Stagnating Economic Well-Being and Unrelenting Inequality

Related publications

• One Pager No.57 10 September 2018

  Stagnating Economic Well-Being Amid Rising Government Support

  Ajit Zacharias, Thomas Masterson and Fernando Rios-Avila
  Abstract

  The Levy Institute Measure of Economic Well-Being (LIMEW) was designed to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the changes affecting household living standards. Ajit Zacharias, Thomas Masterson, and Fernando Rios-Avila summarize their latest research on the trends in economic well-being for US households. They reveal historic stagnation in LIMEW growth over the 2000–13 period, as well as a major shift in the composition of well-being. The post-2000 period can be characterized as one of a growing dependence on the government to sustain living standards, with rising net government expenditures offsetting a sharp drop in base income.

  Download One-Pager No. 57 PDF (119.14 KB)
• Working Paper No.914 05 September 2018

  Quality of Match for Statistical Matches Using the American Time Use Survey 2013, the Survey of Consumer Finances 2013, and the Annual Social and Economic Supplement 2014

  Fernando Rios-Avila
  Abstract

  This paper describes the quality of the statistical matching between the March 2014 supplement to the Current Population Survey (CPS) and the 2013 American Time Use Survey (ATUS) and Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), which are used as the basis for the 2013 Levy Institute Measure of Economic Well-Being (LIMEW) estimates for the United States. In the first part of the paper, the alignment of the datasets is examined. In the second, various aspects of the match quality are described. The results indicate that the matches are of high quality, with some indication of bias in specific cases.

  Download Working Paper No. 914 PDF (848.60 KB)
• Working Paper No.1037 10 January 2024

  Markups, Profit Shares, and Cost-Push-Profit-Led Inflation

  Michalis Nikiforos, Simon Grothe and Jan David Weber
  Abstract

  The post-pandemic surge in inflation was accompanied by a surge in the corporate share of profits. As a result, several economists and policy makers have given to it names such as “profit-led inflation” or “sellers’ inflation.” The present paper discusses the extent to which profit-led inflation, as an explanation for the recent surge in inflation, is compatible with what we know about the price-setting behavior of firms, income distribution, and inflation. We do that in juxtaposition to two recent critiques: that the increase in the profit share is the result of cyclical factors, and that the increase in import prices leads to higher profit shares even under constant markups. We show that there is little evidence that the recent surge in profitability is cyclical in nature. Moreover, after outlining the Structuralist/Kaleckian theories of prices and inflation we argue that profit-led inflation does not require an increase in the markup of the firms and is consistent with these theories. In the face of large import and other price shocks even under constant markups, firms are able to pass the burden of adjustment to real wages. Thus, the term profit-led emphasizes the distributional source and consequences of inflation. We also provide an empirical examination of the markups in the post-pandemic period using data from the Compustat database. We show that, on average, firms were able to increase or maintain their markups, although there is significant heterogeneity across sectors or the position of the firms in the distribution of markups.

  Download Working Paper No. 1037 PDF (408.42 KB)