Line 160:
}}
* ''policy'' – KrugmanCritics assertedhave argued that neoliberal policies have increased [[economic inequality]]{{sfnp|Haymes|Vidal de Haymes|Miller|2015|p=7}}<ref>{{cite book |last=Dean |first=Jodi |url=https://archive.org/details/communisthorizon00dean |title=The Communist Horizon |date=2012 |publisher=[[Verso Books]] |isbn=978-1844679546 |page=[https://archive.org/details/communisthorizon00dean/page/n128 123] |quote=Pursued through policies of privatization, deregulation, and financialization, and buttressed by an ideology of private property, free markets, and free trade, neoliberalism has entailed cuts in taxes for the rich and cuts in protections and benefits for workers and the poor, resulting in an exponential increase in inequality. |author-link=Jodi Dean |url-access=limited}}</ref> and exacerbated global [[poverty]].{{sfnp|Haymes|Vidal de Haymes|Miller|2015|pp=1–2}}<ref>{{harvp|Jones|Parker|Bos|2005|p=101}}; "Critics of neoliberalism have therefore looked at the evidence that documents the results of this great experiment of the past 30 years, in which many markets have been set free. Looking at the evidence, we can see that the total amount of global trade has increased significantly, but that global poverty has increased, with more today living in abject poverty than before neoliberalism."</ref><ref>[[Jason Hickel]] (February 13, 2019). [https://jacobinmag.com/2019/02/steven-pinker-global-poverty-neoliberalism-progress An Open Letter to Steven Pinker (and Bill Gates)]. ''[[Jacobin (magazine)|Jacobin]].'' Retrieved February 13, 2019.</ref> According to Krugman, [[Movement conservatism|movement conservatives]] increased their influence over the Republican Party beginning in the 1970s. In the same era, it increased its political power. The result was less progressive [[Regressive tax|tax]] laws, anti-labor policies, and slower expansion of the welfare state relative to other developed nations (e.g., the unique absence of universal healthcare).<ref name="Krugman 2009" /> Further, variation in income inequality across developed countries indicate that policy has a significant influence on inequality; [[Japan]], [[Sweden]] and [[France]] have income inequality around 1960 levels.{{clarify|reason=ambiguous sentence: Does Sweden have inequality at 1960 Swedish levels or 1960 US levels, or was it the opposite?|date=October 2023}}<ref name="eml.berkeley.edu">{{cite web|url=http://eml.berkeley.edu/~saez/lecture_saez_chicago14.pdf|title=Income and Wealth Inequality:Evidence and Policy Implications-October 2014|last=Saez|first=Emmanuel}}</ref> The US was an early adopter of [[Causes of income inequality in the United States#Neoliberalism|neoliberalism]], which shifted the distribution of income from labor to capital,<ref>{{cite book |last= Anderson|first=Elizabeth|author-link=Elizabeth S. Anderson|date=2023 |title=Hijacked: How Neoliberalism Turned the Work Ethic against Workers and How Workers Can Take It Back|url= |location= |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|page=xi |isbn= 978-1009275439}}</ref> and whose focus on growth over equality spread to other countries over time.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2016/06/pdf/ostry.pdf|title=Neoliberalism: Oversold|date=June 2016|publisher=IMF FINANCE & DEVELOPMENT|volume=53|issue=2}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url={{google books |plainurl=y |id=JUYZBgAAQBAJ|page=43}}|title=The Rise and Fall of Neoliberal Capitalism|last=Kotz|first=David M.|date=February 9, 2015|publisher=Harvard University Press|isbn=9780674725652}}</ref> Nevertheless, the United States remains, according to [[Jonathan Hopkin]], "the most extreme case of the subjection of society to the brute force of the market." As such, he argues this made the United States an outlier with economic inequality hitting "unprecedented levels for the rich democracies."<ref>{{cite book |last=Hopkin|first=Jonathan|author-link= |date=2020 |title=Anti-System Politics: The Crisis of Market Liberalism in Rich Democracies|chapter=American Nightmare: How Neoliberalism Broke US Democracy|url=|chapter-url=|location= |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|pages=87–88 |isbn=978-0190699765|doi=10.1093/oso/9780190699765.003.0004
}}</ref> The [[Center for Economic and Policy Research|Center for Economic and Policy Research's]] (CEPR) [[Dean Baker]] argued in 2006 that the driving force behind rising inequality in the United States has been a series of deliberate neoliberal policy choices, including anti-[[Inflation|inflationary]] bias, anti-[[Trade union|unionism]] and profiteering in the [[healthcare industry]].<ref>Baker, Dean. 2006. "[http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue40/Baker40.pdf Increasing Inequality in the United States]." Post-autistic Economics Review 40.</ref> The economists David Howell and Mamadou Diallo contend that neoliberal policies have contributed to a [[Economy of the United States|United States economy]] in which 30% of workers earn low wages (less than two-thirds the median wage for full-time workers) and 35% of the [[labor force]] is [[Underemployment|underemployed]] while only 40% of the working-age population in the country is adequately employed.<ref>Howell, David R. and Mamadou Diallo. 2007. "Charting U.S. Economic Performance with Alternative Labor Market Indicators: The Importance of Accounting for Job Quality." SCEPA Working Paper 2007-6.</ref>
}}</ref>
* ''[[Causes of income inequality in the United States#Corporatism|corporatism]]<ref name="ft.com">{{Cite web|url=https://www.ft.com/content/54411224-132c-11e4-8244-00144feabdc0|title=Corporatism, Not Capitalism Is To Blame For Inequality|last=Phelps|first=Edmund|date=July 24, 2014|website=Financial Times|language=en-GB|access-date=October 9, 2019}}</ref> and [[corpocracy]]''<ref name="Duménil">{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/capitalresurgent0000dume|title=Capital Resurgent: Roots of the Neoliberal Revolution|last1=Duménil|first1=Gérard|last2=Lévy|first2=Dominique|year=2004|publisher=[[Harvard University Press]]|isbn=0674011589|quote=The advent of economic neoliberalism in the 1980s triggered a shift in the world economy. In the three decades following World War II, now considered a golden age of capitalism, economic growth was high and income inequality decreasing. But in the mid-1970s this social compact was broken as the world economy entered the stagflation crisis, following a decline in the profitability of capital. This crisis opened a new phase of stagnating growth and wages, and unemployment. Interest rates as well as dividend flows rose, and income inequality widened.|url-access=registration}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url={{google books |plainurl=y |id=qnHfBQAAQBAJ|page=7}}|title=The Routledge Handbook of Poverty in the United States: 1st Edition (Hardback) - Routledge|website=Routledge.com|access-date=October 9, 2019|editor-last1=Haymes|editor-first1=Stephen|editor-last2=Vidal de Haymes|editor-first2=Maria|editor-last3=Miller|editor-first3=Reuben|page=7}}</ref> ''–'' Excessive attention to the interests of corporations reduced scrutiny over compensation shifts.
* ''female labor force participation –'' High earning households are more likely to be dual earner households.<ref name="Gilbert, D. (2002). ''The American Class Structure: In An Age of Growing Inequality''. Belmost, CA: Wadsworth.">{{cite book|title=American Class Structure in an Age of Growing Inequality|last=Gilbert|first=Dennis|publisher=Wadsworth|year=2002|author-link=Dennis Gilbert (sociologist)}}</ref>
|
Article Images