Friday, 8 May 2015
A new economics for the new millennium? Review of Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the Twenty-First Century"
My Grannie knew well that the
rich get richer than the 99%, not because they’re smart but because they’re rich, And for all his data – Piketty is a data guy –
he can be accused of simply putting
numbers to what my Grannie and many others unread by my Grannie, like Karl Marx, for instance, have long known. To use Piketty’s
notation r (return from capital) is greater than g (growth). The wealth of those who start
with it grows more than the rate of economic growth would predict, or warrant.
So Piketty has taken the economic world by storm by demonstrating with numbers
that the rich are getting more from our
common wealth than its increase supports. And so inequality continues to
grow.
If this were all Piketty were claiming then we, with my
grandmother, could nod and yawn, ascribing his
sudden fame to the lamentably blinkered
normality constructed during nearly twenty years of neo-liberal hegemony
in economic circles. But there’s more to it. Piketty calls for reinvestment
and re-regulation to undo the damage to what he calls the social state by the anti-tax, anti-government "free market" regimes that have dominated the world's biggest economies in recent years.Piketty is a key ally of the social economy through his data-based
assault on neo-liberal economics. But
he is too much of an orthodox economist to dabble in social economic waters.
Reinvesting in the post-war social state, as Piketty urges, is certainly timely and necessary, but it will
not bring about the new, social economy that will avoid another boom and bust
economic cycle,if the mainstream ‘free market” is left largely to is own devices, however constrained
by the social state. Another world is possible but will not come about unless
social economic models are replaced.