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

111–120 of 325 posts

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

#111

Post by darawk »

quadrangle wrote: post #105
hash-set wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, tell that to the millions of dead left in its wake.

There have been nowhere near enough actual trials of communism to conclude anything fully. The core examples were all poorer countries with various problems, corruption… To reject communism as a concept over the atrocities of Stalin et al is as reasonable as rejecting capitalism because the U.S. was built on slavery and the genocide of first peoples. The atrocities were real, and they did connect to economics, but to…

While you are right, many people (e.g. Hayek) argue that collectivism entails authoritarianism and control. That the two are inextricably linked, due primarily to the local knowledge problem.

I'm not necessarily arguing that that is the case just trying to explain why people make this argument. The idea is that, logically, any economically communist country will, by definition, eventually come to resemble the Soviet Union, China, and other negative instances.

We can debate whether or not that is so, but I think it's a legitimate debate to have, especially being that all known examples have in fact worked out that way.

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

#112

Post by [deleted] »

hash-set wrote: post #95
broke_wagon wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism isn't some "radical" boogeyman, it's just a process to eliminate inequality. (Why should there be any inequality at all?) We don't need to be diminutive about relatively different ideas; that's unhelpful at best.

Yeah, tell that to the millions of dead left in its wake.

[deleted]

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

#113

Post by Mikeb85 »

hash-set wrote: post #95
broke_wagon wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism isn't some "radical" boogeyman, it's just a process to eliminate inequality. (Why should there be any inequality at all?) We don't need to be diminutive about relatively different ideas; that's unhelpful at best.

Yeah, tell that to the millions of dead left in its wake.

And millions were killed by fascism, by colonialism, and by other -isms. There is nothing inherent to communism/socialism that necessitates killing, plus historical context is a thing.

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

#114

Post by broke_wagon »

hash-set wrote: post #95
broke_wagon wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism isn't some "radical" boogeyman, it's just a process to eliminate inequality. (Why should there be any inequality at all?) We don't need to be diminutive about relatively different ideas; that's unhelpful at best.

Yeah, tell that to the millions of dead left in its wake.

Carrying a communist (or capitalist, or ...) banner around as you pillage doesn't make you a communist (or a capitalist, or ...). Attack the system, not those who usurp its name. Only then we can have a discussion.

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

#115

Post by 4WIW »

broke_wagon wrote: post #89
jernfrost wrote: post #76

I wish more people could have Thomas Piketty's balanced view on capitalism. Too often it is treated as some sort of game where you have to pick sides whether you are for or against capitalism. Especially in America there seems to be a kneejerk reaction to any calls for regulations or moderations of the effects of the free market. Usually it is dismissed without further discussion with "look what happened in the east…

Communism isn't some "radical" boogeyman, it's just a process to eliminate inequality. (Why should there be any inequality at all?) We don't need to be diminutive about relatively different ideas; that's unhelpful at best.

Maybe on paper; in practice, communism has been a process of structuring inequality differently: the criteria is how good are you in serving your current leader/mentor/sponsor and how lucky/good are you in choosing your next one.

While this criteria exists in all systems, it is the most defining one in communism and other authoritarian systems.

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

#116

Post by Mikeb85 »

om2 wrote: post #75
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…

One thing that always puzzles me about r > g is that it's comparing a first derivative to a second derivative. How can this be meaningful? To explain further, r is return on investment, which approximately means rate of growth of wealth of capital. That is, it is a the first derivative of a stock, or equivalently a flow. g is the rate of growth of income, where income itself is a flow. So it's the second derivative o…

> One thing that always puzzles me about r > g is that it's comparing a first derivative to a second derivative. How can this be meaningful?

It's not. It's Piketty trolling the economics field, which has become overly math-y, and try too hard to distil complex interactions into basic formulae.

It's basically his way of saying that capital's share of income is growing faster than labour's share of income, or that the return (r) on capital is outpacing the return on labour, which is represented by the growth rate (g) of the economy.

In other words, it's not a real mathematical formula. It's an idea, a basic premise, merely represented by a 'formula' because hey, it's how every economist does it nowadays, right?

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

#117

Post by 4WIW »

quadrangle wrote: post #105
hash-set wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, tell that to the millions of dead left in its wake.

There have been nowhere near enough actual trials of communism to conclude anything fully. The core examples were all poorer countries with various problems, corruption… To reject communism as a concept over the atrocities of Stalin et al is as reasonable as rejecting capitalism because the U.S. was built on slavery and the genocide of first peoples. The atrocities were real, and they did connect to economics, but to…

You can say the same thing about National-Socialism or any other ideology out there. There are just not enough countries to try them all on, and I am not sure why should we...

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

#118

Post by Mikeb85 »

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…

> in my country, Canada, progressive income taxes are not the answer IMHO.

They would be if they were actually progressive in a meaningful way. The problem is that they're only progressive between the poor and the middle class, then taxation on capital returns is low again, taxation on wealth is non-existent, and the rich have all sorts of mechanisms to avoid taxation.

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

#119

Post by Mikeb85 »

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…

> in my country, Canada, progressive income taxes are not the answer IMHO.

They would be if they were actually progressive in a meaningful way. The problem is that they're only progressive between the poor and the middle class, then taxation on capital returns is low again, taxation on wealth is non-existent, and the rich have all sorts of mechanisms to avoid taxation.

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

#120

Post by Mikeb85 »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #22

My problem with this book is that he doesn't deal at all with the gold standard. During the timeline of his survey, the currencies were almost all gold-backed and by the end, are all fiat currencies. He completely ignores it, yet at the least he should have explained why it was not relevant.

It's because the gold standard is meaningless, only trotted out by gold bugs conspiracy theorists. The concentration and division of wealth is what matters, not nominal values or gold pieces.
Post reply on HN