Podcasts about socio economic inequality

Robert Misik in conversation with Branko MilanovićVISIONS OF INEQUALITYA sweeping and original history of how economists across two centuries have thought about inequality, told through portraits of six key figures. “How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?” That is the question Branko Milanović imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanović argues, we cannot speak of “inequality” as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place.Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was knowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies.Branko Milanović is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Formerly Lead Economist in the World Bank's research department, he is the author of Capitalism, Alone; and The Haves and the Have-Nots.Robert Misik, Author and Journalist

In this episode, Mark Blyth talks with two inequality experts to try and understand something that's been bugging him for years.It goes like this: inequality has profound effects on our economy, society, and lives. It has also been growing, and today is at historically high levels. Given all that, why does inequality never seem to be a topic around which we organize our politics? Too complicated? Too boring? Too unsolvable? The answers that Mark got made him rethink the question itself, and hopefully will make you see inequality in a new light, too. Guests on this episode:Charlotte Cavaille is an assistant professor of public policy at the University of Michigan's Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, and author of “Fair Enough? Support for Redistribution in the Age of Inequality”.Branko Milanovic is a senior scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the CUNY Graduate Center.Learn more about the Watson Institute's other podcasts

Today's discussion was recorded in October of 2024 and was held with Dr. Branko Milanovic. Dr. Milanovic is a senior scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality and one of the leading scholars on income inequality in the world.  He worked as a lead economist at the World Bank's research department for 20 years, and as a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He has held numerous professorships at universities such as the University of Maryland, Johns Hopkins University, London School of Economics, and the New School, where he currently teaches. He is the author of several influential books including The Haves and the Have—Nots, Capitalism Alone, and his newest book, Visions of Inequality. Dr. Milanovic earned his Ph.D. from the University of Belgrade.  Together, we discussed his newest book, a history of thought around inequality, and why he did not include Henry George in his book, even though he is such an important thinker on this subject.  To check out more of our content, including our research and policy tools, visit our website: https://www.hgsss.org/ --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/smart-talk-hgsss/support

With our children being our future and our long-term societal wellbeing depending on them, Professor Kate Pickett and Professor Richard Wilkinson provide insight into their recent CAMH journal Editorial ‘Socio-economic inequality and child and adolescent mental health'. Richard and Kate are co-authors of the bestselling and award winning The Spirit Level (2009) and The Inner Level (2018).  Described by Penguin as ‘the most influential and talked-about book on society in the last decade', The Spirit Level won the 2010 Bristol Festival of Ideas Book Prize and was the 2012 Publication of the Year of the Political Studies Association. The New Statesman listed it in the Top Ten Books of the Decade, and the Guardian among the 100 most influential books of the century. Learning Objectives 1. The relationship between socio-economic inequality and child and adolescent mental health. 2. What causes the lack of good data in low-and-middle income data. 3. The pathways and mechanisms through which socio-economic inequality affects child and adolescent mental health. 4. The three ways in which inequality effects mental health. 5. The framework for how socio-economic inequalities between societies interacts with socio-economic positions within societies. 6. Issues of causality. 7. What can be done to mitigate the impact of income inequality on child and adolescent mental health. 8. Current gaps in the literature that would be fruitful to address.

EPISODE 1823: In this KEEN ON show, Andrew talks to Branko Milanovic, author of VISIONS OF INEQUALITY, about how different economists have made sense of economic inequality over the last 250 yearsBRANKO MILANOVIC is a Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the CUNY Graduate Center and the author of the forthcoming Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War. Branko's main area of work is income inequality, in individual countries and globally, including in pre-industrial societies. He has published articles in The Economic Journal, Review of Economics and Statistics, Journal of Economic Literature, Economic History Review, and Journal of Political Philosophy, among others. His book, The Haves and the Have-nots (2011) was selected by The Globalist as the 2011 Book of the Year. His book Global Inequality (2016), was awarded the Bruno Kreisky Prize for the best political book of 2016, and Hans Matthöfer Prize in 2018, and was translated into sixteen languages. It addresses economic and political effects of globalization and introduces the concept of successive “Kuznets waves” of inequality. In March 2018, Branko was awarded (jointly with Mariana Mazzucato) the 2018 Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Knowledge. His new book Capitalism, Alone was published in September 2019. He has contributed numerous op-eds and essays to Social Europe, VoxEU, The Guardian, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Vox, The Financial Times, Le Monde, El Pais, La Vanguardia, Le Monde Diplomatique and blogs ProMarket (U of Chicago), Global Policy (Durham University), Brave New Europe (Berlin). His blog posts are regularly translated into Spanish (Letras Libres), German (Makronom), Italian (Fata Turchina) and French (Atlanico).Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"How do you see income distribution in your time, and how and why do you expect it to change?" That is the question Branko Milanovic imagines posing to six of history's most influential economists: François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets. Probing their works in the context of their lives, he charts the evolution of thinking about inequality, showing just how much views have varied among ages and societies. Indeed, Milanovic argues, we cannot speak of "inequality" as a general concept: any analysis of it is inextricably linked to a particular time and place. Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War (Harvard UP, 2023) takes us from Quesnay and the physiocrats, for whom social classes were prescribed by law, through the classic nineteenth-century treatises of Smith, Ricardo, and Marx, who saw class as a purely economic category driven by means of production. It shows how Pareto reconceived class as a matter of elites versus the rest of the population, while Kuznets saw inequality arising from the urban-rural divide. And it explains why inequality studies were eclipsed during the Cold War, before their remarkable resurgence as a central preoccupation in economics today. Meticulously extracting each author's view of income distribution from their often voluminous writings, Milanovic offers an invaluable genealogy of the discourse surrounding inequality. These intellectual portraits are infused not only with a deep understanding of economic theory but also with psychological nuance, reconstructing each thinker's outlook given what was unknowable to them within their historical contexts and methodologies. Branko Milanovic is Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the City University of New York and Visiting Professor at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science. Caleb Zakarin is the Assistant Editor of the New Books Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Writing a book like that makes you really think brutally about the past. It makes you really think about the current time and also how the future would look at you.Branko MilanovicAccess Bonus Episodes on PatreonMake a one-time Donation to Democracy Paradox.A full transcript is available at www.democracyparadox.com.Branko Milanovic is a Research Professor at the City University of New York and a Senior Scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality. He served as the lead economist in the World Bank's Research Department for almost 20 years. His most recent book is Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War.Key HighlightsIntroduction - 0:31Why Economic Inequality - 2:53Ideas Before 1820 - 13:26Marx and Socialism - 19:52Piketty and Modern Thought - 40:17Key LinksVisions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War by Branko Milanovicglobalinequality blog by Branko MilanovicFollow Branko Milanovic on X @BrankoMilanDemocracy Paradox PodcastThomas Piketty on EqualityJacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on the Plutocratic Populism of the Republican PartyMore Episodes from the PodcastMore InformationApes of the State created all MusicEmail the show at jkempf@democracyparadox.comFollow on Twitter @DemParadox, Facebook, Instagram @democracyparadoxpodcast100 Books on DemocracySupport the show

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao   ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT   This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/   Dr. Branko Milanović is Presidential Professor at the Graduate Center and a senior fellow at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at The City University of New York (CUNY). Dr. Milanović's main area of work is income inequality, in individual countries and globally, as well as historically, among pre-industrial societies (Roman Empire, Byzantium, and France before the Revolution), and even inequality in soccer. His latest book is Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War.   In this episode, we focus on Visions of Inequality. We start by talking about how long people have been thinking about economic inequality, and the elements of the best income distribution studies. We then go through the work of authors like François Quesnay, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Karl Marx, Vilfredo Pareto, and Simon Kuznets, and how there was a natural progression across them. We discuss how and why studies of income distribution went into retreat during the Cold War era; the rise of neoliberalism and its consequences; and what led to the revival of economic studies. We also talk about a recent expansion in our understanding of the dynamics of inequality, with race and gender inequality. Finally, we discuss Dr. Milanović's goals with this book. -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BERNARDO SEIXAS, OLAF ALEX, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, JOHN CONNORS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, MIKKEL STORMYR, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, ADANER USMANI, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, DANIEL FRIEDMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ANTON ERIKSSON, CHARLES MOREY, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, STARRY, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, IGOR N, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, CHRIS STORY, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, BENJAMIN GELBART, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, NIKLAS CARLSSON, ISMAËL BENSLIMANE, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, PER KRAULIS, KATE VON GOELER, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, LIAM DUNAWAY, BR, MASOUD ALIMOHAMMADI, PURPENDICULAR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, GREGORY HASTINGS, DAVID PINSOF, AND SEAN NELSON! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, AL NICK ORTIZ, AND NICK GOLDEN! AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, BOGDAN KANIVETS, AND ROSEY!

Mark Talley is the son of Geraldine C. Talley, who was killed in the Tops shooting by a white supremacist on May 14th, 2022. Prior to this date, Mark just went along through the trials and tribulations of life believing there was nothing he could do, he was just powerless. Afraid of what he would say or do, Mark just started volunteering everywhere he could on Jefferson Ave for the next several months to channel his emotion. After doing all this volunteering, Mark started feeling an urge to become more of a community leader / social advocate. This led to him forming his own nonprofit “Agents for Advocacy” and organizing his first charitable event on July 7th, 2022 “The Community BBQ and Prayer”. Mark in collaboration with others was able to serve over 700 hotdogs and hamburgers along with providing bags of fresh produce, gifts, appliances, and meats. On April 28th Agents for Advocacy organized a back-to-school drive in which over 500+ children were provided backpacks, calculators, pens/pencils, folders, and notebooks. Currently, Agents for Advocacy is raising funds to provide a Thanksgiving for the homeless. Email: agentsforadvocacy@gmail.comInstagram: @agentsforadvocacyCash App: $SocialChange89$Venmo: @agentsforadvocacyThe Toxic Leadership PodcastInstagram: @ToxicLeadershipPodcastTwitter: @ToxicLeaderShow Dr. Kevin Sansberry II is a behavioral scientist and executive coach with expertise in toxic leadership, human capital strategy, and creating inclusive cultures of belonging to enhance organization performance. Over the years, Kevin has focused on providing research-informed solutions in various settings such as higher education, nonprofit, sales, and corporate environments. Follow KEVRA: The Culture Company on Linkedin to keep up with your favorite behavioral scientist, Dr. Sansberry. At KEVRA: The Culture Company, we partner to effectively evolve your organizational culture by focusing on competency development, best practices, and leading research to deliver systemic and innovative solutions for company success. Have a question for Dr. Sansberry? Visit askdrkev.com to send your leadership and organizational-related questions. Love the show? Subscribe, rate, review & share! https://thetoxicleadershippodcast.com/

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Branko Milanović is Presidential Professor at the Graduate Center and a senior fellow at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at The City University of New York (CUNY). Dr. Milanović's main area of work is income inequality, in individual countries and globally, as well as historically, among pre-industrial societies, and even inequality in soccer. His books include “The Haves and the Have-nots: A Brief and Idiosyncratic History of Global Inequality”, “Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization”, and “Capitalism, Alone”. In this episode, we focus on “Capitalism, Alone”. We start by defining capitalism, and distinguishing mainly between political capitalism and liberal meritocratic capitalism. We talk about China's political capitalism, and the historical role of communism. We get into economic inequality, and discuss how it is measured, recent trends, what drives it, if it is a problem, and how to reduce it. We discuss specifically Universal Basic Income as a proposed solution. Finally, we ask if capitalism has been a net-positive for global society, and if it is possible to predict its future. -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: KARIN LIETZCKE, ANN BLANCHETTE, PER HELGE LARSEN, LAU GUERREIRO, JERRY MULLER, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BERNARDO SEIXAS, HERBERT GINTIS, RUTGER VOS, RICARDO VLADIMIRO, CRAIG HEALY, OLAF ALEX, PHILIP KURIAN, JONATHAN VISSER, JAKOB KLINKBY, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, JOHN CONNORS, PAULINA BARREN, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ARTHUR KOH, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, SUSAN PINKER, PABLO SANTURBANO, SIMON COLUMBUS, PHIL KAVANAGH, JORGE ESPINHA, CORY CLARK, MARK BLYTH, ROBERTO INGUANZO, MIKKEL STORMYR, ERIC NEURMANN, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, BERNARD HUGUENEY, ALEXANDER DANNBAUER, FERGAL CUSSEN, YEVHEN BODRENKO, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, DON ROSS, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, OZLEM BULUT, NATHAN NGUYEN, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, J.W., JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, IDAN SOLON, ROMAIN ROCH, DMITRY GRIGORYEV, TOM ROTH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, ADANER USMANI, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, AL ORTIZ, NELLEKE BAK, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, NICK GOLDEN, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS P. FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, DENISE COOK, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, AND TRADERINNYC! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, IAN GILLIGAN, LUIS CAYETANO, TOM VANEGDOM, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, VEGA GIDEY, THOMAS TRUMBLE, AND NUNO ELDER! AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MICHAL RUSIECKI, ROSEY, JAMES PRATT, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, AND BOGDAN KANIVETS!

A conversation on prosperity, opportunity, and inequality, with https://www.newyorkencounter.org/jeanpaul-fitoussi (Jean-Paul Fitoussi), Professor Emeritus of Economics at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris, and https://www.newyorkencounter.org/branko-milanovic (Branko Milanovic), senior fellow at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality, https://nyencounter.squarespace.com/samuele-rosa (Samuele Rosa), senior economist, International Monetary Fund, moderated by https://www.newyorkencounter.org/anujeet-sareen (Anujeet Sareen), portfolio manager, Brandywine GlobalAmerica, we believe, is the land of opportunity, a country where people of diverse backgrounds have the opportunity to make the most of their talents. But is this narrative true today?  Do we truly offer equality of opportunity?  Income and wealth inequality are the worst they have been in nearly a century. Indeed, the deepening unease across the political spectrum and the increasing distrust of our institutions are perhaps largely a consequence of an erosion of the American dream.  These trends are similar in many advanced economies. How does America once again offer the promise of shared prosperity?

As the world stumbles through a second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that both its catastrophic toll on human life and the severe socioeconomic dislocation it has caused matter equally. Yet it is also becoming clear that there is a growing inequality associated with governments and private citizens' responses to the pandemic – whether in terms of access to vaccines or public policy measures to support the most vulnerable sections. In this context, the work of Professor Branko Milanovic of the Stone Center on Socio Economic Inequality at the City University of New York, and former lead economist in the World Bank's Research Department for almost 20 years, matters ever more today, especially his study of the relationship between inequality and different forms of capitalism across the world. On this episode of the In Focus podcast, he shares his perspective on this subject, including on its relevance to India, with The Hindu's Associate Editor Narayan Lakshman.

Welcome to the fourth episode of Kids Politics. Today's episode is about socioeconomic inequality. More specifically, I will discuss low-income families, homelessness, and the minimum wage with Aiden, ______. I will end the episode with a news brief about the verdict in the Derek Chauvin trial.

Ben trovati! Sono Paolo Gaeta ed oggi per il podcast della nostra serie Tax Talks parleremo di concentrazione della ricchezza privata in Italia.  L'Italia è uno dei paesi nel mondo con il più alto rapporto ricchezza / reddito. Tuttavia la conoscenza della distribuzione dimensionale della ricchezza è attualmente limitata. Oggi tratteremo di una ricerca che vuole ampliare l'osservazione sulla tema della distribuzione del patrimonio personale che prende in esame un arco di tempo che va dal 1995 al 2016.  l'Italia oltre a distinguersi come uno dei paesi con maggiore quota di ricchezza privata è anche quello dove il 50% dei cittadini più poveri della popolazione adulta hanno subito il calo più marcato della ricchezza.  Ne parliamo oggi con il dott. Salvatore Morelli autore assieme al dott. Paolo Aicardi e Facundo Alvaredo della ricerca dal titolo “The Concentration of Personal Wealth in Italy 1995-2016” pubblicato dal The Graduate Center City University of New York.  Il dott. Morelli è Senior Scholar presso lo Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality of New York, ricercatore in scienza delle Finanze presso l'Universita' di Roma Tre e membro del coordinamento del Forum Disuguaglianze e Diversità, con master in scienze economiche presso la London School of Economics e un dottorato di ricerca presso l'Universita' di Oxford.  Ascolta il PODCAST su altre Fonti Digitali✅ Studio Gaeta Podcast su Spotify✅ Studio Gaeta Podcast su iTunes ✅ Studio Gaeta Podcast su Google✅ Studio Gaeta Podcast su AmazonTrascrizione:Benvenuti nello spazio TaxTalks, podcast dello studio Paolo Gaeta. Un'area dedicata a commenti, interviste ad esperti di diritto tributario, per comprendere meglio insieme come funziona e in che direzione si muove il sistema fiscale italiano. Idee, riflessioni e confronti di valore. Collegatevi al sito www.studiogaeta.com per ascoltare i nostri podcast ed essere aggiornati sulle iniziative dello studio. Bentrovati, sono Paolo Gaeta ed oggi per il podcast della serie tax talks parleremo della concentrazione della ricchezza privata in Italia. L'italia è uno dei paesi del mondo con il più alto rapporto ricchezza reddito. Tuttavia la conoscenza della distribuzione dimensionale della ricchezza è attualmente limitata. Oggi tratteremo di una ricerca che vuole ampliare l'osservazione sul tema della distribuzione del patrimonio personale che prende in esame un arco di tempo che va dal 1995 al 2016. L'italia, oltre a distinguersi come uno dei paesi con maggiore quota di ricchezza privata è anche quello dove il 50% dei cittadini più poveri della popolazione adulta hanno subito il calo più marcato della ricchezza. Ne parliamo oggi con il Dottore Salvatore Morelli, autore assieme al Dottore Paolo Aicardi e Facundo Alvaredo della ricerca dal titolo “The Concentration of Personal Wealth in Italy 1995-2016” pubblicato dal The Graduate Center City University of New York.  Il dott. Morelli è Senior Scholar presso lo Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality of New York, ricercatore in scienza delle Finanze presso l'Universita' di Roma Tre e membro del coordinamento del Forum Disuguaglianze e Diversità, con master in scienze economiche presso la London School of Economics e un dottorato di ricerca presso l'Universita' di Oxford. Domanda:Salvatore Buongiorno ci siamo lasciati l'ultima volta nel nostro podcast del mese di ottobre 2020 pensando di sentirci su altri temi ed eccoci qui, parliamo di ricchezza delle persone fisiche. Il tema è molto caldo, i numeri di cui ci parlerai, raccontano di una situazione che in Italia, come anche negli Stati Uniti, sotto all'attuale presidenza Biden è al centro dei molte attenzioni da parte degli operatori finanziari interni e internazionali e dello Stato. Ma raccontaci com'è nata l'idea di questa seconda ricerca e qual è la posizione dell'Italia nella classifica sull'accumulo della ricchezza nel panorama internazionale che viene fuori dalla vostra ricerca.Risposta:Grazie, buongiorno, l'idea della ricerca è quella di avere un'idea un po' più precisa su come siano effettivamente distribuiti i patrimoni delle famiglie italiane e quindi anche tra gli individui. In particolare vogliamo capire come sia distribuito l'intero stock di patrimonio stimato nei conti patrimoniali del settore delle famiglie che identificano il nostro Paese un totale di circa 8500 miliardi di patrimonio netto, cioè la somma di attivi finanziari immobiliari al netto dell'indebitamento. I risultati principali del nostro lavoro suggeriscono come da un lato il nostro Paese sia stato un po' investito da una vera e propria inversione delle fortune a partire dalla metà degli anni novanta ed è un periodo particolare perché segnato da una grande stagnazione dei redditi un susseguirsi anche da due gravi crisi finanziarie e recessioni economiche, poi rafforzate anche dalla crisi del debito e in altre parole è sempre più patrimonio si concentra nelle mani di un piccolo gruppo della popolazione, come ad esempio l'un per cento della popolazione è sempre meno nel gruppo più povero, quindi ad esempio il cinquanta per cento più povero della popolazione. In confronto ad altri paesi il livello di concentrazione di ricchezza che noi stimiamo e osserviamo per l'italia sembra essere oggi in linea con gli altri paesi europei come Francia, Spagna e Germania, però l'evoluzione temporale quindi il trend temporale osservato e stimato sembra più vicino invece a quello riscontrato negli Stati Uniti. L'italia appare come un paese con una classe medio-alta relativamente forte, parliamo per esempio del quaranta percento, subito al di sotto del dieci per cento più ricco, mentre la quota del cinquanta per cento più povero, quello che di cui ho parlato prima, che è composta da venticinque milioni di individui, ha sperimentato invece il più forte declino che noi osserviamo dalla metà degli anni novanta se confrontato con gli altri paesi. L'aspetto interessante del nostro lavoro è che per la prima volta, scattiamo una fotografia diversa da quella che riusciamo a stimare attraverso l'unica fonte di dati finora a disposizione che era l'indagine campionaria sui bilanci delle famiglie gestite dalla banca D'italia e queste dinamiche di crescita della disuguaglianza semplicemente non appaiono con questi dati. Nel nostro lavoro, invece, utilizziamo una nuova fonte di dati mai esplorata finora e si tratta dei registri della dichiarazione di successione che forniscono il nostro paese una fotografia dei possedimenti di ricchezza che passano di mano alla morte e che vengono dichiarate all'agenzia delle entrate. A partire da questi dati, aggiustandone anche un po' il contenuto, per esempio dobbiamo trasformare il valore catastale degli immobili in valore di mercato. Noi cerchiamo di ricostruire la fotografia della distribuzione del patrimonio degli italiani in vita. Il vantaggio principale di questi dati è una migliore copertura del gruppo dei ricchi di patrimonio semplicemente non riusciamo a stimare un numero più alto di persone con patrimoni milionari, cosa che invece l'indagine campionaria attualmente non riesce a fare e in più i nostri dati sono compatibili con le statistiche macroeconomiche dei conti nazionali.Domanda:Quale fotografia esce fuori della ricchezza individuale in termini di crescita nel lungo periodo, anche turbolento, che avete analizzato dal 1995 al 2016? Ci dai anche qualche dato interessante per profilare in maniera un po' più dettagliata il settore della popolazione con un focus sugli ultra high net worth individual?Risposta:Si, come hai accennato brevemente prima, la dinamica principale di lungo periodo è una dinamica di crescita di concentrazione della ricchezza nei segmenti di popolazione più ricche, andando un po più a fondo nei risultati stimiamo che, per esempio, la quota di ricchezza del 1% degli adulti più ricchi del paese è aumentato dal 16% nel 1995 al 22% nel 2016. Parliamo di circa 500mila adulti con almeno 1,4 milioni di euro, con una ricchezza netta media di circa 4 milioni di euro. Cioè in altre parole, di quel  8500 miliardi di euro di patrimonio netto aggregato che menzionavo prima, questo gruppo ne possiede oggi circa 1700 miliardi quel 1% più ricco della popolazione. Ma il nostro studio permette anche di andare un po' più a fondo e differenziare anche i più ricchi tra i ricchi, ad esempio, possiamo osservare la quota di ricchezza spettante allo 0.1% dei più ricchi della popolazione, circa 50mila individui. In questo gruppo ha visto raddoppiare la sua ricchezza netta da circa 7,6 milioni di euro a 15 milioni di euro dal 95 al 2016, mentre, ad esempio, giusto per un confronto, il cinquanta per cento più povero di cui parlavo prima controllava il 12% della ricchezza totale novantacinque scesa a circa il 3,5 % negli anni recenti. Si tratta di un calo di circa 80% della ricchezza netta media da ventisette mila euro a sette mila euro a prezzi costanti nel 2016 e possiamo ancora addirittura ulteriormente ingrandire l'osservazione andando un po' più a fondo nel gruppo dei più ricchi, ad esempio, possono arrivare al gruppo dei cinquemila adulti più ricchi lo 0,01%. E questo gruppo almeno un patrimonio netto di minimo 20 milioni di euro, con una media di 80 milioni di euro. Questo gruppo ha visto la quota di ricchezza più che raddoppiare sul totale da circa il 2% nel 95 al 5%n nel 2016 e questi numeri sono ovviamente ancora più grandi se dovessimo distribuire le stime dei miliardi di euro di patrimoni finanziari detenuti nei conti offshore che noi non riusciamo a catturare nei dati di contabilità nazionale, parliamo di circa 170 miliardi di euro ai giorni nostri, pari circa il 10% del prodotto interno lordo. Bene, se noi distribuissimo questa quantità di patrimoni finanziari detenuti nei conti offshore a gruppo della popolazione, ebbene la soglia per entrare all'interno di questo gruppo raddoppierebbe da circa venti a quaranta milioni di euro.Domanda:Ci puoi parlare delle determinanti dell'accumulazione e della concentrazione?Risposta:Sì, questo è un punto importante. Ad esempio noi usciamo non solo per esempio a osservare che i ricchi abbiano un patrimonio più sostanzioso, ma anche un portafoglio sostanzialmente  diverso ad esempio più dell'ottanta percento del patrimonio dei cinque adulti più ricchi sono detenuti in attività finanziarie di impresa, mentre l'1%più ricco detiene il sessanta percento dei patrimoni in immobili e chiaramente riuscire a differenziare i rischi dagli ultraricchi, dunque, appare anche cruciale non solo per stimare questa eterogeneità, ma anche per capire quali siano le determinanti di accumulazione e cosa possa guidare queste dinamiche. Infatti, in linea con questi risultati possiamo dire che osserviamo che le quote di ricchezza, soprattutto quelle più elevate, sono guidate dalla dinamica dei patrimoni finanziari. In altre parole, i rendimenti di questi titoli finanziari e dei risparmi hanno guidato queste dinamiche, mentre l'accumulo di patrimoni immobiliari, invece sembra avere avuto un effetto di stabilizzazione delle dinamiche concentrazione. Ma l'accumulazione di ricchezze non avviene solo per il cambio di risparmio, per la variazione dei prezzi dei titoli degli immobili, avviene anche per trasferimento di ricchezza ricevuti nel corso della vita. Noi ci soffermiamo abbastanza su questo canale, perché è per la sua rilevanza sostanziale. Per esempio, noi possiamo sapere che buona parte delle grandi fortune è frutto di risparmi e di attività imprenditoriali. Noi  riusciamo a vedere chiaramente come emerge un ruolo sempre più crescente l'eredità delle donazioni in vita, aumenta la concentrazione di queste eredità nelle mani di pochi. Quindi confermiamo in un certo senso i risultati di un altro studio di cui avevamo già parlato insieme in un altro podcast. E inoltre mostriamo anche da un lato, come una percentuale sempre più bassa di eredità milionari viene soggetto a tassazione oggi rispetto alla metà degli anni 90 e quindi è diminuito sostanzialmente l'onere fiscale medio su questi lasciti milionari.Domanda:A proposito di questo, qual è il ruolo delle imposte su questi grandi patrimoni in questo scenario attuale? In prospettiva quale può essere e quali le implicazioni del vostro lavoro nel panorama del dibattito nazionale e internazionale attorno a questi argomenti?Risposta:A dirla tutta, la corretta attuazione della distribuzione ricchezza, sicuramente un primo passo per parlare poi seriamente di fisco e di imposte sul patrimonio, la misurazione, la quantificazione era esattamente l'obiettivo della ricerca di cui abbiamo parlato. Parliamo di tassazione, usciamo un po' dal perimetro di questo studio, per orientarci in questo dibattito, comunque controverso ma assolutamente necessario, ci sono un paio di cose da ribadire secondo me. Innanzitutto l'italia è da anni in una fase di stagnazione dei redditi, mentre il peso dei patrimoni è continuato a salire. Siamo oggi uno dei paesi con il più alto rapporto tra ricchezza e il reddito del mondo sviluppato, se il totale del reddito disponibile delle famiglie vale 1150miliardi, abbiamo detto prima, il totale invece del patrimonio vale 8500 miliardi quindi stiamo parlando di un rapporto di sette a uno e questo rapporto è triplicato negli ultimi quaranta cinquant'anni. Invece, a fronte di questa crescita del peso dei patrimoni, non è invece cresciuto proporzionalmente la quota di introiti fiscali che è dovuta a prelievi sui patrimoni e quindi esiste banalmente un margine di azione in questo senso. Il secondo punto che vale la pena ribadire è che esistono diversi modi di passare il patrimonio, alcuni più diretti di altri. Bisognerebbe secondo me prendere un po' tutti in considerazione per ponderare bene i pro e i contro, per esempio, a partire dalla tassazione di trasferimento di ricchezza di cui parlavamo prima quelle riferite alle donazioni. Questa forma di tassazione, almeno storicamente, è tra le prime forme di tassazione create in generale e anche tra le prime ad essere anche generalmente apprezzate da varie culture politiche, perché abbraccia obiettivi di giustizia sociale da un lato, garantendo uguaglianza e opportunità pari riducendo gli squilibri e garantendo anche obiettivi di efficienza economica, banalmente migliorando la allocazione del capitale produttivo, magari favorendo anche la cessione attività territoriali al di fuori della sfera familiare. Infatti noi sappiamo che si può ereditare facilmente un'impresa, ma non necessariamente la capacità di gestirla al meglio e poi anche compatibile con obiettivi di democrazia liberale, perché riducendo il peso della ricchezza dinastica si tende un po' a distorcere meno le dinamiche democratiche perché noi sappiamo che anche le grandi ricchezze sono anche diciamo simbolo di potere, di influenza politica e concentrazione di potere economico. Quindi su questo in Italia ci sarebbe ancora da fare, perché il nostro sistema tributario vede con molto favore i lasciti ereditari e le donazioni e nel panorama internazionale l'italia è oggi uno dei paesi che tassa questi trasferimenti in modo un po' più timido. Ad esempio trasferimenti tra genitori e figli nel nostro paese sono tassati con un'aliquota proporzionale del 4% sopra il milione di euro. In tanti altri paesi avanzati come Uk, Francia, Germania, Giappone, Corea del Sud, l'aliquota massima arriva anche al 50/55%. Proprio un paio di giorni fa gli eredi della grande industria multinazionale Samsung hanno annunciato un pagamento di un'imposta sui lasci ereditari di circa 11 miliardi di dollari.Domanda:Pari circa il cinquanta per cento del valore del patrimonio, siamo a livelli davvero altissimi di vera redistribuzione.Risposta:E infatti proprio su questo punto avevamo avanzato un anno fa una proposta di riforma dell'imposta di successione italiana che diventi proprio più progressiva, faccia pagare meno persone ma che poi riesca a spostare il carico fiscale soprattutto su chi riceve fortune milionarie e avvicinando però anche l'aliquota massima ad altri paesi sviluppati, come appunto il caso della Corea del Sud, si puo' fare, garantendo anche il diritto alle famiglie di provvedere ai propri figli con delle soglie di esenzioni sostanziose. Per esempio noi avevamo proposto 500 mila euro, che ricordiamolo, è un livello di ricchezza sostanziale perché permette a conti fatti con i dati che ho menzionato prima di entrare nel sei per cento più ricco degli italiani, ma passare i trasferimenti chiaramente non è l'unico modo. Si possono passare i rendimenti del patrimonio, alcuni redditi da capitale, come i dividendi, le plusvalenze, ma anche gli affitti. Si possono tassare in questo senso i flussi di reddito generati dal patrimonio e facendolo quindi si riducono anche i rendimenti del patrimonio. Ma diciamo questo è l'esempio legato alla proposta dell'amministrazione Biden che ha proposto di aumentare le imposte sui capital gain negli Stati Uniti. Questo è un approccio che va in questa direzione però un aspetto negativo di questo approccio è che l'imposta si potrebbe facilmente evitare in un certo qual senso, prolungando la proprietà degli asset fino alla morte dove i capital gain vengono azzerati. Oppure prolungando fino a quando un'altra amministrazione cambierà nuovamente le regole. Quindi bisognerebbe in altre parole, provare a tassare i capital gain non realizzati. Esiste poi la possibilità anche delle patrimoniali vere e proprie. Qui ci sono due approcci sostanzialmente o tassare le cose, quindi diversi tipi di asset separatamente, come il caso delle patrimoniale all'italiana cioè si pagano le imposte di bollo sui conti, ma non si sommano questi asset in capo alla persona. Invece l'approccio alternativo sarebbe quello dell'imposta patrimoniale personale, cioè l'approccio, un po' più controverso, quello più dibattuto. Ma anche qui ci sarebbero due possibilità ulteriori l'implementazione o una tassa one-off, cioè una tantum oppure un'imposta ricorrente annuale. Chiaramente, in questo senso, le implicazioni distorsive di natura con comportamentale potrebbe essere completamente diverse, quindi sono tante le questioni aperte, ma un aspetto che bisognerebbe tenere in conto è che esiste ad esempio, come suggeriscono alcuni scienziati delle finanze americani, un numero sostanziale cospicuo di milionari le cui aziende non distribuiscono dividendi sufficienti che realizzano pochissimi capital gain, ricevono salari relativamente bassi e soprattutto le cui aziende pagano imposte molto basse sui profitti d'impresa. Quindi nessuno degli approcci tradizionale alla tassazione risolverebbe questo problema di bassa aliquota media, di questi individui che si sottraggono in un certo qualsenso alla progressività del sistema tributario e questo problema potrebbe essere risolto da un'imposta temporanea sui capital gain non realizzati, quindi quelli maturati o con un'imposta patrimoniale personale. Ovviamente su tutto questo in Italia siamo ancora molto lontani da averne discusso in maniera approfondita e sicuramente questo è il primo passo.Grazie di essere stato con noi Salvatore e complimenti davvero per l'importante e molto interessante e attuale lavoro che hai fattoGrazie! Grazie mille per l'interesse e per l'accoglienzaPotete ascoltare le trust Talks sul sito www.studiogaeta.com per contatti diretti con i nostri esperti inviati una mail a info@studiogaeta.com

How have governments responded to the economic crisis created by the Covid-19 pandemic, and what will be the consequences? On Tuesday, April 6, a panel discussion with Wolfgang Schmidt, State Secretary, Federal Ministry of Finance of Germany, Angella MacEwen, Senior Economist, Canadian Union of Public Employees, and Branko Milanovic, Professor and Senior Scholar, the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality, the Graduate Center, CUNY, addressed the inequalities revealed and exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic, the public policy tools available to ameliorate those inequalities, and the likely paths economies can take in the recovery from the pandemic. This public online event was moderated by John Torpey, Director, European Union Studies Center and Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies, and organized with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, Washington office. It was co-sponsored by the American Council on Germany, Colorado European Union Center of Excellence, University of Florida Center for European Studies, and Stone Center on Inequality at the Graduate Center, CUNY. You can find a transcript of the episode here: https://ralphbuncheinstitute.org/2021/04/08/economic-inequality-after-the-pandemic/ You can also watch the recording of the event here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdFdOBi7moc

Nobel laureate Paul Krugman is a distinguished professor of economics at The Graduate Center, CUNY, a faculty member at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality, and a New York Times columnist. He writes frequently about U.S. politics, economics, and economic and social policy. Lately, he has been sharing his opinions about Bidenomics(mostly good), the state of the Republican Party and democracy in America (mostly not good), and how the U.S. can emerge from its “coronacoma.” In this episode of The Thought Project podcast, he elaborates on many of his ideas, particularly how the U.S. can pull itself out of its COVID-induced economic slump, burnish its international reputation and standing, and address inequality through policies on health care, child care, and social security. He discusses what could make the post-pandemic U.S. economy come roaring back and shares his biggest fears. Listen in on a frank and wide-ranging discussion with one of today's most well-known public intellectuals.

Marco Ranaldi is a postdoctoral scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the Graduate Center, CUNY. His research interests lie at the intersection between economic inequality and political economy, with a focus on inequality measurement and the comparative analysis of economic systems. He holds a PhD in Economics from the Paris School of Economics. Our next book club meeting will take place on April 6th. It will once again be hosted by Fiori Sara Berhane. We will (Zoom) meet at 7pm EST and will be reading The Ministry For The Future. All are welcome!Sign Up HereMusic by Podington Bear A Correction Podcast Episodes RSS

In this episode, Nate is joined by professor Miles Corak to discuss how to strengthen our social safety net and, more specifically, what an EI system for the 21st century should look like.Miles is currently an economics professor at The Graduate Center of the City University of New York, and senior scholar at the James M. and Cathleen D. Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality. In 2017, he was the Economist in Residence at Employment and Social Development Canada, and a lead author of Canada's first poverty reduction strategy.You can read more of his work at milescorak.com

I trasferimenti di ricchezza, (lasciti, eredità e donazioni) sono risorse economiche fondamentali per le famiglie e fonte prediletta per l'accumulo di ricchezza.   Nei paesi più ricchi la loro quota rispetto al reddito nazionale è aumentata notevolmente negli ultimi decenni. Questo trend è ancora più evidente in Italia dove da un lato i lasciti ereditari si stanno concentrando sempre più in poche mani, dall'altro le imposte di successione versate sono molto diminuite nell'arco dei decenni.  Ne parliamo con il dott. Salvatore Morelli, autore assieme al dott. Paolo Aicardi della ricerca dal titolo “Wealth Transfers and Net Wealth at Death: Evidence from the Italian Inheritance Tax Records 1995–2016” pubblicato ad ottobre 2020 dal National Bureau of Economic Research.  Il dott. Morelli è Senior Scholar presso lo Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality of New York, ricercatore in scienza delle Finanze presso l'Universita' di Roma Tre, con master in scienze economiche presso la London School of Economics e un dottorato di ricerca presso l'Universita' di Oxford.   Il documento può essere scaricato qui: https://www.dropbox.com/s/26lr2e7ti393e0x/NBER%20WP%2027899.pdf?dl=0

Mike talks with economist Branko Milanovic. Dr. Milanovic is  Visiting Presidential Professor at the Stone Center of Socio-Economic Inequality at the Graduate Center, City University of New York. He was formerly Lead Economist in the World Bank's research department. He's also the author of a number of books, including Capitalism, Alone: The Future of the System That Rules the World ( https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Alone-Future-System-Rules/dp/0674987594/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=capitalism+alone&link_code=qs&qid=1590592531&sourceid=Mozilla-search&sr=8-1 ) , which they discuss on this episode. *Topics covered include:* - the benefits of capitalism - the different forms of capitalism - the liberal meritocratic capitalism of the United States - rising economy inequality since the 1980s - sustainable growth under current models of capitalism - capitalism and corruption in China - the future of capitalism *Branko Milanovic on Twitter* ( https://twitter.com/BrankoMilan ) *Be part of the discussion* on the Politics Guys ‘ BipartisanPolitics ( https://www.reddit.com/r/BipartisanPolitics/ ) ' community on Reddit. *Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible*. If you're interested in supporting the, go to patreon.com/politicsguys ( https://www.patreon.com/politicsguys ) or politicsguys.com/support ( http://www.politicsguys.com/support ). Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-politics-guys/donations Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands Privacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy