The Literature on Piketty

King, J. E.

doi:10.1080/09538259.2016.1173425

Cited by 35 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 Within communication sciences and political economy of the media, Preston (2016) and Fuchs (2014) provide longer standalone articles on the book. King (2017), in his survey of the post-Piketty literature, shows that the supporters and critics are many and various. Particularly relevant for the present article is the intense criticism that has been voiced especially against policies proposed by Piketty.…”

Section: Capital In the Twenty-first Century And The Piketty Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

‘Piketty is a genius, but … ’: an analysis of journalistic delegitimation of Thomas Piketty’s economic policy proposals

Rieder

Theine

2019

Critical Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Capital In the Twenty-first Century And The Piketty Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

‘Piketty is a genius, but … ’: an analysis of journalistic delegitimation of Thomas Piketty’s economic policy proposals

Rieder

Theine

2019

Critical Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, Piketty's account suggests that substitutability lies between 1.3 and 1.6. However, it has been widely noted that there is a lack of empirical support for this value range (Summers 2014;Pressman 2015;King 2017), with Rognlie (2014), in particular, presenting evidence suggesting substitutability to be less than one.…”

Section: Piketty and His Criticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policies for Equality Under Low or No Growth: A Model Inspired by Piketty

Hartley

Bergh

2020

Review of Political Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

GDP growth is declining in industrial economies, and there is increasing evidence that growth may be environmentally unsustainable. If growth falls below returns to wealth then inequalities increase, as Thomas Piketty recently showed. This poses a challenge to managing slow and/or negative growth. Here, we examine policies that have been proposed to solve the problem of increasing income inequality in slow-or non-growing economies, including redistribution, taxation, and employment reforms. We construct a simple model, expanding Piketty's recent work, to evaluate the parameter ranges within which these different policies can be effective. Our analysis leads to two main findings. First, except in the case of complete wealth equality, any strategy to prevent increasing income inequality must reduce returns to wealth below the rate of growth. Second, several strategies may prevent an increase in income inequality during periods of low growth and may slow rising inequality, but not prevent it, in non-growing economies.

show abstract

“…The Post-Keynesian and Structuralist reception of Piketty's work has been largely sceptical. King's (2017) comprehensive review summarizes the arguments (of Neoclassical, Austrian and Post-Keynesian economists) in nine over-arching points of critique. These range from differences in opinion regarding the relevance of wealth inequality and the suggested policy conclusions, empirical disagreements and theoretical critiques, the latter including the importance of institutions and of low-income countries.…”

Section: Piketty and The Post-keynesiansmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reception of the book in Post-Keynesian economics has been mixed. On the one hand, Post-Keynesian economists recognize the empirical contributions of the book: the collection of historical data and the carving out of observable patterns therein (Rowthorn 2014;Rehm and Schnetzer 2015;King 2017). On the other hand, Piketty's Neoclassical theoretical framework by which he explains the dynamics of wealth and income inequality has attracted the criticism of Post-Keynesian economists, in whose theoretical frameworks distribution has long played a major role (for example, Galbraith 2014;Palley 2014;López-Bernardo et al 2016a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making sense of Piketty's ‘fundamental laws’ in a Post-Keynesian framework: the transitional dynamics of wealth inequality

Ederer

Rehm

2020

Review of Keynesian Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If Piketty's main theoretical prediction (r > g leads to rising wealth inequality) is taken to its radical conclusion, then a small elite will own all wealth if capitalism is left to its own devices. We formulate and calibrate a Post-Keynesian model with an endogenous distribution of wealth between workers and capitalists which permits such a corner solution of all wealth held by capitalists. However, it also shows interior solutions with a stable, non-zero wealth share of workers, a stable wealth-to-income ratio, and a stable and positive gap between the profit and the growth rate determined by the Cambridge equation. More importantly, simulations show that the model conforms to Piketty's empirical findings during a transitional phase of increasing wealth inequality, which characterizes the current state of high-income countries: the wealth share of capitalists rises to over 60 per cent, the wealth-to-income ratio increases, and income inequality rises. Finally, we show that the introduction of a wealth tax as suggested by Piketty could neutralize this rise in wealth concentration predicted by our model.

show abstract

The Literature on Piketty

Cited by 35 publications

References 76 publications

‘Piketty is a genius, but … ’: an analysis of journalistic delegitimation of Thomas Piketty’s economic policy proposals

‘Piketty is a genius, but … ’: an analysis of journalistic delegitimation of Thomas Piketty’s economic policy proposals

Policies for Equality Under Low or No Growth: A Model Inspired by Piketty

Making sense of Piketty's ‘fundamental laws’ in a Post-Keynesian framework: the transitional dynamics of wealth inequality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About