Capital in the Twenty-First Century

De: Thomas Piketty, Arthur Goldhammer - translator

Narrado por: L. J. Ganser

Duración: 24 h y 58 m

Resumen del Editor

What are the grand dynamics that drive the accumulation and distribution of capital? Questions about the long-term evolution of inequality, the concentration of wealth, and the prospects for economic growth lie at the heart of political economy. But satisfactory answers have been hard to find for lack of adequate data and clear guiding theories. In Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Thomas Piketty analyzes a unique collection of data from 20 countries, ranging as far back as the 18th century, to uncover key economic and social patterns. His findings will transform debate and set the agenda for the next generation of thought about wealth and inequality.

Piketty shows that modern economic growth and the diffusion of knowledge have allowed us to avoid inequalities on the apocalyptic scale predicted by Karl Marx. But we have not modified the deep structures of capital and inequality as much as we thought in the optimistic decades following World War II. The main driver of inequality - the tendency of returns on capital to exceed the rate of economic growth - today threatens to generate extreme inequalities that stir discontent and undermine democratic values. But economic trends are not acts of God. Political action has curbed dangerous inequalities in the past, Piketty says, and may do so again.

A work of extraordinary ambition, originality, and rigor, Capital in the Twenty-First Century reorients our understanding of economic history and confronts us with sobering lessons for today.

Download the accompanying reference guide.

©2014 the President and Fellows of Harvard College (P)2014 Audible, Inc.

Reseñas de la Crítica

"L.J. Ganser's voice and accents are superb, and emphasis is well placed." ( AudioFile)

Understanding of Capital Accumulation and its Evil

Capital, In the Twenty-first Century, a study by Thomas Piketty of ails and cures for the inequitable allocation of wealth. A subject whose presence is a leading issue in the 2016 presidential run. Capital is the story of the accumulation of large financial resources in a small societal group. The group Senator Bernie Sander calls the 1%. This insidious accumulation of wealth is not the teaching of Bernie Sanders nor Elizabeth Warren. It is the original iteration of Professor Piketty; it is Piketty that introduced the economic distortion to the global community in this book. This book gives one insight into why the markets have failed to demonstrate the nature of the corruption caused by the unreasonable accumulation of wealth, why those markets have failed to curb this mass accretion affluence in a few and then how to cure the evil: by a tax on capital amassing, full education and democratic discussion. Professor Piketty explains the disorder and how to work a cure on the natural imbalance that comes from wealth’s likely ability to accumulate.

Knowledge of the inequitable distribution of wealth will be fashioning our political scene for decades to come. I am in high praise of this work but warn you not to pick it up for a read (listen) unless you truly want to do some profound economic analysis. This is deep deep learning on a not too easy to understand the concept.

Two more points, Piketty’s theses depend on economic mathematics. He professes to deplore mathematical application to prove economic theorems, but nevertheless, Piketty doesn’t necessarily shy from mathematical or in particular statistical analysis in the book.

For a non-economist, the definitional section, chapter two in the audio version, is not easy to grasp with one listen. His applied mathematics to his data was not easy to follow but once mastered it aids in revealing truths – but to get there the intensity of Piketty’s analysis will make you scream with frustration, even if you are a statistician. It took multiple listens but the elemental understanding was essential. It was well worth the effort. Piketty, - thank the gods of tolerability - it finally turns out, is a fundamentalist not a technician in his proofs and conclusions. If you force yourself to read his communicative reasoning you will find he is effectively explained; and enjoyable!

Piketty also explicates that earlier studies did not have the statistical analytics and data we have today to test theories like his on Capital, and so his present work is superior to historical studies. A reading of this cogitation makes me conclude he is right! This is a literate and new and unique masterful work.

Piketty does this only to provide the reader with an economic basis by which to apostolate his findings – which will be his conclusions on wealth inequality – and how to cure its wrongs; but before he gets there he makes sure the reader is well versed in his understanding of modern economics.

Piketty begins by canvassing past analysts of capitalism, from John Stuart Mills (capitalisms, free markets, and proper taxation), Ricardo to Thomas Robert Mathus (population and its effect on economics) and then on to Marx/ Engel (communism and Das Kapital) and Simon Kuznets (components for the growth of nations), etc. He then explains his methodology of analysis.

Piketty’s capture of growth rates (Chapter 3 in the Audible edition) shattered my understanding of what may be achievable. He made great sense in anticipating no more than 1.5 percent (if not .5 percent) for the industrialized universe and then only if alternative courses of power can be developed other than carbon. Should he be correct, there are some economic adjustments ahead for the world. The chapter opened with a discussion of population and its effect on economic growth or perhaps to be more accurate how the vectors of population growth intermixes with productivity – from the known world from the 1700s to the present day. A fun read. He then provides the statistics for his later analysis. Not fun to read.

Piketty next provides a commanding explanation of inflation from a historical perspective. It was not always as omnipresent as we understand it to be these days. He then goes on to provide us with a framework of how income and capital relationships existed in Britain and France from the 1700s to today and then next likewise for the balance of Europe.

Supplied with the primary understanding of economic factors needed to analyze capital accumulation he then takes on the reasons for the natural accumulation of wealth, its evil, and how to cure it before it creates an oligarchy. I read this book in conjunction with Jayne Mayer’s Dark money. Piketty explains the unnatural growth of money in singular hands and Ms. Mayer demonstrates Piketty’s warning on how the super-rich can distort our well-being.

Read the book instead of listening

The graphs are included with the audio book but I highly suggest just reading the book. A must read book however. If you won’t get to reading it, listen to it.

Truly Magnificent Work

I'm not an economist bit as is pointed out clearly in this work it is in every citizen's interest to understand the political and social history surrounding money. Peketty has completed a monumental effort to help us gain this understanding.

Important work that should be taught in schools

Great interdisciplinary approach to a subject too often clouded by dogma pretending to be science. Finally, an intellectually honest approach to modern economics. Should be foundational for all educations.

Historical masterpiece

This book places itself among the most influential political, philosophical and social scientific books in history. An absolut must for anyone who cares about the state of the world.

A Seminal Work

In my opinion, as a layman, this is a well-argued, exhaustively-researched piece of work. Prof Piketty does not simply make statements or come to conclusions based on nothing more than ideas. His conclusions are the end-products of seemingly tireless work and research that serve to inform and bolster his arguments. It goes without saying that "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" is an ambitious undertaking. Nevertheless, it has been executed in a manner that is difficult not to admire.

very interesting

it's very interesting book. With some old ideas spun With A New Perspective. Some of the historical references seen incorrect with almost a questionable motives. it's long but it's interesting.

Unique Perspective

Love the fact-based and data-driven descriptive analysis that helps me to form my own conclusions regarding history. I'm less enamored with the prescriptive solutions proposed, where Piketty's socialist/collectivism/statist bias are obvious.

Well structured information blocks.

If you are interested in how modern financial system operates, this book is a great source. Or just a general knowledge about the financial world.

Hottest Economic Beach Read of the Season

This is one of those scholarly books that seem to end up being accidental cultural markers of time and place. I'm pretty sure Piketty wanted his book to be read/discussed/debated, and Belnap/Harvard Press certainly wanted it to be bought. But, I'm pretty sure neither the author or the publisher was expecting it to do sell like it did (whether it gets read is another matter). My guess is this book will stimulate a lot of debate about the real nature and scope of income and capital inequality AND debate about the proper roll of government in addressing these issues.

What I loved about this book was Piketty's voice. His narrative style. The fact he rejected the theoretical speculation favored by a lot of modern economists and instead went with a historical and data-centric narrative, gave this book juice. He wrote an economics book that demands to be read. I loved how he used literature (Balzac and Austen) as reference points for his thesis about the challenges with income and capital disparities between the 1% and the lower 50%. I loved his boldness. I mean really, it takes some scholarly, economic balls to name your book 'Capital'. It is like walking into a Liverpool pub with a Manchester Untied shirt on. Piketty was provocative right from the start.

Why didn't I rate this higher? I thought his proscriptive approach (Part IV) was a bit naive. I get what he is trying to do. He is setting the flag at the ideal point and letting the politics take care of itself, but his ideal isn't really even on this planet (not even on Planet France). I'm not sure the governing class in any of the major nations he dealt with will ever be ready for a large-scale capital tax, or a global system of taxing and studying incomes. There just isn't any stomach for that. Perhaps I'm a pessimist, but I think we are already governed by system of economic élite domination. It is more likely that a natural disaster, world war, or years of inflation are way more likely to change the current and growing capital inequality in the US and Europe than any preventative, rational, or progressive tax on wealth.

We can barely politically stomach a slight increase to capital gains/dividend tax rates without shutting down government and calls to impeach our president. A one-time, double-digit tax on wealth just won't happen in my lifetime. When 97% of scientists warn us about global warming, but because of vested energy interests and media complicity we find half of our nation believing it is all hype as the poles melt, what hope do we have in preventing millionaires and billionaires from accumulating more wealth? Most will remain ignorant of the problem, apathetic about how that type of income disparity harms democracy, and mostly antagonistic about changing what is perceived to be a meritocracy for a redistributive tax solution. Just not going to happen. I can't see it happening in France, let alone Britain, China or the US.

But that is just me venting my frustrations. The future IS the sole property of the future. I might be wrong. For the most part the book is already doing what he wanted. He's got FT writing and challenging his data. He has Paul Krugman giving supporting data. I'm reading his book instead of a Dan Brown novel. So, my bitching aside, his book has already done 10x what it had every practical right to do. It might just end up being the next John Rawls tome, read by economists, politicians and those tired of Dan Brown novels. I sure hope so.