Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
post about capital in the 21st century
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
rokob committed Jan 26, 2017
1 parent 95582cb commit 860a373
Showing 1 changed file with 79 additions and 0 deletions.
79 changes: 79 additions & 0 deletions _posts/2017-01-23-capital-in-the-twenty-first-century.md
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
---
layout: post
title: Capital in the Twenty-First Century
date: '2017-01-23T22:24:52-08:00'
categories: book
tags: book great history nonfiction
---

Every once in a while a book comes along that many people talk about wanting to read or bragging
about having read and I often find it hard to get myself excited to read them.
[*Capital in the Twenty-First Century*][capital-amazon] has come up in various discussions, radio
programs, and articles over the past couple years. I have a background in economics and an interest
in books that take very long term perspectives so this naturally made it on to my reading list. I
have been putting it off for a while and finally just decided that it was time to get down to it. An
exceptional book if only for the reason that he made the effort to collect the data and put forth a
systematic analysis of wealth and income inequality throughout the world and over a span of more
than 200 years. His interpretations of the data are not necessarily full-proof nor are his
moral assumptions strictly universal, but this does not detract from a great piece of scholarly
work.

One of the best reasons to read this book is that data is presented which dispels many commonly held
misconceptions about wealth both within certain countries as well as wealth and inequality in
relative terms between countries, primiarly between the US and Europe. There are certain beliefs
that seem to be common knowledge among a large proportion of the population, in the US at least,
which are patently false. For example, the idea that America is owned or is increasingly being owned
by foreign investors, the Chinese in particular, is put forth as a sign that certain policies or
facets of government or industry are failing. The reality is that net public wealth is close to zero
with any foreign holdings almost perfectly offset by corresponding domestic holdings of foreign
capital. We do not have other countries to fear, the only fear for the average American should be
from within our borders.

The extremely short version of the book is that the relationship between the rate of return on
capital, *r*, and the growth rate of output and labor, *g*, determines the level of inequality in the
long run. If *r > g*, then without some intervening mechanism, wealth will tend to concentrate in an
increasingly small minority of hands. We are most likely entering a period where *r* will remain
basically stable and *g* will decrease. Therefore we are likely to see inequality get worse unless
something is done to prevent this situation.

While the book tries to emphasize that income inequality is not bad in itself, there is still a
decently strong predisposed viewpoint that it is morally problematic for an individual to accumulate
a significantly large amount of wealth, an obscene amount in colloquial terms.
The author takes as a foundational assumption that one
agrees with the statement "Social distinctions can be based only on common utility." from
*Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen*. How one interprets this defines the level of
wealth deemed obscene. The extremes being that any amount of inequality is obscene and no amount of
inequality is obscene. The real distinction seems to come from where the wealth came from and how it
is being used. To benefit common utility the most, wealth should be distributed into the hands that
will make the most productive use of it. In some cases, the most productive uses are to reward
someone for labor that is itself productive. The incentive to work is a useful allocation of
capital. The author agrees with this sentiment. Static wealth which only serves to grow itself is
what is deemed obscene. Moreover wealth that is passed down across generations either via
inheritance or gift is deemed to be essentially unfair and thus this source of wealth is seen as
more obscene than the wealth obtained via labor income. While many people have this viewpoint, it is
not necessarily universal. Cast in these terms it makes sense that the proposed policy to remedy
inequality is a progressive global tax on capital. If you make productive use of your wealth above
and beyond the tax rate and inflation rate, then it makes sense for you to have the wealth that you
do. On the other hand, if tax plus inflation eats away your capital because you are not using it,
then this redistribution is morally correct. That is the basic gist of the argument as I read it.
One might ask why a progressive tax? There are a variety of arguments that appeal to morality,
empathy, and social justice. These are all economically unappealing. However, there is a decent
economic argument which allows one to skirt the moral quagmire. The rate of return is an increasing
function of initial stake. In other words, larger fortunes can earn a greater return than smaller
fortunes, ceteris paribus. There are a variety of reasons for this, but it is more or less an
empirical fact. Hence, to force capital to be used dyanmically, one must institute a progressive tax
to account for the increasing baseline return on capital.

One issue I had with the book is the use of averages in certain areas. Many important parts are
broken down into percentiles which allows for an accurate view into the distribution. However,
within the say top 1% of the wealth distribution, we are left looking at average rates of return and
the like. There are distributions in the other dimension that are also important. This issue is
raised by the author and basically explained away frequently. It is very hard to present
multivariate distributions in a way that is digestable in clear graphs or tables. I understand that,
but some effort to even use medians or other percentiles in some places might have been nice.

Overall I highly recommend this book. If you want to understand what wealth really means and how
various rich countries are really organized around labor and capital, you need to read this book.

[capital-amazon]: http://a.co/1APUYum

0 comments on commit 860a373

Please sign in to comment.