Search

Several governmental programs attempt to relieve economic stress for given segments of the population. Their success is often contingent upon how accurately economic distress in given areas can be identified and measured. The indicator most commonly used is the poverty rate or a related measure, such as the proportion of persons with incomes below 150% of the designated poverty threshold. However, these poverty thresholds are determined nationally and thus fail to take account of local income levels or variations in living costs. Nationally determined poverty thresholds obscure the existence of economic distress in affluent areas. This paper explores an alternate methodology that relates household income at the census tract level to county median household income in order to identify areas of significant poverty. The findings are then compared with official poverty statistics. The analysts is performed for Nassau and Suffolk Counties, two affluent suburban counties located on long Island, adjacent to New York City. The data used came from the 1990 decennial census. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous work (Smiley, 1995) attributed failure of development efforts to the injection of aid into societies where landed institutions may absorb this aid, block growth and maintain inequality An interactive simulation model was built (Smiley, 1996) to explore the effects of land rent flows under alternative transition strategies In these simulations, the public collection of land rent was found to be superior to all other third world development and reformist strategies in achieving growth with equity The underlying ethical and economic arguments are here examined in more general classes of transitions economic transitions involving industrial and post-industrial societies, political transitions involving territorial conflict, and environmental transitions involving adverse externalities. Recommendations are made for collective action to improve both efficiency and equity outcomes from these transitions [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although they are leading institutions in the world of modern development finance, the multilateral development banks have not been very explicit in outlining the development theories upon which they base their loan operations. This paper assesses the utility of the three prime theories employed by these institutions: the project approach, the macroeconomic (gap theory) approach, and the social welfare (or income distribution) approach. It indicates the questions to which each approach addresses itself, and it indicates weaknesses and theoretical inadequacies of each as a primary or sole development tool. Only a balanced and careful use of all these sometimes contradictory approaches will permit the multilateral lending institutions to fulfill their multifaceted obligations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examines the extent to which income distribution affects the ability of economic growth to reduce poverty, based on 1990s data for a sample of rural and urban sectors of African economies. Using the basic-needs approach, an analysis-of-covariance model is derived and estimated, with the headcount, gap, and squared gap poverty ratios serving as the respective dependent variables, and the Gini coefficient and PPP-adjusted incomes as explanatory variables. The study finds that the responsiveness of poverty to income growth is a decreasing function of inequality, albeit at varying rates for the three poverty measures: lowest for the headcount, followed by the gap and fastest for the squared gap. The ranges for the income elasticity in the sample are estimated at: 0.02–0.68, 0.11–1.05, and 0.10–1.35, respectively, for these poverty measures. Furthermore while, on average, the responsiveness of poverty to income growth appears to be the same between the rural and urban sectors, there are substantial sectoral differences across countries. The results suggest the need for country-specific emphases on growth relative to inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the effects of economic growth on the distribution of income. Henry George and Alfred Marshall were among the most influential authors of the late 19th century. George's best-selling "Progress and Poverty" fueled many policy debates of the time; and Marshall's "Principles of Economics," the standard textbook for decades, laid the foundation for modern economics. Each recognized the other's influence. Not only were George and Marshall important figures in intellectual his tow, but they had an important common ground in their deep concern with poverty. Both considered poverty mentally and morally debasing in large part because of its general association with relentlessly hard manual labor. George and Marshall both believe that aided by a proper set of policies, progress can eliminate poverty. With a tax that appropriates rent from the unimproved value of land, George sweeps away all other taxes, all unearned and undeserved private income, poverty, greed, and only one aspect of private land ownership-its entitlement to residual income. With more public education and a higher sense of duty, Marshall's tamed competition gradually eliminates poverty and its attendant evils.

The article presents information on Hong Kong and Singapore. There are many similarities between Hong Kong and Singapore. They have both enjoyed high rates of economic growth over the past three decades, averaging six percent a year in real terms. The two have become known as "East Asian Tigers," having made the transition from poverty to newly industrialized economies in a relatively short time. Both started off as British colonies, with British legal and administrative systems, and made their living as trading ports serving their respective regions. Singapore has been an independent republic since 1965, Hong Kong was returned to China on July 1, 1997. Hong Kong and Singapore are both densely populated cities. Hong Kong and Singapore capture economic rent primarily by nationalizing land and leasing it out. In 1998, Hong Kong's land area of 1,095 square kilometers and her population of 6.6 million were both approximately twice those of Singapore. Owing to historical reasons, Hong Kong's land- tenure arrangements produce an effect comparable to that of straightforward land-value taxation.

This article compares income distribution and economic progress to neo-classical and neo-Keynesian schools. It aims to determine empirically whether there is a strong relationship between income distribution and economic progress. Its first section briefly examines the economic theories on the relationship between income inequality and economic progress within the framework of institutional economics. The second section contains the empirical analysis of the hypothesized relationship which involves construction of a model, description of the variables and data, and interpretation of the estimated results. A cross- national study with a sample of 65 countries is carried out. In the final section, conclusions and suggestions for further study are made. The analysis of income distribution and economic progress (or growth) in the past was largely dominated by the conventional approaches such as neo-classical and neo-Keynesian schools. However, institutionalism offers an alternative explanation, particularly on the relationship between income distribution and economic growth.

Henry George delivered his famous "Moses" lecture in 1878, just one year prior to the publication of his masterwork, Progress and Poverty. The many parallels in the thinking of both George and Moses suggest that George may have been greatly inspired by Moses. George appreciated Moses' concern with improving this world rather than the hereafter Moses, like George, advocated a minimum role for government. Moses proposed a thoroughly equitable distribution of the land which would generate fair taxes and avoid the exploitation so denounced by George. Land accumulation by the few would be prevented by requiring the return of ownership to the original owners every fifty years. George, the humanitarian, is also sympathetic with Mosaic reforms restoring human dignity such as the cancellation of oppressive debt every seventh year, and relief from drudgery every sabbath day and sabbatical year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Henry George's Progress and Poverty, published a century ago, laid the foundation for a theory that attracted a worldwide following. He emphasized that political economy investigates the way a community produces wealth and the proportions in which that wealth will be distributed between individuals. In our day that has been called `plutology,' a subdiscipline of political economy. Many of George's critics, then and now, act as apologists of the status quo, in society and in the academy. But the science's purview must be broader than plutology. Economics, to be relevant, must be useful in the solution of economic and social problems. In redirecting economists to their basic responsibility, George made a lasting contribution to economic science. He also was a perennial influence on economic scholars, even on some of his most antagonistic critics. But George is neglected because his doctrines were and are a threat to various establishments. However, by force of logic and through clarity of expression, he is a goad to the consciences of all folk of good will. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This investigation of American Indian .underdevelopment is based on historical data on the Cherokee people which demonstrate how a self-sufficient people have been reduced to their present state of poverty and welfare dependence. Colonialism and the imposition of White control over Native institutions undermined the Cherokees' ability to innovate effectively. This hypothesis is substantiated by similar experiences of other tribes, as well as those of different indigenous groups, such as Alaska Natives, who have been more successful in preserving their traditional cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article comments on anti-poverty policy. With respect to anti-poverty policy, two major positions have emerged-one emphasizing a structural approach, the other an aggregative approach. These positions are not mutually exclusive, their difference being a question of relative emphasis. Both hold that there is some link between the rate of economic growth and the rate at which poverty incidence is reduced. The essential point of departure between the two points of view lies with the strength of this linkage: the structural position holding that, although economic growth opens up possibilities to escape poverty, a substantial proportion of the poor are not able to exploit these opportunities and are thus left behind in a poverty backwash. In short, the crucial distinction between the two theses is disagreement over the effect of economic growth in reducing poverty incidence. The higher levels of poverty incidence among minority families indicates, of course, that family poverty is relatively more concentrated among these groups and is what one would expect to be likely.