@MISC{Soltow_incomesize, author = {Lee Soltow and Melvin W. Reder and Melvin W. Reder}, title = {income Size Distribution}, year = {} }
Share
OpenURL
Abstract
"THE strongly empirical tone of this chapter is of course due to the absence of a developed theory of the size distribution of income. " Thus does George Stigler summarize a textbook chapter entitled "The Size Distribution of Income. " [1] The validity of this remark has led me, in several places, to attempt creation where a critical recounting would otherwise have been more appropriate; where there was no theory and I thought I could provide at least a sketch of one, I have tried to do so. However, there are a good many bits and pieces of theory lying around in the literature that can, with a little trimming of edges, be fitted into a mosaic called "The Theory of Income Size Distribution"; the major part of the paper is concerned with this task. These theoretical fragments are very disparate and sometimes are not presented in a form that indicates their relation to income size distribu-tions. Among the arguments that do refer explicitly to income size dis-tribution, some refer only to a single year, others to the lifetime incomes of a cohort; some refer to individuals and some to families; some to single types of incomes and some to all types combined; some to pretax and some to post-tax income, etc. If a survey of all this is to be more than a mere catalogue, items must be forced into categories with in-evitable discomfort for straddlers. The categories I have chosen are, in the logical sense, arbitrary: they have no claim to preferment beyond expository convenience. They re-flect a definite view as to the role of economic theory in the present context; the purpose of an economic theory is to provide hypotheses as