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

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":"\"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":"35 4","pages":"462-489"},"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}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"经济毒药":(1996年至2016年德国联邦议会对富人(不)征税》。
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。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 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.
期刊最新文献
Procedural Justice and the Design of Administrative Dispute Resolution Procedures Thoughts on Educational Justice: Can Poor Students be Privileged? Experimental and Longitudinal Investigations of the Causal Relationship Between Belief in a Just World and Subjective Well-Being Correction to: The Organizational Underpinnings of Social Justice Theory Development Correction to: Confusing the Expression of Social Norms and Justice Motivation
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1