5 ms·

It's not that I disagree with his use of statistics, but my own philosophical framework (particularly inspired by the ideas of J.E. Roemer, Gerry Cohen, Nitzan

It's not that I disagree with his use of statistics, but my own philosophical framework (particularly inspired by the ideas of J.E. Roemer, Gerry Cohen, Nitzan & Bichler, and more recently Roberto Veneziani) sees serious problems (I think exploitation, domination, alienation, and insufficient focus on capabilities qua equality of opportunity) with not only capital in general but the state too. I can't easily recall the statistics or framework he used, though the disagreement between our frameworks of society (such as methodological individualism) was what stood out to me. I recall Pikkety making a more convincing case on the economic side, and Frederic Lordon making a more convincing case on the philosophical side. I also disagree with Sowell on his position on sweatshops (again, not rejecting the principle on which it is made, which is that the workers would not be employed otherwise, or have lower wages from domestic companies, but rather a disagreement on the reach and justification of that argument).

googthrowaway42 6y ago
For what it's worth, Thomas Sowell was a Marxist up until he did a summer internship at the US Department of Labor. Excerpt from interview where he talks about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6PDpCnMvvw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6PDpCnMvvw
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  I know that; I think his book on Marx(ism), from the parts I've read, is actually one of the better ones written by mainstream economists, but that's quite a low bar. There are some good criticisms of it floating around on the 'net.
  - googthrowaway42 6y ago
    The best criticism of Marxism I've read is in the introduction to Human Action by Mises where he shows that the concept of class struggle, specifically class itself, is illogical. Also FWIW I have been upvoting you as you get downvoted.
    - claudiawerner 6y ago
      Rothbard (and later Mises) are both on my reading list, I'm nothing if not open-minded. Thanks.
      - googthrowaway42 6y ago
        Personally I would recommend starting with Human Action by Mises as it represents essentially the purest distillation of that school of thought and the culmination of a lot of Mises' earlier works. Rothbard studied under Mises so it would serve as a good introduction to him as well.
      - Consultant32452 6y ago
        I highly recommend Rothbard's Anatomy of the State as an excellent starting place. It's really short, practically a pamphlet.
      - SiFiPi 6y ago
        At the end of the day, when it comes to Ludwig von Mises, it's a question of whether or not you believe humans have free will. If you've studied long enough to become a neurologist, you find that free will is laughable.
        deadgunslinger 6y ago
        Do people that have studied long enough to become a neurologist, find this laughable out of their own free will?
    - tokai 6y ago
      Remember the rules. "Please don't comment about the voting on comments." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
brodouevencode 6y ago
The one place where I align with the Piketty-neo-Marxist crowd is that economic ignorance leads to some terrible, terrible public policy. I daresay Sowell believes the same. But it ends there.
ergodicity001 6y ago
What do you think of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's claim that Piketty basically has his math all wrong? https://medium.com/incerto/inequality-and-skin-in-the-game-d8f00bc0cb46 https://medium.com/incerto/inequality-and-skin-in-the-game-d... >>with not only capital in general but the state too Why should capital in general be a problem? Isn't it crony capitalism the actual problem? If you are very rich, that isn't usually a problem to your neighbor. But if you are very rich and can thus get away with tax evasion but your neighbor lands in jail for the same reason, isn't that when it actually becomes a problem?
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  I haven't read Taleb's response; I might, though Pikkety is less my focus, because I think he spends a lot of time arguing for the system, but continuing along the line of reducing inequality, rather than questioning the system itself. I see capital as a problem precisely not as a matter of quantity (one person having more than another), but as a matter of quality. While 'crony capitalism' is obviously a problem, I don't think it's the root of the problem, philosophically speaking. I'd still think that a system in which a rich person can't get away with tax evasion has serious problems. This is where I likely diverge from, say, Warren's or even Sanders' platform (speaking as someone not from the US). I think deep issues (exploitation, domination, and alienation) deserve a look, even if they seem to be an alien perspective from the outset.

googthrowaway42 6y ago

For what it's worth, Thomas Sowell was a Marxist up until he did a summer internship at the US Department of Labor. Excerpt from interview where he talks about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6PDpCnMvvw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6PDpCnMvvw

claudiawerner 6y ago
I know that; I think his book on Marx(ism), from the parts I've read, is actually one of the better ones written by mainstream economists, but that's quite a low bar. There are some good criticisms of it floating around on the 'net.
- googthrowaway42 6y ago
  The best criticism of Marxism I've read is in the introduction to Human Action by Mises where he shows that the concept of class struggle, specifically class itself, is illogical. Also FWIW I have been upvoting you as you get downvoted.
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    Rothbard (and later Mises) are both on my reading list, I'm nothing if not open-minded. Thanks.
    - googthrowaway42 6y ago
      Personally I would recommend starting with Human Action by Mises as it represents essentially the purest distillation of that school of thought and the culmination of a lot of Mises' earlier works. Rothbard studied under Mises so it would serve as a good introduction to him as well.
    - Consultant32452 6y ago
      I highly recommend Rothbard's Anatomy of the State as an excellent starting place. It's really short, practically a pamphlet.
    - SiFiPi 6y ago
      At the end of the day, when it comes to Ludwig von Mises, it's a question of whether or not you believe humans have free will. If you've studied long enough to become a neurologist, you find that free will is laughable.
      - deadgunslinger 6y ago
        Do people that have studied long enough to become a neurologist, find this laughable out of their own free will?
  - tokai 6y ago
    Remember the rules. "Please don't comment about the voting on comments." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

brodouevencode 6y ago

The one place where I align with the Piketty-neo-Marxist crowd is that economic ignorance leads to some terrible, terrible public policy. I daresay Sowell believes the same. But it ends there.

ergodicity001 6y ago

What do you think of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's claim that Piketty basically has his math all wrong? https://medium.com/incerto/inequality-and-skin-in-the-game-d8f00bc0cb46 https://medium.com/incerto/inequality-and-skin-in-the-game-d... >>with not only capital in general but the state too Why should capital in general be a problem? Isn't it crony capitalism the actual problem? If you are very rich, that isn't usually a problem to your neighbor. But if you are very rich and can thus get away with tax evasion but your neighbor lands in jail for the same reason, isn't that when it actually becomes a problem?

claudiawerner 6y ago
I haven't read Taleb's response; I might, though Pikkety is less my focus, because I think he spends a lot of time arguing for the system, but continuing along the line of reducing inequality, rather than questioning the system itself. I see capital as a problem precisely not as a matter of quantity (one person having more than another), but as a matter of quality. While 'crony capitalism' is obviously a problem, I don't think it's the root of the problem, philosophically speaking. I'd still think that a system in which a rich person can't get away with tax evasion has serious problems. This is where I likely diverge from, say, Warren's or even Sanders' platform (speaking as someone not from the US). I think deep issues (exploitation, domination, and alienation) deserve a look, even if they seem to be an alien perspective from the outset.