首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Rising Inequality Is Holding Back the U. S. Economy [A]In announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an
Rising Inequality Is Holding Back the U. S. Economy [A]In announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an
admin
2016-09-09
18
问题
Rising Inequality Is Holding Back the U. S. Economy
[A]In announcing his run for the presidency last month, Jeb Bush has set an ambitious goal of 4 percent real growth in gross domestic product(GDP). This goal has been greeted with substantial skepticism from parts of the economics establishment, while some economists have praised it as a "worthy and viable aspiration" that could be achieved with growth-oriented policies. Our recent research implies that a 4 percent growth goal for first term of the next President is not only possible, but is what we should strive to achieve. Like Hubbard and Warsh, veteran Republican economic policymakers, we agree that the U. S. needs policies that raise labor force participation, accelerate productivity growth and improve expectations. Where we part ways is the tactics.
[B]Their recommendations focus on supply-side policies, such as tax reform, regulatory reform, reduced trade friction and education and training. Our research implies that a weak demand side explains the sluggish(萧条的)recovery from the Great Recession, with the rise of income inequality as a central factor. Consequently, our policy prescriptions revolve around increasing the take-home pay of the majority of American households. The Great Recession, which began in December 2007, was the most severe American economic downturn in three-quarters of a century. Most economists did not anticipate ahead of time that this kind of thing could happen, although we warned that "it could get ugly out there" in October 2007.
[C]But as the severity of the recession became apparent in the dark days of late 2008 and early 2009, many economists predicted a swift bounce-back, reasoning from historical evidence that deep downturns are followed by rapid recoveries. Sadly, that prediction was also incorrect. The growth path following the Great Recession has been historically sluggish. Our recent research, supported by the Institute for New Economic Thinking, helps explain why: The economic drag from decades of rising income inequality has held back consumer spending.
[D]Our work studies the link between rising income inequality and U. S. household demand over the past several decades. From the middle 1980s until the middle 2000s, American consumers spent liberally despite the fact that income growth stagnated(停滞)for most of the population. We show that the annual growth rate of household income slowed markedly in 1980 for the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution, while income growth for the top 5 percent accelerated at the same time. The result was the widely discussed rise of income inequality.
[E]It is also well known that household debt grew rapidly during this period. Our work points out that the buildup of debt relative to income was concentrated in the bottom 95 percent of the income distribution. Debt to income for the top 5 percent bounced around with little clear trend: When the financial crisis hit, our work shows that the bottom 95 percent of Americans could no longer get the rising debt they needed to continue to spend along the trend they established in the years leading up to the crisis. The result was a sharp cutback in household demand relative to income that caused the collapse of the Great Recession.
[F]What about the recovery? Household demand in 2013(the most recent observation we have because our computations incorporate data that are released with a lag and are available at an annual frequency only)was a stunning 17. 5 percent below its pre-recession trend, with no sign of recovering back toward the trend. What happened? Our research implies that the cutoff of credit for the group of households falling behind as income inequality rose prevented their spending from recovering to its pre-recession path.
[G]While there is no reason to necessarily expect that consumer spending will follow a constant trend over long periods of time, the practical reality is that the U. S. economy needed the pre-recession trend of demand to maintain adequate growth and at least a rough approximation of full employment prior to 2007. In the middle 2000s, there was no sign of excess demand in the U. S. economy. Inflation was tame and interest rates were low. Wage growth was stagnant. Although some gradual slowing in long-term U. S. growth might have been predicted as the large baby-boom generation ages, the overall labor force participation rate was actually rising prior to the recession, so there was no reason to expect any significant decline in labor resources in the years immediately following 2007.
[H]Yes, the way many Americans were financing their demand was unsustainable, but there is no indication that businesses could not sustainably continue to produce along the pre-recession trend if they had been able to sell the output. Our interpretation of the evidence is that the demand drag that could be expected as the result of rising inequality is, after a delay of a-quarter century, finally constraining the U. S. economy. Intuition, theory and evidence predict that high-income people spend, on average, a smaller share of their income than everyone else does. So as a higher share of income goes into the pockets of the well-to-do, the household sector as a whole is likely to recycle less of its income back into spending, which slows the path of demand growth.
[I]A possible problem with this prediction for the U. S. in recent years is that income inequality began to rise in the early 1980s, but household demand remained strong through 2006. Our argument is that the demand drag from rising inequality was postponed by the buildup of debt: The bottom 95 percent borrowed rather than cut back their spending when their income growth slowed. But as the crisis hit, lending to households collapsed, and the trend of rising debt could not continue.
[J]The effect of rising inequality has hit the economy hard. As a result, today’s economy is underperforming. No one can know precisely how much of the stagnation in household demand is due to the rise of inequality, but our estimates imply that the current path of total demand in the economy is at least 10 percent below where it would have been with the income distribution of the early 1980s. Where demand goes, so follows output and employment. This analysis links to the call for 4 percent growth. Considering conventional estimates of the long-term trend growth of the economy, a 4 percent growth rate through the next U. S. President’s first term would go a long way toward closing the gap in output that opened with the collapse of household spending in the Great Recession and has yet to be filled.
[K]How can we move toward this goal? Our research strongly implies that the main problem is on the demand side, not the supply side. The U. S. needs to find a way to boost demand growth by arresting, and hopefully reversing, the dramatic rise of inequality. The basic argument is exceedingly simple: The economy continues to be held back by insufficient household spending, and if the income share of Americans outside of the top sliver rises, household spending will increase. Policies that raise the minimum wage and reduce the tax burden of low- and middle-income households would help.
[L]In our view, however, the best method to achieve this objective would be to restore wage growth across the income distribution as occurred in the decades after World War II. Meeting this objective is challenging for a variety of reasons, including the fact that there remains no clear consensus about what has caused the rise of American economic inequality. But the need to address inequality is not just a matter of social justice: it also is important to get the economy back on the right track after more than seven years of stagnation. We can do better.
Reducing the income inequality is of significance in terms of social justice and economic recovery.
选项
答案
L
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/WFyFFFFM
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
AproposalforanewuniversityinCanadarecentlycaughtmyeyeforahostofreasons,nottheleastofwhichisthatitsstude
A、Morepeoplewouldapplytomedicalschool.B、Understaffedareaswouldgainmorephysicians.C、Studentswouldfinishmedicalsc
中国是率先拥有医药文化的几个国家之一。与西医相比,中医的治疗方法完全不同。经过5000年的发展,中医已经对医药学(medicalscience)、理论、诊断方法、处方等方面形成了一个深刻且全面的理解。中医医生可以没有任何辅助设备,只通过一次体检就能够治愈
Thehealth-careeconomyisfilledwithunusualandevenuniqueeconomicrelationships.Oneoftheleastunderstoodinvolvesthe
Thehealth-careeconomyisfilledwithunusualandevenuniqueeconomicrelationships.Oneoftheleastunderstoodinvolvesthe
MyViewonKnowledgeEconomy1.近年来,知识型经济在人们的经济生活中发挥着越来越大的作用2.它产生了哪些影响3.我的看法
RisingInequalityIsHoldingBacktheU.S.Economy[A]Inannouncinghisrunforthepresidencylastmonth,JebBushhassetan
RisingInequalityIsHoldingBacktheU.S.Economy[A]Inannouncinghisrunforthepresidencylastmonth,JebBushhassetan
RisingInequalityIsHoldingBacktheU.S.Economy[A]Inannouncinghisrunforthepresidencylastmonth,JebBushhassetan
随机试题
诊断中期妊娠,下列哪项最不可靠
下列对心律失常患者进行的健康教育中哪项不妥
公民、法人或者其他组织认为行政机关的具体行政行为侵犯其合法权益,可以依法申请行政复议机关依照行政复议程序审查原具体行政行为的合法性,并由复议机关作出复议决定。 ( )
压力管道中的公用管道安装许可类别为GB类压力管道,分为燃气管道和()。
背景资料:施工单位承接了一新建高速公路K50+000~K75+000段路面工程与交通工程的施工,其中包含中央分隔带及路面排水工程,一般路段中央分隔带断面设计如下图所示。设计说明:1.图中尺寸除注明外均以cm计。2.施工中应确保防水
甲公司2020年1月1日有一笔闲置资金,可以进行公司债券和股票的投资。进行债券投资要求的报价必要收益率为12%,进行股票投资要求的报价报酬率为20%。现有5种证券可供选择,相关资料如下:(1)A公司债券于2018年1月1日发行5年期、面值为1000元、票
正一道“三山符篆”不是指()。
设m和n为正整数,a>0,且为常数,则下列说法不正确的是()
设pn=,n=1,2,…,则下列命题正确的是()
•Readthearticlebelowaboutjobenrichment,akindofwaytopromotetheworkefficiencyofacompany.•Choosethecorrectw
最新回复
(
0
)