ZICw2w

Chapter 16 Distribution • 3114%3%2%income share (%), top 0.1%1%0%19251928193119341937194019431946194919521955195819611964196719701973197619791982198519881991199419972000Highest tax bracket Income share, top 0.1%Figure 16.3 • The income share of the top 0.1% of U.S. society (left axis), and thehighest marginal U.S. Tax break (right bracket) between 1913 and 2002.could go toward supplying other nonmarket goods. The governmentcould do this directly or could subsidize the private production of suchgoods. The rent could also be redistributed progressively by financing theabolition of regressive taxes.■ Consequences of Distribution forCommunity and HealthThe existing distribution of wealth is not only a precondition for efficientallocation; it is also a fundamental dimension of justice in society. As such,it affects us more directly than we might at first think. Evidence indicatesthat inequality of income distribution (independently of absolute poverty)has a substantial effect on rates of morbidity and mortality. 8 The relativelypoor have higher incidences of death and sickness than the relatively rich,regardless of the absolute level of income of the relatively poor. The mainreason investigators suggest is the extra stress associated with beingrelatively poor, being at the bottom of a dominance hierarchy. This extrastress is caused by less control over the circumstances of one’s life, greaterrisks of job loss, a lower level of social standing and respect, and more8 See. G. Wilkinson, Mind the Gap, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001.