Compassion or Resentment?

Feed the babies who don't have enough to eat
Shoe the children with no shoes on their feet
House the people living in the street
Oh, oh, there's a solution
--Steve Miller Band

Interesting empirical research helps answer questions that can't easily be resolved by theory-building alone. For example, it is straightforward to develop competing theories about why people support taxing the rich and redistributing wealth. One theory posits that people feel compassionate for the needy, and the rich have resources that can help them. Another theory is that people are envious of the rich, and this resentment motivates forcible confiscation of resources from the wealthy.

Which theory is reflected more in practice? This is an empirical question.

Emily Ekins offers an empirical answer. As part of a larger study on American perceptions of poverty, wealth, and work, she employs regression analysis that compares people's responses to measures of compassion for the poor and resentment of the rich to willingness to tax wealthy. She finds that resentment is more likely to motivate tax increases on the rich and redistribution of wealth than does compassion:

Similarly, she finds that concerns about inequality are related more to antagonism toward the rich than to compassion for the poor:

And finally, she finds that, while both compassion and resentment predict favorable views toward socialism, hostility toward capitalism is more likely to be motivated by resentment of the successful.

Nice demo of how empirical research sheds light on the validity of plausible rival hypotheses.