by Why So Few American Economists Are Studying Inequality—Alana Semuels at the Atlantic provides a nice summary of the problems in the profession, and cites the work by a few economists like Jamie Galbraith and the two cited below (Milanovic and DeLong)Chinese income distribution in 2002-3 and 2013—Branko Milanovic on how Chinese inequality, did not increase much in that period, even though it is high, and how it converged to the US levelsGlobalization: What Did Paul Krugman Miss?—Brad DeLong more on globalization really, but there again, globalization has been at the core of the debates on inequality (how much it hurt the Rust Belt here, or how it raised incomes in the South, China and India mostly)
Topics:
Matias Vernengo considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Nick Falvo writes Canada’s 2024 federal budget: What’s in it for rental housing and homelessness?
Robert Vienneau writes Precursors Of The Modern Revival Of Classical Political Economy
NewDealdemocrat writes The snooze-a-than in jobless claims continues; what I am looking for in tomorrow’s jobs report
Bill Haskell writes Monthly payments could get thousands of homeless people off the streets
Why So Few American Economists Are Studying Inequality—Alana Semuels at the Atlantic provides a nice summary of the problems in the profession, and cites the work by a few economists like Jamie Galbraith and the two cited below (Milanovic and DeLong)
Chinese income distribution in 2002-3 and 2013—Branko Milanovic on how Chinese inequality, did not increase much in that period, even though it is high, and how it converged to the US levels
Globalization: What Did Paul Krugman Miss?—Brad DeLong more on globalization really, but there again, globalization has been at the core of the debates on inequality (how much it hurt the Rust Belt here, or how it raised incomes in the South, China and India mostly)