Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. We are indebted to a referee for thoughtful and inspiring comments. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractA transfer from a richer individual to a poorer one seems to be the most intuitive and straightforward way of reducing income inequality in a society. However, can such a transfer reduce the welfare of the society? We show that a rich-to-poor transfer can induce a response in the individuals' behaviors which actually exacerbates, rather than reduces, income inequality as measured by the Gini index. We use this result as an input in assessing the social welfare consequence of the transfer. Measuring social welfare by Sen's social welfare function, we show that the transfer reduces social welfare. These two results are possible even for individuals whose utility functions are relatively simple (namely, at most quadratic in all terms) and incorporate a distaste for low relative income. We first present the two results for a population of two individuals. We subsequently provide several generalizations. We show that our argument holds for a population of any size, and that the choice of utility functions which trigger this response is not singular -the results obtain for an open set of the space of admissible utilityfunctions. In addition, we show that a rich-to-poor transfer can exacerbate inequality when we employ Lorenz-domination, and that it can decrease social welfare when we draw on any increasing, Schur-concave welfare function.

We study the emergence of chaotic behavior of Follow-the-Regularized Leader (FoReL) dynamics in games. We focus on the effects of increasing the population size or the scale of costs in congestion games, and generalize recent results on unstable, chaotic behaviors in the Multiplicative Weights Update dynamics [10,11,42] to a much larger class of FoReL dynamics. We establish that, even in simple linear non-atomic congestion games with two parallel links and any fixed learning rate, unless the game is fully symmetric, increasing the population size or the scale of costs causes learning dynamics to become unstable and eventually chaotic, in the sense of Li-Yorke and positive topological entropy. Furthermore, we show the existence of novel non-standard phenomena such as the coexistence of stable Nash equilibria and chaos in the same game. We also observe the simultaneous creation of a chaotic attractor as another chaotic attractor gets destroyed. Lastly, although FoReL dynamics can be strange and non-equilibrating, we prove that the time average still converges to an exact equilibrium for any choice of learning rate and any scale of costs.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. We are indebted to a referee for kind words, intriguing questions, and thoughtful remarks, and to Andrew Foster for advice and guidance. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractAcknowledging individuals' distaste for low relative income renders trade less appealing when trade is viewed as a technology that integrates economies by merging separate social spheres into one. We define a "trembling trade" as a situation in which gains from trade are overtaken by losses of relative income, with the result that global social welfare is reduced. A constructive example reveals that a "trembling trade" can arise even when trade is doubly gainful in that it increases the income of every individual and narrows the income gap between the trading populations.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. We are indebted to a referee for thoughtful and inspiring comments. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractA transfer from a richer individual to a poorer one seems to be the most intuitive and straightforward way of reducing income inequality in a society. However, can such a transfer reduce the welfare of the society? We show that a rich-to-poor transfer can induce a response in the individuals' behaviors which actually exacerbates, rather than reduces, income inequality as measured by the Gini index. We use this result as an input in assessing the social welfare consequence of the transfer. Measuring social welfare by Sen's social welfare function, we show that the transfer reduces social welfare. These two results are possible even for individuals whose utility functions are relatively simple (namely, at most quadratic in all terms) and incorporate a distaste for low relative income. We first present the two results for a population of two individuals. We subsequently provide several generalizations. We show that our argument holds for a population of any size, and that the choice of utility functions which trigger this response is not singular -the results obtain for an open set of the space of admissible utilityfunctions. In addition, we show that a rich-to-poor transfer can exacerbate inequality when we employ Lorenz-domination, and that it can decrease social welfare when we draw on any increasing, Schur-concave welfare function.

We offer an explanation for the inconclusive results of empirical studies into the relationship between the magnitude of the Gini coefficient of income distribution at origin and the intensity of migration. Bearing in mind the substantial literature that identifies relative deprivation as an important determinant of migration behavior, we study the relationship between aggregate or total relative deprivation, TRD, the Gini coefficient, G, and migration. We show that for a given change of incomes, TRD and G can behave differently. We present examples where, in the case of universal increases in incomes, TRD increases while G does not change; G decreases while TRD does not change; and G decreases while TRD increases. We generalize these examples into formal criteria, providing sufficient conditions on the initial and final income vectors under which incongruence between the directions of changes of G and of TRD occur. Our analysis leads us to infer that when the incentive to migrate increases with TRD, then this response can co-exist with no change of G or with a decrease of G.