"经济毒药":(1996年至2016年德国联邦议会对富人(不)征税》。

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Social Justice Research Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-01-29 DOI:10.1007/s11211-021-00383-y
Till Hilmar, Patrick Sachweh
{"title":"\"经济毒药\":(1996年至2016年德国联邦议会对富人(不)征税》。","authors":"Till Hilmar, Patrick Sachweh","doi":"10.1007/s11211-021-00383-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The concentration of wealth is a key component of the rise in economic inequality at the beginning of the twenty-first century. While the abolition of taxes on private wealth during the 1990s and 2000s is recognized as an important institutional driver behind this development, comparatively little is known about the justification of tax cuts for the wealthy in advanced democracies. This paper investigates how the abolishment of the personal net wealth tax in Germany, a country with high levels of wealth inequality, has been debated and justified in parliament over a period of 20 years. Using a mixed methods approach that combines computational social science methods and a qualitative analysis, we examine how Germany's two major parties, the Christian Democrats (CDU) and the Social Democrats (SPD), have variously construed the meaning and purpose of the wealth tax and justified their support for or opposition to it. While the Social Democrats debate the wealth tax primarily from a social justice perspective, the Christian Democrats rely on an efficiency frame that invokes biological metaphors, enabling them to narrate the wealth tax as a threat to the social body. Paradoxically, then, by arguing that the tax is \"poison to the economy\", conservative discourse succeeds in linking opposition to the wealth tax to a principle of social unity. On these grounds, we suggest that future research should scrutinize how the interrelation between political discourse and institutional architectures has facilitated the rise of wealth inequality in recent decades.</p>","PeriodicalId":47602,"journal":{"name":"Social Justice Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799970/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Poison to the Economy\\\": (Un-)Taxing the Wealthy in the German Federal Parliament from 1996 to 2016.\",\"authors\":\"Till Hilmar, Patrick Sachweh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11211-021-00383-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The concentration of wealth is a key component of the rise in economic inequality at the beginning of the twenty-first century. While the abolition of taxes on private wealth during the 1990s and 2000s is recognized as an important institutional driver behind this development, comparatively little is known about the justification of tax cuts for the wealthy in advanced democracies. This paper investigates how the abolishment of the personal net wealth tax in Germany, a country with high levels of wealth inequality, has been debated and justified in parliament over a period of 20 years. Using a mixed methods approach that combines computational social science methods and a qualitative analysis, we examine how Germany's two major parties, the Christian Democrats (CDU) and the Social Democrats (SPD), have variously construed the meaning and purpose of the wealth tax and justified their support for or opposition to it. While the Social Democrats debate the wealth tax primarily from a social justice perspective, the Christian Democrats rely on an efficiency frame that invokes biological metaphors, enabling them to narrate the wealth tax as a threat to the social body. Paradoxically, then, by arguing that the tax is \\\"poison to the economy\\\", conservative discourse succeeds in linking opposition to the wealth tax to a principle of social unity. On these grounds, we suggest that future research should scrutinize how the interrelation between political discourse and institutional architectures has facilitated the rise of wealth inequality in recent decades.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Justice Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8799970/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Justice Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-021-00383-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Justice Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-021-00383-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

财富集中是 21 世纪初经济不平等加剧的一个关键因素。虽然 20 世纪 90 年代和 2000 年代取消私人财富税被认为是这一发展背后的重要制度驱动力,但人们对发达民主国家为富人减税的理由却知之甚少。德国是一个财富高度不平等的国家,本文研究了德国议会在 20 年间是如何就取消个人净财富税进行辩论和论证的。我们采用计算社会科学方法和定性分析相结合的混合方法,研究了德国两大政党--基督教民主联盟(CDU)和社会民主党(SPD)--是如何对财富税的含义和目的进行不同的解释,并证明其支持或反对财富税的合理性。社会民主党主要从社会公正的角度来讨论财富税,而基督教民主党则以效率为框架,引用生物隐喻,将财富税描述为对社会身体的威胁。自相矛盾的是,保守派通过论证财富税是 "经济的毒药",成功地将反对财富税与社会团结的原则联系起来。有鉴于此,我们建议未来的研究应仔细研究政治话语与制度架构之间的相互关系是如何在近几十年中促进了财富不平等的加剧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

"Poison to the Economy": (Un-)Taxing the Wealthy in the German Federal Parliament from 1996 to 2016.

"Poison to the Economy": (Un-)Taxing the Wealthy in the German Federal Parliament from 1996 to 2016.

"Poison to the Economy": (Un-)Taxing the Wealthy in the German Federal Parliament from 1996 to 2016.

"Poison to the Economy": (Un-)Taxing the Wealthy in the German Federal Parliament from 1996 to 2016.

The concentration of wealth is a key component of the rise in economic inequality at the beginning of the twenty-first century. While the abolition of taxes on private wealth during the 1990s and 2000s is recognized as an important institutional driver behind this development, comparatively little is known about the justification of tax cuts for the wealthy in advanced democracies. This paper investigates how the abolishment of the personal net wealth tax in Germany, a country with high levels of wealth inequality, has been debated and justified in parliament over a period of 20 years. Using a mixed methods approach that combines computational social science methods and a qualitative analysis, we examine how Germany's two major parties, the Christian Democrats (CDU) and the Social Democrats (SPD), have variously construed the meaning and purpose of the wealth tax and justified their support for or opposition to it. While the Social Democrats debate the wealth tax primarily from a social justice perspective, the Christian Democrats rely on an efficiency frame that invokes biological metaphors, enabling them to narrate the wealth tax as a threat to the social body. Paradoxically, then, by arguing that the tax is "poison to the economy", conservative discourse succeeds in linking opposition to the wealth tax to a principle of social unity. On these grounds, we suggest that future research should scrutinize how the interrelation between political discourse and institutional architectures has facilitated the rise of wealth inequality in recent decades.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
4.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Social Justice Research, is an international multidisciplinary forum for the publication of original papers that have broad implications for social scientists investigating the origins, structures, and consequences of justice in human affairs. The journal encompasses the justice-related work (using traditional and novel approaches) of all social scientists-psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, economists, policy scientists, political scientists, legal researchers, management scientists, and others. Its multidisciplinary approach furthers the integration of the various social science perspectives. In addition to original research papers - theoretical, empirical, and methodological - the journal also publishes book reviews and, from time to time, special thematic issues.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信