Progress for the Poor

171 Pages·2011·0.63 MB·English

by  Lane Kenworthy

PROGRESS FOR THE POOR
This page intentionally left blank
Progress for
the Poor
LANE KENWORTHY
1
3
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxfordox26dp
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwidein
Oxford NewYork
Auckland CapeTown DaresSalaam HongKong Karachi
KualaLumpur Madrid Melbourne MexicoCity Nairobi
NewDelhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
Withofficesin
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile CzechRepublic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
SouthKorea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam
OxfordisaregisteredtrademarkofOxfordUniversityPress
intheUKandincertainothercountries
PublishedintheUnitedStates
byOxfordUniversityPressInc.,NewYork
#LaneKenworthy2011
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted
DatabaserightOxfordUniversityPress(maker)
Firstpublished2011
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,
storedinaretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,
withoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,
orasexpresslypermittedbylaw,orundertermsagreedwiththeappropriate
reprographicsrightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproduction
outsidethescopeoftheaboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,
OxfordUniversityPress,attheaddressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisbookinanyotherbindingorcover
andyoumustimposethesameconditiononanyacquirer
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData
Dataavailable
TypesetbySPIPublisherServices,Pondicherry,India
PrintedinGreatBritain
onacid-freepaperby
MPGBooksGroup,BodminandKing’sLynn
ISBN 978–0–19–959152–7
1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
For Alex Hicks, Leon Lindberg, Joel Rogers, Wolfgang Streeck,
Jeff Weintraub, and Erik Wright—generous teachers
and mentors, sterling exemplars
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
1. RaisetheFloor 1
2. GrowthIsGoodforthePoor,IfSocialPolicyPassesItOn 5
3. HowTrickleDownCanFail:TheU.S.Case
LaneKenworthyandKeithBentele 19
4. GenerousSocialPolicyReducesMaterialDeprivation
LaneKenworthy,JessicaEpstein,andDanielDuerr 33
5. LowWagesNeedNotMeanLowIncomes 39
6. TargetingMayNotBeSoBad 53
7. PublicServicesAreanImportantAntipovertyTool 63
8. TheTaxMixMattersLessThanWeThought 71
9. TheAimIsNotSpendingPerSe 89
10. Tradeoffs? 95
11. ThePoliticsofHelpingthePoor 103
Acknowledgments 111
Appendix:DataDefinitionsandSources 113
Notes 119
References 131
Index 155
This page intentionally left blank
1
Raise the Floor
Oneoftheprincipalgoalsofantipovertyeffortsshouldbetoimprove
theabsolutelivingstandardsoftheleastwell-off.Myaiminthisbook
istoenhanceourunderstandingofhowtodothat.
ABSOLUTE IMPROVEMENT
Improvement in absolute living standards has several components,
each of which is contentious. Begin with absolute improvement.
The inspiration comes in part from John Rawls. In A Theory of
Justice,Rawlsaskswhatdistributionofincomeandwealthisfairest.1
Because luck plays a large role in determining our abilities, prefer-
ences,motivations,andcircumstances,Rawlsconcludesthatanequal
distributionisfairest.Heargues,however,that arise ininequalityis
acceptable if it is to the absolute benefit of the least well-off. In this
way, Rawls attaches substantial ethical weight to absolute improve-
mentforthepoor.Inmyviewheisrighttodoso.2
Whyisimprovementimportant?Experimentalresearchhasfound
that many people believe justice entails a floor for living standards,
below which no one should fall, but not necessarily a rising floor.3
I don’t think policy makers should share this view. In a rich and
growingeconomy,itisdifficulttojustifystagnantlivingstandardsfor
those at the bottom. As an economy grows, our view about the
appropriate floor will tend to be revised upward. This suggests that
we favor not simply a satisfactory level of living standards for the
poor,butimprovementovertime.
An additional reason for favoring rising living standards comes
from Benjamin Friedman’s argument about psychological impact of