42 thoughts on “An Introduction to Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century- A Macat Economics Analysis

  1. One sobering fact in the book.
    Bill Gates(founder of Microsoft, ranked as the richest man in the world at least one tome or another) is making more money today after he retired by investing the money than the money he was making as a CEO of the company.
    He also points out another example of this by showing how the larger universities(larger capital, Piketty uses the word, "endowment") make more money than smaller universities by investing it(as much as 2x).

    In today's system, money creates more money. If you are rich today, the system(capitalism) demands you to be richer tomorrow.

    The opposite is true also, if you are poor or doing ok, the system demands you to be poorer tomorrow,

    The world resource, the capital, are finite. You don't create wealth out of thin air.
    You skim the wealth from other people.
    You just don't notice when the economy becomes so large.

    It's natural, the conclusion of capitalism is inequality.
    There's no other way around.

  2. I suspect this "Macat" entity is another marxist bunch of manipulators afraid to unveil themselves. I could be wrong, but this vid sure doesn't suggest that.

  3. the rich thinks the poor is jealous of the rich's money. that may not be so. The moment your money is making my life more difficult would make me upset. you can invest your money in tons of thing, and the increase price can affect my life. you invest your money aboard and take away my job. with your money you can invest into a certain politician and help to elect him and change my life and get my country into wars and the poor will pay with their life, so maybe you a petroleum company. And help global warming , damage the wild life, the ocean life, and tons and tons of other reason someone can think of. this is when your life endanger the life of others. a workers income might change from 30K to 50K, but the rich could change from a billion to trillion. you do not see anything in the universe with no law, therefor, money has to bee given a law.

  4. Good thing there is a handy infographic on YouTube for this garbage book since it was the most unread best seller. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-summers-most-unread-book-is-1404417569

  5. And btw return has not been %5 REGARDLESS of whether the capital was invested in gold, stocks, bonds, real estate, etc, etc. It has been %5 (unadjusted for inflation) ONLY in stocks. The other assets returned a fraction of stocks.

  6. Return on Capital has been around %5. The growth of the economy has been around %3. What on earth may account for the %2 difference that Piketty's premise is founded on??? Well, what do ya know? Turns out the rate of inflation over the same time period was about %2 :)) Pikkety does not adjust for inflation when he states that ROC has been %5 but does so when he points out that Growth has been %3. Can you say sleight of hand

  7. Who says inequility is bad? Maybe inequility is the just and fair result of different economic choices? It's not Janes fault that Joe doesnt save or invest any of his money.

  8. The assumptions in the example case provided are totally absurd. First, if I inherited $10mill, and especially if I was earning $500k/year on it, I certainly wouldn't bother with getting a job when I could live quite comfortably on that $500k/year income! And I suspect that I am far from the only person who would choose not to work for a living if I didn't have to because I had such a hefty inheritance to live off of. Do a survey of the people who work as store clerks, waitresses, or fast food joint cashiers. I suspect that you will get an overwhelming preference for quitting their jobs and living on the inheritance. Second, it takes a special kind of idiot to make $100k/year and spend all of it saving nothing for retirement. But that is typical leftist thinking–feeling sorry for someone who makes $100k/year and who doesn't have the good sense to save a dime of it for retirement, while people who make a fraction of that do scrimp and save a significant portion of their income for their retirement with litttle difficulty. lol.

  9. What the fuck is this communist propaganda!!

    “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
    ― Margaret Thatcher

  10. This seems like complete nonsense. How can the worth of capital increase unless there is a demand for the product and services upon which that capital is based (I.e the working and middle classes have economic power)? Unless there is a bubble or printing money, it can't. Piketty has made a huge error in ignoring property prices and drawing assumptions from pre-war economic management of artificially high interest rates.

  11. Nothing new.
    Pure old socialist propaganda once again.
    Haven’t you learn anything from the last century?
    That tax only punishes intelligence, entrepreneurship and hard work and rewards laziness and mediocrity.
    It’s born out of envy, bitterness and resentment.
    Shared misery.
    Everyone’s equal but dirt poor.
    Socialism DOES NOT WORK.

  12. Interesting data, but who cares if income inequality gets worse, Joe doesn't lose any money. Jane never took anything from Joe. Everybody's better off

  13. Sadly, Piketty's tax will do nothing but go into the pockets of the people that are supposed to distribute it to the poor.

  14. The central issue that the video misses out is what is done with the tax. Presumably, it is invested by the government. In which case, the result is almost the same, you just have to ascertain who is better at investing. Given that the governments who suggest these policies often leave us with trillions in national debt, and the 'rich' often have accumulated more wealth by investing, I'd say that the latter is more competent in doing so. It also misses the point of inflation. Inheritance can only have an effect over a certain amount of generations. I can't get wealthy from the inheritance my grandfather got from my great grandfather because prices have risen considerably since that period in time. The only way that I could inherit money is if my family succeeding him successfully invested that money, in which they would be contributing to economic growth by investing in promising firms, which helps the poor by making them better off than they were X amount of years ago.

  15. Ended up here after reading 200 pages of this book and not understanding a thing. I feel so dumb, it's probably because I just began economy classes.

  16. Economic theory always seems to over-complicate what happens in our everyday lives in terms of our financial well-being. It is refreshing to see Thomas Piketty in his book, "Capital in The Twenty-First Century," reversing that trend in an audacious attempt at equality by over-simplifying.

    Simpletons around the world thank you for this easy to understand correction. Oh by the way wonder why Piketty didn't taken into account where jobs come from in his model if not "r"?

    Wonder why Piketty didn't account for redistribution to poor via taxes?

    Wonder why he didn't baseline against say Russia or any socialist countries data in terms of his model.

    Wonder why he only looked at equality? Instead of total lifestyle impact. Still Hollywood types, media elite,man those who have never had a macro econ course will find Piketty's Propaganda a welcome addition to the regular fair provided by Paul Krugman.

  17. So capitalism increases financial inequality. So what? As long as everybody's prosperity rises (even in the lower income classes), what's the problem with rising inequality? The only answer that I can think of is: jealousy.
    "Poor" people nowadays have higher standards of living than the richest man on the planet had 2000 years ago. Even the emperor of Rome didn't have what we have today, in terms of communication, information, medicine, or transportation. It's capitalism that fueled much of this progress.

  18. My god this video is ridiculous. So to help the poor, a world body should take money away from rich people? How exactly does that help the poor? Why would rich people do the things that they do in order to make themselves rich if a world government body is just going to take what they earn over a certain amount? Who in their right mind would trust a government to take your money and do anything with it other than enrich themselves and blow it on stupid crap? Why is it that people think business people are evil thieves but politicians are angels?

  19. uh okay is it just that this video is for stupid people or is the entire book? Does this book actually contain anything useful for Marxists who know anything about anything? Doesn't seem so to me, in that case this book has a very unfortunate title it doesn't deserve.

  20. The brilliant minds in the comments section would probably do best to actually study the issue before expressing an opinion.

  21. I want someone to explain to me how Jane making money from investments hurts Joe? Now forget the inheritance. Pretend Jane makes 50% more in 10 years and Joe makes 20% more in 10 years. Their income gap has grown, but they both make more. How is Joe hurt by this? It would seem Joe is actually doing better after 10 years. Not as well as Jane, but that in no way means he is not still doing better than he was. If I'm wrong, I'd like it explained to me.

  22. This is such nonsense. At the very beginning with the graphic, it shows that they think the economy is a zero sum game, which it's not. Then Jane gets 10 million in an inheritance, which is really rare and unusual to begin with. Then it assumes that her investments are all perfect which is also rare and unusual. Bad investments happen all the time and people lose the money they invested. Then it also never says how Jane making money from investments hurts Joe. It doesn't. It just tries to make you feel sorry for Joe just because Jane had a rich family member die and she inherited money. First, shouldn't we feel sorry for Jane? She is the one with the dead family member that apparently she loved enough that they left her 10 million dollars. Second, its' not Jane's fault that Joe doesn't save or invest his money. He can live on less than 100K and save or invest his money. Because he is bad with money, we're supposed to feel sorry for him? Jane may very well have invested in Joe's company, saving his job. This entire premise is absurd.

  23. capitalism is unfair for those people who are on the average to poor status, they cant climb mountains, comparing to those rich capitalist, they can move mountains.

  24. "Does the structure of capitalism eliminates inequality or reinforces it?" If this is THE question of this book, let me tell you: Karl Marx already answered that question in the 19th century 🙂 But we can't talk about Marx or say Marx is right this days can we?

  25. Thank you for this, I have been struggling through this book for some time. I want to make the best decision when voting and I think economic dynamics play a central role in many social issues.

  26. This doesn't explain what the problem with inequality is, or why it is moral to steal from one group of people to give to another. Why should people envy others? Why does a group of people gain the right to steal that an individual would not?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *