Is a Growing Middle Class Good for the Poor? Social Policy in a Time of Globalization

We examine the effect of the rise and evolution of the middle class on extreme poverty, using the World Bank's international poverty line of $1.90 per person per day in 2011 purchasing power parity (PPP)- adjusted terms. Like the definition of poverty, the definition of the middle class used here is also set in absolute terms, comprising households where per capita income or consumption lies between$11 and $110 per person per day in 2011 PPP terms—referred to as a "global," as opposed to national, definition of the middle class (Kharas, 2017). We argue that middle-class expansion initially is pro-poor given the incentives of the emerging middle class and the working poor to cooperate on matters of social policy. As citizens join the ranks of the middle class, they lobby for programs that provide them income stability and protections against shocks (social insurance). By allying with the working poor who seek social assistance (income transfers), middle-class constituents increase their bargaining power relative to elites who seek labor flexibility and lower taxes in a competitive global economy. Over time, however, as the middle class prospers and acquires greater political influence, the balance of programs shifts increasingly toward social insurance and away from social assistance. In this way, the middle class begins to capture an increasing proportion of the benefits of social spending, leaving less for welfare services targeted exclusively at the poorest. One implication of this is that the emerging middle class has never been truly progressive, because progressivity ultimately comes at its own expense

A clarification of the Goodwin model of the growth cycle

We show that there is a difficulty in the original Goodwin model which isalso found in some more recent applications. In it both the labour share and theproportion employed can exceed unity, properties which are untenable. However, weshow that the underlying dynamic structure of the model can be reformulated toensure that these variables cannot exceed unity. An illustrative example extends theoriginal model, and we argue it is both plausible and satisfies the necessary unit boxrestrictions. We show that there is a difficulty in the original Goodwin model which isalso found in some more recent applications. In it both the labour share and theproportion employed can exceed unity, properties which are untenable. However, weshow that the underlying dynamic structure of the model can be reformulated toensure that these variables cannot exceed unity. An illustrative example extends theoriginal model, and we argue it is both plausible and satisfies the necessary unit boxrestrictions

The Character and Determinants of Corporate Capital Gains

This paper analyzes how corporate capital gains taxes affect the capital gain realization decisions of firms. The paper outlines the tax treatment of corporate capital gains, the consequent incentives for firms with gains and losses, the efficiency consequences of these taxes in the context of other taxes and capital market distortions, and the response of firms to these incentives. Despite receiving limited attention, corporate capital gain realizations have averaged 30 percent of individual capital gain realizations over the last fifty years and have increased dramatically in importance over the last decade. By 1999, the ratio of net long-term capital gains to income subject to tax was 21 percent and was distributed across a variety of industries suggesting the importance of realization behavior to corporate financing decisions. Time-series analysis of aggregate realization behavior demonstrates that corporate capital gains taxes impact realization behavior significantly. Similarly, an analysis of firm-level investment and property, plant, and equipment (PPE) disposal decisions and gain recognition behavior similarly suggests an important role for these taxes in determining when firms raise money by disposing of assets and realizing gains.