apparently this "starry-eyed high school" writing style is working for him. "The Next Nobel Laureate in Economics? Posted on October 18, 2015 by Josh Hoxie I’d like to offer up three potential candidates. All three happen to be French, and each has contributed mightily to the global movement against skyrocketing wealth and income inequality. These three economists — Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman — have all worked closely together and could be awarded the Nobel Prize as a group. But all three have also made serious and substantive contributions in their own right. Let’s consider the Nobel case for each of these engaged — and exemplary — scholars. Thomas Piketty The most widely known of the group, this Paris School of Economics analyst authored 2014’s biggest global social sciences blockbuster, Capital in the Twenty First Century, a book that every serious academic and pundit at least claims to have read. Piketty’s Capital sifts through hundreds of years of tax data to show the trends that have expanded and reduced inequality over time. His key finding: If capital is growing at a rate faster than the rate of growth in the overall economy, wealth will inexorably concentrate at the top. Over recent centuries, only world war and reconstruction have fundamentally undone this concentration. Piketty’s book, an admitted brick of a tome at nearly 700 pages, remains incredibly accessible to lay readers and includes both clear-eyed analysis and concrete solutions. Perhaps most importantly, Piketty’s work upends the still commonly held false belief that the free market, left to its own devices, will eventually reduce inequality. ..." - See more at: http://inequality.org/the-next-nobel-prize-laureate-in-economics/#sthash.4xUvcEhL.dpuf
french chefs... yes. french alpinists... yes... french women... oui, (if I were single) ... french rivera...yes... french economists the noble prize? non... c'set impossible (said with a smug french accent).
Our “leaders” – aka the Deep State – can change the terms any time they want. What kind of contract is it where one party can change the deal and the other can’t? And where the other party was never given the opportunity to negotiate it, or even approve it? It’s not a contract at all. It’s just part of the mythology of modern democracy. It imposes “duties,” but they only make sense if you swallow the whole enchilada of minor insults and major delusions that keep the Deep State in business.
It is possible that he would join other Nobel Laureates like Paul Krugman, Yasser Arafat, Kofi Annan, Al Gore and Barack Obama. That does not change the fact that the article you posted reads like it was written by a political hack who supports Bernie Sanders.
I've read Piketty's book, but know relatively little of his personal politics. It makes sense to me that , if he could, he would be a supporter of Sanders, as am I. Sadly Sanders is not going to get the nomination, but I still am glad he is carrying his message forward. Sanders is addressing the core issues that must be addressed if our economy is to lift itself out of what threatens to be along-term malaise. He is aware of and has addressed perennial political issues such as immigration reform, the deficits spending, guns or butter, tax reform, entitlements, etc., but he's focusing on issues that are critical to the success of our economy and society. For example when have you heard any other politician call for major criminal justice system reform? Do you know that Alabama, for example, spends 20% of their budget on prisons! Is that how you want your tax dollars spent?
When your customers are broke you can't make sales. When one guy has all the chips the poker tournament is over.
I would suggest you read the article you posted in the OP. You may find some clues about his politics, and, his flexibility with the truth. I commented on the article, not his book. BTW, politicians on both sides of the isle have called for criminal justice reform. Criminal justice reform pertaining to the "war on drugs" comes to mind.
typical finite pie democrat. When one guy has all the chips he either invests it, spends it, or gambles it all away. The government is just now getting around to making all the dot com millionaires pay their fair share.
The pie does not have to be finite for the principle to hold. If the overwhelming share of slices are in the hands of the few, and all future slices of a bigger pie will be distributed according to present distribution, the problem remains.