Google Piketty and you get 42,400,000 hits.
An amazing result.
I bought the executive summary of his book Capital in the 21st Century, but that only whetted my appetite so now the book is on its way.
It seems from the reviews that I have read that most of what Piketty reports is common sense and his main conclusion can be evidenced from a cursory reading of any Newspaper.
The rich are getting richer, and as the song says, the poor get poorer.
But the research, supporting his argument, is impressive and exhaustive
Piketty argues that the two main drivers of wealth accumulation are the rise in managerial compensation including I imagine, bonuses paid to bankers and inheritance.
In his conclusion he argues for taxation as the best way of correcting these processes.
Two news items this week suggest that the public appetite for the continuing drift towards social inequality might be lessening.
The decision by the Chancellor to refuse to allow RBS Executives to reward themselves by paying handsome bonuses, so handsome in fact that the FT no less felt, able to comment in its editorial today, that 'half of the £576M bonus pool intended by the RBS board would have been reserved for the investment bankers ..... a pretty lavish handout, given that the part of the business in which they operate made only £620M in 2013'.
Not every one agrees with Piketty but the research and the detail which he has brought to bear in support of his analysis is pretty impressive.
Yesterday I had to pay a bill.
Not an uncommon event of course we all have to do it, the bill was not unreasonable given the service that I had received from the company and the quality of the workmanship involved.
But as the bill was presented it came with an apology that the VAT meant that a reasonable invoice immediately appeared unreasonable, especially as it was being paid out of an income on which I had already paid income tax.
Unlike so many tax efficient companies who domicile themselves for their greater tax efficiency, I cannot, say, have an office in Luxembourg for the purposes of paying myself, with another office in say, Monaco for the purpose of paying my bills.
So, like most people, I pay VAT at 20% out of income on which I have already paid tax at 20%.
Piketty sees taxation as the best instrument to achieve social equity in the economy, but, and I haven't read his argument that closely yet, it seems to me that unless the underlying principle behind taxation is radically reviewed, the instrument will be too blunt to respond to the challenge of growing inequality.
And the rich will get richer.
I am sure that there is an equation, I might find it explained in the book, when an individuals net wealth will simply outstrip any conceivable expenditure that the individual could possibly undertake.
This equation will explain how some people when they fall asleep in the evening will always wake up richer in the morning despite having done nothing other than sleep the night away.
It explains why for some people in todays climate, the old saw of how to end up with a small fortune, to begin with a large one, remains only a distant and vaguely amusing possibility.
With the recent change of manager at Manchester United we have seen how the economics of football have changed so dramatically from the days when Newton Heath Football Club changed their name.
Accompanying the huge rise in personal and company wealth whereby financial assets appear to have become magnetised so that capital has a constant polarity attracting more capital to itself we are also seeing a dramatic increase in public debt.
Governments borrow more and the Condems in the UK have pursued their austerity policies in such a way that the poorest bear the highest burden of paying down that debt whilst the rich are excused the responsibility.
For Piketty higher taxes should be progressive and used to pay down Government Debt thereby relieving the burden that currently falls on the shoulders of those least able to pay.
But this debate is unwinnable in the short or long term and Piketty has been attacked by the right in the US, although the book has been welcomed and received good reviews in the UK.
What I would like to see, given the tragedy that is unfolding in the UK in the mutual business called the Co-op is for the Co-op to address some of these issues in a tangible and open manner.
We could start by challenging the view that monopoly salaries are necessary to attract the best people. There should be a clearly stated relationship between what the highest paid employee earns and what the lowest paid employee can be paid, and that should be made mandatory.
It would be interesting to see what calibre of managers might be attracted and what value they would add to the business.
In the novel The Great Gatsby, Gatsby, Fitzgerald's poor boy become rich, living in extraordinary opulence in his fine mansion on the bay, orders Klipspringer to play the piano and so he plays the song 'ain't we got fun'.
Landlords mad and getting madder
Ain't we got fun?
Times are so bad and getting badder
Still we have fun
There's nothing surer
The rich get rich and the poor get laid off
In the meantime, in between time
Ain't we got fun?
An amazing result.
I bought the executive summary of his book Capital in the 21st Century, but that only whetted my appetite so now the book is on its way.
It seems from the reviews that I have read that most of what Piketty reports is common sense and his main conclusion can be evidenced from a cursory reading of any Newspaper.
The rich are getting richer, and as the song says, the poor get poorer.
But the research, supporting his argument, is impressive and exhaustive
Piketty argues that the two main drivers of wealth accumulation are the rise in managerial compensation including I imagine, bonuses paid to bankers and inheritance.
In his conclusion he argues for taxation as the best way of correcting these processes.
Two news items this week suggest that the public appetite for the continuing drift towards social inequality might be lessening.
The decision by the Chancellor to refuse to allow RBS Executives to reward themselves by paying handsome bonuses, so handsome in fact that the FT no less felt, able to comment in its editorial today, that 'half of the £576M bonus pool intended by the RBS board would have been reserved for the investment bankers ..... a pretty lavish handout, given that the part of the business in which they operate made only £620M in 2013'.
Not every one agrees with Piketty but the research and the detail which he has brought to bear in support of his analysis is pretty impressive.
Yesterday I had to pay a bill.
Not an uncommon event of course we all have to do it, the bill was not unreasonable given the service that I had received from the company and the quality of the workmanship involved.
But as the bill was presented it came with an apology that the VAT meant that a reasonable invoice immediately appeared unreasonable, especially as it was being paid out of an income on which I had already paid income tax.
Unlike so many tax efficient companies who domicile themselves for their greater tax efficiency, I cannot, say, have an office in Luxembourg for the purposes of paying myself, with another office in say, Monaco for the purpose of paying my bills.
So, like most people, I pay VAT at 20% out of income on which I have already paid tax at 20%.
Piketty sees taxation as the best instrument to achieve social equity in the economy, but, and I haven't read his argument that closely yet, it seems to me that unless the underlying principle behind taxation is radically reviewed, the instrument will be too blunt to respond to the challenge of growing inequality.
And the rich will get richer.
I am sure that there is an equation, I might find it explained in the book, when an individuals net wealth will simply outstrip any conceivable expenditure that the individual could possibly undertake.
This equation will explain how some people when they fall asleep in the evening will always wake up richer in the morning despite having done nothing other than sleep the night away.
It explains why for some people in todays climate, the old saw of how to end up with a small fortune, to begin with a large one, remains only a distant and vaguely amusing possibility.
With the recent change of manager at Manchester United we have seen how the economics of football have changed so dramatically from the days when Newton Heath Football Club changed their name.
Accompanying the huge rise in personal and company wealth whereby financial assets appear to have become magnetised so that capital has a constant polarity attracting more capital to itself we are also seeing a dramatic increase in public debt.
Governments borrow more and the Condems in the UK have pursued their austerity policies in such a way that the poorest bear the highest burden of paying down that debt whilst the rich are excused the responsibility.
For Piketty higher taxes should be progressive and used to pay down Government Debt thereby relieving the burden that currently falls on the shoulders of those least able to pay.
But this debate is unwinnable in the short or long term and Piketty has been attacked by the right in the US, although the book has been welcomed and received good reviews in the UK.
What I would like to see, given the tragedy that is unfolding in the UK in the mutual business called the Co-op is for the Co-op to address some of these issues in a tangible and open manner.
We could start by challenging the view that monopoly salaries are necessary to attract the best people. There should be a clearly stated relationship between what the highest paid employee earns and what the lowest paid employee can be paid, and that should be made mandatory.
It would be interesting to see what calibre of managers might be attracted and what value they would add to the business.
In the novel The Great Gatsby, Gatsby, Fitzgerald's poor boy become rich, living in extraordinary opulence in his fine mansion on the bay, orders Klipspringer to play the piano and so he plays the song 'ain't we got fun'.
Landlords mad and getting madder
Ain't we got fun?
Times are so bad and getting badder
Still we have fun
There's nothing surer
The rich get rich and the poor get laid off
In the meantime, in between time
Ain't we got fun?
