Die Ungleichheit der verfügbaren Einkommen in Deutschland ist nach dem Höhepunkt im Jahr 2005 leicht zurückgegangen. Diese Tendenz hat sich jedoch zuletzt - im Jahr 2011 - nicht weiter fortgesetzt. Die Einkommensmobilität, das heißt der Auf- oder Abstieg einzelner Personengruppen in der Einkommenshierarchie, ist seit der Wiedervereinigung deutlich zurückgegangen. Zu diesem Ergebnis kommt das Deutsche Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin) in einer aktuellen Studie. „Die Chance, innerhalb eines Vierjahreszeitraums aus dem Armutsrisiko zu entkommen, ist in den vergangenen Jahren um zehn Prozentpunkte auf 46 Prozent gesunken“, erläutert DIW-Forscher Markus Grabka. Die Ungleichheit der verfügbaren Haushaltseinkommen und das Armutsrisiko verharren insgesamt auf einem hohen Niveau.
What we are witnessing in many countries looks like a slow-motion replay of the last housing-market train wreck. And, like last time, the bigger the bubbles become, the nastier the collision with reality will be.
Countries and international organizations working on longer-range development issues depend on long-term quantitative projections and scenario analysis. Such forecasting has become increasingly challenging, thanks to the rapid pace of globalization, technological progress, the interplay among them, and enhanced connectivity among people. As a result, seemingly isolated events can quickly lead to wide-ranging and lasting regional or even global consequences. This paper examines the problem of long-term economic forecasting in the face of increased complexity and uncertainty. With the benefit of hindsight, it scrutinizes past long-term qualitative and quantitative projections for the 1990s in order to draw lessons on how an institution can and should conduct long-term forecasting and policy analysis. The main conclusions are that policy makers and researchers across the world urgently need to see the big picture if they are to deal with the specific challenges and opportunities they will face over the long term as economies and global linkages undergo major structural changes under conditions of considerable uncertainty and volatility. Global institutions need to have strong research programs that work in close collaboration with other international organizations, academic centers, and independent experts on important long-term development issues ("blue sky" issues) and megatrends. These institutions need to build on their comparative strengths and form teams of in-house researchers and global experts who work on state-of-the-art models related to globalization, technological progress and innovations, climate change, demographic shifts, population, and labor force quality and their policy implications at both the global and country levels. Researchers should be encouraged to consider how global challenges such as financial crises, climate change, and infectious diseases can lead to breaks in economic trends and regime change and how such breaks affect economic activity. Alternative scenarios need to be created that incorporate the views of contrarian forecasters, including forecasts of possible shocks.
Back on November 15, 2010, I was one of the signatories of the following letter, addressed to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, which was published in the Wall Street Journal:
We believe the Federal Reserve's large-scale asset purchase plan (so-called "quantitative easing") should be reconsidered and discontinued. We do not believe such a plan is necessary or advisable under current circumstances. The planned asset purchases risk currency debasement and inflation, and we do not think they will achieve the Fed's objective of promoting employment.
We subscribe to your statement in The Washington Post on November 4 that "the Federal Reserve cannot solve all the economy's problems on its own." In this case, we think improvements in tax, spending and regulatory policies must take precedence in a national growth program, not further monetary stimulus.
The issue of income inequality is back in the news at a time when the U.S. public believes there is a growing gulf between rich and poor that is likely to continue, according to recent Pew Research Center surveys.
President Obamafocused on the issue in a Wednesday speech in which he said there was “a dangerous and growing inequality” in the nation which now stood as “the defining challenge of our time.”
İtalya'nın Prato kentinde pazar günü çıkan fabrika yangınında 7 Çinli işçinin ölmesi üzerine, gözler Çinli göçmenlerin 'köleliğe yakın' çalışma koşullarına çevrildi. Roma'dan bildiren gazeteci Övgü Pınar, İtalya'daki Çinli işçileri yazıyor.
PISA 2012 is the programme’s 5th survey. It assessed the competencies of 15-year-olds in reading, mathematics and science (with a focus on mathematics) in 65 countries and economies.
Around 510 000 students between the ages of 15 years 3 months and 16 years 2 months participated in the assessment, representing about 28 million 15-year-olds globally.
The students took a paper-based test that lasted 2 hours. The tests were a mixture of open-ended and multiple-choice questions that were organised in groups based on a passage setting out a real-life situation. A total of about 390 minutes of test items were covered. Students took different combinations of different tests. They and their school principals also answered questionnaires to provide information about the students' backgrounds, schools and learning experiences and about the broader school system and learning environment.
To wipe out global poverty, transfer money to the people who work hardest to earn it
With a speech on inequality last week, President Obama sought to kick-start a national debate about the growing gap between America’s rich and poor and what to do about it. Since 1979, U.S. productivity has increased by more than 90 percent, but the income of the typical family has increased by less than 8 percent. Worse, inter-generational inequality is huge. “A child born in the top 20 percent has about a two-in-three chance of staying at or near the top. A child born into the bottom 20 percent has a less than one-in-20 shot at making it to the top,” Obama noted. Behind growing inequality lay the impact of technology, greater competition, slashed taxes on the rich, limited investment in public goods, a lagging minimum wage, and weaker unions, argued the president. The unspoken implication: A growing wealth gap wasn’t primarily because of the harder work of the people at the top.
The next big international trade deals should focus on green growth. By John Mathews
This week, ministers and delegates gather in Bali to try to thrash out a new multilateral trade deal. It seems likely that a deal, if it materializes, has been reduced to addressing trade and customs procedures, rather than the core issues of reducing tariffs and trade barriers. Given this minimalism, it is high time to think about the benefits of free trade in a new and broader light.
There are now substantial regional alternatives to the global forum, such as NAFTA, the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), or the new proposed US-EU Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). But these are all regional and focused on the existing state of affairs – and they exclude China.
President Obama took on a topic yesterday that most Americans don’t like to talk about much: inequality. There are a lot of ways to measure economic inequality (and we’ll be discussing more on Fact Tank), but one basic approach is to look at how much income flows to groups at different steps on the economic ladder.
Emmanuel Saez, an economics professor at UC-Berkeley, has been doing just that for years. And according to his research, U.S. income inequality has been increasing steadily since the 1970s, and now has reached levels not seen since 1928. (The GIF file at the top of this post, created by Dorsey Shaw of Buzzfeed, compares growth in average income of the top 1% of Americans with everyone else.)
President Obama hit all the right notes in his speech today addressing income inequality. I was pretty tough on him last July in a similar speech where I said he was better at the diagnosis of the problem than in proposing solutions. In particular, I pointed out he failed to acknowledge that to generate expanded opportunity and a broader middle class requires broad-based wage growth. After all, a good working definition of the middle class is people and families that rely almost exclusively on the income from work—wages and benefits. They don’t have income from owning stocks or other financial assets and don’t receive much ‘transfer income’ from the government.
Do you know what happens in one minute on the Internet? In just one minute, more than 204 million emails are sent. Amazon rings up about $83,000 in sales. Around 20 million photos are viewed and 3,000 uploaded on Flickr.