German Male Income Volatility 1984 to 2008: Trends in Permanent and Transitory Income Components and the Role of the Welfare State

Bartels, Charlotte; Bönke, Timm

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1699725

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(). The pattern in Germany of stable risk in net incomes as market income risk has risen is also broadly comparable to other findings, for example Bartels and Bönke () using the Moffitt and Gottschalk () approach.…”

Section: Results For Canada Germany Great Britain and The Ussupporting

confidence: 88%

Income Risk in 30 Countries

Nichols

Rehm

2014

Review of Income and Wealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a measure of income risk that decomposes income dynamics into long-run inequality, volatility (inter-temporal variability around individual-specific growth rates), and mobility risk (variation in individual-specific growth rates). We measure these income risk components in panel data from 30 rich democracies. We use this comprehensive collection of panel data to analyze long-terms trends in income dynamics for four countries (Canada, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States), and cross-national patterns of income dynamics for an additional 26 countries. We find that tax and transfer systems lower income risk, but less so in the United States than in other comparable countries. We find that higher incomes tend to grow faster and to be more volatile than lower incomes. We find that the United States is exceptional in its level of, and increase in, each type of income risk. Various other measures of mobility are positively correlated with mobility risk. JEL Codes: D31, H24S98 1 Growth in incomes relative to average growth is called "relative mobility," so both volatility and mobility may result in reranking of individuals within the income distribution in any one period or over time. 2 For example, that the model applies to all individuals (see, e.g.

show abstract

Section: Results For Canada Germany Great Britain and The Ussupporting

confidence: 88%

Income Risk in 30 Countries

Nichols

Rehm

2014

Review of Income and Wealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bartels and Bonke (2010) capture, in 5-year windows starting in 1984, the earnings volatility of prime-age men (aged 20-59) who live in the western states of Germany, using an alternative formulation of Gottschalk and Moffitt (1994) methods. Bartels and Bonke (2010) capture, in 5-year windows starting in 1984, the earnings volatility of prime-age men (aged 20-59) who live in the western states of Germany, using an alternative formulation of Gottschalk and Moffitt (1994) methods.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…11. Bartels and Bonke (2010) capture, in 5-year windows starting in 1984, the earnings volatility of prime-age men (aged 20-59) who live in the western states of Germany, using an alternative formulation of Gottschalk and Moffitt (1994) methods. They also look at the household size-adjusted disposable income of this subsample of the population.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Consolidating the Evidence on Income Mobility in the Western States of Germany and the United States From 1984 to 2006

Bayaz‐Öztürk¹,

Burkhauser²,

Couch³

2013

Economic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cross-national intragenerational literature has often analyzed income mobility within short time periods over which mobility might reasonably be thought of as invariant. Here, we argue that a great social transformation-German reunification-abruptly and permanently altered mobility. Using standard measures (with panel data for the western states of Germany and the United States) over the period 1984-2006, we find the conventional result that income mobility is greater in Germany. But when we cut the data into 5-year windows, we find that income mobility declines significantly over the years immediately following reunification in Germany but not in the United States, using both measures. (JEL J1, J6)

show abstract

“…The larger reduction of intra-individual inequality suggests that the German welfare state possibly puts more emphasis on insurance than on redistribution. Indeed, Bartels and Bönke (2010) find that insurance against transitory labor market risks outweighs the reduction of perma-nent earnings differences in Germany. When considering only the adult population, as presented in Figure 4, income variation within a life-cycle becomes more pronounced than income differences between people.…”

Section: Redistribution and Insurancementioning

confidence: 99%

Redistribution and Insurance in the German Welfare State

Bartels¹

2012

SCHM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. Terms of use: Documents in SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research at DIW BerlinThis series presents research findings based either directly on data from the German SocioEconomic Panel Study (SOEP) or using SOEP data as part of an internationally comparable data set (e.g. CNEF, ECHP, LIS, LWS, CHER/PACO). SOEP is a truly multidisciplinary household panel study covering a wide range of social and behavioral sciences: economics, sociology, psychology, survey methodology, econometrics and applied statistics, educational science, political science, public health, behavioral genetics, demography, geography, and sport science.The decision to publish a submission in SOEPpapers is made by a board of editors chosen by the DIW Berlin to represent the wide range of disciplines covered by SOEP. There is no external referee process and papers are either accepted or rejected without revision. Papers appear in this series as works in progress and may also appear elsewhere. They often represent preliminary studies and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be requested from the author directly.Any opinions expressed in this series are those of the author(s) and not those of DIW Berlin.Research disseminated by DIW Berlin may include views on public policy issues, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. Abstract. Welfare states redistribute both between individuals reducing annual inequality and over the life-cycle insuring against income risks. But studies measuring redistribution often focus only on a one-year period. Using German SOEP data from 1984 to 2009, long-term inequality over a 20-year period is computed and then decomposed into an inter-and intra-individual component. Results show that annual inequality is higher than long-term inequality, but redistribution is also larger annually. In the long-term, the German welfare state clearly gives priority to insurance over redistribution. This gets even more pronounced at later stages of the life-cycle through the payment of social security pensions.

show abstract

German Male Income Volatility 1984 to 2008: Trends in Permanent and Transitory Income Components and the Role of the Welfare State

Cited by 7 publications

References 28 publications

Income Risk in 30 Countries

Income Risk in 30 Countries

Consolidating the Evidence on Income Mobility in the Western States of Germany and the United States From 1984 to 2006

Redistribution and Insurance in the German Welfare State

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About