正在确认阅读权限…
How Fiscal Multipliers Diverge Across Income Strata — And Why Aggregate Models Obscure Distributional Reality
财政乘数在不同收入阶层间的分化——以及为何总量模型掩盖了分配现实
-
Fiscal stimulus does not operate uniformly: marginal propensity to consume varies sharply across income deciles.财政刺激效果并非均质：边际消费倾向在不同收入十分位组间差异显著。
-
High-income households allocate over 70% of additional income toward savings or asset purchases, not domestic goods.高收入家庭将额外收入的70%以上用于储蓄或资产购置，而非国内商品消费。
-
Low-income households spend nearly 90% of fiscal transfers within three months, directly stimulating local demand.低收入家庭在三个月内几乎花掉全部财政转移支付，直接提振本地需求。
-
Yet national models treat government spending as a homogeneous injection, ignoring behavioral heterogeneity.但国家级模型将政府支出视为同质注入，忽视行为异质性。
-
This simplification leads to systematic underestimation of labor-intensive service sector impacts.这种简化导致对劳动密集型服务业影响的系统性低估。
-
It also misattributes inflationary pressure, conflating supply constraints with demand-side miscalibration.它还错误归因通胀压力，混淆了供给约束与需求侧误判。
-
Cross-country evidence confirms multiplier divergence predicts post-stimulus employment polarization more accurately than GDP growth alone.跨国证据表明，乘数分化比单纯GDP增长更能准确预测刺激后的就业极化。
-
Policy design fails when 'average' multipliers obscure how stimulus reshapes labor market power asymmetries.当‘平均’乘数掩盖刺激如何重塑劳动力市场权力不对称时，政策设计即告失败。
-
Targeted transfer mechanisms therefore reflect distributional ethics as much as macroeconomic technique.因此，定向转移机制既体现分配伦理，也反映宏观技术考量。
-
Central banks increasingly incorporate micro-level spending elasticity data into forward guidance frameworks.各国央行正日益将微观层面的支出弹性数据纳入前瞻性指引框架。
-
Ignoring stratified responses risks entrenching inequality even amid nominal expansion.忽视分层响应，可能在名义扩张中固化不平等。
-
Accurate modeling demands disaggregated household balance sheets — not just aggregated expenditure aggregates.精准建模需依赖分层的家庭资产负债表，而非仅靠汇总支出数据。