Abstract

 
 

References (8)



 


 



Why Praise Inequality? Public Good Provision, Income Distribution and Social Welfare


Indraneel Dasgupta


Durham University - Department of Economics and Finance; Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)


IZA Discussion Paper No. 3988

Abstract:     
We consider a two-person Cournot game of voluntary contributions to a public good with identical individual preferences, and examine equilibrium aggregate welfare under a separable, symmetric and concave social welfare function. Assuming the public good is pure, Itaya, de Meza and Myles (Econ. Letters, 57: 289-296; 1997) have shown that maximization of social welfare precludes income equality in this setting. We show that their case breaks down when the public good is impure: there exist individual preferences under which maximization of social welfare necessitates exact income equalization. Even if the public good is pure, any given, positive level of income inequality can be shown to be socially excessive by suitably specifying individual preferences. Thus, sans knowledge of individual preferences, one cannot reject the claim that a marginal redistribution from the rich to the poor will improve social welfare, regardless of how small inequality is in the status quo.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 8

Keywords: public goods, voluntary provision, income distribution, inequality, social welfare

JEL Classification: D31, D63, D74, Z13

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 2, 2009  

Suggested Citation

Dasgupta, Indraneel, Why Praise Inequality? Public Good Provision, Income Distribution and Social Welfare. IZA Discussion Paper No. 3988. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1351152

Contact Information

Indraneel Dasgupta (Contact Author)
Durham University - Department of Economics and Finance
Durham, DH1 3HY
United Kingdom
Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA)
P.O. Box 7240
Bonn, D-53072
Germany
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 326
Downloads: 59
Download Rank: 185,330
References:  8

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.532 seconds