Just read this fascinating discussion about Capital in the Twenty-First Century in The New Yorker.
The book summarising a couple of decades of research and is currently pretty much the biggest news among economics academics - so big that the US publication date has actually been brought forward!
Perhaps the most interesting 'soundbyte' from the book is the statement - supported by data, note - that in terms of income generated by work, the level of inequality in the United States is "probably higher than in any other society at any time in the past, anywhere in the world".
Yes, that's saying the US is currently the most unequal society ever. Which is pretty startling given that 'ever' includes societies not exactly known for their equality like say, ancient Mesopotamia, Rome and Egypt. To say nothing of 19th century Europe.
An (oft cited) example is that, back in the 1950s, a CEO typically earned around 20 times what an average worker in their company earned. Today, they typically earn 200 times what their average worker does. For Walmart's former boss, Michael Duke the figure was around 920 times however that pales into insignificance compared to Tim Cook, for whom the figure is a staggering 6,258 times.
To be fair, the rest of the developed world is also more unequal than it has been, at least since a former peak in the 1920s.
From 1945 to 1973 there was an all-too-brief golden period where equality in the west was pretty good however, since the right wing revolution of the late 70s, inequality has sky rocketed. To the point, the book argues, where it is becoming seriously destabilising.
The books demonstrates that the current levels of inequality are driven by politics rather than economic fundementals. It the suggests that the best solution is to return to the sort of taxation levels Europe and the US had during the golden period, say 80% for incomes of more than $1 million and up to 10% on capital.
Somehow I have a feeling not everyone here will entirely agree with that eminently sensible suggestion ..
The book summarising a couple of decades of research and is currently pretty much the biggest news among economics academics - so big that the US publication date has actually been brought forward!
Perhaps the most interesting 'soundbyte' from the book is the statement - supported by data, note - that in terms of income generated by work, the level of inequality in the United States is "probably higher than in any other society at any time in the past, anywhere in the world".
Yes, that's saying the US is currently the most unequal society ever. Which is pretty startling given that 'ever' includes societies not exactly known for their equality like say, ancient Mesopotamia, Rome and Egypt. To say nothing of 19th century Europe.
An (oft cited) example is that, back in the 1950s, a CEO typically earned around 20 times what an average worker in their company earned. Today, they typically earn 200 times what their average worker does. For Walmart's former boss, Michael Duke the figure was around 920 times however that pales into insignificance compared to Tim Cook, for whom the figure is a staggering 6,258 times.
To be fair, the rest of the developed world is also more unequal than it has been, at least since a former peak in the 1920s.
From 1945 to 1973 there was an all-too-brief golden period where equality in the west was pretty good however, since the right wing revolution of the late 70s, inequality has sky rocketed. To the point, the book argues, where it is becoming seriously destabilising.
The books demonstrates that the current levels of inequality are driven by politics rather than economic fundementals. It the suggests that the best solution is to return to the sort of taxation levels Europe and the US had during the golden period, say 80% for incomes of more than $1 million and up to 10% on capital.
Somehow I have a feeling not everyone here will entirely agree with that eminently sensible suggestion ..
