The Limited Role of Market Power in Generating Great Fortunes in Great Britain, the United States, and Australia

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.Studies of the largest contemporary fortunes in Great Britain, the United States, and Australia each find that over two-thirds of the fortunes originated in competitive industries. A finding that market power is responsible for only one-third of the wealth of the wealthiest individuals is consistent with earlier research. Great fortunes can arise from competitive industries because of risk and uncertainty, infra-marginal (Ricardian) rents, and disequilibrium. * The authors would like to thank Lawrence J. White and two anonymous referees for helpful comments. 1 For a summary of research concerning the effects of market power on the wealth distribution, 277 This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Fri, 12 Dec 2014 03:56:08 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 7The populations of the UK, US, and Australia, respectively, were 57 million, 250 million, and 17 million (Source: Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1992

Billionaire Wealth, Firm Performance and Financial Crisis: An Empirical Analysis for India

“…More recently, using decadal data during 1982–2012, Kaplan and Rauh (2013) found that education has become a much more important factor explaining wealth accumulation by the 400 richest Americans as compared to having inherited wealth and family business, per se. These observations are consistent with prior research for developed economies which support that a majority of billionaire wealth in these countries is self-made (Siegfried & Round, 1994, 1995). In Russia, Goldman (1998) documented that the accumulation of wealth was based more on expropriation and driven less by productive entrepreneurship.…”

The Rich, the Affluent and the Top Incomes: A Literature Review

“…More recently, absolute wealth affluence lines were used to study the UK, the USA and Australia using information from magazines (Forbes, Money and Business Review Weekly), with the lines set at GBP 30 million, USD 180 million and AUD 30 million (Siegfried, Blitz, & Round, 1995). Lower lines, usually income thresholds, have also been used.…”

How Creative are the Super-Rich?

“…We often think of profits as earned only by firms, with individuals earning wages or rents. But rich list data plainly indicate that the majority of extreme personal wealth is due to profit from entrepreneurship (Siegfried et al, 1995). The aggregate effect of entrepreneurship is the continual transformation or evolution of the economic order.…”

“…In the 1800s, for example, vast Australian fortunes were concentrated among pastoralists and merchants (see Rubinstein 2004;Leigh 2005). Yet by 1958 these fortunes were disproportionately concentrated in manufacturing and by 1990 the concentration had shifted to financial services (Siegfried et al, 1995). This is prima facie evidence for economic evolution as an ongoing process of structural transformation through the emergence and growth of new industries and the induced decline in significance of other industries.…”