Interview with economist Thomas Piketty: capital and ideology I FT

► Check out our Community tab for more stories or to suggest videos.

[mfst]

I love how he speaks French in English.

[harryedwards]

I look forward to the financial times trying it's best to ignore these ideas over the next 12months

[Grandyu]

“If we don’t do this kind of departure from the current organization of globalization then you end up with nativist parties who are going to propose another kind of departure, which is ... to be very tough with migrants. Because that’s easier than being tough with Google, or with rich people.”

[lacalleinvisible]

Edward Snowden, such a great interviewer

[jaytsecan]

I don't think Thomas Piketty is going to be invited to Davos (World Economic Forum) anytime soon. (Though I'd love to see it)

[rp]

Loved the book...very interesting analysis of social organization over times and cultures.

[danieldonaldson]

Must have been hard for the FT to find a staff member to talk to Piketty who wouldn't piss themselves with fear once he starts explaining his ideas. Using a dark couch was a good idea. Also notice he's sitting over the split between the couch bits.

[mikahundin]

In the interview with economist Thomas Piketty, he discusses his new book "Capital and Ideology" and provides insights on various topics. Here are the main points he made, attributed to him:

1. Broadening the scope: Piketty mentions that unlike his previous book, which focused mainly on Western countries, his new book takes a much broader comparative and international perspective, looking at countries like India, Brazil, South Africa, China, and Latin America.

2. Ideology and political mobilization: Piketty argues that the main driving force behind the transformation of inequality structures over time is not violent destructions through war or economic deterministic forces, but rather changing ideologies and political mobilization about inequality.

3. Historical examples: He provides examples of countries that have significantly changed their structure of inequality, such as Sweden, which transitioned from a highly unequal society in terms of voting rights to a very egalitarian one, and India, which implemented positive discrimination to reverse strong inequalities toward lower castes.

4. Global reach of ideas: Piketty notes that sometimes there is a very quick diffusion of ideas, such as the rise of progressive taxation of income and wealth around World War One and in the interwar period, while other ideas remain idiosyncratic to different countries.

5. Role of elites: He points out that elites sometimes instrumentalize their own national history to preserve their interests, which is a function of ideology as he describes it.

6. Lasting change through ideas: Piketty suggests that when ideas change, it leads to more lasting changes in inequality regimes, citing the example of Germany's co-management system, where workers have rights in the board of companies.

7. State of play in terms of ideology: Piketty believes that we are living in a time of great uncertainty, as the ideology of globalization and financial deregulation that developed in the 1980s is now in crisis, leading to two possible reactions: limiting competition from foreign workers or regulating the circulation of people and capital more.

8. Wealth tax proposal: Piketty proposes a wealth tax with rates going up to 90% for exceptional wealth, which has been done in the past (e.g., after World War Two in Germany and Japan) to reduce large public debt and invest in public infrastructure and education.

9. Counterargument to wealth tax: Addressing concerns that his wealth tax proposal might remove incentives for accumulation, Piketty questions why some people should inherit significantly more than others and argues that the monarchical view of modern economies and corporations is at odds with reality.

10. International wealth tax: Piketty has previously advocated for an international wealth tax but acknowledges that it might be possible for a single country to pursue steep wealth taxation if they rethink the way they organize the movement of capital and capital controls.

[heathflagtvedt]

A lot of people commenting here that Piketty's calls for action are undesirable and communist. What makes him significant, and thus interviewed on the grand stage of international discussion, is not his prescription for repair, but his coherent presentation and understanding of the problem. Income inequality destroys societies. Always. I don't think he has the fix and it is unrealistic to expect him to. He does present the history and context of the problem better than anyone, recently if not ever.

Wealth tax may be bad policy. But we are hurtling toward a dark end. We need an innovative approach to an old problem, and that starts with a comprehensive understanding of the problem in its current state. Picketty is step one. The easy part, relatively speaking, but still important.

Andrew Yang's proposal only seems crazy if you cannot wrap your head around Picketty's statement of the problem. It is seems desperate, but our situation IS desperate.

[julianjazz]

We owe Piketty so much. Imagine if his ideas get any fruition. Our world would be 1000x better for all.

[anchorpoint]

the level of inequality in the US is probably higher than in any other
society at any time in the past anywhere in the world " thomas piketty

[jappiejojo]

I don’t like Piketty’s socialist ideas at all, but I’ll give him this: he’s a real original thinker and he brings a lot of arguments forward we’ve neglected for far too long.

[wille]

This man could ramble on for ages and I love it

[bouffezlegumes]

Love to see another documentary made from from his new book

[ludwigweihs]

Why you guys oppose his ideas ?
I mean some good base of it, is also that the potential of applied capital is
minimized by confinement to very few human decisionary channels.
Even Keynes says only active markets can act to their best.
If you put more people at least at range of enabling them to positively
contribute to human purposes you have to give them at least access
to capital channeling.
Leaving aside the taxation topic in general his analysis is correct.
Everybody could be richer - so to say - if the distribution would be more leading
to overall wealth effectiveness.
! Of course the ideologies behind are important, capital should also be there to defend
values that i consider "our" values - the danger behind it all is that too static economic systematics
press useful improvement into the state of inferiority for the sake of personal indifferent greed due to
distance to moral commitment. ....

[barmariosky]

One of the best economists, perfect analysis.

[jibjub]

if I had a euro for every communist strawman in the comments, I'd be facing a wealth tax

[alloomis]

we think, or we like to think we think, as individuals, but societies evolve in response to daily inputs within and without the nation. national planning is always pointed towards keeping rulers in power, and wealthy. naked greed drives from the top.
this evolution is driving us over a climate precipice which will certainly create great unrest, and there is a possibility of extinction.
so it's time for intellectual input in the management of society, pointed towards survival. this means socialism, and would be done best under democracy.
neither is blossoming yet, and if/when they show up, it may be too late.

[BarryHawk]

The Germans, ahead of everyone as usual.

[yinghanfu]

a 40% exit tax? I'm sure billionaires will wait until the legislation.