User Profile

Piketty and his colaborators collected information about the distribution of incomes from labor and from capital around the world over the past couple of centuries.

This data allows them to show how economic inequality has changed over this period in different countries.

The findings are striking: economic inequality in the modern era is as high as during the "Gilded age", and it is continually becoming more extreme.

Piketty argues that contrary to Kuznets hopeful belief, the reduction of inequality observed by him in the USA was not an automatic result of a well functioning capitalist system, but a product of policies meant to achieve this reduction.

Had Kuznets had more data, he would have seen his inequality curve rise again.

For labor income to increase, the economy needs to grow.

For capital income to increase, part of the returns have to be reinvested.

The fundamental force for divergence, making the rich richer, is the fact that the rate of return of capital (r) has historically been greater than the rate of growth of the economy (g), which means owning things has historically been the surest way to increase your income.

There is also a force for convergence, helping labor increase its income: education and diffusion of knowledge.

But historically this has not been anywhere near enough to compensate for the strong force of divergence.

Many people feel that their jobs could be accomplished in much less than 8 hours every day, but social and economic stigma forces us to spend needless time at work, which most would rather spend doing other things.

On top of that, some jobs that exist in current society can be considered outright malicious and exploitative, and as such society would benefit from these not being done.

The author presents various examples for both arguments supplemented by self reports from persons in different professions which corroborate that this is a shared feeling, and explore the different impacts such work arrangements have on people.

The explicit goal of the book is to highlight that our current economic system is very far from the rational ideal it sells itself as, and to point out the negative impacts this has on an individual and social level, to foster debate about the problem as a first step to addressing it.

While he does suggest Universal Basic Income could help solve some of these issues, he clearly states his goal is not to promote this or any other policy as a unique solution.