Using harmonic proportions to justify fair level of the income distribution

Occupation: Head of laboratory
Affiliation: Central Economics and Mathematics Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow

Journal name

Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody

Edition

Volume 57 Issue 3

Pages

5-16

Abstract

The harmonic proportions are used in the article to justify the fair level of income distribution for the equal groups of the population. Three harmonic proportions are considered, first of all, the "golden ratio", as well as the "silver ratio" and the "plastic ratio". The paper describes the possibilities of the new model of income distribution described by a finite functional sequence that was proposed in the earlier author's articles. This model makes it possible to estimate quantitatively the income shares of quintile and decile of different levels of inequality using a new indicator of inequality that is correlated with Gini coefficient and estimated using statistical data or the quintile and decile dispersion ratios. These estimates are compared with the data of international ratings and confirm the desirability of choosing a level of inequality characterized by the inequality indicator in the range of approximately 1.25–1.33 (Gini coefficient about 26–33), which is typical for social market economies. The income ratios of individual population groups found for this range of inequality levels can be used as a standard in the development and implementation of state policy aimed at achieving some harmonious inequality level.

Keywords

inequality, income, fair, harmonious proportions, model, distribution, indicator of inequality, golden ratio.

Received

15.09.2021

Publication date

22.09.2021

Number of characters

32460

Cite Download pdf To download PDF you should sign in

GOST	Varshavsky A. Using harmonic proportions to justify fair level of the income distribution // Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody – 2021. – V. 57. – Issue 3 C. 5-16 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://emm.jes.su/S042473880016407-6-1 (circulation date: 26.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S042473880016407-6
MLA	Varshavsky, Alexander E "Using harmonic proportions to justify fair level of the income distribution." Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody 57.3 (2021):5-16. DOI: 10.31857/S042473880016407-6
APA	Varshavsky A. (2021). Using harmonic proportions to justify fair level of the income distribution. Ekonomika i matematicheskie metody 57(3), pp.5-16 DOI: 10.31857/S042473880016407-6

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.


1	1. Введение
2	Существующая экономическая ситуация во многих странах характеризуется значительным уровнем неравенства и устойчивой тенденцией его роста после 1970-х годов. Новыми факторами резкого роста неравенства стали глобализация, вывод производств в страны с дешевым трудом, развитие информационно-коммуникационных технологий, цифровизация, повышение роли сектора финансовых услуг, ослабление влияния профсоюзов, изменение правил оплаты труда, снижение норм налогообложения (Atkinson, 2015). В результате доля доходов наиболее богатых 10% населения возросла к 2016 г. до 37% в европейских странах, 41% — в Китае, 46% — в России, 47% — в США и Канаде (Alvaredo et al., 2018; Stone et al., 2020). При этом наблюдается большой диапазон разброса коэффициента Джини — от 23 до 71 (см. (Palma, 2011, 2014), где были проанализированы данные для 135 стран).
3	По данным Росстата, коэффициент Джини в России значительно вырос по сравнению с СССР: в 1989 г. — 23,8, в 1991 г. — 26,0, в 2014 г. — 42,0 и в 2016 г. — 41,5; при этом альтернативные оценки ведущих российских экономистов выше (Варшавский,2019).
4	Значительный рост неравенства стимулировал появление работ ведущих экономистов, посвященных связанным с этим проблемам. Дж. Стиглиц (Stiglitz, 2012) подчеркивал, что именно провалы рынка ведут к росту неравенства, усилению несправедливости. В связи с этим в (Doyle, Stiglitz, 2014) предлагалось снизить неравенство в США к 2030 г. до уровня, при котором индекс Пальма (соотношение доходов наиболее богатых 10% и наиболее бедных 40%) будет равен 1 (в 2017 г. он был равен P = 1,76, оценка по данным OECD), что соответствует коэффициенту Джини около 27 (см. ниже). В монографии (Venkatasubramanian, 2017) рассматриваются проблемы максимизации справедливости; показано, что этому критерию удовлетворяют скандинавские страны (см. также (Milanovic, 2016)).
5	Анализ долгосрочных изменений распределения доходов и состояний показывает (Piketty, 2014, 2020; Alfani, 2019; Atkinson, Piketty, Saez, 2011), что на протяжении многовековой истории развития человеческого общества рост неравенства и его стабилизация на некотором максимальном уровне сменялись падением только в результате глобальных катастроф. Такая триггерная модель изменения уровня неравенства типична в условиях неконтролируемого развития; в ее основе лежат, очевидно, пороки человеческого общества, то, что называется смертельным грехом — корыстолюбие, сребролюбие, жадность, зависть, властолюбие.
6	Однако рост неравенства может сдерживаться с помощью мер, предпринимаемых государством, установками общества на создание государства общественного благосостояния и формирование соответствующих институтов. Такая политика осуществляется в настоящее время в странах с так называемой социально-ориентированной экономикой, где распределение доходов считается справедливым, так как там гармонично сочетаются относительно низкое неравенство доходов с низким же неравенством возможностей (Checchi, Peragine, Serlenga, 2010; Айвазян, 2012).

Price publication: 0

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 352

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Aivazian S.A. (2012). Quality of life and living standards analysis (econometric approach). Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of RAS. Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).

2. Alfani G. (2019). Handbook of Cliometries. C. Diebolt, M. Haupert (eds.). Berlin: Heidelberg, Springer Verlag, Springer Nature Switzerland, 1173–1201.

3. Alferov S.A. (2006). Harmonious distribution of income and Golden proportion. Available at: http://www.trinitas.ru/rus/doc/0232/009a/02320025.htm (in Russian).

4. Alvaredo F., Chancel L., Piketty T., Saez T., Zucman G. (2018). World inequality report 2018. Paris, Berkeley, World Inequality Lab. Available at: https://wir2018.wid.world/download.html

5. Andersen T., Holmström B., Honkapohja S., Korkman S., Söderström H., Vartiainen J. (2007). The Nordic model. Embracing globalization and sharing risks. Helsinki: ETLA.

6. Aristotle (2016). Politics. Translated from ancient Greek by S.A. Zhebelev (in Russian).

7. Arrow K., Bowles S., Durlauf S. (2000). Meritocracy and economic inequality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

8. Asen E. (2020). Insights into the tax systems of Scandinavian countries. February 24. Available at: https://taxfoundation.org/bernie-sanders-scandinavian-countries-taxes/

9. Atkinson A. (2015). Inequality: What can be done? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

10. Atkinson A., Piketty T., Saez E. (2011). Top incomes in the long run of history. Journal of Economic Literature, 49, 1, 3–71.

11. Checchi D., Peragine V., Serlenga L. (2010). Fair and unfair income inequalities in Europe. IZA Discussion Paper No. 5025. June 2010. Bonn.

12. Corbalán F. (2016). The golden ratio: The mathematical language of beauty. Washington: National Geographic.

13. Doyle M., Stiglitz J. (2014). Eliminating extreme inequality: A sustainable development goal, 2015–2030. Ethics and International Affairs, 28 (10), 1–7.

14. Fisher R. (1993). Fibonacci applications and strategies for traders. N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

15. Gazalé M. (1999). Gnomon: From pharaohs to fractals. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

16. Helliwell J., Layard R., Sachs J. (2019). World happiness report 2019. N.Y.: Sustainable Development Solutions Network.

17. Hellmann T., Schmidt P., Heller S. (2019). Social Justice in the EU and OECD. Index Report 2019. Bertelsmann Stiftung. December.

18. Ilyin I.A. (1993). In search of Justice. On the coming Russia: Selected articles. N.P. Poltoratsky (ed.). Moscow: Voenizdat (in Russian).

19. Kan A.S. (1980). History of the Scandinavian countries. Moscow: Vysshaja shkola (in Russian).

20. Kenton W. (2019). Welfare state. July 14. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/welfare-state.asp

21. Makarov V.L. (2010). Social clusterism. Russian challenge. Moscow: Business Atlas (in Russian).

22. Milanovic B. (2016). Global inequality: A new approach for the age of globalization. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

23. Pacioli Luca (2007). About the divine proportion. Translated by A.I. Shchetnikov. Мoscow: Foundation “Russkii avangard” (in Russian). Originally published: Pacioli Luca (Paciollo) (1509). Divina proportione. Venice: Paganino de Paganinis.

24. Palma J.G. (2011). Homogeneous middles vs. heterogeneous tails, and the end of the 'Inverted-U': The share of the rich is what it's all about. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics (CWPE) 1111. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Available at: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/dae/repec/cam/pdf/cwpe1111.pdf

25. Palma J.G. (2014). Has the income share of the middle and upper-middle been stable over time, or is its current homogeneity across the world the outcome of a process of convergence? The 'Palma Ratio' revisited. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1437. Cambridge: Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.

26. Petoukhov S.V. (2008). The matrix genetics, algebras of the genetic code, noise immunity. Moscow: Regular & Chaotic Dynamics (in Russian).

27. Philosophical Encyclopedia (1989). S.S. Averintsev et al. (eds.). 2nd ed. Moscow: Sovetskaja entsiklopedija, 108–109 (in Russian).

28. Piketty T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

29. Piketty T. (2020). Capital and ideology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

30. Piketty T., Saez E. (2006). The evolution of top incomes: A Historical and International perspective. American Economic Review, 96 (2), 200–205. Available at: http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/saez/piketty-saezOUP04US.pdf

31. Social justice in an Open World (2006). N.Y.: United Nations.

32. Stakhov A. (2005).The generalized principle of the golden section and its applications in mathematics, science, and engineering. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 26 (2), 263–289.

33. Stakhov A. (2014). A history, the main mathematical results and applications for the mathematics of harmony. Applied Mathematics, 5, 363–386.

34. Stiglitz J. (2012). The price of inequality: How today's divided society endangers our future. N.Y., L.: W.W. Norton & Company.

35. Stone C., Trisi D., Sherman A., Beltran J. (2020). A Guide to Statistics on Historical Trends in Income Inequality, January 13. Available at: https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-and-inequality/a-guide-to-statistics-on-historical-trends-in-income-inequality

36. Subbota A.G. (1994).“The Golden Section” (“section aurea”) in medicine. Lectures. St. Petersburg: Voen.-med. akad. (in Russian).

37. The Social Progress Index 2019 (2019). Available at: https://socialprogress.in/2019/09/social-progress-index-2019-reveals-progress-in-sustainable-development-goals-too-slow-threatens-chances-of-fulfilling-2030-agenda/

38. Varshavsky A. (2009). A new model of income distribution based on polynomial with roots on the unit circle. 8th International Conference of the International Development Ethics Association (IDEA) on “Ethics of Human Development and Global Justice: Responsibilities of Institutions and Citizens for Action on Poverty”. F. Arenas-Dolz, L.C. Sanahuja, L. Palop, L. Giancristofaro (eds.). Valencia: Etica del desarrollo humano y justicia global, 451–456. ISBN: 978-84-7642-791-0. Available at: http://naullibres.com/libro/etica-del-desarrollo-humano-y-justicia-global

39. Varshavsky A. (2010). Assessing reasonable limits of inequality on the basis of a new model of income distribution. Intellectual Economics, 1 (7), 63–75. Available at: https://www.mruni.eu/upload/iblock/451/Varshavsky.pdf

40. Varshavsky A.E. (2007a). Significant reduction of income inequality is the most important condition for the transition to an innovative economy based on knowledge. Economics and Mathematical Methods, 43, 4, 35–55 (in Russian).

41. Varshavsky A.E. (2007b). Slowing down diffusion of innovations and transition to knowledge-based society under income inequality growth. Concepcii, 2 (19), 3–36 (in Russian).

42. Varshavsky A.E. (2010). Problems of mutual changes of the main components of social stratification under the shocks. Economics and Mathematical Methods, 46, 2, 3–22 (in Russian).

43. Varshavsky A.E. (2019). Excessive income inequality — problems and threats for Russia. Sociological Studies (Socis), 10, 19, 52–61 (in Russian).

44. Varshavsky A.E. (2020). Model of income distribution on the basis of a finite functional sequence and its application for inequality analysis. Economics and Mathematical Methods, 56, 4, 20–31 (in Russian).

45. Venkatasubramanian V. (2017). How much inequality is fair? Mathematical Principles of a Moral, Optimal, and Stable Capitalist Society. Columbia: Columbia University Press.

46. Welfare state (n/d). Encyclopædia Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com