I don't really understand what was special about Picketty, though, so I can understand the silence. It's been recognized for a very long time, amongst certain e

I don't really understand what was special about Picketty, though, so I can understand the silence. It's been recognized for a very long time, amongst certain economists, that capitalism rewards capitalists - that is, those who own things. Mainstream economics is mainstream because it ignores these economists. It doesn't matter how you come to this conclusion, no economics department is going to give it the time of day - and those that do can expect to become targeted by politicians, as hotbeds of 'left wing academic bias'. Which is a very good way to shrink your department. So amongst those that are not professionally immune to this kind of argument, Picketty get's a, 'well, duh'. Amongst the rest (mainstream economists) it gets a resounding silence. It isn't really relevant to the field, because the field is constituted by a kind of professional avoidance of politically charged topics.