Skip to content

Comment on Piketty's Findings Undercut by Errorsparent

Comments

I liked your point, which is similar to my reaction to the book. Part 1: "Relative inequality is rising" Step 2: "?" Step 3: "Policy proposals"

Most notably, Piketty never made a case why his policy proposals are the best way to improve the lives of the bottom 50% on an absolute basis.

Have you read the book? It is clearly not his focus (or area of expertise!) but the book makes its premise clear: extreme inequality is inconsistent with the meritocratic ideals upon which modern capitalist democracies are founded, and can lead to social unrest. This is close to a direct quotation from the book's introduction --0 I would quote it exactly if I had the book in front of me right now. Maybe you don't agree with this premise, but I don't think you can fault Piketty for taking it as an assumption (explicitly!), particularly given that he is not a sociologist or political philosopher.

And in either case, it strikes me a significant contribution in itself to move the debate from "does capitalism and rising productivity raise all boats?" (answer: no) to "ok then...is extreme inequality really such a bad thing?"

How is the answer to raise all boats 'no'?

You're right, I was imprecise. Piketty does not claim (I don't think) that capitalism doesn't raise all boats, only that capitalism and increased productivity do not raise all boats equally.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.