Abstract
This final chapter provides a short résumé, arguing to not ignore questions of income distribution when discussing measures to spur economic growth. The chapter also presents various empirically oriented policy implications aimed at fostering both economic growth and a more equal distribution of income. It is referred to wage policy and the importance of trade unions, competition and innovation policy, public investment in infrastructure and human capital, as well as tax and transfer policy. While adequate policies can foster inclusive growth, it is doubtful whether appropriate policy actions will be taken in the years ahead. Among the impediments to fiscal intervention are the high and partly rising public debt-to-GDP ratios in numerous advanced countries, often pointed at to advocate public spending cuts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
While the proposed policy measures refer to the current economic environment in major advanced countries, they also conform to Steindl’s ([1952] 1976) stagnation approach in the sense that they may foster economic growth and a more equal distribution of income along Steindlian lines. On Steindlian-oriented policy implications, see also Guger (2018, pp. 193–198).
- 2.
Correcting the existing external imbalances within the euro area would require hourly labor compensation in Germany, for instance, to temporarily rise faster than labor productivity. While such developments can be expected to be accompanied by growth distortions, future long-term economic growth would be more sustainable.
- 3.
While Autor et al. (2017a, b) use the term winner-take-most markets to describe the dominance of a few firms in the product market, Frank and Cook ([1995] 2010) refer to winner-take-all markets to describe the dominance of a few individuals in the labor market. Both concepts, however, are similar. As noted by Frank and Cook ([1995] 2010), in the labor market new information and communication technologies have led to the rise of global superstars, particularly in sports and entertainment. For example, the best-performing athletes, actors, or musicians typically enjoy a global fanbase and benefit from high salaries and advertising revenues. Their close competitors, on the other hand, whose performance is only slightly inferior, are usually much less popular and receive much lower incomes.
- 4.
With a rise in industry concentration, both the functional and personal distribution of income also appear to be increasingly affected by pay differences among firms as well as changing employment practices. Large employers with a high degree of market dominance typically pay higher wages than smaller and less dominant firms. Yet, large and market-dominating firms are also increasingly outsourcing non-core (and often low-skill) tasks to lower paying firms and service providers, including temporary employment agencies. This “[...] fissuring of the workplace [...],” as Autor et al. (2017b, p. 26) call it with reference to Weil (2014), adversely impacts the labor income share and personal (labor) income inequality. See also Weil (2011).
- 5.
Referring to the post-Second World War period, (Steindl [1979] 1990, p. 120) also mentioned the importance of state-funded research. He held, “Although R & D expenditure (of which half to two-thirds was financed by governments in the US, Britain, and France) was to a great extent for military and space research, its indirect effects on the pace of technological progress in general, and therefore on private investment activity, were considerable. The aftermath of wartime innovation itself provided a great stimulus to industry in the post-war period.”
- 6.
R&D expenditure, which has been referred to in the previous section, has been classified as gross fixed capital formation since the revision of national accounting standards around the years 2013/2014. In the United States, for example, the revision was implemented as part of the change in the System of National Accounts (SNA) from version SNA 1993 to version SNA 2008. In Europe, the revision was implemented as part of the change in the European System of Accounts (ESA) from version ESA 1995 to version ESA 2010. See also Dunn et al. (2014), the European Union (2014), Ravets and Mazzi (2014, p. 2–3), van de Ven (2015).
- 7.
Similar to Aschauer (1989a), Hansen (1940, p. 3546) and Steindl ([1985d] 1990, p. 238) also referred to the stimulating impact of public investment on private investment.
- 8.
On the development of top marginal personal income tax rates in major advanced countries, see Fig. 1.5a (Sect. 1.1.2.2). On the development of top marginal corporate income tax rates, see OECD (2018a, e). As part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, in recent times the US-federal government reduced the top marginal personal income tax rate from 39.6% to 37% and the top marginal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. Effective as of 2018, spurring economic growth has been named among the goals of these tax policy measures (The White House 2018; Gale et al. 2018, pp. 2, 5).
- 9.
While Piketty et al. (2014) refer to the top marginal personal income tax rate, Diamond and Saez (2011) and Saez et al. (2012) refer to the top marginal tax rate, considering “[...] the maximum federal and average state income, Medicare, and typical sales tax rates in the United States [...]” Saez et al. (2012, p. 8).
- 10.
Tax expenditures are provisions that allow for tax relief. See also OECD (2010a, p. 3). As defined by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Act of 1974, in the United States “[t]he term ‘tax expenditures’ means those revenue losses [of the government] attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability [...]” (United States Congress 1974, Sect. 3).
- 11.
Long-term capital gains are capital gains on assets that were held “[...] for more than one year [...]” (Internal Revenue Service 2018).
- 12.
Although property taxes, i.e., taxes on wealth stocks, are targeted at the distribution of wealth and not at the distribution of income, the distributions of wealth and income are intertwined. It is true that those at the top of the income hierarchy do not necessarily find themselves at the top of the wealth hierarchy. As compared to those in the lower parts of the income distribution, however, those in the upper strata of the income hierarchy typically save a larger share of their income and can thus accumulate more wealth over time. Similarly, those at the top of the wealth distribution may benefit from substantial property income, including rents, interests, and dividends. Income and wealth inequality thus reinforce each other, implying that taxes which change the distribution of wealth tend to also change the distribution of income (and vice versa) in the same direction.
- 13.
With regard to fiscal solvency, however, public indebtedness in foreign currency is much more problematic than government debt as such. Moreover, it is the indebtedness of a country as a whole—including both the public and the private sectors—toward the rest of the world which must be considered here. In fact, strongly negative net international investment positions can be more critical than government debt. Japan’s risk of default, for example, is typically perceived to be low, as the public debt is mainly held by domestic investors and is denominated in national currency (Ministry of Finance Japan 2018a, p. 24). Additionally, Japan’s net international investment position is positive, implying that the country as a whole is a net creditor toward the rest of the world (Ministry of Finance Japan 2018b).
- 14.
As has been outlined in Sect. 4.2.1, Schumpeter also advocated government intervention in severe depressions.
- 15.
As has been particularly outlined in the relevant German-language literature of the late 1960s and 1970s, the transfer approach is indeed inadequate to capture the distributional impact of government debt. Especially Andel (1969) and Gandenberger (1970) pointed out that, although there may be a transfer of income via public interest payments and taxes used to finance these interest payments, public deficit spending also serves a purpose. For instance, if the government engages in net borrowing to raise its expenditure on education or to stimulate employment in a recession, it may be particularly those private households at the bottom of the income hierarchy that benefit from this public spending. Hence, the potentially adverse distributional impact via public interest payments and taxes may be more than offset when loan-financed government spending disproportionately benefits those in the lower parts of the distribution. For further elaboration on the transfer approach and its shortcomings, see also Lang and Koch (1980, pp. 130–136) and Anselmann and Krämer (2014).
- 16.
Referring to productive expenditure, Domar (1944, p. 820), a student of Hansen at Harvard University, held, “[...] [T]he term ‘investment expenditures’ may be misleading, because it is too closely associated with steel and concrete. [...] If healthier people are more productive, expenditures on public health satisfy these requirements. The same holds true for expenditures on education, research, flood control, resource development and so on.” Similarly, with reference to the German economist Carl Dietzel, Stettner (1948, p. 298)—another student of Hansen—outlined that productive public expenditure is a multifaceted term. Whether a particular type of government spending is productive or not also depends on the specific economic circumstances. “The most ‘productive’ pattern of expenditure [...],” he held, “[...] is that which contributes most toward the achievement of the economic, political, and social aims of a particular time and a particular country. This interpretation of ‘productive public expenditures’ has an important bearing on the question of their financing. [...] [B]oth immaterial and material capital have an equal claim on loan financing. [...] [T]he significant fact in public investment is the increase in productivity of the economy as a whole. This increase is the economic source of the interest payment on the loan.” (Stettner 1948, p. 298).
- 17.
The primary balance is defined as public revenue (excluding public net borrowing) less public expenditure (excluding interest payments). A negative (positive) primary balance is called a primary deficit (surplus).
- 18.
As rightly outlined by Barrett (2018, p. 4), this empirical finding is not at odds with Piketty (2014, pp. 350–358), who concludes that the average rate of return on capital has been mostly exceeding the rate of economic growth throughout history. While Piketty (2014, pp. 350–358) refers to the average rate of return on capital, the calculations underlying Fig. 10.7 are based on (risk-free) ten-year government bond yields.
References
Acemoglu D, Akcigit U (2012) Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. J Eur Econ Assoc 10(1):1–42
Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2002) Competition and innovation: an inverted U relationship. NBER Working Paper No. 9269. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. http://www.nber.org/papers/w9269. Accessed 23 Sept 2018
Aghion P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2005) Competition and innovation: an inverted-U relationship. Q J Econ 120(2):701–728
Akgun O, Cournède B, Fournier J (2017) The effects of the tax mix on inequality and growth. OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 1447. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/c57eaa14-en. Accessed 16 Sept 2018
Andel N (1969) Zur These von den unsozialen Verteilungswirkungen öffentlicher Schulden. Pub Financ 24(1):69–79
Anselmann C, Krämer H (2014) Ungleichheit als Preis für Vollbeschäftigung? Einige Anmerkungen zu den intragenerativen Verteilungswirkungen der Staatsverschuldung. In: Dullien S, Hein E, Truger A (eds) Macroeconomics, Metropolis-Verlag, Marburg, Development and Economic Policies, pp 101–119
Aschauer DA (1988) Is government spending stimulative? Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Staff Memoranda SM 88-3. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Chicago, IL. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/historical/frbchi/workingpapers/frbchi_workingpaper_1988-03.pdf. Accessed 28 Sept 2016
Aschauer DA (1989a) Does public capital crowd out private capital? J Monet Econ 24(2):171–188
Aschauer DA (1989b) Is public expenditure productive? J Monet Econ 23(2):177–200
Aschauer DA (1990) Why is infrastructure important? In: Munnell AH (ed) Is there a shortfall in public capital investment? Proceedings of a conference held at Harwich Port, Massachusetts, in June 1990. Conference Series No. 34, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Boston, MA, pp 21–50
Atkinson AB (2015) Inequality: what can be done?. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, and London
Autor D, Dorn D, Katz LF, Patterson C, Van Reenen J (2017a) Concentrating on the fall of the labor share. Am Econ Rev 107(5):180–185
Autor D, Dorn D, Katz LF, Patterson C, Van Reenen J (2017b) The fall of the labor share and the rise of superstar firms. NBER Working Paper No. 23396. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23396. Accessed 21 Sept 2018
Barrett P (2018) Interest-growth differentials and debt limits in advanced economies. IMF Working Paper WP/18/82. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/~/media/Files/Publications/WP/2018/wp1882.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct 2018
Causa O, Hermansen M (2017) Income redistribution through taxes and transfers across OECD countries. OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 1453. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/bc7569c6-en. Accessed 16 Sept 2018
Diamond P, Saez E (2011) The case for a progressive tax: from basic research to policy recommendations. J Econ Perspect 25(4):165–190
Díez FJ, Leigh D, Tambunlertchai S (2018) Global market power and its macroeconomic implications. IMF Working Paper WP/18/137. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/~/media/Files/Publications/WP/2018/wp18137. Accessed 20 Sept 2018
Domar ED (1944) The “burden of the debt” and the national income. Am Econ Rev 34(4):798–827
Dunn M, Akritidis L, Biedma L (2014) The impact of ESA 2010 on key indicators of the national accounts in Europe. Eurostat Review on National Accounts and Macroeconomic Indicators special issue on the implementation of the European system of accounts (ESA 2010) 2/2014:7–27
European Central Bank (2018) ECB statistical data warehouse. Government primary deficit(-) or surplus(+) (as % of GDP), Germany. European Central Bank, Frankfurt am Main. http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/. Data as of 24 Oct 2018. Accessed 04 Dec 2018
European Commission (2018) Annual macro-economic database of the European Commission’s Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs (AMECO database). European Commission, Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/ameco/user/serie/SelectSerie.cfm. Data as of November 08, 2018. Last accessed 26 Nov 2018
European Union (2014) Manual on measuring research and development in ESA 2010. 2014 edition. Eurostat manuals and guidelines. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/products-manuals-and-guidelines/-/KS-GQ-14-004. Accessed 02 Oct 2018
Foster JB, McChesney RW (2012) The endless crisis: how monopoly-finance capital produces stagnation and upheaval from the USA to China. Monthly Review Press, New York, NY
Frank RH, Cook PJ, ([1995], (2010) The winner-take-all society: why the few at the top get so much more than the rest of us. Virgin Books, London
Gale WG, Gelfond H, Krupkin A, Mazur MJ, Toder E (2018) Effects of the tax cuts and jobs act: a preliminary analysis. Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, Washington, DC. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/ES_20180608_tcja_summary_paper_final.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2018
Gandenberger O (1970) Öffentlicher Kredit und Einkommensverteilung. Finanzarchiv 29(1):1–16
Geiger N, Prettner K, Schwarzer JA (2018) Die Auswirkungen der Automatisierung auf Wachstum, Beschäftigung und Ungleichheit. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik 19(2):59–77
Gordon RJ (2016) The rise and fall of American growth. The U.S. standard of living since the Civil War. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Guellec D, Paunov C (2017) Digital innovation and the distribution of income. NBER Working Paper No. 23987. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23987. Accessed 23 Sept 2018
Guger A (2018) Josef Steindl und die neue Stagnationsdiskussion: ‘Kapitalismus ohne Arbeits-losigkeit’? In: Hagemann H, Kromphardt J, Marterbauer M (eds) Keynes. Metropolis-Verlag, Marburg, Geld und Finanzen, pp 173–201
Hagemann H, Erber G, Geiger N, Schwarzer J, Zwiessler O (2016) Wachstums- und Investitionsdynamik in Deutschland. Metropolis-Verlag, Marburg
Hansen AH (1938) Full recovery or stagnation? W. W, Norton, New York, NY
Hansen AH (1939) Economic progress and declining population growth. Am Econ Rev 29(1):1–15
Hansen AH (1940) Testimony of Alvin Harvey Hansen, Professor of Political Economy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. In: Temporary National Economic Committee (ed) Investigation of concentration of economic power. Hearings before the Temporary National Economic Committee Congress of the United States. Part 9: Savings and investment, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp 3495–3520, 3538–3559, 3837–3859
Hansen AH (1941) Fiscal policy and business cycles. W. W, Norton, New York, NY
Hansen AH (1943) Federal debt policy. In: Proceedings of the annual conference on taxation under the auspices of the national tax association 36(November 20–22):256–268
IMF (2013) Taxing times. Fiscal monitor, October 2013. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/FM/Issues/2016/12/31/Taxing-Times. Accessed 02 Oct 2018
IMF (2017) Fostering inclusive growth: G-20 leaders’ summit, July 7–8, 2017, Hamburg, Germany. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/2017/062617.pdf. Accessed 17 Sept 2018
IMF (2018a) Future of work: measurement and policy challenges. Group of Twenty. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/2018/071818a.pdf. Accessed 26 Sept 2018
IMF (2018b) Historical public debt database. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. http://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/datasets/DEBT. Accessed 29 Nov 2018
IMF (2018c) World economic outlook database, October 2018. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/02/weodata/index.aspx. Accessed 29 Nov 2018
Internal Revenue Service (2018) Tax topics: topic no. 409 capital gains and losses. Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC. https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc409. Accessed 16 Sept 2018
Krugman P (2018) On the debt non-spiral. The New York Times. The opinion pages. The conscience of a liberal, September 11, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/11/opinion/on-the-debt-non-spiral.html. Accessed 14 Oct 2018
Lang E, Koch WAS (1980) Staatsverschuldung — Staatsbankrott? Physica-Verlag, Würzburg
Mazzucato M ([2013] 2014) The entrepreneurial state: debunking public vs. private sector myths. Anthem Press, London and New York, NY
Merola R, Sutherland D (2012) Fiscal consolidation: part 3. Long-run projections and fiscal gap calculations. OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 934. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k9h28p42pf1-en. Accessed 06 Oct 2018
Ministry of Finance Japan (2018a) Debt management report 2018: The government debt management and the state of public debts. Ministry of Finance Japan, Tokyo. https://www.mof.go.jp/english/jgbs/publication/debt_management_report/2018/esaimu2018.pdf. Accessed 08 Oct 2018
Ministry of Finance Japan (2018b) International investment position of Japan (end of 2017). Ministry of Finance Japan, Tokyo. https://www.mof.go.jp/english/international_policy/reference/iip/e2017.htm. Accessed 08 Oct 2018
OECD (2010a) Tax expenditures in OECD countries. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2010b) Tax policy reform and economic growth. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2011a) Divided we stand: why inequality keeps rising. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2011b) Fiscal consolidation: targets, plans and measures. OECD J Budg 11(2):15–67
OECD (2012) Restoring public finances, 2012 update. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2014) OECD science, technology and industry outlook 2014. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2017a) Educational opportunity for all: overcoming inequality throughout the life course. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2017b) Health at a glance 2017: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2018a) Corporate income tax rates: Historical table II.1 (1981–1999). OECD, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/tax-database.htm#C_CorporateCapital. Accessed 18 Sept 2018
OECD (2018b) OECD compendium of productivity indicators 2018. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2018c) OECD.Stat. Labour. Trade unions and collective bargaining. Variable collective bargaining coverage. OECD, Paris. http://stats.oecd.org/. Data as of 27 Apr 2018. Accessed 02 Dec 2018
OECD (2018d) OECD.Stat. OECD, Paris. http://stats.oecd.org/. Last accessed 04 Dec 2018
OECD (2018g) Opportunities for all: a framework for policy action on inclusive growth. OECD Publishing, Paris
OECD (2018f) OECD.Stat. Science, technology and patents. Science and technology indicators. Main science and technology indicators (MSTI Database). Variable percentage of GERD financed by government. OECD, Paris. http://stats.oecd.org/. Data as of 24 Jul 2018. Accessed 02 Dec 2018
OECD (2018h) The role and design of net wealth taxes in the OECD. OECD Publishing, Paris, OECD tax policy studies
Okun AM (1975) Equality and efficiency: the big tradeoff. The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
Osberg L (2015) How much income tax could Canada’s top 1% pay? Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Ottawa. https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/how-much-income-tax-could-canadas-top-1-pay. Accessed 20 Sept 2018
Piketty T (2014) Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, and London
Piketty T, Saez E, Stantcheva S (2014) Optimal taxation of top labor incomes: a tale of three elasticities. Am Econ J Econ Policy 6(1):230–271
Prettner K (2018) Verteilungsforschung: Entwicklung der Ungleichheit, sozioökonomische Konsequenzen und politische Handlungsspielräume. In: Hagemann H, Kollmer-von Oheimb-Loup G (eds) Universität Hohenheim 1818–2018: Festschrift zum 200jährigen Jubiläum. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, pp 168–179
Ravets C, Mazzi GL (2014) A new European system of national and regional accounts (ESA 2010). European Commission, Luxembourg. http://www.oecd.org/sdd/na/ESA%202010.pdf. Accessed 01 Oct 2018
Reinhart CM, Rogoff KS (2010) Growth in a time of debt. Am Econ Rev 100(2):573–578
Saez E, Slemrod J, Giertz SH (2012) The elasticity of taxable income with respect to marginal tax rates: a critical review. J Econ Lit 50(1):3–50
Steindl J ([1952] (1976) Maturity and stagnation in American capitalism (with a new introduction by the author). Monthly Review Press, New York, NY, and London
Steindl J ([1979] (1990) Stagnation theory and stagnation policy. In: Steindl J (ed) Economic papers 1941–88. St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY, pp 107–126
Steindl J ([1983] (1990) The control of the economy. In: Steindl J (ed) Economic Papers 1941–88. St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY, pp 216–229
Steindl J ([1985c] (1990) Saving and debt. In: Steindl J (ed) Economic papers 1941–88. St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY, pp 208–215
Steindl J ([1985d] (1990) Structural problems in the crisis. In: Steindl J (ed) Economic papers 1941–88. St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY, pp 230–238
Steindl J ([1989] (1990) From stagnation in the 30s to slow growth in the 70s. In: Steindl J (ed) Economic papers 1941–88. St. Martin’s Press, New York, NY, pp 166–179
Stettner WF (1948) Carl Dietzel, public expenditures and the public debt. In: Metzler LA, Domar ED, Duesenberry JS, Higgins B, Goodwin RM, Samuelson PA, Wright DM, Alexander SS, Perloff HS, Musgrave RA, Lerner AP, Stettner WF, Brown EC, Bishop RL, Dunlop JT, Bourneuf A (eds) Income, employment and public policy: essays in honor of Alvin H. Hansen, W. W. Norton, New York, NY, pp 276–299
Summers LH (2018) Is the world ready for the next downturn? A symposium of views. Summers responds. Int Econ Summer 2018:21
Terborgh G (1945) The bogey of economic maturity. Machinery and Allied Products Institute, Chicago, IL
The White House (2018) The tax cuts and jobs act: the most significant federal tax reform enacted in the United States in decades. The White House, Washington, DC. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/WH_CuttingTaxesForAmericanWorkers_Feb2018.pdf. Accessed 19 Sept 2018
United States Congress (1974) Congressional budget and impoundment control act of 1974. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
van de Ven P (2015) New standards for compiling national accounts: what’s the impact on GDP and other macro-economic indicators? OECD statistics brief, February 2015, no. 20. OECD, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/sdd/na/new-standards-for-compiling-national-accounts-SNA2008-OECDSB20.pdf. Accessed 01 Oct 2018
von Weizsäcker CC (2015) How to avoid secular stagnation? In: Nowotny E, Stessl S (eds) Long-term perspectives for economic growth. In: Proceedings of the 43rd OeNB economic conference 2015. Oesterreichische Nationalbank, Vienna, pp 146–157
von Weizsäcker CC (2016) Europas Mitte. Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik 17(4):383–392
Weil D (2011) Enforcing labour standards in fissured workplaces: the US experience. Econ Lab Relat Rev 22(2):33–54
Weil D (2014) The fissured workplace: why work became so bad for so many and what can be done to improve it. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Anselmann, C. (2020). Summary, Economic Policy Outlook, and Conclusion. In: Secular Stagnation Theories. Springer Studies in the History of Economic Thought. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41087-2_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41087-2_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-41086-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-41087-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)