Question A:

The increasing share of income and wealth among the richest people in a number of advanced countries is giving significantly more political power to the wealthy.

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Question B:

The increasing share of income and wealth among the richest people in a number of advanced countries is having a significantly negative effect on intergenerational social mobility.

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Question C:

The increasing share of income and wealth among the richest people in a number of advanced countries is a major threat to capitalism.

Responses weighted by each expert's confidence

Question A Participant Responses

Participant University Vote Confidence Bio/Vote History
Allen
Franklin Allen
Imperial College London
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Who has political power is a difficult question. Political events such as Brexit and Trump seem to suggest the opposite perhaps.
Antras
Pol Antras
Harvard
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Blanchard
Olivier Blanchard
Peterson Institute
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Bloom
Nicholas Bloom
Stanford
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Not obvious - in the UK and US Brexit and Trump were movements mostly supported by the poor and not the educated, informed or wealthy.
Blundell
Richard William Blundell
University College London
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Bénassy-Quéré
Agnès Bénassy-Quéré
Paris School of Economics
Uncertain
1
Bio/Vote History
Carletti
Elena Carletti
Bocconi
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Danthine
Jean-Pierre Danthine
Paris School of Economics
Uncertain
3
Bio/Vote History
I am more concerned about the political power given big corporations
De Grauwe
Paul De Grauwe
LSE
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Eeckhout
Jan Eeckhout
UPF Barcelona
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Fehr
Ernst Fehr
Universität Zurich
Strongly Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Freixas
Xavier Freixas
Barcelona GSE
Strongly Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Fuchs-Schündeln
Nicola Fuchs-Schündeln
Goethe-Universität Frankfurt
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Galí
Jordi Galí
Barcelona GSE
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Giavazzi
Francesco Giavazzi
Bocconi Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Griffith
Rachel Griffith
University of Manchester
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Guerrieri
Veronica Guerrieri
Chicago Booth Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Guiso
Luigi Guiso
Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Guriev
Sergei Guriev
Sciences Po
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Honohan
Patrick Honohan
Trinity College Dublin
Agree
1
Bio/Vote History
Javorcik
Beata Javorcik
University of Oxford
Strongly Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Krahnen
Jan Pieter Krahnen
Goethe University Frankfurt
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Kőszegi
Botond Kőszegi
Central European University
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
La Ferrara
Eliana La Ferrara
Harvard Kennedy
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Leuz
Christian Leuz
Chicago Booth
Uncertain
4
Bio/Vote History
Some work in economics consistent with the relation but evidence in political science viewed more mixed. See links below.
-see background information here
-see background information here
-see background information here
Mayer
Thierry Mayer
Sciences-Po Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Meghir
Costas Meghir
Yale
Strongly Agree
10
Bio/Vote History
Pagano
Marco Pagano
Università di Napoli Federico II
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Pastor
Lubos Pastor
Chicago Booth
Disagree
6
Bio/Vote History
The premise seems false. Income inequality has been decreasing recently in the U.S., due to faster wage growth for low-income workers.
Persson
Torsten Persson
Stockholm University Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Pissarides
Christopher Pissarides
London School of Economics and Political Science Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Portes
Richard Portes
London Business School
Strongly Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Prendergast
Canice Prendergast
Chicago Booth
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Propper
Carol Propper
Imperial College London Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Rasul
Imran Rasul
University College London
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Reichlin
Lucrezia Reichlin
London Business School
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Reis
Ricardo Reis
London School of Economics
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Repullo
Rafael Repullo
CEMFI
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Rey
Hélène Rey
London Business School Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Schoar
Antoinette Schoar
MIT
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Storesletten
Kjetil Storesletten
University of Minnesota
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Sturm
Daniel Sturm
London School of Economics
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Van Reenen
John Van Reenen
LSE
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Problem is much bigger in US (and to lesser extent, Uk) than elsewhere
Vickers
John Vickers
Oxford
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Voth
Hans-Joachim Voth
University of Zurich
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Whelan
Karl Whelan
University College Dublin
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
This is particularly true in countries that do not have state-funded political expenses and so donations from rich people are important.
Wyplosz
Charles Wyplosz
The Graduate Institute Geneva
Strongly Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Money and political influence are sibblings
Zilibotti
Fabrizio Zilibotti
Yale University Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History

Question B Participant Responses

Participant University Vote Confidence Bio/Vote History
Allen
Franklin Allen
Imperial College London
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
There seems to be some evidence of this in some places. The wealthy are able to send their children to private school, tutor them, and so on
Antras
Pol Antras
Harvard
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Blanchard
Olivier Blanchard
Peterson Institute
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
in the previous question, we were talking about the 0.1% richest. In this one, more like the 10% richest.
Bloom
Nicholas Bloom
Stanford
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Blundell
Richard William Blundell
University College London
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Bénassy-Quéré
Agnès Bénassy-Quéré
Paris School of Economics
Strongly Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Carletti
Elena Carletti
Bocconi
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Danthine
Jean-Pierre Danthine
Paris School of Economics
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
De Grauwe
Paul De Grauwe
LSE
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Eeckhout
Jan Eeckhout
UPF Barcelona
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Fehr
Ernst Fehr
Universität Zurich
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Freixas
Xavier Freixas
Barcelona GSE
Strongly Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Fuchs-Schündeln
Nicola Fuchs-Schündeln
Goethe-Universität Frankfurt
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Galí
Jordi Galí
Barcelona GSE
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Giavazzi
Francesco Giavazzi
Bocconi Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Griffith
Rachel Griffith
University of Manchester
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Guerrieri
Veronica Guerrieri
Chicago Booth Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Guiso
Luigi Guiso
Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance
Strongly Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
this is simply mechanical
Guriev
Sergei Guriev
Sciences Po
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Honohan
Patrick Honohan
Trinity College Dublin
Agree
1
Bio/Vote History
This is less clear, but likely if the supe-rich attach lower importance to education and economic progress of low income persons.
Javorcik
Beata Javorcik
University of Oxford
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Krahnen
Jan Pieter Krahnen
Goethe University Frankfurt
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
...because access to education and networks are often wealth-dependent
Kőszegi
Botond Kőszegi
Central European University
Strongly Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
La Ferrara
Eliana La Ferrara
Harvard Kennedy
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Leuz
Christian Leuz
Chicago Booth
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
This is Kruger's Great Gatsby Curve. See his CAP speech for some references in support.
-see background information here
Mayer
Thierry Mayer
Sciences-Po Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Meghir
Costas Meghir
Yale
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Pagano
Marco Pagano
Università di Napoli Federico II
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Pastor
Lubos Pastor
Chicago Booth
Disagree
6
Bio/Vote History
The premise seems false. Income inequality has been decreasing recently in the U.S., due to faster wage growth for low-income workers.
Persson
Torsten Persson
Stockholm University Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Pissarides
Christopher Pissarides
London School of Economics and Political Science Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Portes
Richard Portes
London Business School
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Prendergast
Canice Prendergast
Chicago Booth
Uncertain
6
Bio/Vote History
Propper
Carol Propper
Imperial College London Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Rasul
Imran Rasul
University College London
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Reichlin
Lucrezia Reichlin
London Business School
Strongly Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Reis
Ricardo Reis
London School of Economics
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Repullo
Rafael Repullo
CEMFI
Uncertain
4
Bio/Vote History
Rey
Hélène Rey
London Business School Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Schoar
Antoinette Schoar
MIT
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Storesletten
Kjetil Storesletten
University of Minnesota
Disagree
6
Bio/Vote History
Sturm
Daniel Sturm
London School of Economics
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Causation likely run both ways here.
Van Reenen
John Van Reenen
LSE
Disagree
6
Bio/Vote History
Chettys work suggests that this isn’t the case. It is certainly a risk though
Vickers
John Vickers
Oxford
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Voth
Hans-Joachim Voth
University of Zurich
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Whelan
Karl Whelan
University College Dublin
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
This seems likely to be correct but I'm not aware of research demonstrating it.
Wyplosz
Charles Wyplosz
The Graduate Institute Geneva
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Zilibotti
Fabrizio Zilibotti
Yale University Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History

Question C Participant Responses

Participant University Vote Confidence Bio/Vote History
Allen
Franklin Allen
Imperial College London
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
I think it's difficult to say whether this promotes or retards competition.
Antras
Pol Antras
Harvard
Uncertain
7
Bio/Vote History
Blanchard
Olivier Blanchard
Peterson Institute
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Bloom
Nicholas Bloom
Stanford
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Trump and Brexit are prime examples - both act to damage free markets and capitalism with damaging populist policies.
Blundell
Richard William Blundell
University College London
Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Bénassy-Quéré
Agnès Bénassy-Quéré
Paris School of Economics
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Carletti
Elena Carletti
Bocconi
Uncertain
2
Bio/Vote History
Danthine
Jean-Pierre Danthine
Paris School of Economics
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
De Grauwe
Paul De Grauwe
LSE
Strongly Agree
8
Bio/Vote History
Eeckhout
Jan Eeckhout
UPF Barcelona
Strongly Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Fehr
Ernst Fehr
Universität Zurich
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Freixas
Xavier Freixas
Barcelona GSE
Agree
1
Bio/Vote History
Fuchs-Schündeln
Nicola Fuchs-Schündeln
Goethe-Universität Frankfurt
Uncertain
4
Bio/Vote History
Galí
Jordi Galí
Barcelona GSE
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Giavazzi
Francesco Giavazzi
Bocconi Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Griffith
Rachel Griffith
University of Manchester
Agree
3
Bio/Vote History
Guerrieri
Veronica Guerrieri
Chicago Booth Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Guiso
Luigi Guiso
Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance
Uncertain
6
Bio/Vote History
Guriev
Sergei Guriev
Sciences Po
Strongly Disagree
8
Bio/Vote History
Honohan
Patrick Honohan
Trinity College Dublin
Uncertain
1
Bio/Vote History
A threat to its effectiveness; but probably not to the survival of capitalism
Javorcik
Beata Javorcik
University of Oxford
Agree
7
Bio/Vote History
Krahnen
Jan Pieter Krahnen
Goethe University Frankfurt
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
...because unequal access to society's resources may pave the way for populists and extremist parties.
Kőszegi
Botond Kőszegi
Central European University
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
La Ferrara
Eliana La Ferrara
Harvard Kennedy
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Leuz
Christian Leuz
Chicago Booth
Agree
2
Bio/Vote History
Major is a bit strong. It is not wealth per se, but the sense of fairness, so how the rich obtained it. Inequality can create ripple effects
-see background information here
Mayer
Thierry Mayer
Sciences-Po Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Meghir
Costas Meghir
Yale
Agree
9
Bio/Vote History
Pagano
Marco Pagano
Università di Napoli Federico II
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Pastor
Lubos Pastor
Chicago Booth
Disagree
6
Bio/Vote History
The premise seems false. Income inequality has been decreasing recently in the U.S., due to faster wage growth for low-income workers.
Persson
Torsten Persson
Stockholm University Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Pissarides
Christopher Pissarides
London School of Economics and Political Science Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Portes
Richard Portes
London Business School
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Prendergast
Canice Prendergast
Chicago Booth
Uncertain
7
Bio/Vote History
Propper
Carol Propper
Imperial College London Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Rasul
Imran Rasul
University College London
Agree
6
Bio/Vote History
Reichlin
Lucrezia Reichlin
London Business School
Uncertain
4
Bio/Vote History
Reis
Ricardo Reis
London School of Economics
Uncertain
1
Bio/Vote History
Repullo
Rafael Repullo
CEMFI
Agree
4
Bio/Vote History
Rey
Hélène Rey
London Business School Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History
Schoar
Antoinette Schoar
MIT
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Storesletten
Kjetil Storesletten
University of Minnesota
Uncertain
6
Bio/Vote History
Sturm
Daniel Sturm
London School of Economics
Uncertain
3
Bio/Vote History
Van Reenen
John Van Reenen
LSE
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
It is a threat, but not as major as the general slowdown in productivity growth. And climate change, pandemics and defense are bigger probs
Vickers
John Vickers
Oxford
Uncertain
3
Bio/Vote History
Voth
Hans-Joachim Voth
University of Zurich
Uncertain
5
Bio/Vote History
Whelan
Karl Whelan
University College Dublin
Strongly Disagree
5
Bio/Vote History
I'm not sure anything is really a major threat to capitalism. To paraphrase Churchill, it's the worst system apart from all the others.
Wyplosz
Charles Wyplosz
The Graduate Institute Geneva
Agree
5
Bio/Vote History
Zilibotti
Fabrizio Zilibotti
Yale University Did Not Answer Bio/Vote History