Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Economic progressivism

Economic progressivism is a political-economic ideology that promotes active government intervention in free markets to reduce economic inequality, alleviate poverty, and enhance social welfare through policies such as business regulations, progressive taxation, labor protections, and redistributive programs.^[1] Originating in the United States during the Progressive Era (roughly 1890s–1920s), it arose as a response to industrialization's perceived excesses, including monopolies, labor exploitation, and wealth concentration, advocating for expert-led reforms to foster social efficiency and collective progress over individualistic laissez-faire capitalism.^[2] Influential figures like economist Richard T. Ely and institutionalist John R. Commons emphasized a centralized state guided by scientific management principles to harmonize economic interests and curb market failures.^[2] Core principles include stringent regulation of corporations to prevent anticompetitive practices, establishment of social insurance mechanisms like minimum wages and unemployment benefits, and fiscal policies favoring wealth redistribution to promote upward mobility.^[1]^[2] These ideas contributed to landmark achievements such as the antitrust laws under Theodore Roosevelt and the income tax via the 16th Amendment, which aimed to democratize economic power and mitigate cycles of boom and bust.^[2] However, the ideology's expansion of the regulatory state has sparked controversies, with critics arguing that interventions often distort market signals, entrench bureaucratic inefficiencies, and foster dependencies rather than genuine prosperity, as evidenced by persistent inequality despite decades of such policies.^[3] Empirical assessments reveal mixed causal outcomes: while short-term poverty reductions occur through targeted spending, long-term growth effects are debated, with some analyses indicating that heavy regulation correlates with slower innovation and higher compliance costs without proportionally curbing disparities.^[4] In contemporary contexts, economic progressivism influences debates on universal basic income and industrial policy, though its opposition to unfettered markets draws scrutiny for underestimating incentives and over-relying on administrative expertise amid acknowledged institutional biases in policy evaluation.^[5]

Definition and Core Principles

Philosophical Foundations

Economic progressivism philosophically posits that unregulated capitalist markets inherently produce concentrations of economic power and inequality that undermine social welfare, necessitating active government intervention to redistribute opportunities and resources for collective advancement. This view emerged as a critique of classical liberalism's emphasis on laissez-faire individualism, arguing instead for a pragmatic adaptation of institutions to evolving industrial realities. Proponents contended that expert-guided reforms, informed by empirical observation and moral imperatives, could harness national power to fulfill egalitarian ideals without resorting to revolutionary upheaval.^[6]^[7] A foundational text is Herbert Croly's The Promise of American Life (1909), which advocated employing Hamiltonian centralization—strong federal authority—to achieve Jeffersonian ends of widespread prosperity and self-realization. Croly rejected atomistic individualism as insufficient for modern complexities, proposing a "New Nationalism" where the state fosters economic cooperation, regulates monopolies, and ensures a "living wage" to bind citizens in shared national purpose. This philosophy influenced Theodore Roosevelt's 1912 campaign, framing economic policy as a moral duty to realize America's potential through constructive national planning rather than passive liberty.^[8]^[7] John Dewey's pragmatism further underpinned these ideas, viewing economic issues as experimental problems solvable through intelligent democratic action and social intelligence. In works like Liberalism and Social Action (1935), Dewey argued that laissez-faire doctrines ignored interdependent human needs, advocating "social planning" and institutional reconstruction to promote growth, education, and equitable distribution amid industrialization. His instrumentalist approach prioritized adaptive reforms—such as labor protections and public works—over abstract rights, emphasizing that true freedom arises from participatory economic democracy rather than market autonomy alone.^[9]^[10] The Social Gospel movement provided a moral-ethical layer, interpreting Christian teachings as mandates for socioeconomic justice in response to Gilded Age excesses. Theologians like Walter Rauschenbusch, in Christianity and the Social Crisis (1907), fused Protestant ethics with evolutionary progressivism, decrying industrial poverty as sinful and urging state interventions like wage laws and factory regulations to embody kingdom-of-God principles in earthly policy. This religious framing legitimized economic progressivism as a divine imperative for uplift, bridging evangelical reformism with secular expertise during the Progressive Era.^[11]^[12]

Key Economic Tenets

Economic progressivism posits that unregulated markets lead to inefficiencies, monopolistic practices, and excessive inequality, necessitating active government intervention to promote competition, protect workers and consumers, and ensure broader prosperity.^[6]^[13] This view emerged prominently in the late 19th and early 20th centuries amid rapid industrialization, where reformers argued that private enterprise alone failed to address externalities like unsafe working conditions and adulterated goods.^[14] Core tenets emphasize a mixed economy, where public policy corrects market failures through regulation, taxation, and social provisions, rather than laissez-faire approaches.^[6] A foundational tenet is antitrust enforcement to dismantle monopolies and foster competition. Progressives advocated strengthening laws like the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, leading to actions such as the breakup of the Northern Securities Company in 1902 and the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which targeted practices stifling rivalry.^[14]^[13] This reflects the belief that concentrated economic power undermines efficiency and public welfare, requiring federal oversight via bodies like the Federal Trade Commission.^[14] Progressive taxation forms another pillar, enabling wealth redistribution and funding public goods. The Sixteenth Amendment, ratified in 1913, empowered Congress to levy income taxes without apportionment, aiming to curb Gilded Age disparities where a small elite amassed fortunes amid widespread poverty.^[13]^[15] Proponents viewed graduated taxes as a tool to mitigate inequality while supporting infrastructure and education investments essential for long-term growth.^[6] Labor and consumer protections underscore the tenet of safeguarding individuals from market excesses. Reforms included the Pure Food and Drug Act and Meat Inspection Act of 1906, which established standards for product safety and led to the creation of the Food and Drug Administration.^[13]^[14] At the state level, progressives enacted minimum wage laws for women, industrial accident insurance, and child labor restrictions by the 1910s, premised on the idea that government must enforce humane standards where employers prioritize profits.^[15] Public welfare programs represent a commitment to social insurance against economic risks. Early efforts laid groundwork for unemployment aid and pensions, with the Federal Reserve System established in 1913 to stabilize banking and employment.^[14]^[6] These measures embody the principle that full employment and security require government action beyond voluntary charity, countering cycles of depression and destitution observed in the 1890s.^[6] Economic progressivism maintains a foundational commitment to capitalist markets and private ownership of production, distinguishing it from socialism, which advocates for collective or state control over the means of production to eliminate class exploitation. Progressive economic reforms, such as the antitrust prosecutions under the Sherman Act of 1890 and the breakup of Standard Oil in 1911, aimed to restore competitive dynamics within private enterprise rather than nationalize industries, as socialist platforms demanded during the same era. Most Progressive Era economic reformers were thus statists favoring expanded government oversight but explicitly non-Marxist, rejecting socialism's abolition of profit motives in favor of regulated incentives for efficiency and growth.^[2]^[16] In contrast to classical liberalism's emphasis on laissez-faire economics and limited government intervention to protect individual rights and property, economic progressivism views unregulated markets as prone to monopolistic abuses that concentrate wealth and distort democratic processes, warranting proactive state measures like progressive taxation and regulatory agencies. Early 20th-century progressives differentiated their "new liberalism" from classical variants by endorsing such interventions to address industrial-era inequalities, as exemplified by the establishment of the Federal Trade Commission in 1914 to curb unfair business practices without dismantling market freedoms. This reformist stance positions economic progressivism as more activist than classical liberalism's skepticism toward state economic planning, prioritizing causal corrections to market failures over absolute non-interference.^[17]^[18] Economic progressivism shares affinities with social democracy in pursuing redistribution and worker protections within capitalism but diverges in its U.S.-centric focus on antitrust enforcement and administrative efficiency over Europe's emphasis on universal welfare entitlements and decommodified labor markets. While social democrats, as in Scandinavian models post-1945, integrate strong unions and expansive social insurance to buffer market volatility, American progressives have historically prioritized breaking economic concentrations to enhance competition, reflecting a tradition wary of over-reliance on state provisioning that could stifle innovation. These distinctions arise from contextual differences: progressivism's roots in combating Gilded Age trusts versus social democracy's response to interwar depressions, leading to less comprehensive safety nets in the former.^[19]^[20]

Historical Development

Origins in the Progressive Era (United States, 1890s–1920s)

Economic progressivism emerged during the Progressive Era as a response to the economic disruptions of rapid industrialization, including the rise of monopolistic trusts, labor exploitation, and recurrent financial panics that characterized the Gilded Age. Reformers, influenced by muckraking journalism exposing corporate abuses, advocated for federal government intervention to restore competition and mitigate inequalities without fully abandoning capitalist structures. This approach contrasted with laissez-faire policies, emphasizing regulation to address market failures empirically observed in events like the Panic of 1893 and 1907.^[21]^[22] A foundational measure was the Sherman Antitrust Act, signed into law on July 2, 1890, which declared illegal every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade and attempts to monopolize interstate commerce. Initially weakly enforced, the Act gained traction under President Theodore Roosevelt, who from 1901 pursued aggressive "trust-busting" to differentiate between "good" trusts serving public interest and "bad" ones stifling competition; his administration initiated 44 antitrust suits, including the successful dissolution of the Northern Securities Company railroad monopoly in 1904. Roosevelt's Square Deal policies further advanced economic regulation through the Hepburn Act of 1906, empowering the Interstate Commerce Commission to set maximum railroad rates, and consumer protections like the Pure Food and Drug Act and Meat Inspection Act of 1906, which addressed adulteration and unsafe practices in food industries.^[23]^[24]^[25] Under President Woodrow Wilson, economic progressivism evolved through the New Freedom agenda, prioritizing small business competition over regulated consolidation. Key enactments included the Underwood Tariff Act of 1913, which reduced average import duties from 40% to 25% and incorporated the first permanent federal income tax following ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment on February 3, 1913, imposing a 1% rate on incomes over $3,000 for individuals and up to 6% on higher brackets to fund government while curbing regressive tariffs. The Federal Reserve Act, signed December 23, 1913, established a central banking system with 12 regional banks to provide elastic currency, rediscount commercial paper, and prevent banking panics by serving as lender of last resort, addressing the inelastic money supply that exacerbated prior crises.^[26]^[27]^[28] Subsequent Wilson-era laws reinforced these origins, with the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 creating an agency to investigate unfair competitive practices and the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 exempting labor unions and agricultural cooperatives from antitrust liability while prohibiting interlocking directorates and price discrimination. These measures, alongside the establishment of the Department of Labor in 1913, aimed to balance corporate power with worker protections, including limits on child labor and hours, though some faced constitutional challenges. Collectively, they institutionalized federal oversight in economic affairs, laying groundwork for later expansions despite debates over their efficacy in fostering genuine competition versus entrenching bureaucracy.^[29]^[30]

Evolution in the 20th Century

In the 1930s, economic progressivism evolved through the New Deal programs initiated by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression, extending earlier Progressive Era emphases on government intervention to stabilize markets and provide relief. Unemployment peaked at approximately 25% in 1933, prompting reforms such as the Banking Act of 1933 (Glass-Steagall), which separated commercial and investment banking to prevent speculative excesses, and the establishment of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to insure deposits up to $2,500 initially.^[31] These measures built on progressive beliefs in active state roles beyond mere budgeting, rejecting laissez-faire approaches in favor of pragmatic experimentation across trust-busting, industry codes, and planning elements.^[31] The Social Security Act of 1935 marked a pivotal expansion, creating old-age pensions, unemployment insurance, and aid for dependent children, funded initially through payroll taxes and administered federally with state variations. Labor protections advanced via the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act, 1935), which guaranteed collective bargaining rights and reduced union membership barriers, leading to a rise from about 3 million union members in 1933 to 9 million by 1939. Public works programs like the Works Progress Administration employed over 8.5 million workers by 1943 on infrastructure and arts projects, though critics noted incomplete recovery, with unemployment at 14% by 1937 before a recession.^[31] This era solidified the mixed economy model, blending private enterprise with regulatory oversight.^[6] Post-World War II, progressive economics aligned with Keynesian fiscal policies emphasizing demand management for full employment, dominating non-communist nations through the 1970s and fostering middle-class growth via public investments in infrastructure, education, and housing. In the United States, the Employment Act of 1946 committed the federal government to economic stabilization, while the GI Bill of 1944 provided benefits to 7.8 million veterans, boosting homeownership and college enrollment. European welfare states, influenced by similar principles, expanded with universal healthcare and social insurance, as in Britain's National Health Service established in 1948. These adaptations correlated with sustained GDP growth averaging 3.5-4% annually in the U.S. from 1945 to 1973.^[6] The 1960s saw further evolution under President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society, which extended New Deal frameworks to address persistent poverty, affecting 19% of Americans in 1964. Key initiatives included the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, launching community action programs and Head Start for early education, alongside Medicare and Medicaid in 1965, which enrolled 20 million elderly in health coverage by 1966 and expanded eligibility for low-income groups. These policies aimed to enhance economic fairness through targeted redistribution, reducing poverty rates to 11.1% by 1973, though long-term evaluations highlight dependencies and cost escalations exceeding initial projections.^[32] By the late 20th century, progressive economics faced empirical challenges from 1970s stagflation—U.S. inflation hit 13.5% in 1980 amid 7.1% unemployment—prompting shifts toward monetarist critiques by figures like Milton Friedman, who argued excessive fiscal intervention distorted markets. Deregulation accelerated under the Carter administration's airline and trucking reforms in 1978-1980, followed by Reagan-era tax cuts in 1981 reducing top marginal rates from 70% to 50%, reflecting a neoliberal pivot that diminished progressive dominance by prioritizing supply-side incentives over demand management.^[6]

Post-World War II Adaptations and Global Spread

In the United States, economic progressivism post-World War II shifted toward a Keynesian emphasis on aggregate demand management to prevent depressions and achieve full employment, building on New Deal foundations amid rapid economic expansion driven by pent-up consumer demand and industrial reconversion. The Employment Act of 1946 established the Council of Economic Advisers and mandated federal policies for maximum employment, production, and purchasing power, marking a formal commitment to countercyclical fiscal intervention. President Truman's 1949 Fair Deal program sought to extend social security coverage to 10 million more Americans, enact national health insurance, and expand public housing, though Congress approved only modest expansions like increased minimum wages and agricultural supports amid Cold War priorities.^[6] This adaptation reflected progressives' dominance in Congress and the executive branch through the 1960s, prioritizing demand-side stimulus over supply-side deregulation, even as private-sector growth—fueled by wartime savings and technological advances—outpaced government initiatives.^[33] Across Western Europe, wartime destruction and labor mobilization accelerated the spread of progressive economic models through comprehensive welfare states, often under social democratic coalitions that nationalized key industries and institutionalized redistribution to mitigate class conflict and sustain reconstruction. In the United Kingdom, the Labour government's 1945–1951 tenure implemented the 1942 Beveridge Report's blueprint, creating the National Insurance Act 1946 for universal benefits and the National Health Service via the 1946 Act, which began operations on July 5, 1948, covering medical care for 48 million people at no direct cost.^[34] Similar expansions occurred in Scandinavia, where Sweden's Social Democrats entrenched the "people's home" (folkhemmet) model by the 1950s, combining progressive taxation funding universal pensions and child allowances with labor-market policies achieving unemployment rates below 2% through active state coordination.^[35] West Germany's 1948 social market economy under Economics Minister Ludwig Erhard integrated free-market competition with mandatory worker codetermination and social insurance, influencing the "economic miracle" (Wirtschaftswunder) that saw GDP per capita rise from $1,800 in 1950 to $3,500 by 1960.^[36] These systems adapted prewar progressive ideas to postwar realities, leveraging U.S. Marshall Plan aid—totaling $13 billion from 1948–1952—to finance infrastructure while embedding social protections, though initial growth stemmed more from market liberalization than expansive spending.^[37] The global dissemination of these adaptations occurred via international institutions and decolonization, promoting mixed economies with state-led development in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, though outcomes varied due to local governance and external shocks. Bretton Woods agreements of 1944, ratified postwar, created the IMF and World Bank to stabilize currencies and fund reconstruction, reflecting progressive goals of managed globalization over laissez-faire orthodoxy; by 1970, IMF lending had supported welfare-oriented programs in over 100 countries.^[38] In newly independent states, such as India's 1950s Five-Year Plans under Jawaharlal Nehru, progressive policies emphasized import-substituting industrialization and public investment, raising industrial output from 9% of GDP in 1950 to 18% by 1965, albeit with inefficiencies critiqued in later empirical analyses.^[39] European models influenced Commonwealth nations like Australia, where the 1945 Chifley government's full employment white paper mirrored Keynesian commitments, sustaining unemployment under 2% into the 1950s.^[40] However, systemic biases in academic narratives from this era, often from left-leaning institutions, overemphasized state roles while underplaying private enterprise's contributions to the 1945–1973 boom, during which global GDP grew at 4.8% annually.^[36]

Key Policies and Proponents

Core Policy Instruments

Economic progressivism utilizes government intervention as its primary mechanism to address perceived market failures, income disparities, and social inequities through targeted fiscal, regulatory, and monetary policies.^[41] These instruments emphasize redistribution of wealth, business oversight, and public welfare enhancements, distinguishing the approach from laissez-faire economics by prioritizing collective stability over unfettered individual enterprise.^[6] Historical implementations during the Progressive Era in the United States laid foundational examples, including the establishment of federal mechanisms for taxation and competition enforcement.^[14] Progressive taxation serves as a cornerstone for revenue generation and inequality reduction, with the Sixteenth Amendment ratified on February 3, 1913, authorizing a federal income tax that allowed graduated rates on higher earners to finance public expenditures.^[13] This policy instrument enables funding for social programs while aiming to curb wealth concentration, as advocated in progressive frameworks that view taxation as a tool for equitable growth.^[41] Antitrust and business regulation target monopolistic practices to foster competition and protect consumers, exemplified by the Sherman Antitrust Act of July 2, 1890, which prohibited contracts in restraint of trade, and subsequent enforcement under President Theodore Roosevelt, who initiated 42 antitrust lawsuits between 1901 and 1909.^[14] The Clayton Antitrust Act of October 15, 1914, further strengthened these efforts by addressing price discrimination and interlocking directorates.^[13] Additional regulatory tools include the Hepburn Act of 1906, which empowered the Interstate Commerce Commission to set railroad rates, and the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, establishing standards for industry conduct.^[14] Labor protections and standards aim to improve worker conditions and bargaining power, with progressive reforms supporting union organization, eight-hour workdays for federal employees by 1912, and state-level child labor restrictions adopted in 38 states by that year.^[14] These include minimum wage mandates and fair labor practices to counter exploitation, as integral to reducing economic vulnerability.^[41] Social welfare and public investment provisions expand safety nets and infrastructure, evolving from Progressive Era initiatives into broader programs like unemployment insurance under the New Deal, while early examples involved public education and works projects to promote middle-class expansion.^[6] The Federal Reserve Act of December 23, 1913, created a central bank for monetary stability, serving as a key instrument for managing economic cycles.^[14]

Influential Figures and Movements in the United States

In the Progressive Era, Louis D. Brandeis emerged as a pivotal advocate for economic regulation, criticizing corporate concentration in works like Other People's Money and How the Bankers Use It (1914), where he argued that bigness stifled competition and economic efficiency, influencing the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 and Federal Trade Commission.^[42]^[43] Brandeis's philosophy emphasized decentralizing economic power to preserve individual initiative, serving as counsel in antitrust cases such as the 1911 Standard Oil dissolution and advising on banking reforms post-1907 panic.^[44] Robert M. La Follette, as Wisconsin governor from 1901 to 1906, spearheaded state-level economic reforms through the "Wisconsin Idea," establishing the Railroad Commission in 1903 to enforce regulated rates and curb utility monopolies, alongside progressive taxation on railroads that generated $5 million annually by 1905.^[45] In the U.S. Senate from 1906, La Follette pushed federal measures like the 1910 Mann-Elkins Act for interstate commerce oversight and opposed unchecked corporate influence, embodying a movement for direct democracy and corporate accountability that influenced national policy.^[46] Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, initiated in 1933 amid 25% unemployment, implemented economic stabilization via the Emergency Banking Act (March 9, 1933), which reopened solvent banks after a national holiday, and the Glass-Steagall Act (1933), separating commercial and investment banking to mitigate financial risks exposed in the 1929 crash.^[47] Subsequent programs like the National Industrial Recovery Act (1933) aimed to boost wages and prices through industry codes, though invalidated by the Supreme Court in 1935, while the Social Security Act (1935) created unemployment insurance and retirement benefits funded by a 1% payroll tax on wages up to $3,000.^[48] Post-World War II, John Kenneth Galbraith advanced progressive critiques of market outcomes in The Affluent Society (1958), contending that private consumption overshadowed public goods, leading to underinvestment in infrastructure and education; he advocated countervailing power through unions and government to balance corporate dominance, influencing 1960s policies like the Great Society's expansion of federal spending.^[49] Galbraith's institutionalist framework, developed during his roles in the Office of Price Administration (1941-1943) and as ambassador to India (1961-1963), emphasized planning to address demand deficiencies beyond pure market mechanisms.^[50] Key movements included the Wisconsin Progressive movement under La Follette, which integrated university expertise into policy for empirical regulation, and the broader New Deal coalition, blending labor unions, farmers, and urban Democrats to enact 15 major laws by 1938 reshaping federal economic roles from laissez-faire to active intervention.^[45]^[51] These efforts prioritized empirical responses to industrial excesses, such as the 1907 Panic's revelations of banking fragility, over ideological purity.^[6]

International Variants and Examples

The Nordic countries—Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden—exemplify an international variant of economic progressivism through their social democratic model, which integrates market-oriented economies with robust redistributive mechanisms and universal welfare provisions. This framework emerged prominently after World War II, featuring progressive taxation (with top marginal rates often above 50%), centralized wage bargaining via strong unions covering 60-80% of workers, and public funding for comprehensive healthcare, education, and parental leave systems that achieve near-universal coverage.^[52] ^[53] These policies have yielded low income inequality, with average Gini coefficients for disposable income at 0.27 in recent years, versus 0.39 in the United States, driven partly by wage compression and transfers that reduce market income disparities by up to 40%.^[54] ^[55] GDP per capita remains high, averaging USD 80,406 across the region in 2022, exceeding the EU average of USD 57,098, supported by export-led growth in sectors like technology and resources.^[56] However, outcomes reflect not pure interventionism but a hybrid system reliant on competitive markets, low corruption, and pre-existing high-trust societies that enable efficient resource allocation, with public sectors comprising 25-30% of employment.^[57] ^[58] In Canada, economic progressivism has shaped policies emphasizing public goods and redistribution, including the 1966 establishment of universal medicare under Lester B. Pearson's Liberal government and subsequent expansions like the 2016-2019 enhancements to the Canada Pension Plan, which increased contributions and benefits to bolster retirement security for lower earners.^[59] These initiatives, alongside progressive income taxes funding child benefits that lifted over 435,000 children out of poverty by 2019, aim to mitigate market-driven inequalities in a resource-dependent economy.^[60] Yet empirical comparisons reveal constraints: Canada's productivity growth has trailed Australia's by 1-2 percentage points annually since the 1990s, despite similar welfare commitments, attributed to heavier regulatory burdens and slower capital investment.^[61] ^[62] France offers another variant, with its dirigiste tradition of state-led planning and high social spending (over 30% of GDP on welfare transfers as of 2023), including expansive labor protections and universal family allowances that have maintained a Gini coefficient around 0.29 post-redistribution.^[63] This model, rooted in post-1945 reforms under the Fourth Republic, prioritizes worker security through 35-hour workweeks and generous unemployment benefits, but has correlated with structural unemployment rates averaging 8-10% since the 1980s, higher than Nordic peers, amid rigid labor markets that deter hiring.^[58] In Australia, progressive elements persist in means-tested welfare and superannuation mandates, yet the country's 1980s-1990s liberalization of trade and finance—reducing tariffs from 25% to near zero—drove superior GDP growth (averaging 3% annually versus Canada's 2.2% from 2000-2020), suggesting that blending progressivism with market reforms yields stronger outcomes than intervention alone.^[61] ^[64]

Empirical Assessments of Impacts

Claimed Achievements and Supporting Data

Proponents of economic progressivism attribute substantial reductions in elderly poverty to Social Security, established in 1935 under the New Deal. The official U.S. poverty rate for individuals aged 65 and older fell from 28.5 percent in 1966 to 9.4 percent in 2006, with Social Security benefits serving as the primary mechanism by preventing poverty for approximately 22 million recipients annually, including 16.3 million older adults.^[65]^[66] In 2021, absent these benefits, the aged poverty rate would have reached 37.7 percent, compared to the actual supplemental poverty measure rate of around 10.7 percent.^[67]^[68] Broader economic security programs, expanded through progressive-era initiatives like the War on Poverty in the 1960s, are credited with lifting 39 million people—including nearly 9 million children—above the poverty line in 2017 alone.^[69] These transfers reduced the overall poverty rate by 47 percent that year, a marked improvement from just 9 percent in 1970, reflecting increased government spending on means-tested aid and unemployment insurance.^[70] Empirical analyses from institutions like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, drawing on Census Bureau data, argue this demonstrates the efficacy of redistributive policies in mitigating income shortfalls without relying solely on market-driven growth.^[69]^[70] The New Deal's public works and relief programs are cited for accelerating recovery from the Great Depression, with U.S. unemployment declining from about 25 percent in 1933 to 14 percent by 1937 and real GDP growth reaching 8.9 percent in 1935.^[71]^[72] Federal outlays rose from 5.9 percent of 1929 GDP in 1933 to nearly 11 percent by 1939, funding infrastructure projects that employed millions and restored banking stability through reforms like the Glass-Steagall Act.^[73] Advocates, including historians analyzing Federal Reserve and Census data, contend these interventions laid foundations for post-1940s prosperity, though causal attribution remains debated due to concurrent global factors like World War II mobilization.^[74] Progressive taxation is claimed to have financed these expansions while curbing inequality; for instance, top marginal rates above 70 percent from 1944 to 1963 coincided with average annual GDP growth of 4 percent and median family income rising 2.1 percent yearly in real terms.^[75] Studies from progressive think tanks assert this structure enabled public investments in education and health without stifling investment, as evidenced by the U.S. Gini coefficient stabilizing below 0.40 during peak progressivity periods.^[76] However, econometric models calibrated to U.S. data indicate that such systems may yield only mild net growth effects after accounting for behavioral responses like reduced labor supply among high earners.^[77]

Unintended Consequences and Empirical Critiques

Expansive welfare systems, a hallmark of economic progressivism, have empirically fostered dependency and reduced labor force participation through high effective marginal tax rates (EMTRs) created by benefit phase-outs, often termed "welfare cliffs." These cliffs occur when additional earnings trigger abrupt losses in benefits like housing subsidies or food assistance, resulting in EMTRs exceeding 70-100% for some low-income households, effectively penalizing work and trapping individuals in subsidized idleness.^[78]^[79] Longitudinal data from programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) demonstrate state dependence, where prior welfare receipt significantly predicts future reliance, with coefficients indicating a 10-20% higher probability of continued participation per year on benefits.^[80] Policies such as minimum wage increases, aimed at bolstering worker incomes, have unintended disemployment effects, particularly among teenagers and low-skilled laborers. A meta-analysis of U.S. state-level hikes finds elasticities of employment to wages around -0.1 to -0.3 for vulnerable groups, implying that a 10% wage floor rise reduces jobs by 1-3% in affected sectors like retail and hospitality.^[81] The Congressional Budget Office's 2021 assessment of raising the federal minimum to $15 projected 1.3-1.4 million net job losses by 2025, alongside modest poverty reductions overshadowed by these labor market contractions. Progressive taxation and regulatory interventions, intended to curb inequality and externalities, correlate with subdued economic dynamism. Cross-country regressions link higher top marginal income tax rates (above 40%) to 0.2-0.5% lower annual GDP growth, as they diminish incentives for capital accumulation and entrepreneurship; for instance, a one-unit increase in tax progressivity indices reduces per capita GDP growth by approximately 0.19%.^[82]^[83] Empirical syntheses of regulatory impacts reveal net negative effects on total factor productivity, with compliance burdens in heavily regulated industries (e.g., finance, energy) raising entry barriers and stifling firm creation by 10-20% relative to lighter regimes.^[84] Great Society-era expansions, including Medicare and Medicaid, accelerated family structure erosion alongside fiscal strain. Out-of-wedlock birth rates among black Americans rose from 24% in 1965 to over 70% by 2010, aligning with welfare incentives that subsidized single motherhood and reduced marriage rates by 5-10 percentage points in affected demographics, per analyses tracing Moynihan Report predictions.^[85]^[86] These shifts perpetuated poverty persistence, as single-parent households face 3-5 times higher poverty risks than intact families, undermining long-term mobility despite initial poverty rate drops from 19% to 11% in the late 1960s.^[86] Unfunded liabilities from such entitlements now exceed $100 trillion, crowding out private investment and risking intergenerational inequity through sustained deficits averaging 5% of GDP post-2008. Critiques highlight causal mechanisms like moral hazard, where interventions distort price signals and incentives, leading to inefficient resource allocation; for example, rent controls under progressive housing policies reduce housing supply by 10-15% via landlord disincentives, exacerbating shortages.^[87] While some studies from ideologically aligned institutions minimize these effects, neutral econometric evidence from sources like the CBO and Federal Reserve underscores persistent trade-offs between equity goals and growth, with progressive regimes showing 1-2% lower long-run output per capita compared to market-oriented peers.^[88]^[83]

Comparative Economic Outcomes

Countries with higher scores on indices of economic freedom—reflecting limited government intervention, secure property rights, low regulatory burdens, and open markets—consistently outperform those with lower scores in key economic metrics. The Fraser Institute's Economic Freedom of the World report, covering 165 jurisdictions, finds that nations in the highest quartile of economic freedom achieve average per capita incomes exceeding $50,000, compared to under $7,000 in the lowest quartile, alongside annual growth rates over 2% higher and poverty rates below 2% versus above 30%.^[89] These patterns hold across decades, with a one-point increase in the index linked to 1-2% higher long-term GDP growth.^[90] Economic progressivism, emphasizing expansive regulation, redistribution, and state-led investment, aligns more closely with lower-freedom environments, where such policies correlate with diminished investment, innovation, and productivity gains.^[91] In transatlantic comparisons, the United States—having pursued relatively freer-market reforms since the 1980s, including tax cuts and deregulation—has outpaced the European Union in per capita GDP growth. From 1980 to 2023, U.S. GDP per capita rose from approximately $30,000 to $89,600 (in current dollars), a compound annual growth rate of about 1.7%, while the EU's increased from roughly $25,000 to $46,800, lagging by over 0.5 percentage points annually.^[92] ^[93] This divergence accelerated post-2010, with U.S. per capita output expanding at 3.4% annually versus Europe's subdued pace, amid Europe's higher tax burdens (averaging 40% of GDP versus the U.S. 27%) and labor market rigidities characteristic of progressive frameworks.^[94] Freer U.S. policies fostered higher entrepreneurship rates (e.g., 15% of adults starting businesses annually versus Europe's 8%) and technological innovation, contributing to sustained dynamism despite Europe's stronger social safety nets.^[95] Subnational evidence within the U.S. reinforces these trends: states with policies echoing economic progressivism, such as high progressive taxation and stringent regulations (e.g., California, New York), exhibit slower job growth and higher out-migration compared to lower-intervention states (e.g., Texas, Florida). Between 2010 and 2023, Texas added 4.2 million jobs at a 2.1% annual rate, versus California's 1.2 million at 0.8%, correlating with Texas's flatter tax structure and lighter regulations.^[96] Empirical analyses attribute such disparities to progressive policies distorting incentives, reducing capital formation, and elevating costs, though proponents argue short-term equity gains offset long-term efficiency losses—a claim undermined by cross-state poverty persistence in high-intervention areas exceeding 12% versus under 10% elsewhere.^[97] Overall, data prioritize causal links from freer institutions to broader prosperity over interventionist alternatives.^[98]

Theoretical and Philosophical Criticisms

Free-Market and Austrian School Perspectives

Ludwig von Mises, a foundational figure in the Austrian School, characterized interventionism—the hallmark of economic progressivism—as an inherently unstable policy regime that disrupts voluntary market exchanges and generates economic dislocations requiring ever-escalating government controls.^[99] In his 1929 work A Critique of Interventionism, Mises demonstrated through logical analysis that measures like price ceilings or minimum wages alter relative prices and incentives, leading to shortages, surpluses, or malinvestments that cannot be rectified without abandoning intervention or advancing toward full socialism.^[99] He argued this dynamic undermines the price system's role in coordinating scarce resources via individual knowledge and preferences, a core praxeological insight of Austrian economics.^[99] Friedrich Hayek built on Mises's framework by emphasizing the epistemic limitations of central planners in progressive schemes, asserting that no authority can aggregate the dispersed, tacit knowledge held by millions of market participants.^[100] In The Road to Serfdom (1944), Hayek warned that progressive-era advocacy for "planning for freedom"—such as coordinated industrial regulation or redistributive welfare—inevitably concentrates coercive power in the state, eroding spontaneous order and individual liberty as planners suppress dissent to enforce coherence.^[100] This critique targeted the intellectual drift among British Fabians and American New Dealers toward collectivism, positing that partial interventions foster a logic of control that culminates in totalitarianism, as evidenced by interwar Europe's slide from democratic socialism to fascism and communism.^[101] From a broader free-market vantage, economists aligned with Austrian principles, such as Murray Rothbard, extended these arguments to progressive trust-busting and antitrust laws, viewing them as arbitrary state privileges that favor incumbents over dynamic competition.^[99] Rothbard's Man, Economy, and State (1962) posits that such policies violate homesteading principles of property rights, substituting bureaucratic fiat for contractual exchange and stifling entrepreneurial discovery processes essential for wealth creation.^[102] Free-market theorists further contend that progressive redistribution ignores time-preference variations and moral hazard, where coerced transfers reduce productivity incentives; for instance, historical data from U.S. Progressive Era tariffs and regulations correlate with slowed industrial innovation compared to laissez-faire benchmarks in the preceding Gilded Age.^[103] Austrian and free-market philosophers also assail the ethical foundations of progressivism, rejecting its premise of market "failures" as a pretext for overriding consent-based outcomes.^[104] Hayek's concept of catallaxy—the extended order emerging from self-interested trades—contrasts with progressive faith in engineered equity, arguing the former better aligns with human action's evolutionary adaptation, as unsubstantiated calls for "social justice" interventions historically amplify scarcity rather than alleviate it.^[100] This perspective holds that true progress arises not from state directives but from institutional rules safeguarding private property and contract, preventing the rent-seeking and calculation errors endemic to interventionist regimes.^[99]

Incentives, Efficiency, and Causal Mechanisms

Progressive taxation and expansive welfare systems inherent to economic progressivism create marginal tax rates that can exceed 50% when combining income taxes, payroll taxes, and phase-outs of benefits, thereby diminishing incentives for additional labor supply and entrepreneurship. Empirical analyses indicate that such high effective rates reduce hours worked and participation rates, particularly among high earners; for instance, a one-percentage-point increase in marginal tax rates correlates with a 0.2 to 0.5 percentage-point decline in labor supply elasticity, as estimated from U.S. tax reforms between 1946 and 2010.^[105] ^[106] This distortion arises because individuals rationally adjust behavior to avoid the tax wedge, leading to less investment in human capital and innovation, with studies showing that top marginal rates above 70% historically suppressed reported income and economic dynamism without proportionally increasing revenue due to behavioral offsets.^[107] Welfare programs compound these disincentives through "welfare cliffs," where benefits phase out abruptly, imposing effective marginal tax rates over 100% on incremental earnings, which empirically discourages transitions from dependency to employment. Longitudinal data from U.S. reforms, such as the 1996 welfare overhaul, reveal that pre-reform structures reduced female labor force participation by up to 10-15% via implicit taxes on work, with dynamic models confirming substantial negative effects on job search and retention among single mothers and youth.^[108] ^[109] In causal terms, these mechanisms operate by altering relative prices: transfers weaken the opportunity cost of leisure, fostering dependency cycles where recipients forgo skill-building or full-time work, as evidenced by reduced employment transitions in randomized evaluations of benefit expansions.^[110] Regulatory interventions, another pillar of progressive policy, impose compliance costs that erode allocative efficiency by diverting resources from productive uses to bureaucratic navigation, with aggregate estimates placing annual U.S. regulatory burdens at 1-2% of GDP in lost output. Peer-reviewed assessments of sectors like energy and finance show that stringent rules, intended to correct market failures, often amplify deadweight losses through reduced entry and innovation; for example, post-1970s environmental regulations correlated with 0.5-1% annual productivity drags via capital misallocation.^[111] ^[112] Causally, regulations distort information signals—firms underinvest in high-risk ventures due to uncertain liabilities, while avoidance strategies like offshoring or lobbying consume resources equivalent to 20-30% of direct compliance expenditures, perpetuating inefficiency without achieving proportional social gains.^[113] ^[114] These elements interact via feedback loops: diminished incentives from taxes and transfers lower overall growth, amplifying fiscal pressures that necessitate further interventions, which in turn heighten regulatory complexity and evasion. Theoretical models grounded in public choice reveal that progressive policies overlook principal-agent problems, where bureaucrats expand mandates beyond initial intents, leading to cascading inefficiencies; empirical cross-country data supports this, showing nations with heavier progressive interventions experiencing 0.5-1% slower per-capita GDP growth relative to lighter-touch regimes, attributable to entrenched incentive misalignments rather than exogenous factors.^[115]^[116]

Debates on Inequality and Market Failures

Advocates of economic progressivism often contend that excessive income inequality constitutes or exacerbates market failures, such as underconsumption due to insufficient aggregate demand or barriers to opportunity that hinder efficient resource allocation. They argue that disparities in wealth concentration enable monopolistic tendencies or political influence that distort competitive markets, justifying redistributive policies like progressive taxation to restore balance. For example, some analyses posit that inequality reduces overall economic growth by limiting access to education and credit for lower-income groups, potentially creating a feedback loop of inefficiency.^[117] However, this view assumes inequality is primarily a symptom of systemic flaws rather than outcomes of individual choices and productivity differences. Empirical evidence on the relationship between inequality and growth remains contested, with studies yielding mixed causal directions. Early cross-country regressions, such as those by Alesina and Rodrik (1994), suggested a negative correlation, attributing it to reduced investment in human capital among the poor.^[118] In contrast, Barro (2000) identified that higher inequality impedes growth in low-income nations but correlates positively with growth in wealthier ones, where it incentivizes entrepreneurship and capital accumulation.^[119] More recent work, including a 2023 panel analysis of 46 countries, found a negative long-run effect but no short-run impact, robust to various specifications yet challenged by endogeneity concerns like reverse causality from growth to inequality.^[120] Critics, drawing from first-principles of incentives, argue that inequality reflects marginal productivity—higher rewards for innovations that benefit society broadly—and that interventions to equalize outcomes erode the signals driving efficient allocation, potentially stifling the very growth that lifts absolute living standards.^[121] Regarding market failures like externalities or information asymmetries, progressives invoke them to rationalize interventions such as subsidies for public goods or regulations to curb monopolies, positing that unregulated markets underprovide socially optimal levels. Yet, theoretical critiques emphasize that identifying and quantifying these failures requires unattainable centralized knowledge, as dispersed individual preferences and local adaptations outperform top-down fixes. Austrian economists, for instance, reject the notion of pervasive market failures in favor of viewing deviations as temporary discoordinations often worsened by prior interventions, with prices serving as superior coordinators than bureaucratic mandates.^[122] Empirical parallels highlight "government failures," where policies intended to correct markets introduce rent-seeking, regulatory capture, and deadweight losses exceeding original inefficiencies; a 2019 analysis notes that market failure rationales frequently overlook these dynamic costs, leading to overregulation without verifiable net gains.^[123] ^[124] In debates linking inequality to market failures, some claim wealth gaps amplify externalities by fostering instability or underinvestment in merit goods, but evidence indicates no direct causation—inequality often emerges from market successes like technological leaps rather than inherent flaws. For instance, post-crisis data shows financial disruptions increasing inequality via channels like asset deflation, not vice versa, underscoring that interventions risk compounding distortions through moral hazard.^[125] Overall, while market imperfections exist, the presumption of governmental superiority in rectification falters under scrutiny of incentive misalignment and historical precedents of policy-induced scarcities, favoring minimal interventions targeted at verifiable externalities over broad egalitarian mandates.^[126]

Contemporary Manifestations and Debates

21st-Century Policy Proposals (2000s–2020s)

In the United States, economic progressives in the 2010s and 2020s advanced proposals to address income inequality exacerbated by the 2008 financial crisis and technological disruptions, emphasizing government-led redistribution and investment. The Green New Deal, introduced by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in February 2019, outlined a 10-year national mobilization for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, coupled with guarantees of high-wage jobs, universal healthcare, paid family leave, and affordable housing to mitigate economic insecurity and climate risks.^[127] Proponents argued it would generate millions of jobs in clean energy sectors while reducing disparities, though estimates varied on costs exceeding $90 trillion over decades.^[128] Wealth taxation emerged as a core proposal, with Senator Elizabeth Warren's Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, first detailed in 2019 and reintroduced in March 2021 and 2024, imposing a 2% annual levy on net worth exceeding $50 million and 3% above $1 billion.^[129] Warren projected it would raise approximately $3 trillion over 10 years to fund education, infrastructure, and childcare without impacting 99.95% of households, drawing on economic analyses that highlighted wealth concentration among the top 0.1%.^[130] Independent models, such as from the Wharton School, estimated $2.1 trillion in revenue but forecasted a 0.37% long-run GDP reduction due to behavioral responses like reduced investment.^[131] Universal basic income (UBI) gained traction amid automation concerns, exemplified by Andrew Yang's 2020 presidential campaign "Freedom Dividend" offering $1,000 monthly to adults, funded by a 10% value-added tax on goods and services.^[132] Pilot programs, such as Stockton, California's 2018–2021 experiment providing $500 monthly to 125 low-income residents, reported improved employment and financial stability, influencing broader debates though scalability remained contested.^[132] The Congressional Progressive Caucus's 21st Century New Deal for Jobs, proposed around 2010s, advocated federal job guarantees prioritizing underserved communities, integrating social justice with full employment targets.^[133] Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), popularized in works like Stephanie Kelton's 2020 book The Deficit Myth, informed progressive fiscal advocacy by asserting sovereign currency issuers face no inherent budget constraints, enabling deficit-financed programs for full employment and infrastructure without inflation risks below capacity.^[134] This framework underpinned post-2020 stimulus expansions, including the American Rescue Plan's $1.9 trillion in 2021, though critics from institutions like the IMF highlighted risks of unchecked spending eroding fiscal discipline.^[135] These proposals reflected a shift toward expansive state roles, often prioritizing equity over efficiency in response to stagnant median wages—rising only 0.2% annually from 2000 to 2020 after inflation.^[136]

Recent Developments and Electoral Outcomes

In the 2024 United States presidential election held on November 5, Donald Trump secured victory over Kamala Harris, capturing key swing states amid voter prioritization of economic issues such as inflation and cost of living.^[137]^[138] This result followed the Biden administration's implementation of progressive-leaning policies, including the Inflation Reduction Act's $369 billion in climate and energy investments and expanded social spending, which contributed to a reported strong post-pandemic recovery but also elevated federal deficits and inflation peaking at 9.1% in June 2022.^[139]^[140] Analysts have attributed the Democratic loss partly to perceptions of economic mismanagement, despite macroeconomic indicators like low unemployment, highlighting voter focus on real wages and household costs over aggregate growth.^[5] Concurrent state-level ballot initiatives revealed support for specific progressive economic measures, with voters in Alaska, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota approving minimum wage increases to $15 per hour, and Nevada and Missouri enacting paid family leave expansions.^[141] However, federal congressional races showed a decline in competitive progressive challengers, with fewer insurgent candidates emerging compared to prior cycles, suggesting electoral constraints on advancing bolder redistributionist agendas within the Democratic Party.^[142] In the United Kingdom, the Labour Party won a landslide in the July 4, 2024, general election, gaining 412 seats and ending 14 years of Conservative rule, on a platform promising fiscal discipline alongside progressive reforms like a national wealth fund and enhanced worker protections.^[143]^[144] Labour's manifesto committed to strict borrowing rules to stabilize public finances, targeting 1.5% annual GDP growth through planning reforms and green investments, representing a moderated approach from the more expansive spending proposals under previous leadership that had faced electoral backlash.^[145] By early 2025, progressive advocates in the US shifted focus to defending elements of the prior agenda against anticipated rollbacks, including preparations for debates over extending Trump-era tax cuts expiring in 2025, while emphasizing public support for policies like union strengthening and higher taxes on high earners.^[146]^[147] These outcomes underscore a pattern of selective endorsement for progressive economics at subnational levels amid broader electoral shifts toward fiscal caution and growth-oriented critiques of interventionism.

Ongoing Controversies in Policy Implementation

Implementation of expansive fiscal stimulus under progressive economic frameworks, such as the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan in March 2021, has sparked debates over its role in fueling inflation, with empirical analyses attributing a significant portion of the 2021-2022 price surge to excess demand rather than solely supply disruptions.^[148] Critics, including economists from institutions wary of Keynesian overreach, argue that such interventions distort price signals and exacerbate shortages, as evidenced by core PCE inflation reaching 5.5% by mid-2022, prompting Federal Reserve rate hikes that slowed growth without fully reversing the policy-induced imbalances.^[149] Proponents counter that targeted spending preserved employment during the pandemic, though subsequent data revisions have tempered claims of outsized multipliers, highlighting implementation challenges in calibrating scale amid uncertain economic feedbacks.^[150] Minimum wage hikes, a hallmark progressive tool for income redistribution, continue to generate controversy regarding employment effects, particularly in low-skill sectors. In California, the 2024 mandate raising fast-food wages to $20 per hour correlated with up to 6,166 job losses in the industry—a 1.1% decline—per federal Bureau of Labor Statistics data, underscoring risks in concentrated labor markets where automation or hours reductions offset wage gains.^[151] While meta-analyses from labor economists often report negligible disemployment in broader samples, these aggregate findings mask heterogeneous impacts, with monopsonistic markets showing gains but competitive ones exhibiting losses, as confirmed in recent sectoral studies; this variance fuels disputes over uniform policy application without localized tailoring.^[152]^[153] Universal basic income (UBI) pilots, tested in various U.S. locales since the late 2010s, reveal ongoing tensions between short-term relief and long-term viability. Programs in Denver, Texas, and Illinois, evaluated through randomized trials, demonstrated minimal work disincentives but failed to scale due to fiscal burdens—often exceeding $1,000 monthly per recipient—and absence of sustained poverty reduction, with participants reallocating funds to consumption rather than investment, per program audits.^[154] Despite positive mental health correlations in some cohorts, the lack of policy adoption post-pilot stems from evidentiary gaps in macroeconomic modeling and public skepticism over trillion-dollar national costs, as pilots inadvertently highlight trade-offs like reduced labor force participation in subgroups.^[155]^[156] Green New Deal-inspired initiatives face scrutiny for implementation hurdles, including ballooning costs and technological overreach. Estimates for achieving net-zero emissions via mandated transitions peg federal spending at $93 trillion over decades, dwarfing GDP contributions and risking energy shortages, as seen in Europe's 2022-2023 gas crises post-subsidy shifts.^[157] Empirical critiques emphasize selection biases in industrial policy analogs, where government picking of "winners" like subsidized renewables yields lower returns than market-driven innovation, with U.S. Inflation Reduction Act projects in 2023-2025 incurring delays and overruns amid supply chain dependencies.^[158] Debates persist on whether such policies genuinely abate emissions or merely relocate them, given reliance on imported minerals from non-compliant nations, complicating causal claims of global benefit.

References

[1]
Moral reframing increases support for economically progressive ...
Jun 20, 2023 · We define progressive economic policies as governmental interventions on the free market that aim to reduce economic inequality, poverty, or ...Missing: "peer | Show results with:"peer
[2]
[PDF] American Economic Reform in the Progressive Era: Its Foundational ...
Commons (1934, 874) characterized his progressivism this way: “a theory of social progress by means of personality controlled, lib- erated, and expanded by ...Missing: "peer | Show results with:"peer
[3]
The Poverty Of Progressivism - Hoover Institution
Aug 2, 2016 · The initial observation is that virtually every progressive reform undermines free markets and tends to establish monopolies in labor, ...
[4]
The Trouble with Progressive Economics - The Breakthrough Institute
Jun 2, 2011 · Beyond fetishizing spending and demand, progressive economics challenges the neoclassical assumption that markets, left to their own devices, ...
[5]
The rise — and fall? — of the New Progressive Economics - Vox
Oct 14, 2024 · The critics argued that there were far deeper problems with the US economy that required far more sweeping change.
[6]
The Origins and Evolution of Progressive Economics
Mar 14, 2011 · Ruy Teixeira and John Halpin examine several core assumptions that broadly define a progressive approach to economics in terms of theory, values, and practice.
[7]
Herbert D. Croly: Apostle of Progressivism | The Heritage Foundation
Mar 14, 2013 · Herbert David Croly (1869–1930) was one of the most influential public intellectuals of the Progressive movement in the early 20th century.
[8]
The Promise of American Life | Teaching American History
According to Croly, Americans had to embrace a “New Nationalism” by centralizing political and economic power in the form of a regulatory administrative state ...
[9]
John Dewey: Portrait of a Progressive Thinker
Dewey believed that a philosopher should not only reflect but also act, both to improve society and to participate in “the living struggles and issues of his ...
[10]
Economic Issues in John Dewey's Social Philosophy
This article focuses on the pragmatist philosopher John Dewey's conception of economic life in his social philosophy and underlines how his Lectures on ...
[11]
The Social Gospel and the Progressive Era, Divining America ...
The Social Gospel's role in the Progressive Era was amplified by the close connection between the Social Gospel and the emergence of professional social science ...
[12]
[PDF] Religion and Evolution in Progressive Era Political Economy
This essay argues that the progressive economists' merger of evolutionary science and Protestant belief was made possible by the fact that the Social Gospel was ...
[13]
The Progressive Era (Progressive movement) (article) | Khan Academy
Progressive reformers sought to regulate private industry, strengthen protections for workers and consumers, expose corruption in both government and big ...
[14]
Theodore Roosevelt and the Themes of Progressive Reform
Progressives also shared the belief that it was a government responsibility to address social problems and regulate the economy. They transformed American ...
[15]
Overview of the Progressive Era - Digital History
At the state level, Progressives enacted minimum wage laws for women workers, instituted industrial accident insurance, restricted child labor, and improved ...
[16]
Progressivism, socialism, and the role of the state
Progressivism and socialism both found foothold in the late nineteenth century with promises to transform the economy and society via an activist state.
[17]
[PDF] From classical to progressive liberalism: Ideological development ...
Jan 29, 2024 · 2. In the early 20th century, the term “progressive” distinguished “new liberals” from classical liberals, though both “liberal” and “ ...
[18]
[PDF] The Progressive Environmental Gospels versus Classical Liberalism
The Progressive faith of both schools that economic growth alone would produce heaven on earth was weakened by two world wars. (and, in America, the Vietnam War) ...
[19]
The Economics and Politics of Social Democracy: A Reconsideration
May 14, 2020 · Once social democrats chose to work within the rules of capitalism, they had to abandon their radical goal of systemic transformation and commit ...
[20]
Social Democracy Beats Democratic Socialism by Daron Acemoglu
Feb 17, 2020 · Daron Acemoglu thinks the differences between the two progressive frameworks are more important than their similarities.<|control11|><|separator|>
[21]
Overview | Progressive Era to New Era, 1900-1929 | U.S. History ...
The incomes of working people increased along with those of middle class and wealthier Americans. The major growth industry was automobile manufacturing.
[22]
The Progressive Movement and U.S. Foreign Policy, 1890-1920s
These reformers favored such policies as civil service reform, food safety laws, and increased political rights for women and U.S. workers. In the 1890s, the ...
[23]
Sherman Anti-Trust Act Signed into Law - This Month in Business ...
Sep 30, 2025 · The Sherman Anti-Trust Act, signed July 2, 1890, was the first law to prohibit trusts, declaring them illegal in restraint of trade.
[24]
https://www.ushistory.org/us/43b.asp
[25]
Sherman Act - Theodore Roosevelt Center
When Theodore Roosevelt's first administration sought to end business monopolies, it used the Sherman Anti-Trust Act as the tool to do so. Passed after a series ...
[26]
Woodrow Wilson: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center
Wilson focused first on tariff reform, pushing through Congress the Underwood-Simmons Act, which achieved the most significant reductions in rates since the ...
[27]
16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Federal Income Tax (1913)
Sep 13, 2022 · Passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified February 3, 1913, the 16th amendment established Congress's right to impose a Federal income tax.
[28]
Federal Reserve Act
Mar 10, 2017 · The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 established the Federal Reserve System as the central bank of the United States to provide the nation with a safer, more ...
[29]
Progressive Era Politics - President Wilson House
The era witnessed the rapid expansion and overcrowding of cities, inadequate housing, unregulated labor, poor public health, farmer indebtedness and ...<|separator|>
[30]
The Antitrust Laws | Federal Trade Commission
Congress passed the first antitrust law, the Sherman Act, in 1890 as a "comprehensive charter of economic liberty aimed at preserving free and unfettered ...Guide to Antitrust Laws · Mergers · The Enforcers · Dealings with Competitors
[31]
New Dealers - Digital History
The New Dealers were strongly influenced by the Progressive reformers of the early 20th century, who believed that government had not only a right but a duty ...
[32]
How the Great Society Democratized Our Economy
May 21, 2014 · But it also broke new ground in the use of government as an instrument for making the economy more efficient, fairer, and more accountable.Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
[33]
[PDF] The Origins and Evolution of Progressive Economics
Where did their ideas come from and what motivated their beliefs and actions? What were their main goals for society and government? How did their ideas ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[34]
The Welfare State and Inequality: were the UK reforms of the 1940s ...
Feb 1, 2023 · This commentary describes the reforms, sets out what is known about changes in inequality between the pre- and post-war periods and the impact of the reforms.
[35]
Lessons From The European Welfare State - Hoover Institution
May 26, 2016 · Following a surge of market-driven growth after World War II, there was a rise across the continent in income redistribution and regulations ...
[36]
Recovery and reconstruction: Europe after WWII - CEPR
Nov 21, 2019 · The quarter-century that followed is known as the most remarkable period of economic growth and social progress in Europe.
[37]
Marshall Plan (1948) | National Archives
Jun 29, 2022 · On April 3, 1948, President Truman signed the Economic Recovery Act of 1948. It became known as the Marshall Plan, named for Secretary of State George Marshall.
[38]
Great Responsibilities and New Global Power | New Orleans
Oct 23, 2020 · The dominance of the American economy in the global marketplace after World War II brought significant changes to the way Americans lived their ...Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
[39]
Development thought after World War II - Britannica
Economic development after independence became an objective of policy not only because of the humanitarian desire to raise living standards but also because ...
[40]
Post World War II economy - (AP US History) - Fiveable
This era was characterized by increased government spending on infrastructure and defense, the rise of the middle class, and the expansion of the welfare state, ...
[41]
Progressive economic ideology - (AP US Government) - Fiveable
Key proponents of progressive economic ideology include influential figures such as Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who championed policies aimed ...
[42]
The curse of bigness - The National Constitution Center
Jun 3, 2016 · Louis Brandeis, who was confirmed to the Supreme Court exactly 100 years ago this past week, was America's greatest critic of bigness since Thomas Jefferson.
[43]
A New Look at the Far-Reaching Influence of Louis D. Brandeis
In 1912, Brandeis helped influence the antitrust policies that President Wilson introduced. He assisted with developing the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914 and ...
[44]
[PDF] Louis D. Brandeis and the Progressive Tradition
Bran- deis saw large industry as a corrupting force that degraded the laborers responsible for its success and inhibited the economic freedom of the com-.
[45]
Progressivism and the Wisconsin Idea | Wisconsin Historical Society
Discover how Robert "Fighting Bob" La Follette, the Wisconsin Republican Party and the Progressive Movement reformed state and national government.
[46]
"Fighting" Bob La Follette | Wisconsin Historical Society
In Washington, La Follette pushed for the same kinds of reforms he had promoted in Wisconsin. He often spoke at length on the corruption of government and ...
[47]
Franklin D. Roosevelt: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center
In general, the First New Deal looked to stabilize the U.S. financial system, provide relief and jobs to the suffering, and reenergize America's capitalist ...
[48]
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal
The first days of Roosevelt's administration saw the passage of banking reform laws, emergency relief programs, work relief programs, and agricultural programs.Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
[49]
John Kenneth Galbraith: Free Market Fraud - Progressive.org
Apr 12, 2006 · John Kenneth Galbraith, emeritus professor of economics at Harvard University, is the author of “The Affluent Society” and many other works.
[50]
"John Kenneth Galbraith" by Alexander J. Field - Scholar Commons
Galbraith, who advanced and reinterpreted institutionalist and Keynesian traditions in economics while promoting a liberal and progressive political agenda ...
[51]
[PDF] New Deal Economic Policies: FDR and the Congress, 1933-1938
The New Deal initially attacked the depression on several fronts: banking, agriculture, industry, public works, work relief, and regional development. Its ...
[52]
The Nordic Model of Economic Development and Welfare
This research provides an overview of the recent developments in the functioning of the Nordic model of economic development and welfare.
[53]
The 'Nordic model' of capitalism
May 28, 2019 · The Nordics are often characterised as welfare capitalist countries, featuring a combination of free market activity and government intervention.
[54]
Wage Compression Drives Nordic Income Equality | NBER
May 1, 2025 · The Gini coefficient for disposable income in Nordic countries averages 0.27, compared to 0.39 in the US and 0.36 in the UK. In Income Equality ...
[55]
[PDF] Income Equality in The Nordic Countries: Myths, Facts, and Lessons
The Nordic countries have an average Gini coefficient of 0.27, whereas the Gini coefficient is as high as 0.39 in the U.S. and 0.36 in the U.K. In other ...
[56]
Regional perspective on the economy - State of the Nordic Region ...
By 2022, the average EU per capita GDP was USD 57.098, while the corresponding Nordic average was USD 80.406 (OECD, 2024). Both GDP levels and growth rates ...
[57]
The Myth of Scandinavian Socialism | The Heritage Foundation
Apr 20, 2022 · An essential element of the Nordic model is strong unions. About 30 percent of the population works in the public sector. According to Norwegian ...
[58]
The Nordic Model: Pros and Cons - Investopedia
The Nordic model merges free-market capitalism with a generous welfare system. Some view the Nordic model as an attractive alternative to the winner-take-all ...
[59]
The economic policy legacy of the Justin Trudeau Liberal ...
Jan 6, 2025 · The economic policy legacy of the Justin Trudeau Liberal Government, 2015 to 2024 · Expanded the Canada Pension Plan · Increased by 10% the ...
[60]
Our Progress | Liberal Party of Canada
Below you'll see examples of this progress, like making housing more affordable, implementing the Canada Child Benefit and lifting over 435,000 kids out of ...
[61]
Why our friends in Australia are doing so much better than Canada
Mar 26, 2024 · Australia continues to outperform Canada economically, while maintaining its social democracy and generous welfare programs. Read on.
[62]
[PDF] The Canadian-Australian Productivity Gap - Fraser Institute
Sep 11, 2022 · This essay reviews comparative institutional and policy settings in. Canada and Australia to help identify the sources of Canada's ...
[63]
The Nordic model and income equality: Myths, facts, and policy ...
Mar 27, 2025 · The Nordic countries appear to have developed a social and economic model that combines prosperity with equality.
[64]
[PDF] Australia's experience with economic reform - Treasury.gov.au
The paper begins with a broad overview of the main reforms before examining what they achieved for Australia in terms of economic performance and stability.
[65]
Elderly Poverty and Supplemental Security Income
From 1966 through 2006, the official poverty rate for persons 65 or older declined from 28.5 percent to 9.4 percent. In 1966, elderly poverty exceeded that of ...The Merge · The Results: Absolute... · Relative Poverty
[66]
[PDF] Social Security Lifts More People Above the Poverty Line Than Any ...
Jan 21, 2025 · Social Security lifts 22 million people above the poverty line, including 16.3 million older adults and 959,000 children. Without it, 22 ...
[67]
Poverty Among the Population Aged 65 and Older | Congress.gov
Dec 6, 2022 · According to the Census Bureau's analysis, in 2021, 37.7% of the aged population would live in poverty without Social Security benefits, holding ...
[68]
How Many Older Adults Live in Poverty? - KFF
May 21, 2024 · The Supplemental Poverty Measure poverty rate among older adults decreased from 12.8% in 2019 to 9.2% in 2020 and 10.7% in 2021, and then ...
[69]
Economic Security Programs Reduce Overall Poverty, Racial and ...
Jul 1, 2021 · Economic security programs lifted 39 million people above the poverty line in 2017, including nearly 9 million children. Some 83 million people ...
[70]
The Nation Has Made Progress Against Poverty But Policy ...
Jul 28, 2022 · In 1970, economic security programs reduced the number of people in poverty by just 9 percent; by 2017 that figure had jumped to 47 percent. ( ...
[71]
The New Deal Explained: Programs, Policies, and Success
Jul 10, 2024 · 1935: FDR launched the Second New Deal, adding $2 billion to debt. The economy grew 8.9%, and unemployment fell to 20.1%. 1936: The economy grew ...New Deal Policies · First New Deal and Its Programs · Why the New Deal Was a...<|separator|>
[72]
The New Deal and the Great Depression - Explaining History Podcast
Jun 13, 2025 · Estimates vary, but by 1937 unemployment fell from ~25% to around 14%. (Census data show industrial production up and unemployment down by mid- ...
[73]
The Impact of New Deal Spending and Lending During the Great ...
Many new programs involved large increases in funding; real federal outlays increased from 5.9 percent of 1929 real GDP in 1933 to nearly 11 percent by 1939.Missing: achievements | Show results with:achievements
[74]
The New Deal and Recovery, Part 1: The Record | Cato at Liberty Blog
Jun 16, 2020 · “Under the New Deal, the US economy grew at rapid rates, even for an economy in recovery.” (Eric Rauchway, The Money Makers, p. 100.).
[75]
The relationship between taxation and U.S. economic growth
Jun 30, 2021 · An examination of empirical evidence linking U.S. economic growth to facets of taxation and income and wealth inequality.<|separator|>
[76]
Progressive Taxation and Inequality: Experience of Eastern Europe ...
Jul 31, 2023 · It is generally believed that a progressive personal income tax is an effective instrument for enhancing income redistribution and, hence, ...
[77]
[PDF] Economic growth and inequality tradeoffs under progressive taxation
This paper examines the sensitivity of the growth-inequality tradeoff to the progressivity of the tax structure. Using an endogenous growth model calibrated ...
[78]
[PDF] Mitigating Benefits Cliffs for Low-Income Families
Sep 1, 2023 · (2023) finds that a quarter of low- income workers face lifetime effective marginal tax rates (EMTRs)—or the percentage of resources, defined as ...
[79]
[PDF] Understanding benefit cliffs and marginal tax rates
They argue against reducing marginal tax rates, citing research showing that social welfare benefits lift more than 40 million people out of poverty—even after ...
[80]
An Empirical Analysis of Welfare Dependence - jstor
An Empirical Analysis of Welfare Dependence. By MARK W. PLANT ... This notion of state dependence is precisely what is meant by the term "welfare trap.".
[81]
[PDF] Employment effects of minimum wages | IZA World of Labor
Studies that focus on the least-skilled workers find the strongest evidence that minimum wages reduce jobs. Targeted tax credits do a better job of reaching ...
[82]
[PDF] The Effect of Tax Progressivity on Economic Growth Ravi Shah The ...
This study will employ a new, distinct tax progressivity index to determine the effects of tax structure on economic growth. This paper will first address the ...
[83]
The Impact of Individual Income Tax Changes on Economic Growth
Jun 14, 2022 · Other studies on migration tend to find that high-rate progressive taxes have the greatest effect on the location decisions of high earners ...
[84]
[PDF] The Impact of Economic Regulation on Growth: Survey and Synthesis
Most studies point in one direction: they find that economic regulation has negative impacts on growth and productivity. While increasing GDP is not typically ...
[85]
The Black Family: 40 Years of Lies | Daniel Patrick Moynihan's Report
Moynihan argued that the rise in single-mother families was not due to a lack of jobs but rather to a destructive vein in ghetto culture that could be traced ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence
[86]
Family Breakdown and America's Welfare System
Oct 7, 2019 · First, family breakdown fuels poverty. On average, even high school dropouts who are married have a far lower poverty rate than do single ...
[87]
Paved With Unintended Consequences - Hoover Institution
Oct 5, 2023 · For a few centuries now, economists have discussed unintended consequences of government policies. One who systematically noted them was ...
[88]
Growth Effects of Progressive Taxes | Richmond Fed
These models generally imply: (1) that economic growth must fall with the share of government expenditures in output across countries, and (2) that one-time ...Missing: GDP studies
[89]
[PDF] Economic Freedom of the World, 2025 Annual Report - Fraser Institute
The EFW index is designed to measure the degree to which the institutions and policies of countries permit people to make their own economic choices. To achieve.
[90]
The causal relationship between economic freedom and prosperity
Sep 18, 2023 · A 7-point increase in economic freedom corresponds to even larger increases in GDP over five years: nearly 10 to nearly 15 percentage points.
[91]
Economic freedom and growth, income, investment, and inequality ...
Jan 29, 2024 · The published estimates support the view that economic freedom is positively related to growth, income, and investment.
[92]
GDP per capita, current prices - International Monetary Fund (IMF)
U.S. dollars per capita ; Euro area. 50.51 thousand ; European Union. 46.8 thousand ; United States. 89.6 thousand.
[93]
GDP per capita (current US$) - European Union
GDP per capita (current US$) - European Union. Country official statistics, National Statistical Organizations and/or Central Banks; National Accounts data ...
[94]
Comparing Economic Growth between EU and US States - ECIPE
Jul 3, 2023 · The path of divergence continued and became particularly acute from 2010 onwards when US GDP per capita grew at an average of 3.4 percent while ...<|separator|>
[95]
Index of Economic Freedom: About the Index
Economic freedom brings greater prosperity. The Index of Economic Freedom documents the positive relationship between economic freedom and a variety of positive ...
[96]
Index of Economic Freedom: Read the Report
Explore the Index of Economic Freedom to gauge global impacts of liberty and free markets. Discover the powerful link between economic freedom and progress.
[97]
Economic freedom influences economic growth and unemployment
Mar 15, 2023 · This study analyses the effect of four components of economic freedom (business freedom, labour freedom, government integrity, tax burden) on the mean GDP ...
[98]
[PDF] Economic Freedom of the World, 2025 Annual Report - Cato Institute
The EFW index is designed to measure the degree to which the institutions and policies of countries permit people to make their own economic choices. To achieve.
[99]
A Critique of Interventionism - Mises Institute
In Mises's view, interventionism is an inherently unstable policy because it creates new dislocations that would seem to cry out for further interventions, ...
[100]
Hayek's Road to Serfdom at 80: what critics get wrong about the ...
Mar 11, 2024 · “The most powerful critique of socialist planning and the socialist state”, is how Margaret Thatcher described Friedrich von Hayek's book, The Road to Serfdom.
[101]
They Didn't Listen: The Reality of Hayek's Bestseller | Mises Institute
Jul 26, 2023 · Hayek never claimed anything as such. His book was a critique of authoritarian collectivism and the fallacies regarding totalitarianism and ...
[102]
Interventionism: An Economic Analysis - Mises Store
Interventionism provides Mises's analysis of the problems of government interference in business from the Austrian School perspective.
[103]
The Progressive Critique of Free Markets: A Response
Aug 1, 2018 · Early Progressives' rejection of natural rights led them to propose a massive increase in the scope, size, and power of the federal government. ...Missing: causal | Show results with:causal
[104]
Criticism of Austrian Economics
Austrian economics places great stress on free markets. It argues government efforts to control the economy cycle invariably make it worse.
[105]
[PDF] Evidence on the High-Income Laffer Curve from Six Decades of Tax ...
marginal tax rates were severely reducing the incentives of people to work, and that cutting tax rates, by stimulating people to work harder and earn more ...
[106]
Marginal Tax Rates and Economic Opportunity - Tax Foundation
Jun 30, 2022 · High marginal tax rates can directly influence the decisions workers make about accepting a raise, or working more hours, and harm economic ...
[107]
How to set top tax rates without deterring innovation | Stanford ...
Oct 25, 2022 · “There is extensive empirical evidence that innovation responds to tax incentives,” Jones says. If income taxation distorts innovation by ...
[108]
[PDF] Welfare Programs and Labor Supply
The labor supply and other work incentive effects of welfare programs have long been a central concern in economic research.
[109]
New Evidence on Welfare's Disincentive for the Youth Using ...
May 14, 2024 · We provide novel evidence on the employment response of the unmarried childless youths to an increase in welfare payments in Denmark.
[110]
Labor Supply Response to Welfare Programs: A Dynamic Analysis
The findings indicate that welfare programs have substantial effects on virtually every labor market transition examined.
[111]
[PDF] The Effects of Economic Regulation
Contents. 1. Introduction. 2. The effects of government regulation in general: What are we measuring? 3. Alternative frameworks for evaluating the effects ...
[112]
[PDF] Regulation in Theory and Practice: An Overview
During the past twenty-five years the amount of research on the economics of government regulation has increased enormously. The study of public-.
[113]
Reviewing the Deadweight Loss Effects of High Tax Rates
Nov 8, 2019 · This deadweight loss occurs because taxes distort choices and steer resources away from their highest and best use, leaving people worse off ...
[114]
[PDF] tax avoidance and the deadweight loss of the income tax
Traditional income tax analysis underestimates deadweight loss. Tax avoidance through compensation and consumption changes increases it, making it more than ...
[115]
[PDF] Evaluating the Economic Impacts of the U.S. Regulatory System
False positives if deregulatory actions reduce costs but increase the number of restriction words. • Has not yet been used for research in a peer reviewed.
[116]
Why progressive policies always fail - Hoover Institution
At the top of the system, a relentless program of redistributive taxation undermines incentives for long-term investment and growth. Continue reading Richard ...
[117]
Wealth inequality and economic growth: Evidence from the US and ...
The preponderance of the evidence shows that rising income inequality slows economic growth ... Our empirical analysis centers on wealth inequality and economic ...
[118]
Literature review on income inequality and economic growth
Early empirical studies by Alesina and Rodrik [9], Persson and Tabellini [50] and Perotti [49] reported that inequality exerted a negative impact on growth.
[119]
[PDF] INCOME DISTRIBUTION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN ...
Barro (2000) presents empirical evidence that indicates higher inequality to be a hindrance to growth in poor countries and promote growth in richer countries.
[120]
Full article: Income inequality and economic growth: An empirical ...
The results revealed that income inequality has a negative impact on economic growth in the long run, and no effect in the short run. These results are robust ...<|separator|>
[121]
[PDF] A Reassessment of the Relationship Between Inequality and Growth
Results suggest that in the short and medium term, an increase in a country's level of income inequality has a strong positive correlation with subsequent.
[122]
Does Austrian economics deny market failure? - Quora
Nov 18, 2019 · It certainly does not deny market failure. Most Austrians believe that (a) natural economic failures are limited and self-correcting and (b) general economic ...What are some strong arguments for Austrian economics? - QuoraIs inequity considered as market failure? - QuoraMore results from www.quora.com
[123]
How 'Market Failure' Arguments Lead to Misguided Policy
Jan 22, 2019 · “Market failure” is a common justification for new government policies. Proponents of interventions love to point to instances of apparently imperfect markets.Introduction · Wrongly Labeling All... · Ignoring the effects of...
[124]
Market Failure vs. Government Failure - Goodman Institute
The existent of market failure is often taken as an excuse for government intervention to do whatever markets fail to do. In recent years, however ...
[125]
Do financial crises increase income inequality? - ScienceDirect.com
We find strong evidence that currency, banking, inflation and debt crises increase inequality, particularly in the long run.<|control11|><|separator|>
[126]
Is Market Failure a Sufficient Condition for Government Intervention?
Apr 1, 2013 · “Externality problems are market 'failures' only in comparison to the perfectly competitive model's equilibrium. In other words, the 'failure' ...
[127]
Understanding the Green New Deal: A Guide to Policies and Goals
The deal emphasizes environmental and social justice, aiming to overhaul infrastructure, create jobs, and address economic inequality. The Evolution of the ...Ambitions of the Green New... · Addressing Climate Change...
[128]
Strengths and weaknesses of the Green New Deal - Stanford Report
Mar 28, 2019 · Climate costs savings to the world due to reducing U.S. emissions would be $3.3 trillion a year. These savings would continue for 100 years. The ...
[129]
Warren, Jayapal, Boyle Reintroduce Ultra-Millionaire Tax on ...
Mar 19, 2024 · The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, popular, comprehensive legislation that would bring in at least $3 trillion in revenue over 10 years.
[130]
Ultra-Millionaire Tax - Elizabeth Warren for Senate
A two-cent tax on the great fortunes of more than $50 million can bring in nearly $3 trillion to rebuild America's middle class.
[131]
Budgetary and Economic Effects of Senator Elizabeth Warren's ...
Mar 15, 2021 · PWBM projects that the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act of 2021, introduced by Senator Elizabeth Warren, would raise $2.1 trillion over the ...
[132]
The pros and cons of universal basic income | UNC-Chapel Hill
Sep 10, 2025 · It involves around 20,000 people and unconditional cash payments that cover basic needs. It started in 2017 and will last 12 years. There are ...Missing: 2010s 2020s<|separator|>
[133]
21st Century New Deal for Jobs - Congressional Progressive Caucus
The 21st Century New Deal for Jobs combines strong job and wage growth with the fundamental principles of social and racial justice, targeting employment for ...
[134]
Modern Monetary Theory: The Right Compass for Decision-Making
As Kelton (2000) argues, issuers of currency finance their spending by creating money when they spend and cannot do otherwise. When the ECB buys government ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[135]
Rethinking Economics: How Economics Must Change in - IMF eLibrary
Mar 4, 2024 · The mantras of the 2010s—”secular stagnation,” “modern monetary theory,” “stimulus”—which preached that prosperity needed only for the ...
[136]
One and a Half Cheers for Supply-Side Progressivism
Sep 16, 2022 · Between 2000 and 2021, U.S. real growth in GDP per capita averaged just 1.1 percent—less than half the rate seen in the 20th-century postwar ...
[137]
Why Donald Trump won and Kamala Harris lost: An early analysis of ...
Nov 6, 2024 · Brookings Senior Fellow William Galston breaks down the results of the 2024 presidential election and the implications for both parties.
[138]
Economy Most Important Issue to 2024 Presidential Vote
Oct 9, 2024 · The economy ranks as the most important of 22 issues that US registered voters say will influence their choice for president.Missing: progressive | Show results with:progressive
[139]
The Biden Administration Handed Over a Strong Economy
Jan 23, 2025 · Here are five reasons why the U.S. economy was at its best in decades, right before President Trump took office for his second term. Authors ...Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
[140]
The Long-Term Budget Outlook: 2025 to 2055
Mar 27, 2025 · This report presents the Congressional Budget Office's projections of what the federal budget and the economy would look like over the next 30 years.
[141]
Trump Wins While Americans Vote for Progressive Policies
Nov 7, 2024 · On November 5, 2024, American voters sent Donald Trump back to the White House. In 2020, he lost his bid for reelection to Joe Biden, ...
[142]
2024 Post-Election Reflection Series: Decline of Progressive ...
Apr 15, 2025 · The paper relies on interviews with 42 former progressive candidates and causal estimates of progressive challengers' impact on Democratic ...
[143]
General Election 2024 result - Labour majority - TaxScape | Deloitte
Jul 5, 2024 · The Labour Party won an overall majority of seats in the UK General Election held on 4 July 2024, meaning that they will form a government.
[144]
[PDF] Change Labour Party Manifesto 2024
Deliver economic stability with tough spending rules, so we can grow our economy and keep taxes, inflation and mortgages as low as possible. 2. Cut NHS waiting ...
[145]
Election Special: The Labour manifesto explained - IFS
Jun 14, 2024 · Explain why higher economic growth would positively impact government finances? 2. Labour will target an increase in the employment rate from 75 ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[146]
Progressives gear up for 2025 - POLITICO
Oct 15, 2024 · PROGRESSIVES INTO BATTLE: Any agreement over how Washington deals with the temporary portions of the Trump tax cuts could easily be a ...
[147]
Working-Class and College-Educated Voters Want New Progressive ...
Jun 3, 2025 · Working-class and college-educated voters support progressive economic policies such as a higher minimum wage, stronger unions, higher taxes on the rich.Missing: 2020-2025 | Show results with:2020-2025
[148]
The new progressive economics: some constructive criticism
the inflation, the interest costs, the frequent inability to build real ...
[149]
America's 1970s Problems Are Her 2020s Problems - Providence
Sep 12, 2024 · From inflation at home to declining American power abroad, the 2020s are looking a lot like the 1970s.
[150]
Government spending, political dynamics, and economic recovery
Empirical evidence suggests that well-targeted government expenditure can counteract economic downturns by stimulating demand, preserving employment, and ...
[151]
New SEIU-Funded Report Concedes $20 Wage Law Caused Job ...
Feb 26, 2025 · Job losses: The best federal data shows California has lost up to 6,166 (-1.1%) fast food restaurant jobs since the $20 minimum wage law was ...<|separator|>
[152]
Do minimum wage hikes result in job losses? It depends on the ...
Apr 3, 2025 · We found that in areas where a few employers dominate hiring, raising the minimum wage can lead to increased employment. Conversely, in markets ...
[153]
Most minimum wage studies have found little or no job loss
Sep 9, 2024 · A new review that I co-authored with Arindrajit Dube finds that most minimum wage studies find no job losses or only small disemployment effects.Missing: meta | Show results with:meta
[154]
Universal Basic Income Programs Are Guaranteed Failures
Aug 8, 2024 · Two studies have been released recently that actually tried to properly account for the success or failure of UBI programs in Denver, Texas, and Illinois.
[155]
Three reasons universal basic income pilots haven't led to policy ...
Apr 11, 2022 · Challenges in evidence, long-term planning and public understanding mean that universal basic income has become easier said than done.
[156]
Effects of guaranteed basic income interventions on poverty‐related ...
On the other hand, the concept of UBI is also controversial and has been criticized for potentially disincentivizing work and for being extremely costly, to ...
[157]
How Much Will the 'Green New Deal' Cost? - FactCheck.org
Mar 14, 2019 · Numerous Republicans have touted a $93 trillion price tag for the resolution. President Donald Trump has rounded that up to $100 trillion. · Sen.
[158]
When does industrial policy fail and when can it succeed? Case ...
Jul 28, 2025 · Abstract. When does industrial policy succeed and fail in advanced economies? Most approaches to these questions concentrate on policy ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence