Wednesday, October 9th, 2019 11:08 am

Inequality, Populism, and Redistribution

Question A: Rising inequality is straining the health of liberal democracy.

Responses
 

Source: IGM Economic Experts Panel
www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Source: IGM Economic Experts Panel
www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

Question B: Enacting more redistributive expenditures and policies would be likely to limit the rise of populism.

Responses
 

Source: IGM Economic Experts Panel
www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Source: IGM Economic Experts Panel
www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

Question C:
Governments should allocate more resources to policies that would be likely to limit the rise of populism, even if it means higher public debt or lower public spending in other areas.

Responses
 

Source: IGM Economic Experts Panel
www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Source: IGM Economic Experts Panel
www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel

Question A Participant Responses

Participant University Vote Confidence Comment Bio/Vote History
Acemoglu Daron Acemoglu MIT Agree 5
Unshared gains from growth, esp when resulting in part from the political power of the rich, destroy trust in democratic institutions.
Bio/Vote History
         
Alesina Alberto Alesina Harvard Agree 8
Bio/Vote History
         
Altonji Joseph Altonji Yale Strongly Agree 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Auerbach Alan Auerbach Berkeley Agree 7
Bio/Vote History
         
Autor David Autor MIT Agree 8
Autor, Dorn, Hanson, Majlesi "Importing Political Polarization" document this for the China Shock. Point applies to inequality generally.
Bio/Vote History
         
Baicker Katherine Baicker Chicago Agree 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Banerjee Abhijit Banerjee MIT Strongly Agree 7
Bio/Vote History
         
Bertrand Marianne Bertrand Chicago Strongly Agree 9
Bio/Vote History
         
Brunnermeier Markus Brunnermeier Princeton Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Chetty Raj Chetty Stanford Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Chevalier Judith Chevalier Yale Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Cutler David Cutler Harvard Strongly Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Deaton Angus Deaton Princeton Strongly Agree 10
Bio/Vote History
         
Duffie Darrell Duffie Stanford Strongly Agree 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Edlin Aaron Edlin Berkeley Uncertain 7
A bigger problem might be that incomes haven’t increased meaningfully for the poor nor the middle class
Bio/Vote History
         
Eichengreen Barry Eichengreen Berkeley Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Einav Liran Einav Stanford Agree 1
Bio/Vote History
         
Fair Ray Fair Yale No Opinion
This question and the other two do not rely on my expertise as an economist. They require value judgments or political science expertise.
Bio/Vote History
         
Finkelstein Amy Finkelstein MIT Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Goolsbee Austan Goolsbee Chicago Strongly Agree 10
Look out the *$%# window.
Bio/Vote History
         
Greenstone Michael Greenstone Chicago Strongly Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Hall Robert Hall Stanford Uncertain 2
We don't understand the rise of populism as a general matter
Bio/Vote History
         
Hart Oliver Hart Harvard Agree 8
Bio/Vote History
         
Holmström Bengt Holmström MIT Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Hoxby Caroline Hoxby Stanford Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Hoynes Hilary Hoynes Berkeley Agree 8
Bio/Vote History
         
Judd Kenneth Judd Stanford Agree 9
Political power often comes with wealth. The ideal is "one person, one vote". "One dollar, one vote" is not democracy.
Bio/Vote History
         
Kaplan Steven Kaplan Chicago Disagree 5
Technological change is the driving force. It has disrupted many developed economies including those with less inequality.
Bio/Vote History
         
Kashyap Anil Kashyap Chicago Agree 1
inequality is an endogenous response to other factor and it is the underlying forces that are creating stress
Bio/Vote History
         
Klenow Pete Klenow Stanford Agree 1 Bio/Vote History
         
Levin Jonathan Levin Stanford Agree 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Maskin Eric Maskin Harvard Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Nordhaus William Nordhaus Yale Strongly Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Obstfeld Maurice Obstfeld Berkeley Strongly Agree 7
No the only thing but very important -- esp. on a broad definition of "inequality."
Bio/Vote History
         
Saez Emmanuel Saez Berkeley Agree 8
Bio/Vote History
         
Samuelson Larry Samuelson Yale Agree 8
Inequality coupled with a lack of mobility is especially noxious.
Bio/Vote History
         
Scheinkman José Scheinkman Columbia University Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Schmalensee Richard Schmalensee MIT Strongly Agree 8
Bio/Vote History
         
Shapiro Carl Shapiro Berkeley Strongly Agree 10
Bio/Vote History
         
Shimer Robert Shimer Chicago Uncertain 1
Alternative explanation is poor performance of the bottom of the earnings distribution
Bio/Vote History
         
Stock James Stock Harvard Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Thaler Richard Thaler Chicago Strongly Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Udry Christopher Udry Northwestern Strongly Agree 8
Not just inequality, but it is a major part of the story.
Bio/Vote History
         

Question B Participant Responses

Participant University Vote Confidence Comment Bio/Vote History
Acemoglu Daron Acemoglu MIT Uncertain 5
A better social safety net would help. What is needed is not just fiscal redistribution but good jobs (high-wage employment opportunities)
-see background information here
Bio/Vote History
         
Alesina Alberto Alesina Harvard Uncertain 8
i am not sire what "populism" means we should stop us g this very vague word
Bio/Vote History
         
Altonji Joseph Altonji Yale Uncertain 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Auerbach Alan Auerbach Berkeley Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Autor David Autor MIT Uncertain 5
Genie is out of the bottle. Populism rising even in social welfare states.
Bio/Vote History
         
Baicker Katherine Baicker Chicago Uncertain 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Banerjee Abhijit Banerjee MIT Strongly Agree 7
They need to be designed with a sensitivity to what the pain points are, not what we assume they must be.
Bio/Vote History
         
Bertrand Marianne Bertrand Chicago Strongly Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Brunnermeier Markus Brunnermeier Princeton Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Chetty Raj Chetty Stanford Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Chevalier Judith Chevalier Yale Agree 2
Bio/Vote History
         
Cutler David Cutler Harvard Uncertain 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Deaton Angus Deaton Princeton Disagree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Duffie Darrell Duffie Stanford Strongly Agree 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Edlin Aaron Edlin Berkeley Uncertain 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Eichengreen Barry Eichengreen Berkeley Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Einav Liran Einav Stanford Uncertain 1
Bio/Vote History
         
Fair Ray Fair Yale No Opinion
Bio/Vote History
         
Finkelstein Amy Finkelstein MIT Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Goolsbee Austan Goolsbee Chicago Agree 1
Bio/Vote History
         
Greenstone Michael Greenstone Chicago Agree 2
These questions are pretty unfocused.....what definition of populism is relevant here?
Bio/Vote History
         
Hall Robert Hall Stanford Disagree 2
Resentment from a belief that other people are benefiting from government programs is part of populism
Bio/Vote History
         
Hart Oliver Hart Harvard Agree 7
Bio/Vote History
         
Holmström Bengt Holmström MIT Agree 6
Universal, affordablr healthcare a central example.
Bio/Vote History
         
Hoxby Caroline Hoxby Stanford Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Hoynes Hilary Hoynes Berkeley Agree 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Judd Kenneth Judd Stanford Uncertain 7
Trump's "populist" policy included a reduction in corporate taxation, which will increase inequality. Populists don't seem to care.
Bio/Vote History
         
Kaplan Steven Kaplan Chicago Strongly Disagree 10
Lower inequality in Germany, Italy and, particularly, France (relative to the U.S.) has not limited populism.
Bio/Vote History
         
Kashyap Anil Kashyap Chicago Uncertain 1
too vague to say much. which policies, what is "populism", are taxes a policy?
Bio/Vote History
         
Klenow Pete Klenow Stanford Agree 1 Bio/Vote History
         
Levin Jonathan Levin Stanford Uncertain 3
Hard to know how specific redistributive policies will affect political sentiments
Bio/Vote History
         
Maskin Eric Maskin Harvard Agree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Nordhaus William Nordhaus Yale Agree 5
But the meaning of "populism" is unclear. I assume means right-wing authoritarian, but could be any-wing.
Bio/Vote History
         
Obstfeld Maurice Obstfeld Berkeley Uncertain 5
Some may be necessary but redistribution far from sufficient and could be counter-productive if taken too far or done wrong.
Bio/Vote History
         
Saez Emmanuel Saez Berkeley Agree 8
It's not necessarily $ expenditures that are needed but ways to rebalance power to boost pre-tax incomes of working class (min wage, unions)
Bio/Vote History
         
Samuelson Larry Samuelson Yale Agree 6
The sources of populism are complicated and not well understood, but addressing inequality should be part of an effective antidote.
Bio/Vote History
         
Scheinkman José Scheinkman Columbia University Uncertain 6
Depends on specifics of policies
Bio/Vote History
         
Schmalensee Richard Schmalensee MIT Agree 5
Hard to be too confident, since symbols often matter more than substance.
Bio/Vote History
         
Shapiro Carl Shapiro Berkeley Strongly Agree 10
Bio/Vote History
         
Shimer Robert Shimer Chicago Uncertain 1
Bio/Vote History
         
Stock James Stock Harvard Agree 4
Bio/Vote History
         
Thaler Richard Thaler Chicago No Opinion
Bio/Vote History
         
Udry Christopher Udry Northwestern Strongly Agree 5
The redistribution has to be designed well in order to achieve legitimacy.
Bio/Vote History
         

Question C Participant Responses

Participant University Vote Confidence Comment Bio/Vote History
Acemoglu Daron Acemoglu MIT Agree 5
More spending for a more generous and rational social safety net, job creation programs and education are vital. This needs more tax revenue
Bio/Vote History
         
Alesina Alberto Alesina Harvard Uncertain 10
Bio/Vote History
         
Altonji Joseph Altonji Yale Uncertain 2
Bio/Vote History
         
Auerbach Alan Auerbach Berkeley Agree 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Autor David Autor MIT Agree 5
I think these policies are worth enacting, even though they probably won't limit rise of populism.
Bio/Vote History
         
Baicker Katherine Baicker Chicago Uncertain 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Banerjee Abhijit Banerjee MIT Uncertain 7
Depends on the choice of policies.
Bio/Vote History
         
Bertrand Marianne Bertrand Chicago Agree 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Brunnermeier Markus Brunnermeier Princeton Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Chetty Raj Chetty Stanford Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Chevalier Judith Chevalier Yale Uncertain 4
Governments should address inequality but I am not sure we have enough evidence of what "causes" populism.
Bio/Vote History
         
Cutler David Cutler Harvard Agree 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Deaton Angus Deaton Princeton Agree 8
Bio/Vote History
         
Duffie Darrell Duffie Stanford Uncertain 1
Depends on the policy. Some "anti-populist" policies could impinge on free speech. Redistribution or education could be effective.
Bio/Vote History
         
Edlin Aaron Edlin Berkeley Uncertain 6
Bio/Vote History
         
Eichengreen Barry Eichengreen Berkeley Uncertain 5
Depends on the particulars. See Barry Eichengreen, "The Populist Temptation: Economic Grievance & Political Reaction in the Modern Era"
Bio/Vote History
         
Einav Liran Einav Stanford Uncertain 1
Bio/Vote History
         
Fair Ray Fair Yale No Opinion
Bio/Vote History
         
Finkelstein Amy Finkelstein MIT Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Goolsbee Austan Goolsbee Chicago Uncertain
Bio/Vote History
         
Greenstone Michael Greenstone Chicago Uncertain 2
the intended definition of populism is too broad here. and, i don't think we know which policies affect populism.
Bio/Vote History
         
Hall Robert Hall Stanford Uncertain 2
We don't know what those would be
Bio/Vote History
         
Hart Oliver Hart Harvard Uncertain 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Holmström Bengt Holmström MIT Disagree 5
Bio/Vote History
         
Hoxby Caroline Hoxby Stanford Did Not Answer
Bio/Vote History
         
Hoynes Hilary Hoynes Berkeley No Opinion
You left off the choice of higher taxes - it doesnt have to come from more debt or less other spending.
Bio/Vote History
         
Judd Kenneth Judd Stanford Uncertain 5
Government should focus on doing its job in providing education and safety. Populism is partly based on a view that government is not.
Bio/Vote History
         
Kaplan Steven Kaplan Chicago Strongly Disagree 3
Not sure what the right solution is, but more redistribution has not helped in France and Western Europe.
Bio/Vote History
         
Kashyap Anil Kashyap Chicago No Opinion
same general concerns as with the second question
Bio/Vote History
         
Klenow Pete Klenow Stanford Agree 1
Bio/Vote History
         
Levin Jonathan Levin Stanford Uncertain 3
Would prefer to evaluate policies based on whether they broaden opportunity vs whether they achieve short term political objective
Bio/Vote History
         
Maskin Eric Maskin Harvard Agree 7
Bio/Vote History
         
Nordhaus William Nordhaus Yale Disagree 5
Aside from being bad policy, unclear would help.
Bio/Vote History
         
Obstfeld Maurice Obstfeld Berkeley Agree 7
With low for long interest rates it's feasible -- and the rise of populism partly represents market failures that government could address.
Bio/Vote History
         
Saez Emmanuel Saez Berkeley Agree 7
Bio/Vote History
         
Samuelson Larry Samuelson Yale Agree 4
I would prefer to see governments address inequality, but would need more policy details to have in informed judgement.
Bio/Vote History
         
Scheinkman José Scheinkman Columbia University Disagree 6
The objective of economic policy should be increasing welfare and lower inequality but not to directly affect success of populism.
Bio/Vote History
         
Schmalensee Richard Schmalensee MIT Disagree 7
This is an argument for politics over substance.
Bio/Vote History
         
Shapiro Carl Shapiro Berkeley Strongly Agree 10
Bio/Vote History
         
Shimer Robert Shimer Chicago Uncertain
It's unclear what those policies would be
Bio/Vote History
         
Stock James Stock Harvard Uncertain 3
Bio/Vote History
         
Thaler Richard Thaler Chicago No Opinion
Bio/Vote History
         
Udry Christopher Udry Northwestern Agree 2
Bio/Vote History
         

10 New Economic Experts join the IGM Panel


For the past two years, our expert panelists have been informing the public about the extent to which economists agree or disagree on important public policy issues. This week, we are delighted to announce that we are expanding the IGM Economic Experts Panel to add ten new distinguished economists. Like our other experts, these new panelists have impeccable qualifications to speak on public policy matters, and their names will be familiar to other economists and the media.

To give the public a broad sense of their views on policy issues, each new expert has responded to a selection of 16 statements that our panel had previously addressed. We chose these 16 statements, which cover a wide range of important policy areas, because the original panelists' responses to them were analyzed in a paper comparing the views of our economic experts with those of the American public. You can find that paper, by Paola Sapienza and Luigi Zingales, here. The paper, along with other analyses of the experts' views, was discussed during the American Economic Association annual meetings, and the video can be found here.

The new panelists' responses to these statements can be seen on their individual voting history pages. Our ten new economic experts are:

Abhijit Banerjee (MIT)
Markus K. Brunnermeier (Princeton)
Liran Einav (Stanford)
Amy Finkelstein (MIT)
Oliver Hart (Harvard)
Hilary Hoynes (Berkeley)
Steven N. Kaplan (Chicago)
Larry Samuelson (Yale)
Carl Shapiro (Berkeley)
Robert Shimer (Chicago)


Please note that, for the 16 previous topics on which these new panelists have voted, we left the charts showing the distribution of responses unchanged. Those charts reflect the responses that our original panelists gave at the time, and we have not altered them to reflect the views of the new experts.

We have also taken this opportunity to ask our original panelists whether they would vote differently on any of the statements we have asked about in the past. Several experts chose to highlight statements to which they would currently respond differently. In such cases, you will see this "revote" below the panelist's original vote. We think you will enjoy seeing examples of statements on which some experts have reconsidered.

As with the 16 previous statements voted on by new panelists, these "revote" responses are not reflected in the chart that we display showing the distribution of views for that topic: all the charts for previous questions reflect the distribution of views that the experts expressed when the statement was originally posed.

About the IGM Economic Experts Panel

This panel explores the extent to which economists agree or disagree on major public policy issues. To assess such beliefs we assembled this panel of expert economists. Statistics teaches that a sample of (say) 40 opinions will be adequate to reflect a broader population if the sample is representative of that population.

To that end, our panel was chosen to include distinguished experts with a keen interest in public policy from the major areas of economics, to be geographically diverse, and to include Democrats, Republicans and Independents as well as older and younger scholars. The panel members are all senior faculty at the most elite research universities in the United States. The panel includes Nobel Laureates, John Bates Clark Medalists, fellows of the Econometric society, past Presidents of both the American Economics Association and American Finance Association, past Democratic and Republican members of the President's Council of Economics, and past and current editors of the leading journals in the profession. This selection process has the advantage of not only providing a set of panelists whose names will be familiar to other economists and the media, but also delivers a group with impeccable qualifications to speak on public policy matters.

Finally, it is important to explain one aspect of our voting process. In some instances a panelist may neither agree nor disagree with a statement, and there can be two very different reasons for this. One case occurs when an economist is an expert on a topic and yet sees the evidence on the exact claim at hand as ambiguous. In such cases our panelists vote "uncertain". A second case relates to statements on topics so far removed from the economist's expertise that he or she feels unqualified to vote. In this case, our panelists vote "no opinion".

The Economic Experts Panel questions are emailed individually to the members of the panel, and each responds electronically at his or her convenience. Panelists may consult whatever resources they like before answering.

Members of the public are free to suggest questions (see link below), and the panelists suggest many themselves. Members of the IGM faculty are responsible for deciding the final version of each week’s question. We usually send a draft of the question to the panel in advance, and invite them to point out problems with the wording if they see any. In response, we typically receive a handful of suggested clarifications from individual experts. This process helps us to spot inconsistencies, and to reduce vagueness or problems of interpretation.

The panel data are copyrighted by the Initiative on Global Markets and are being analyzed for an article to appear in a leading peer-reviewed journal.

chicago booth