Den politiska debatten i Sverige präglas ofta av en upprördhet över inkomstskillnader. Hur skiljer sig attityder till sådana skillnader åt mellan ett skandinaviskt land, med relativt låga skillnader och betydande omfördelning, och USA, med relativt höga skillnader och en mer begränsad omfördelning? En experimentell studie, ”Cutthroat Capitalism Versus Cuddly Socialism: Are Americans More Meritocratic and Efficiency-Seeking than Scandinavians?”, accepterad för publicering i Journal of Political Economy, finner följande:

We provide causal evidence suggesting that fairness considerations are more fundamental for inequality acceptance than efficiency considerations. In both countries, merit instead of luck as the source of inequality causes a huge increase in inequality acceptance, while the introduction of a cost of redistribution has a negligible effect on the distributive choices of the participants.

Angående kopplingen mellan inkomstojämlikhet och rättvisa finner forskarna, i linje med resultat jag presenterar i det tidigare inlägget ”Det är inte ojämlikhet människor ogillar utan orättvisa”, detta:

The present study robustly demonstrates that most people do not consider all inequalities to be unfair. In particular, introducing a difference in productivity instead of luck as the source of inequality causes a large and statistically significant increase in inequality acceptance in all subgroups. Hence, it is important to accommodate the distinction between fairness and equality in our social preference models.

Det duger alltså inte att utifrån ett faktiskt konstaterande av inkomstskillnader, eller ökade sådana skillnader, dra slutsatsen att dessa nödvändigtvis är illegitima eller oönskade.

När det gäller skillnader mellan och inom länderna skriver de:

We have shown that Americans accept significantly more inequality than Scandinavians, but our findings also challenge common perceptions of these societies in the public debate. The United States is sometimes portrayed as representing cutthroat capitalism, but the present study clearly demonstrates that many Americans are concerned with unfair inequalities. In our experiment, the majority of Americans equalize completely when the inequality is due to luck, even when there is a significant cost of redistribution. … Our findings should also nuance the perception of the Scandinavian countries as representing cuddly socialism. We find that a large majority of Scandinavians accept inequalities due to a difference in producivity, what they object to are inequalities due to luck. Hence, the political support for an extensive welfare state in the Scandinavian countries may partly reflect that these policies are viewed as contributing to elimination of inequalities due to luck, without undermining inequalities due to productivity differences.

Givetvis kan man gå vidare och diskutera och ifrågasätta människors uppfattning av vad som är orsakat av egen ansträngning respektive tur, och då kommer man in på fundamentala filosofiska frågor om fri vilja etc. Men det går i vilket fall att konstatera att denna typ av uppfattningar tycks direkt kopplade till politiska hållningar.