Is Rentier Capitalism That Bad? Rent, Efficiency and Inequality Dynamics

Mabrouk, Mohamed (2017): Is Rentier Capitalism That Bad? Rent, Efficiency and Inequality Dynamics.

Abstract

The current economic context shows a tendency to inequality and rather weak growth. Rent-seeking behavior is often blamed for that. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the consequences, on the accumulation trajectory, of the existence of a rent levied by the rich on the poor. The model is inspired by the articles Stiglitz 1969, Schilcht 1975 and Bourguignon 1981. In particular, convex saving is used. We seek to see to what extent the introduction of a rent may call into question the Pareto-superiority of inequality proved by Bourguignon 1981 or alter the risk of decline highlighted in Mabrouk 2016. Within the limits of the assumptions of the model and of the numerical simulations carried out, we arrive at interesting and rather unexpected observations. Namely, a moderate rent levied by the rich on the poor may not only allow a Pareto-improvement of the economy and prevent the risk of decline, but also, it may unlock the economy from under-accumulation trap even if initial capital endowment is insufficient. The disadvantages of such a rent for the poor are felt only if the economy approaches or exceeds the golden rule where the net marginal productivity of capital is zero.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Rent, Inequality, Efficiency, Accumulation
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D3 - Distribution > D31 - Personal Income, Wealth, and Their Distributions; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E1 - General Aggregative Models > E13 - Neoclassical; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E2 - Consumption, Saving, Production, Investment, Labor Markets, and Informal Economy > E21 - Consumption ; Saving ; Wealth; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E2 - Consumption, Saving, Production, Investment, Labor Markets, and Informal Economy > E25 - Aggregate Factor Income Distribution; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity

References

François Bourguignon, Pareto-Superiority of Unegalitarian Equilibria in Stiglitz' Model of Wealth Distribution With Convex Saving Function, Econometrica, vol. 49, N°6, Nov. 1981

Karen E. Dynan, Jonathan Skinner, Stephen P. Zeldes, Do The Rich Save More?, Journal of Political Economy, vol 112, n°2, 397-444, 2004

Didier Jacobs, Extreme Wealth Is Not Merited, Oxfam Discussion Paper, Nov. 2016

Keynes J.M. (1936), General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, http://cas.umkc.edu/economics/ people/facultypages/kregel/courses/econ645/ winter2011/generaltheory.pdf

Mohamed Mabrouk, The Paradox Of Thrift In An Inegalitarian Neoclassical Economy, Business And Economic Horizons, vol. 12, issue 3, Dec. 2016, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15208/beh.2016.07

Kevin M. Murphy, Andrei Shleifer, Robert W. Vishny, Why Is Rent-Seeking So Costly To Growth? The American Economic Review, 83(2): 409--14, 1993

Oxfam report, Even It Up, 2014, http://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/ oxfam/bitstream/10546/333012/43/cr-even-it-up-extreme-inequality-291014-en.pdf

Ekkehart Schilcht, A Neoclassical Theory of Wealth Distribution, Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 189, 78-96, 1975

Joseph Stiglitz, New Theoretical Perspectives On The Distribution Of Income And Wealth Among Individuals: Part II: Equilibrium Wealth Distributions, National Bureau Of Economic Research, WP 21190, May 2015, http://www.nber.org/papers/w21190

Joseph Stiglitz, Inequality And Economic Growth, The Political Quaterly, Dec. 2015 , DOI: 10.1111/1467-923X.12237

Joseph Stiglitz, Distribution of Income and Wealth Among Individuals, Econometrica, 37, 382-3997, July 1969