Capital in the Twenty-First Century

by Nick Broten

Thomas Piketty is a fine example of an evaluative thinker. In Capital in the Twenty-First Century, he not only provides detailed and sustained explanations of why he sees existing arguments relating to income and wealth distribution as flawed, but also gives us very detailed evaluations of the significance of a vast amount of data explaining why incomes is distributed in the ways it is.

As Piketty stresses, "the distribution question... deserves to be studied in a systematic and methodical fashion." This stress on evaluating the significance of data leads him to focus on the central evaluative questions, and look in turn at the acceptability, relevance, and adequacy of existing justifications for the unequal distribution of wealth. In doing so, Piketty applies his understanding of the data to answering the deeply important question of what political structures and what policies are necessary to move us towards a more equal society.

Piketty's evaluation of the data supports his argument that inequality cannot be depended on to reduce over time: indeed, without government intervention, it is highly likely to increase. In addition, he evaluates international data to argue that poor countries do not necessarily become less poor as a result of foreign investment.
This strong emphasis on the interrogation of data, rather than the building mathematical models that are divorced from data, is a defining feature of Piketty's work.

Genres: Economics, Politics

114 pages, Paperback

First published July 5, 2017

Reviews

[Richard · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is interesting as it was incorrectly listed as authored by Thomas Piketty when I selected it. I didn't think I was ready to tackle the tomb that is Capital in the Twenty-First Century.

The book ended up not being a bad cliff notes to Capital in the Twenty-First Century. I feel ready to read the actual book now with some idea what is coming. However, the book is very segmented so each bit stands on it's own, and there is not overarching narrative except the references to the original work. I did like the Q/A / Theory rebuttal near the end that tried to address some of the common complaints about the theories in the book, and what Thomas has to say in response to them, however, the responses quest all seem to be quite dismissive of some of the valid points raised by the criticisms. That being said, I don't think the criticism are theory destroying or hold as much weight as the authors of them believe they do.

Personally I believe this work and theory deserves some attention, but it feels like a theory that is incomplete and needs support to make the model more applicable. To use manager speak, this theory sounds like a 50,000 foot level view, where the complexity doesn't start to appear until the 10,000 foot level, leaving the original view with blind spots and holes.

[Kemp · Rating 2 out of 5]

If the intent of this analysis is to incite the reader to read Thomas Piketty’s book it is an abysmal failure. Each section is summarized ad nauseam. Let me provide an example of that repetition. Each section repeats the key point taking the concept tell them what you will say, tell them, and tell them what you said to an extreme. The repetition is constant. The repetition is repetitive. If you still have any doubt let me summarize that each section repeats the key concept again and again and again.

If you need a cocktail summary to impress, Thomas Piketty argues that the wealth gap is increasing. He introduces the equation r > C; with r representing the rate of return and C the capital of a country or group. As long as r is greater than C those with wealth will grow it faster than those without. Not sure we need a book to know this is happening. Piketty also argues for a wealth tax.

A weak 2, opt for the original over this summary or skip it entirely.

[Tracie Hall · Rating 3 out of 5]

Analyses of the book, "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" by French economist, Thomas Pikkety. It's a bit repetitive, seeming like each module is an independent essay--none referring back to previous modules, but repeating information within them. There are quotes by several well known economists, and the work points out the controversiality of the book. I actually intended to download the actual book but ended up downloading this analysis instead. I decided to go ahead and listen to it, and download the book another time--I'm sure it was helpful in understanding the book when I get to it.

[Tabitha Sumsion · Rating 3 out of 5]

I honestly read this instead of the actual book because the actual book wasn’t available of Libby for audiobook 😅 this was obviously a brief overview but I would probably have just preferred the real book to deep dive into why he believes this especially with all the years of study that he has gathered.

[Laurent · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great analysis overall. Sometimes could be clearer with the terminology; especially unclear when distinguishing income and wages. 3.5.

[Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wanted to get Capital in the Twenty First Century but I got this instead. What a neat concept! Great job. a lot to think about. You get to think about so much. and the criticisms and the criticisms of the criticsm good job. i finished three books today. oh man. do i have to write a review, i'd rather just try to remember all the books and book like online courses which in some ways are considered as media to to do the reading.