyre to manage our comment streams.

To comment, using Livefyre just click the "Sign In" button at the top-left corner of the comment box below. You can create a commenting account using your favorite social network such as Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn or Open ID - or open a Livefyre account using your email address.



You can also comment using Facebook directly using he comment block below.





Econintersect Contributors


search_box

Print this page or create a PDF file of this page
Print Friendly and PDF


The growing use of ad blocking software is creating a shortfall in covering our fixed expenses. Please consider a donation to Econintersect to allow continuing output of quality and balanced financial and economic news and analysis.


Take a look at what is going on inside of Econintersect.com
Main Home
Analysis Blog
Consumers Carry Weak GDP Number Out of the Red
The Theory of the Monetary Circuit: A Critique
News Blog
August 2016 Personal Consumption and Income Year-over-Year Growth Slows.
Rail Week Ending 24 September 2016: Data Is Mixed
Infographic Of The Day: Global Energy Efficiency
Early Headlines: Asia Stocks Lower, Oil Soft, Japan Deflation Strengthens, Trade Backlash, Trump Fades, Veto Override Reconsidered, DB Could Take Down Merkel And Euro, Germany's "Adolfina" And More
What Are British People Most Proud Of
Trust In Mass Media Erodes
Shimon Peres Was An Israeli Nationalist First And A Peacemaker Second
Guessing Game: Valuations Of Trump's Fortune
What We Read Today 29 September 2016
This Mushroom Starts Killing You Before You Even Realize It
August 2016 Median Household Income Has Declined From The Beginning Of The Year
August 2016 Pending Home Sales Index Declines?
24 September 2016 Initial Unemployment Claims: Rolling Averages Continue to Improve.
Investing Blog
Are You A Trader Or Investor?
Investing.com Technical Summary 29 September 2016
Opinion Blog
First: 'Over-Population End-of Times' Now: 'Shrinking Population Disaster'
The Federal Reserve Note
Precious Metals Blog
Where Silver Prices Are Headed Now After Fed's Latest Inaction
Live Markets
30Sep2016 Pre-Market Commentary: Worries Over Failing Deutsche Bank Overshadow Green US Market Open, WTI Crude Prices Recover Somewhat, Investors Concerned That Japans Deflation Will Spread To US
Amazon Books & More






.... and keep up with economic news using our dynamic economic newspapers with the largest international coverage on the internet
Asia / Pacific
Europe
Middle East / Africa
Americas
USA Government



Crowdfunding ....






























 navigate econintersect.com

Blogs

Analysis Blog
News Blog
Investing Blog
Opinion Blog
Precious Metals Blog
Markets Blog
Video of the Day
Weather

Newspapers

Asia / Pacific
Europe
Middle East / Africa
Americas
USA Government
     

RSS Feeds / Social Media

Combined Econintersect Feed
Google+
Facebook
Twitter
Digg

Free Newsletter

Marketplace - Books & More

Economic Forecast

Content Contribution

Contact

About

  Top Economics Site

Investing.com Contributor TalkMarkets Contributor Finance Blogs Free PageRank Checker Active Search Results Google+

This Web Page by Steven Hansen ---- Copyright 2010 - 2016 Econintersect LLC - all rights reserved