Free Download Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty
Free Download Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty
Oft als Mitglied in dieser Website verbleibenden wird sicherlich so Spaß machen. Ja, einen Blick auf Führungs Sammlungen nehmen täglich wird sicher fühlen Sie sich wow. Wo sonst werden Sie diese viele Büchersammlungen, in der Sammlung sehen? Welche Art von Sammlung? In der Bibliothek, in einigen Fällen gibt es mehrere Ressourcen, aber einige alte Bücher gezeigt wurden.
Pressestimmen
Magisterial...Piketty's Capital feels very much like a Category 4 hurricane that hasn't yet made landfall...Piketty draws on a vast store of historical data to argue that the broad dissemination of wealth that occurred during the decades following World War I was not, as economists then mistakenly believed, a natural state of capitalist equilibrium, but rather a halcyon interval between Belle Époque inequality and the rising inequality of our own era...Piketty's most provocative argument is that the discrepancy between the high returns to capital and much more modest overall economic growth--briefly annulled during the mid-century--ensures that the gulf between the rich (who profit from capital investments) and the middle class (who depend chiefly on income from labor) will only continue to grow...The best reason to raise tax rates is not to punish the rich, of course, but to raise the revenue which the United States needs to invest in infrastructure and research, not to mention to pay for Social Security and health care. That investment gap poses a clear and present danger to American global economic leadership. Rising inequality exacerbates the problem by sapping the collective political will needed to address the problem.--James Traub"Foreign Policy online" (04/11/2014)Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century delivered a well placed kick up the backside to complacent mainstream economics.--Paul Mason"The Observer" (11/30/2014)Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century is arguably the most important popular economics book in recent memory. It will take its place among other classics in the field that have survived changing theoretical and political fashions, such as its namesake by Karl Marx (Das Kapital, 1867) or other ambitiously titled books such as John Maynard Keynes's The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936). Anyone who wants to engage in an informed discussion about the economic landscape will have to read Piketty.--Kate Bahn"Women's Review of Books" (01/01/2015)
Über den Autor und weitere Mitwirkende
Thomas Piketty is Professor at the Paris School of Economics and at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales (EHESS).
Produktinformation
Taschenbuch: 816 Seiten
Verlag: Harvard University Press; Auflage: Reprint (14. August 2017)
Sprache: Englisch
ISBN-10: 0674979850
ISBN-13: 978-0674979857
Größe und/oder Gewicht:
14 x 4,6 x 21,3 cm
Durchschnittliche Kundenbewertung:
4.2 von 5 Sternen
33 Kundenrezensionen
Amazon Bestseller-Rang:
Nr. 1.996 in Fremdsprachige Bücher (Siehe Top 100 in Fremdsprachige Bücher)
This is a book that everyone is talking about and for good reason. It is a profound look at inequality in our society backed up with super research. Because I am sure that everyone has included strong opinions about the book itself, my review will comment on the brilliant footnotes in the book. Piketty has backed up all of his statements with detailed research. If there are dissenting opinions or he has used simplifications, he documents these in great detail in his footnotes. When you read the book, don't forget the footnotes!
Für den interessierte Leser ist dieses Buch sehr erleuchtend. Der Autor schafft es nicht nur genug Empirie anzuführen, um seine Aussagen zu untermauern, er gibt auch Denkanstöße die Kapitalverteilung in der Gesellschaft zu beeinflussen.Auch wenn man politisch anderen Meinung ist, sicherlich ein lesenswertes Buch.
Sehrt interessantes Buch und jedem der sich dafür interessiert ist es zu empfehlen. Eine zum nachdenken anregende größere Lektüre. Punkt
Großartige wissenschaftliche Analyse auf Basis enormer Datenmengen. Mehr ist dazu nicht zu sagen. Jedem zu empfehlen, der mit einem Werk dieser Länge und wissenschaftlicher Sprache umgehen kann.
Super
Was am Buch besticht, ist, dass versucht wird, die dargelegten Thesen anhand möglichst breiter Daten darzulegen. Der Autor verwendet hierzu vor Allem auf Steuerdaten der Finanzämter, welche über den gesamten verfügbaren Zeitraum untersucht werden. Dies ermöglicht erstmals Untersuchungen über längere Zeiträume. Anhand der ausgewerteten Daten wird eine seriöse Analyse der wachsenden Ungleichheit im Einkommen vorgenommen, die insofern höchst interessant ist, da das Augenmerk auf Fakten gelenkt wird, die mit der derzeit herrschenden Meinung nur bedingt vereinbar sind. Die Angriffe auf das Buch (u.A. seitens Chris Giles in der Financial Times), welche die wachsende Ungleichheit leugnen bzw. schönreden und rechtfertigen, obgleich die Daten – vor allem seit den 80er-Jahren des vergangenen Jahrhundert – dies offensichtlich belegen und auch unter einer historischen Perspektive durchaus schlüssig sind, scheint somit abgegriffen und stumpf. Die Kritiken scheinen somit eher einer verstaubten ideologischen Diskussion (die an die Zeit des Kalten Kriegs erinnert) anzuhaften als einem effektiven wissenschaftlichen Diskurs.Die Tatsache, dass das Buch sich an eine breitere Leserschaft und nicht allein an die Fachwelt richtet und der Autor sich somit bemüht, das Verständnis dieser breiten Leserschaft zu erleichtern, um einen politischen Dialog zu den aufgeworfenen Themen anzukurbeln, kann keineswegs ein Hinweis für mangelnde epistemologische Stimmigkeit des Buchs angesehen werden, sondern vielmehr als eine Stäke des Buchs. Diese der kontinentalen Wissenschaft oft fremde Klarheit steht voll in der angelsächsischen Tradition der Wissenschaft, in der sich die Autoren lobenswerterweise auch um Einfachheit und Verständlichkeit bemühen und nicht auf die kryptische Sprache weniger Initiierter zurückgreifen. Das Buch hat somit auch eine gewisse literarische Qualität und ist auch sprachlich ansprechend.Zusammenfassend kann somit gesagt werden, dass das Buch schon allein wegen seiner Originalität absolut zu empfehlen ist. Ich persönlich habe es bereits als Geschenk weitergegeben.
The most brilliant idea of this book is the title 'CAPITAL in the Twenty-First Century' which reminds the world of 'DAS KAPITAL' by Karl Marx published in 1867.Wikipedia Nov. 6th, 2015: 'On May 18, 2014, the English edition reached number one on the New York Times Best Sellers List for best selling hardcover nonfiction[2] and became the greatest sales success ever of academic publisher Harvard University Press.[3] As of January 2015, the book had sold 1.5 million copies in French, English, German, Chinese and Spanish.Can you imagine such a success with a book title 'TAXATION in the Twenty-First Century'?This small difference ' using CAPITAL instead of TAXATION ' made Piketty a millionaire, a rich man for normal people.The popularity of Picketty and his book provides several options between ignoring the book and trying to digest the 685 pages to develop one's own Position which I have tried to do. Below I quote directly from the book and add my comments marked as MC.Picketty identifies two fundamental laws of capitalism.The First Fundamental Law of Capitalism: ' = rxß. Share of income from capital (') = rate of return on capital (r) multiplied by the capital/income ratio (ß). For example, if ß=600% (national wealth represents the equivalent of six years of national income) and r=5% per year, then ' is 30%. Page (Pg) 52.The Second Law of Capitalism: the higher the savings rate (s) and the lower the growth rate (g) of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the higher the capital/income ratio (ß). (Pg. 55.)Picketty's goals and tax proposals:The history of the distribution of wealth has always been deeply political, and it cannot be reduced to purely economic mechanisms. (Pg. 20)The dynamics of wealth distribution reveal powerful mechanisms pushing alternately toward convergence and divergence. There is no natural, spontaneous process to prevent destabilizing, inegalitarian forces from prevailing permanently. (Pg. 21) The Fundamental force for divergence: r>g. (Pg. 25)There is no certainty that the largest fortunes are the ones most affected by inflation or that relying on inflation to reduce the influence of wealth accumulated in the past is the best way of attaining that goal. (Pg. 212)As I have already noted, the ideal policy for avoiding an endless inegalitarian spiral and regaining control over the dynamics of accumulation would be a progressive global tax on capital. (Pg. 471)To be sure, good economic and social policy requires more than just a high marginal tax rate on extremely high incomes. By its very nature, such a tax brings in almost nothing. A progressive tax on capital is a more suitable instrument for responding to the challenges of the twenty-first century than a progressive income tax. (Pg. 473)Hence the history of economic development is also a matter of political and cultural development, and each country must find its own distinctive path and cope with its own internal divisions. (Pg. 491)The ideal tool would be a progressive global tax on capital, coupled with a very high level of international financial transparency. ' A global tax on capital is a utopian idea. (P. 515)To my mind, the objective ought to be a progressive annual tax on individual wealth ' that is, on the net value of assets each person controls. (Pg. 516)MC: on one side Picketty considers each country responsible for its own distinctive path; on the other side he proposes a progressive global tax. Any such global tax can be considered as a pure pipe dream, not only a utopian idea which would become true once upon a time.Picketty: The proposed tax is in no way intended to replace all existing taxes. It would never be more than a fairly modest supplement to the other revenue streams on which the modern social state depends: a few points of national income (three or four at most ' still nothing to sneeze at).The primary purpose of the capital tax is not to finance the social state but to regulate capitalism. The goal is first to stop the indefinite increase of inequality of wealth, and second to impose effective regulation on the financial and banking system in order to avoid crises. (Pg. 518)Since a progressive income tax exists and, in most countries, a progressive estate tax as well, what is the purpose of a progressive tax on capital? In fact, these three progressive taxes play distinct and complementary roles. Each is an essential pillar of an ideal tax system. There are two distinct justifications of a capital tax: a contributive justification and an incentive justification. (Pg. 524)' it is very difficult for a country acting on its own to impose a progressive tax on capital. 'What would then be the ideal tax schedule? As usual, there is no mathematical formula for answering this question, which is a matter for democratic deliberation. It would make sense to tax net wealth below 200.000 euros at 0,1 percent and net wealth between 200.000 and 1 million euros at 0,5 percent. 'To a large extent a tax of this sort could be readily implemented by individual countries acting alone.Note that there is no reason why the tax rate on fortunes above 5 million euros should be limited to 2 percent. Since the real returns on the largest fortunes in Europe and around the world are 6 to 7 percent or more, it would not be excessive to tax fortunes above 100 million or 1 billion euros at rates well above 2 percent. The simplest and fairest procedure would be to set rates on the basis of observed returns in each wealth bracket over several prior years. Pg. 529)' it would probably be necessary to levy rates of about 5 percent on the largest fortunes. If a more ambitious goal is preferred ' say, to reduce wealth inequality to more moderate levels than exist today (and which history shows are not necessary for growth) ' one might envision rates of 10 percent or higher on billionaires. (Pg. 530)If necessary, the tax can be quite steeply progressive on very large fortunes, but this is a matter for democratic debate under a government of laws. A capital tax is the most appropriate response to the inequality r>g as well as to the inequality of returns to capital as a function of the size of the initial stake. Footnote 33. (Pg. 532) Footnote 33 on Page 644:The optimal rate of the capital tax will of course depend on the gap between the return on capital, r, and the growth rate, g, with an eye to limiting the effect of r>g. For example, under certain hypotheses, the optimal inheritance tax rate is given by the formula t=1-G/R, where G is the generational growth rate and R the generational return on capital (so that the tax approaches 100 percent when growth is extremely small relative to return on capital, and approaches 0 percent when the growth rate is close to the return on capital. (Pg. 644)MC: How G and R would be calculated and on which level - Eurozone, EU, Europe, globally - is missing!Such progressive tax concepts with the effect of 'multiple taxation' - to tax what has already been taxed ' would create a climate totally unfriendly to entrepreneurs, employers, the whole private industry sectors and the building of wealth far below the level Picketty is focusing on (top decile, top centile). It would finally contribute to growing unemployment when the opposite is of utmost importance.Applying such toxic formulae would empower politicians to expropriate slowly but surely private property and thus undermine the fundamentals of pluralistic democracies based on private wealth and ownership.Picketty: Extending the principle of 'residence of the capital asset' (rather than of its owner) to financial assets would obviously require automatic sharing of bank data to allow the tax authorities to assess complex ownership structures. Such a tax would also raise the issue of multinationality. Adequate answers to all these questions can clearly be found only at the European (or global) level. The right approach is therefore to create a Eurozone budgetary parliament to deal with them. Are all these proposals utopian? No more so than attempting to create a stateless currency. (Pg. 561)MC: this would be an additional parliament beside the EU Parliament; the Eurozone is a fragile part within the EU and Europe is more than the EU. To implement such an institution is another pipe dream of the author given the current political Eurozone and EU status.Picketty comments the quality of his own data to support his goals and tax proposals as follows:A Debate without Data? ' Indeed, the novels of Jane Austen and Honore de Balzac paint striking portraits of the distribution of wealth in Britain and France between 1790 and 1830. Pg. 2His vivid essay [Thomas Malthus in 1798] was by no means inaccurate. Pg. 4Like his predecessors, Marx totally neglected the possibility of durable technological progress and steadily increasing productivity, which is a force that can to some extent serve as a counterweight to the process of accumulation and concentration of private capital. Despite these limitations, Marx's analysis remains relevant in several respects. (Pg. 10).Picketty: Now, for the first time, objective data were available. Although the information was not perfect, it had the merit of existing. (Pg. 13)To expect that the phenomenon [Figure I.1. Income inequality in the United States, 1910-2010] will attain the same proportions elsewhere as it has done in the United States would be risky until we have subjected it to a full analysis ' which unfortunately is not that simple, given the limits of available data. (Pg. 24)MC: Picketty makes similar comments about his own data several times:limitations of the available data (Pg. 27), ' margin of error in these figures is considerable (Pg. 64) 'such calculations clearly leave a good deal of room for error ' uncertainties surrounding exchange rates and purchasing power parities, the average per capita monthly incomes (Pg. 66) '. the national accounts and other statistical data available in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries where wholly inadequate for a correct understanding of the dynamics of the capital/income ratio. (Pg. 230) 'Specifically, the data I have assembled and the historical distance we are fortunate enough to enjoy (still insufficient, to be sure, but by definition greater than that which previous authors had) lead to the following conclusions. (Pg. 233) ' The figures indicated are approximately and deliberately rounded off (Pg. 246) ' Note, finally, that the income and wealth distributions described in Tables 7.1-7.3 and analyzed in this and subsequent chapters are in all cases 'primary' distributions, meaning before taxes. (Pg. 255) 'The way one tries to measure inequality is never neutral. (Pg. 270) ' It is important, however, to be aware of the significant limitations of the data available for measuring the dynamics of the income distribution in poor and emerging countries and for comparing them with the rich countries ' but the truth is that our knowledge remains meager. (Pg. 328)As long as these official estimates of inequality fail to combine survey data with other data systematically gleaned from tax records and other government resources, it will be impossible to apportion macro-economic growth properly among various social groups or among the centiles and deciles of the income hierarchy. This is true, moreover, of wealthy countries as well as poor and emerging ones. (Pg. 330).Such predictions are obviously highly uncertain and are of interest primarily for their illustrative value. (Pg. 398). MC: this statement refers to figures based upon a theoretical model used for graphs along timelines from 1820 to 2100!Picketty:' the global distribution of wealth remains so opaque. ' Navigating our way through a global financial crisis blanketed in such a thick statistical fog is fraught with peril. (Pg. 519)Conclusion ' The sources on which this book draws are more extensive than any previous author has assembled, but they remain imperfect and incomplete. All of my conclusions are by nature tenuous and deserve to be questioned and debated. It is not the purpose of social science research to produce mathematical certainties that can substitute for open, democratic debate in which all shades of opinion are represented. (Pg. 571)MC: readers studying Picketty's impressive figures - almost 100 - with graphics and 18 tables should bear in mind Picketty's comments on his own data. I consider his whole complex of data as proprietary, not officially certified by any public institution. Picketty refers almost always to his own sources: see piketty.pse.ens.fr/capital21.c.Picketty's mistakes:"Six demonstrably false Claims in Thomas Picketty's Theory of Wealth - The best critiques of 'Capital' Show that most of the links in Thomas Picketty's Argument are broken. By Curtis Dubay and Salim Furth" is one of several sources dealing with Picketty's data and arguments which could help you to make up your own mind.Finally I want to draw your attention to a small detail:On Page 423 Picketty quotes an interview with the president of the European Central Bank granted to several major European newspapers a few months after his nomination.'When the journalists posed questions about his strategy for resolving Europe's problems, he offered this lapidary response: 'We must fight against rents.' (Mario Draghi, Le Monde, July 22, 2012). No further details were offered.'The original text in Le Monde - "L'interview-Gag de Mario Draghi patron de la BCE par le journal Le Monde" - was the following:«QUESTION 9 : C'est donc la victoire des thèses libérales ?MARIO DRAGHI : Non. Mettre fin à certaines rentes de situation est une question de justice, pour les employés et les entrepreneurs et pour tous les citoyens. »Translation :Question 9 : Is this the victory of liberal theses ?Mario Draghi : No. To avoid unwarranted earnings is a question of justice, for employees and entrepreneurs and for all citizens.Picketty should be more precise.
Das Buch behandelt sehr wissenschaftlich eine Vielzahl von Subthemen rund um die ungleiche Verteilung von Kapital. Sehr sehr lesenswert. Das Niveau ist natürlich sehr hoch, aber der Autor hat sich Mühe gegeben, die Sachverhalte möglichst anschaulich darzustellen. Für jeden Politik und Ökonomie-Interessierten ein Muss!
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty PDF
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty EPub
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty Doc
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty iBooks
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty rtf
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty Mobipocket
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty Kindle
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty PDF
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty PDF
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty PDF
Capital in the Twenty-First Century, by Thomas Piketty PDF
