TWENTY-FIRST. CENTURY. Thomas Piketty. Translated by Arthur Goldhammer. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. CAMBRIDGE. the technical appendix (pdf) describing the sources, methods and references used in the book (in particular to construct the statistical series used in figures and. de Paris, Thomas Piketty est l'auteur de nombreux travaux historiques et théoriques qui lui . pris l'ampleur internationale qu'il a aujourd'hui.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Dutch|
|Genre:||Children & Youth|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration Required]|
Capital in the Twenty-First Century is a book by French economist Thomas Piketty. .. Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 August Retrieved 6. Since its release in , Thomas Piketty's Le Capital au XXI siècle has become an unlikely international sensation. Il libro in questione. Charles Walton. The paper is a critical review of Piketty's book “Capital in the XXI Century”. Piketty's book has been translated into Italian and published by Bompiani in (Il capitale nel terney.info~saez/piketty-saezSciencepdf.
High taxes, inflation, bankruptcies and the growth of sprawling welfare states caused wealth to shrink dramatically, and ushered in a period in which both income and wealth were distributed in relatively egalitarian fashion.
But the shocks of the early 20th century have faded and wealth is now reasserting itself. On many measures, Piketty reckons, the importance of wealth in modern economies is approaching levels last seen before the first world war. From this history, Piketty derives a grand theory of capital and inequality. Other things being equal, faster economic growth will diminish the importance of wealth in a society, whereas slower growth will increase it and demographic change that slows global growth will make capital more dominant.
But there are no natural forces pushing against the steady concentration of wealth. Piketty closes the book by recommending that governments step in now, by adopting a global tax on wealth, to prevent soaring inequality contributing to economic or political instability down the road.
The book has unsurprisingly attracted plenty of criticism. Some wonder whether Piketty is right to think that the future will look like the past. Theory argues that it should become ever harder to earn a good return on wealth the more there is of it.
Robinson used the economic histories of Sweden and South Africa to show that social inequality depends much more on institutional factors than Piketty's factors like the difference between rate of return and growth. The professors write that general laws, which is how they characterize Piketty's postulations, "are unhelpful as a guide to understand the past or predict the future because they ignore the central role of political and economic institutions in shaping the evolution of technology and the distribution of resources in a society".
In his opinion the work was written with the attitude "Empirical work is science; theory is entertainment" and therefore an example for Mathiness.
Both of us are very liberal in the contemporary as opposed to classical sense , and we regard ourselves as egalitarians. We are therefore disturbed that Piketty has undermined the egalitarian case with weak empirical, analytical, and ethical arguments. Homburg argues that wealth does not only embrace capital goods in the sense of produced means of production , but also land and other natural resources. Homburg argues that observed increases in wealth income ratios reflect rising land prices and not an accumulation of machinery.
Stiglitz endorses this view, pointing out that "a large fraction of the increase in wealth is an increase in the value of land, not in the amount of capital goods". Rognlie also found that "surging house prices are almost entirely responsible for growing returns on capital.
Piketty defines capital as the stock of all assets held by private individuals, corporations and governments that can be traded in the market no matter whether these assets are being used or not.
And he has certainly not produced a working model for capital of the twenty-first century.
For that, we still need Marx or his modern-day equivalent". Harvey also takes Piketty to task for dismissing Marx's Das Kapital without ever having read it. Critique of the proposed measures[ edit ] In a similar vein, philosopher Nicholas Vrousalis faults Piketty's remedies for misconstruing the kind of political "counter-agency" required to remove the inequalities Piketty criticizes and for thinking that they are compatible with capitalism.
The FT found mistakes and unexplained entries in his spreadsheets, similar to those which last year undermined the work on public debt and growth of Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. The central theme of Prof Piketty's work is that wealth inequalities are heading back up to levels last seen before the World War I.
The investigation undercuts this claim, indicating there is little evidence in Prof Piketty's original sources to bear out the thesis that an increasing share of total wealth is held by the richest few. For example, The Economist , a sister publication to the Financial Times, wrote: Mr Giles's analysis is impressive, and one certainly hopes that further work by Mr Giles, Mr Piketty or others will clarify whether mistakes have been made, how they came to be introduced and what their effects are.
Based on the information Mr Giles has provided so far, however, the analysis does not seem to support many of the allegations made by the FT, or the conclusion that the book's argument is wrong. It's hard to think Piketty did something unethical when he put it up there for people like me to delve into his figures and find something that looks sketchy Piketty has been as good or better than anyone at both making all his data available and documenting what he does generally".
Piketty's data for the top 1 percent of the distribution for the nineteenth century — are also unreliable The values Piketty reported for the twentieth century — are based on more solid ground, but have the disadvantage of muting the marked rise of inequality during the Roaring Twenties and the decline associated with the Great Depression.