Talk Elections

So I'm close to finishing this title by french political economist Thomas Piketty. I think this can stir some good debate here.

I personally think it's an excellent analysis to the importance of taxation as an instrument yet it still a revisionist ideology which makes it problematic as a 'beacon' for people left of social democracy. In addition, I would have liked a more solid proposal to policy considering the shift in the method of production with the 'information revolution' ongoing (at times it seems most of the socialist debate is conducted as if we're not amidst one largest changes to social order and economic order we had seen in decades).

We really aren't. The 'Information Revolution' is grossly overrated.

I just ordered this, two copies actually.  my mom has been going off about it for two weeks already, and her birthday is May 18th so it'll be my "gift".  ordered two copies actually.  from the reviews it sounds like he goes against some basic theses of orthodox Marxism in addition to attacking the sick ideologists of late capitalism

Everyone tells me it's garbage.

Piketty is not the best writer and he is prone to tangential philosophizing but it's still an insightful book that's worth reading. At the very least, his empirical work is really important.

It's not overrated at all. If anything, it has opened up an entirely new dimension of inequality - the inequality of information, which is entirely invisible to the masses, but which will strengthen the gatekeepers' hold on them us immeasurably.

This makes me wonder who/what, exactly, you mean by "everybody".

Even The Economist had high praise for the quality of his research and empirical findings, even as they (obviously, would expect nothing less of course) blanch from his proposed solutions.

I just read it and I'm working on a critical analysis of it.

I think it's severely over-hyped and I'm a bit unconvinced that he has in any dramatic way changed the premises of our debate on this issue.

Everyone who told you that is garbage.

I'd imagine he hangs out with other members of the heirs of the  petit rentiers.

I was at a seminar about it the other day from some of the top economists in Sweden and it got resoundingly thrashed. The book is definitely very overhyped.

What where their main arguments against it?

1. He's invented his own theory for how savings worked which he gives no argument for and which has no support in any previous research. Use the standard theory and his theoretical predictions do not hold.

2. His own data gives no support for his theoretical claims.

3. His exclusion of pension claims is potentially very problematic for his data on wealth.

4. Large parts of his analysis is based on pure conjecture and fiction rather than any theoretical or empirical analysis.

Also, he's a bit of a douche. But really, 1 and 2 (especially 2) are sufficient to discard his argument.

The much-touted post-industrial Information Age has not met its promise. Indeed it is a nightmare.

Truth be told, labor has been devalued, and everything else has not a labor-saving item (like energy or information) has become fiendishly expensive. Economic elites have become more rapacious and have begun to work in lockstep.