{"title":"衡量收入不平等的方法存在偏见或误解","authors":"I. Kitov","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2536325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Considering various measures of personal income and the evolution of the household size distribution we reveal major quantitative inconsistencies in the definition of household inequality. The changing composition of households in the U.S. is the only effect causing the observed increase in Gini coefficient since 1967. When corrected for the actual decrease in the average household size the relevant Gini returns to that of personal incomes. The latter has been hovering in a very narrow range between 0.50 and 0.51 since 1974.","PeriodicalId":196465,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measures of Income Inequality are Biased or Misinterpreted\",\"authors\":\"I. Kitov\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2536325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Considering various measures of personal income and the evolution of the household size distribution we reveal major quantitative inconsistencies in the definition of household inequality. The changing composition of households in the U.S. is the only effect causing the observed increase in Gini coefficient since 1967. When corrected for the actual decrease in the average household size the relevant Gini returns to that of personal incomes. The latter has been hovering in a very narrow range between 0.50 and 0.51 since 1974.\",\"PeriodicalId\":196465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2536325\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2536325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measures of Income Inequality are Biased or Misinterpreted
Considering various measures of personal income and the evolution of the household size distribution we reveal major quantitative inconsistencies in the definition of household inequality. The changing composition of households in the U.S. is the only effect causing the observed increase in Gini coefficient since 1967. When corrected for the actual decrease in the average household size the relevant Gini returns to that of personal incomes. The latter has been hovering in a very narrow range between 0.50 and 0.51 since 1974.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
