Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 325 posts

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#41

Post by snappy173 »

trapperkeeper79 wrote: post #11

Wonderful talk. One thing he called for was a wealth tax, which is something that makes complete sense but is going to be very unpopular. On the otherhand, he also calls for progressive income taxes (something that is reported by the media and an easier pill to swallow) - in my country, Canada, progressive income taxes are not the answer IMHO. We didn't have as much inequality for education (i.e. lots of decent Unive…

"Wonderful talk. One thing he called for was a wealth tax, which is something that makes complete sense but is going to be very unpopular. On "

doesn't targeting a higher level of inflation and issuing government bonds basically accomplish this?

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#42

Post by Finnucane »

Tycho wrote: post #14
VodkaHaze wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that the book is a best seller when its intended audience is really people with a graduate education in economics tells me that most people bought is as a signal of smartness (or as an honest effort to inform oneself, but without actually slogging through the book)

I feel like there must have been some string pulling that made this book so popular.

Given that it was published in the US by a university press that had never had such a bestseller before, that's very unlikely.

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#43

Post by cryoshon »

VodkaHaze wrote: post #5
debt wrote: post #3

This is perfect. That book Capital is like 700 pages.

The fact that the book is a best seller when its intended audience is really people with a graduate education in economics tells me that most people bought is as a signal of smartness (or as an honest effort to inform oneself, but without actually slogging through the book)

it's super easy to read. all of the figures are well explained, and the core concepts are hammered to death over the course of the book...

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#44

Post by canadathrowm »

trapperkeeper79 wrote: post #11

Wonderful talk. One thing he called for was a wealth tax, which is something that makes complete sense but is going to be very unpopular. On the otherhand, he also calls for progressive income taxes (something that is reported by the media and an easier pill to swallow) - in my country, Canada, progressive income taxes are not the answer IMHO. We didn't have as much inequality for education (i.e. lots of decent Unive…

I have personally found Renting housing in Canada to be tremendous value. Some of these homes in Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Hamilton, Ottawa and other non Toronto/Vancouver cities can be rented for cheap. Homes which would sell for around $700k can be rented for around $2000 a month. In Calgary right now, nice apartments can be had for around $1000/month all in.

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#45

Post by dnautics »

sdenton4 wrote: post #35
refurb wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one thing I think people forget is that since wealth is a function of time (and age), there is intronsic inequality that you can't get rid of. Looking at wealth by age bracket. It is strongly correlated, which shouldn't surprise anyone. The longer you work the more you save. A 20 year old is going to have a lot less wealth than a 60 year old. I'm not sure that will ever change.

Sure, but there's a strong sense that the bottom rungs of the ladder are progressively more out of reach for the younger generation. Housing is a great example. Instead of getting into the initial mortgage, we're paying rent for longer, and have a harder time coming up with the money for the down payment... In part because the rent is, to borrow a phrase, too damn high. "Millennials are delaying all kinds of major li…

This time phenomenon is not a function of capitalism. Interest rates coordinate time with risk. In the 80s my dad bought his first house (on a middle class gs-7 federal job) at an interest rate of 12%; in the nineties he got a second house at the same value for 6%, (thus effectively free, by refi the first), and in the early aughts he got a third at 3%.

Why? Not because of the free market, but because the fed keeps goosing the interest rate downward to stimulate growth. Will I be able to do such a thing? No.

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#46

Post by beefield »

VodkaHaze wrote: post #2

In the interest of giving the fuller discussion: Picketty's book has been out for a while now. It is good economics. It deserves rightful praise, and scrutiny. Acemoglu and Robinson's answer[1] is also good economics. Digestible podcast form here [2]. It purports that Picketty's "r>g" model is flawed. It also deserves a reading. All of this is part of a larger discussion, which C21 started. r > g doesn't seem to expl…

I wonder whether it is considered good or bad behaviour to point out incorrect spelling, but it is Piketty, not Picketty

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#47

Post by dnautics »

maxerickson wrote: post #27
eldavido wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm tempted to blame ultra-loose monetary policy, but I'm not so sure. I live in the Bay Area where house prices are also out of control, but I'm not sure why we focus on prices (rather than monthly debt payments) since what, 90% of the market is payment buyers? In any case, I do believe the current interest rate environment has distributional consequences that haven't been well-studied. It seems the biggest benefici…

The problem might be 40 years of tight monetary policy. The inflation that comes with a higher growth economy gives wage earners opportunity to move to new, better jobs. In a low growth economy, they fight over jobs and lose earning power. A better national economy also probably has fewer people chasing the wealth in the valley.

"The inflation that comes with a higher growth economy gives wage earners opportunity to move to new, better jobs"

Crack the whip! The best way to motivate those slaves is by making their cost of living higher! That'll force then to get better jobs!

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#48

Post by jabl »

VodkaHaze wrote: post #40
tmnvix wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. We should be taxing wealth and not income (or roughly speaking, unearned instead of earned income). Taxing productive activity is literally counter-productive. This will only become a more pressing issue once automation (esp. of the transport industry) gets into full-swing. Eventually we won't have a choice in the matter. There are a whole host of current issues that are culminating in wealth and income dist…

> We should be taxing wealth and not income (or roughly speaking, unearned instead of earned income). You'll see most economists advocating a consumption tax, instead. > quantitive easing pumping up asset prices while doing nothing for the real economy Both the "pumping up asset prices" and "while doing nothing for the real economy" is extremely disputable. It's kind of pompous of you to think you know better than th…

In some sense I agree with you. And it seems that, anyway, the big multinationals can find ways to squirrel away their profits without having to pay much, if any, taxes anyway. So in this way corporate taxes hit the SMB's while the big boys get a free pass..

However, one argument against lowering corporate taxes I've seen is that it would incentivize people to skirt around their personal taxes by "using" corporations. Instead of buying your own car, let a corporation (maybe your employer, maybe your own 1-person corporation that everybody would set up in a system like this?) own the car and you just use it. So somehow you'd need to prevent that kind of behavior. Perhaps shifting the tax burden from income to consumption would do that, IDK and I'm too tired to think about it now.

Another tax that economists generally seem to think well of, is land value taxes (originally by Henry George, IIRC). But these seem more or less impossible politically, as the politicians are generally better of than the average Joe and tend to own more land/property..

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#49

Post by maxerickson »

dnautics wrote: post #47
maxerickson wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem might be 40 years of tight monetary policy. The inflation that comes with a higher growth economy gives wage earners opportunity to move to new, better jobs. In a low growth economy, they fight over jobs and lose earning power. A better national economy also probably has fewer people chasing the wealth in the valley.

"The inflation that comes with a higher growth economy gives wage earners opportunity to move to new, better jobs" Crack the whip! The best way to motivate those slaves is by making their cost of living higher! That'll force then to get better jobs!

I love the attitude you've imputed there, the way I see it the alternative is that they get stuck with stagnant wages or no job at all. Way better.

You know, the stagnant wages that we have seen for the last 30 years of low inflation.

Re: Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century, in 20 minutes (2014) [video]

#50

Post by thatfrenchguy »

snappy173 wrote: post #41
trapperkeeper79 wrote: post #11

Wonderful talk. One thing he called for was a wealth tax, which is something that makes complete sense but is going to be very unpopular. On the otherhand, he also calls for progressive income taxes (something that is reported by the media and an easier pill to swallow) - in my country, Canada, progressive income taxes are not the answer IMHO. We didn't have as much inequality for education (i.e. lots of decent Unive…

"Wonderful talk. One thing he called for was a wealth tax, which is something that makes complete sense but is going to be very unpopular. On " doesn't targeting a higher level of inflation and issuing government bonds basically accomplish this?

Nope, because the higher capital you have the more returns you've have on it. Higher inflation impact people with few savings the most.
Post reply on HN