International audiencePeople's preferences for state intervention in social policies vary. A cross-section analysis on individual-level survey data is conducted here over 33 democracies to highlight the link between the economic position of agents and their specific demand for redistribution. Controlling for a number of factors usually found to affect individual preferences in the literature, this article focuses on the role played by the occupational status of individuals in shaping their preferences. Individual labour market position, as well as family income, is shown to outweigh all other factors shaping preferences for redistribution. The odds of a manager to oppose redistributive policies are increased by 40%, as compared to those of an office clerk, for instance. Moreover, individuals' perception of personal mobility plays an important role: the odds of holding more positive attitudes towards redistribution are up by 32% for people who think they experienced a downward mobility within the last ten years. Evidence is also found for the fact that the political regime may have a long lasting effect on collective preferences: living in former-East Germany doubles the odds of holding positive attitudes towards redistribution, as compared to living in West Germany. Finally, the research presented here identifies which socio-political groups may be formed on the basis of their preferences for redistribution
In attempting to walk rectilinearly in the absence of visual landmarks, persons will gradually turn in a circle to eventually become lost. The aim of the present study was to provide insights into the possible underlying mechanisms of this behavior. For each subject (N = 15) six trajectories were monitored during blindfolded walking in a large enclosed area to suppress external cues, and ground irregularities that may elicit unexpected changes in direction. There was a substantial variability from trial to trial for a given subject and between subjects who could either veer very early or relatively late. Of the total number of trials, 50% trajectories terminated on the left side, 39% on the right side and 11% were defined as “straight”. For each subject, we established a “turning score” that reflected his/her preferential side of veering. The turning score was found to be unrelated to any evident biomechanical asymmetry or functional dominance (eye, hand…). Posturographic analysis, used to assess if there was a relationship between functional postural asymmetry and veering revealed that the mean position of the center of foot pressure during balance tests was correlated with the turning score. Finally, we established that the mean position of the center of pressure was correlated with perceived verticality assessed by a subjective verticality test. Together, our results suggest that veering is related to a “sense of straight ahead” that could be shaped by vestibular inputs.
We use harmonized survey data from the Luxembourg Income Study to assess the redistributive impact of taxes and transfers across 22 OECD countries over the 1999-2016 period. After imputing missing tax data (employer social-security contributions), we measure the reduction in income inequality from four key levers of tax and transfer systems: the average tax rate, tax progressivity, the average transfer rate, and transfer targeting. Our methodological improvements produce the following results. First, tax redistribution dominates transfer redistribution (excluding pensions) in most countries. Second, targeting explains very little of the cross-country variation in inequality reduction. In contrast, both tax progressivity and the average tax rate have large impacts on redistribution. Last, there seem to be political tradeoffs: high average tax rates are not found together with highly progressive tax systems.JEL Codes: D31, H30, I38
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.