No Access

THE ORIGINS OF EXTREME WEALTH INEQUALITY IN THE TALENT VERSUS LUCK MODEL

Université Paris-Saclay, CentraleSupélec, Laboratoire de Mathematiques et Informatique, pour la Complexite et les Systemes, 9 Rue Joliot-Curie, 91190 Gif-Sur-Yvette, France

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

ALESSANDRO PLUCHINO

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9368-5800

Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Catania, Piazza Università 2, 95131 Catania, Italy

INFN Sezione di Catania, Via Santa Sofia 64, 95123 Catania, Italy

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

ALESSIO EMANUELE BIONDO

Department of Economics and Business, University of Catania, Corso Italia 55, 95129 Catania, Italy

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

, and

ANDREA RAPISARDA

Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Catania, Piazza Università 2, 95131 Catania, Italy

INFN Sezione di Catania, Via Santa Sofia 64, 95123 Catania, Italy

Complexity Science Hub Vienna, Josefstädter Str. 39, 1080 Wien, Austria

E-mail Address: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525920500046Cited by:8 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

While wealth distribution in the world is highly skewed and heavy-tailed, human talent — as the majority of individual features — is normally distributed. In a recent computational study by Pluchino et al. [Talent vs luck: The role of randomness in success and failure, Adv. Complex Syst. 21(03–04) (2018) 1850014], it has been shown that the combined effects of both random external factors (lucky and unlucky events) and multiplicative dynamics in capital accumulation are able to clarify this apparent contradiction. We introduce here a simplified version (STvL) of the original Talent versus Luck (TvL) model, where only lucky events are present, and verify that its dynamical rules lead to the same very large wealth inequality. We also derive some analytical approximations aimed to capture the mechanism responsible for the creation of such wealth inequality from a Gaussian-distributed talent. Under these approximations, our analysis is able to reproduce quite well the results of the numerical simulations of the simplified model in special cases. On the other hand, it also shows that the complexity of the model lies in the fact that lucky events are transformed into an increase of capital with heterogeneous rates, which yields a nontrivial generalization of the role of multiplicative processes in generating wealth inequality, whose fully generic case is still not amenable to analytical computations.

Keywords:

References

1. Hardoon, D., An Economy for the 99% (Oxfam GB, Oxford, 2017). Google Scholar
2. Pareto, V., Cours d’Economique Politique, Vol. 2 (F. Rouge, Lausanne, 1897). Google Scholar
3. Bouchaud, J. P. and Mézard, M., Wealth condensation in a simple model of economy, Physica A 282(3–4) (2000) 536–545. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. Garlaschelli, D. and Loffredo, M. I., Effects of network topology on wealth distributions, J. Phys. A, Math. Theor. 41(22) (2008) 224018. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. Fiaschi, D. and Marsili, M., Economic interactions and the distribution of wealth, in Econophysics and Economics of Games, Social Choices and Quantitative Techniques (Springer, Milano, 2010), pp. 61–70. Crossref, Google Scholar
6. Angle, J., The surplus theory of social stratification and the size distribution of personal wealth, Soc. Forces 65(2) (1986) 293–326. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. Patriarca, M., Heinsalu, E. and Chakraborti, A., Basic kinetic wealth-exchange models: Common features and open problems, Eur. Phys. J. B 73(1) (2010) 145–153. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. Lux, T., Emergent statistical wealth distributions in simple monetary exchange models: A critical review, in Econophysics of Wealth Distributions (Springer, Milano, 2005), pp. 51–60. Crossref, Google Scholar
9. Wechsler, D., The Measurement and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence, Fourth Edn. (Williams and Witkins, Baltimore, 1958). Crossref, Google Scholar
10. Kaufman, A. S., Assessing Adolescent and Adult Intelligence, First Edn. (Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1990). Google Scholar
11. Kaufman, A. S., IQ Testing 101 (Springer, New York, 2009). Google Scholar
12. Stewart, J., The Distribution of Talent, Marilyn Zurmuehlin Working Papers in Art Education 2, Iowa Research Online (1983), pp. 21–22. Google Scholar
13. Erickson, C., Sustainable pace is a smart long-term strategy (2016), https://greatnotbig.com/2016/05/sustainable-pace/. Google Scholar
14. Milanovic, B., Global inequality of opportunity: How much of our income is determined by where we live?, Rev. Econ. Stat. 97(2) (2015) 452–460. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. Pluchino, A., Biondo, A. E. and Rapisarda, A., Talent vs luck: The role of randomness in success and failure, Adv. Complex Syst. 21(03–04) (2018) 1850014. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. Merton, R. K., The Matthew effect in Science, Science 159 (1968) 56–63. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. Wilensky, U., NetLogo (1999), http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. Google Scholar
18. Clauset, A., Shalizi, C. R. and Newman, M. E., Power-law distributions in empirical data, SIAM Rev. 51(4) (2009) 661–703. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
19. Voitalov, I., van der Hoorn, P., van der Hofstad, R. and Krioukov, D., Scale-free networks well done, preprint (2018), arXiv:1811.02071 [physics.soc-ph]. Google Scholar
20. Gillespie, C. S.,Fitting heavy tailed distributions: The poweRlaw package, preprint (2014), arXiv:1407.3492 [Stat.CO]. Google Scholar
21. Alstott, J., Bullmore, E. and Plenz, D., Powerlaw: A Python package for analysis of heavy-tailed distributions, PLoS ONE 9(1) (2014) e85777. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar