Modern Marc throws himself into high-rolling power games with the same ruthless hypocrisy as the old-timers.
First edition preface
They cheer him on enthusiastically. But minutes later, behind closed doors, he cynically orders his underlings to fire a big percentage of them. It owns a large share of Phenix. Unfortunately that one seems to be gone as well. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Piketty cites Karl Marx more than any other economist, even more than Keynes. The professor barely mentions Adam Smith.
Piketty conveniently ignores the fact that most high-performing mutual funds eventually stop beating the market and even underperform. The professor seems to have forgotten a major theme of Marx, and later Joseph Schumpeter, that capitalism is a dynamic model of creative destruction. IBM used to dominate the computer business; now Apple does. Now it is Chase.
New translation of Marx’s Capital
Sears Roebuck used to be the largest retail store. Now it is Wal-Mart. GM used to be the biggest car manufacturer. Now it is Toyota.
- جستجو، مشاهده و هدایت.
- Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Vol. I. The Process of Capitalist Production.
- French edition of Karl Marx's "Capital" contract sold for , euros - Xinhua | agtarobamar.gq.
- Serena | Your VC should work for you — not the other way around.
- Le Capital (France).
- Kants praktische Wende (German Edition).
And the Rockefellers used to be the wealthiest family. Now it is the Walton family, who a generation ago were dirt poor. Piketty is no communist and is certainly not as radical as Marx in his predictions or policy recommendations. Why assess a tax of even 0. It destroys a fundamental sacred right of mankind — financial privacy and the right to be left alone. An income tax is bad enough.
But a wealth tax is worse. A wealth tax is Big Brother at his worst. Such a tax would require every citizen to list all his or her assets. The intent is to prevent any secret stash of gold and silver coins, diamonds, artwork or bearer bonds. Suddenly, the privacy guaranteed to Americans by the Fourth Amendment would be denied and produce an illegal and underground black market. Equally important, a wealth tax is a tax on capital — the key to economic growth. Virtually everyone rich and poor has one, thanks to the ingenuity of entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs.
This is democratic capitalism at its best. Income inequality may be growing, but when it comes to goods and services, inequality may be shrinking. To create new products and services and raise economic performance, a nation need capital, lots of it. The only time capital declines is during war and depression, when capital is destroyed.
Piketty blames the increase in inequality on low growth rates. He says return on capital tends to be higher than the economic growth rate. Even Keynes understood the value of capital investment and the need to keep it growing. Make the cake bigger, and there will be plenty to go around for everyone. This is why increasing corporate profits is good — it means more money to pay workers. Studies show that companies with higher profit margins tend to pay their workers more. If anything, we should reduce taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends, and encourage people to save more and thus increase the pool of available capital and entrepreneurial activity.
A progressive tax on high-income earners is a tax on capital. An inheritance tax is a tax on capital.
Gray Paris: French capital sees only 4 minutes of sunshine in 12222
A tax on interest, dividends and capital gains is a tax on capital. By over-taxing capital, estates and the income of our wealthiest people, including heirs to fortunes, we are selling our country and our nation short. You can never have too much capital. What country has advanced the most since World War II? Hong Kong, which has no tax on interest, dividends or capital. View all 27 comments. Eric H David wrote: "Your review demonstrates a remarkable misread of the work, and shows that your understanding of the importance of the distribution of we David wrote: "Your review demonstrates a remarkable misread of the work, and shows that your understanding of the importance of the distribution of wealth and its evolution over time, including the increasing im Scotty Wardle I hope Mark gets the credit he deserves for such a fine review.
My own review has won numerous awards, but I think Mark goes further than I would in a I hope Mark gets the credit he deserves for such a fine review. My own review has won numerous awards, but I think Mark goes further than I would in attempting to educate those who desperately need it. Well done Mark!
Just keep an eraser handy. Don't let this beautiful thread get watered down by Bernie drones. Mar 16, Marvin rated it it was amazing. Spoiler alert Piketty explains why a tax on capital is so much preferable than taxes on income, the need for global cooperation and why inequality in America will only get worse unless policymakers address higher education affordability, tax policies, especially on inheritance, and minimum wage laws.
A brutally long read, yet well worth the effort. View 2 comments. View all 5 comments. Jun 06, David M rated it it was amazing Shelves: origins-of-the-present-crisis. Fresh confirmation. Economists are all too often preoccupied with petty mathematical problems of interest only to themselves. This obsession with mathematics is an easy way of acquiring the appearance of scientificity without having to answer the far more complex problems of the world we live in.
There is one great advantage to being an academic economist in France: here, economists are not highly respected in the academic or intellectual world or by political and financial elites.
Hence they must set aside their contempt for other disciplines and their absurd claim to greater scientific legitimacy, despite the fact that they know almost nothing about anything. Neo-classical economics is morally and intellectually repulsive pseudo-science. Economists are not actually experts in anything. Every thinking person in the 21st century needs to read this book. As I read him, Thomas Piketty's major disadvantage is political.
- Capital, prefaces;
- Exiting Iraq: Why the U.S. Must End the Military Occupation and Renew the War Against Al Qaeda?
- A Dictionary of Rhyming Slang;
- Édition Spéciale by Luxepack : The capital event for luxury packaging.
He delineates a radical problem, then offers a liberal solution. A global tax on wealth does indeed make sense - indeed it makes so much sense he can't possibly account for the fact that it doesn't exist already. He refuses to consider such things as class struggle and ideology.
However, Piketty also acknowledges that in the 20th century wealth inequalities were wiped out only due to world war; from this perspective, it would seem Marx actually wasn't nearly apocalyptic enough in his predictions. The violence of the first and second world war far exceeded anything a Victorian intellectual could have conceived. If war is ultimately what destroyed inequality, can it also be said that inequality contributed to or even caused world war? The implications here are clearly very radical. It's a question Piketty leaves unexplored. He hints that inequality can have disastrous social consequences, but then treats the major man-made conflicts of last century as if they were random accidents.
Book a book
Feb 19, Randal Samstag rated it really liked it Shelves: economics. A chart of their data is a frequently-used graphic the one that looks like the Golden Gate Bridge in Robert Reich's current documentary film, Inequality for All. This figure shows the income of the top 1 percent of income earners as a ratio of the national income from the period from to It shows a dramatic peak just prior to the crash followed by a collapse in the years up to and then a dramatic rise back up to the same level of approximately 24 percent of national income that the one percent took home in the roaring twenties.
It contains over pages including notes of remarkable data and graphics depicting the historic evolution of income and wealth in our world. It has been making quite a splash in the United States, it's English translation coming as it has on the heels of Inequality for All. Scores of other reviews have come out since it's publication by Harvard Press in March from both right and left.
Michael Roberts has been regularly working at debunking Piketty in the pages of his blog from a Marxist perspective. Someone who has raised such praise and ire from both left Roberts , middle Krugman and Solow , and right Feldstein must be on to something. Piketty's book provides comprehensive documentation of the growing inequality that has the United States and Europe in its grip. But the forgotten element in this that Piketty brings to the discussion if you have not read Ricardo and Marx is that extreme inequality, in Europe at least, is not new.
The inequality that has now established itself in both Europe and the United States is more like a return to the normal state of extreme concentration of wealth and income that ruled in the nineteenth century. It was only the great capital destruction of the inter-war years and the threat posed by the success of socialist revolution in Russia - not so much emphasized by Piketty that reduced inequality in the West in the twentieth century.
Piketty calls this new reality "patrimonial capitalism" in that as economic growth chronically lags behind the rate of return that owners of capital can receive on their wealth, a tiny rentier class eventually emerges over generations that controls significant portions societal wealth and influence. This picture contradicts the story told by free market economists from Hayek to Kuznets to Milton Friedman and Paul Ryan that unregulated markets open doors to everyone to gain wealth.