Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Inequality and Political Consensus

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper develops a model of political consensus in order to explain the missing link between inequality and political redistribution. Political consensus is an implicit agreement not to vote for extreme policy proposals. We show that such an agreement may play an efficiency-enhancing role. Voters anticipate that voting for extremist parties increases policy uncertainty in the future. A political consensus among voters reduces policy uncertainty because self-interested politicians propose non-discriminatory policies. We study how much inequality can be sustained in a democracy and how the limits to redistribution vary with initial inequality. The bounds of the set of political equilibria may react in a fundamentally different manner to changes in exogenous variables than do the policy variables in the one-dimensional, one-shot game. More initial inequality need not lead to more redistribution from the rich to the poor. The maximum amount of redistribution decreases with inequality if (and only if) agents are sufficiently patient. In this case inequality is politically self-sustaining.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alesina A., Angeletos G.M. (2005) Fairness and redistribution: US versus Europe. American Economic Review 95: 913–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A., La Ferrara E. (2005) Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities. Journal of Public Economics 89: 897–931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alesina A., Rodrik D. (1994) Distributive politics and economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 109: 465–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artale A., Grüner H.P. (2000) A model of stability and persistence in a democracy. Games and Economic Behavior 33: 20–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benabou R. (2000) Unequal societies: income distribution and the social contract. American Economic Review 90: 96–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertola G. (1993) Market structure and income distribution in endogenous growth models. American Economic Review 83: 1184–1199

    Google Scholar 

  • Besley T., Coate S. (1998) Sources of inefficiency in a representative democracy: a dynamic analysis. American Economic Review 88: 139–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke G.R.G. (1995) More evidence on income distribution and growth. Journal of Development Economics 47(2): 403–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corneo G., Grüner H.P. (2000) Social limits to redistribution. American Economic Review 90: 1491–1507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corneo G., Grüner H.P. (2002) Individual preferences for political redistribution. Journal of Public Economics 83: 83–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coughlin P. (1986) Elections and income redistribution. Public Choice 50: 27–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta P., Maskin E. (1986) The existence of equilibrium in discontinious games, I: theory. Review of Economic Studies 53: 1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duggan J., Fey M. (2006) Repeated Downsian Electoral competition. International Journal of Game Theory 35: 39–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epple D., Riordan M.H. (1987) Cooperation and punishment under repeated majority voting. Public Choice 55: 41–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grüner H.P. (2003) Redistribution as a selection device. Journal of Economic Theory 108: 194–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grüner H.P., Schils R. (2007) The political Economy of Wealth and Interest. Economic Journal 117(523): 1403–1422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer G. (1977) A dynamical model of political equilibrium. Journal of Economic Theory 16: 310–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mas-Colell A., Whinston M.D., Green J.R. (1995) Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Mc Kelvey R.D. (1987) General conditions for global intransitivities in formal voting models. Econometrica 47: 1085–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meltzer A.H., Richards S.F. (1981) A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy 89: 914–927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller D. (1990) Public Choice II. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordeshook P.C. (1980) Political disequilibrium and scientific inquiry, comment on Riker (1980). American Political Science Review 74: 447–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ordeshook P.C. (1988) Game Theory and Political Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Perotti R. (1992) Income distribution, politics and growth. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 82: 311–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Perotti R. (1993) Political equilibrium, income distribution, and growth, Proof of Lemma 8. Review of Economic Studies 60: 755–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perotti R. (1996) Democracy, income distribution and growth: what the data say. Journal of Economic Growth 1: 149–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson T., Tabellini G. (1994) Is inequality harmful for growth?. American Economic Review 84: 600–621

    Google Scholar 

  • Piketty T. (1995) Social mobility and redistributive politics. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 551–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rae D. (1980) An alimeter for Mr. Escher’s stairway. comment on Riker (1980). American Political Science Review 74: 451–458

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker W.H. (1980) Implications from the disequilibrium of majority rule for the study of institutions. American Political Science Review 74: 432–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roemer, T. (1975), Individual welfare, majority voting, and the properties of a linear income tax, Journal of Public Economics 163–185.

  • Roemer J.E. (1998) Why the poor do not expropriate the rich: an old argument in a new garb. Journal of Public Economics 70: 399–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, K. (1977), Voting over income tax schedules, Journal of Public Economics 329–340.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hans Peter Grüner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grüner, H.P. Inequality and Political Consensus. Theory Decis 67, 239–265 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-008-9096-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-008-9096-0

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation