4 ms·

I would not cite Piketty, Zucman or Saez who are the hardest fighters of the wealth inequality thesis as they usually mix political advocacy and have been criti

by u_sama 11mo ago

I would not cite Piketty, Zucman or Saez who are the hardest fighters of the wealth inequality thesis as they usually mix political advocacy and have been criticized in their methodology and have been under a fair share of controversies. Btw I have grouped them because this is how they are usually treated, both by the fact they are all French economists but also on the fact they all push for the same inequality thesis 1: https://www.davidsplinter.com/AutenSplinter-2024-ReplyToPSZ.pdf https://www.davidsplinter.com/AutenSplinter-2024-ReplyToPSZ.... 2: https://philmagness.com/2014/12/an-empirical-critique-of-thomas-pikettys-capital-in-the-21st-century/ https://philmagness.com/2014/12/an-empirical-critique-of-tho... 3: https://qz.com/1725562/elizabeth-warrens-economic-advisers-are-in-a-controversy-over-wealth-and-taxes https://qz.com/1725562/elizabeth-warrens-economic-advisers-a... EDIT: Here is the rebuttal for 2 by Piketty himself: http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014TechnicalAppendixResponsetoFT.pdf http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014Tec... courtesy of andrepd

rcMgD2BwE72F 11mo ago
So you ask not to cite someone only because they believe in what they discovered and suggest to take action based on that? Who has not been criticize in their methodology? Who do you expect to avoid any amount of "controversies" for such a political subject? Your comment seems to be pure ad hominem. Also, discarding authors because they're French is kinda stupid: historically, quick advances in a field most often start at one time and place.
- u_sama 11mo ago
  I never said to discard them because they are French, but the political ideas they advance are the centric positions of French culture which for every problem the solution is more taxes, taxes on the rich etc It would be like expecting American economists to be very libertarian, or Chinese economists very interventionists. The culture of their countries reflects their ideas. NB: J'habite en France
MangoToupe 11mo ago
The entire concept of economics without politics is nonsensical. They are one and the same.
- u_sama 11mo ago
  I completely agree, thus no article should say "economists" but libertarian economist, social-democratic economist etc Because the politics precede the findings
  - MangoToupe 11mo ago
    Eh, you're either honest with yourself or you're not. There's no need to add ideology.
andrepd 11mo ago
Economics is political, so it should come as no surprise that economists have political opinions about what should be done at the level of the economy. Or is only that which is vaguely left-wing that is "political" or "ideological", and mainstream neoliberal politics and economics are simply "objective" and "technocratic"? I think it's important to separate the empirical and analytic part, to which you can apply objective criticisms, to the political part, with which you can agree or not but which should have no bearing on the former part. Anyway if you want to be honest you can also link to Piketty's rebuttal to the criticism, e.g. http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014TechnicalAppendixResponsetoFT.pdf http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014Tec...
- u_sama 11mo ago
  Yes it is, and I because economics is political, I would appreciate putting an adjective describing the politics of the specific economists who are cited. If I cited a Hayek, as an "economist" it would be incredibly dishonest as his works are deeply libertarian and considered right wing. Mainstream neoliberal politics is right wing but not libertarian, very interventionist. But Piketty is left-wing, and it is dishonest leaving that part unsaid when citing him. I agree, there is a difference between the technical and political parts. Sorry if I seemed dishonest, but I cited both the 2014 critique as well as a more general 2024 PSZ critique (from right wing POVs) including other economists who usually post on the same subject of income inequality. I will edit my original comment to include Piketty's rebuttals.

by u_sama 11mo ago

rcMgD2BwE72F 11mo ago

So you ask not to cite someone only because they believe in what they discovered and suggest to take action based on that? Who has not been criticize in their methodology? Who do you expect to avoid any amount of "controversies" for such a political subject? Your comment seems to be pure ad hominem. Also, discarding authors because they're French is kinda stupid: historically, quick advances in a field most often start at one time and place.

u_sama 11mo ago
I never said to discard them because they are French, but the political ideas they advance are the centric positions of French culture which for every problem the solution is more taxes, taxes on the rich etc It would be like expecting American economists to be very libertarian, or Chinese economists very interventionists. The culture of their countries reflects their ideas. NB: J'habite en France

MangoToupe 11mo ago

The entire concept of economics without politics is nonsensical. They are one and the same.

u_sama 11mo ago
I completely agree, thus no article should say "economists" but libertarian economist, social-democratic economist etc Because the politics precede the findings
- MangoToupe 11mo ago
  Eh, you're either honest with yourself or you're not. There's no need to add ideology.

andrepd 11mo ago

Economics is political, so it should come as no surprise that economists have political opinions about what should be done at the level of the economy. Or is only that which is vaguely left-wing that is "political" or "ideological", and mainstream neoliberal politics and economics are simply "objective" and "technocratic"? I think it's important to separate the empirical and analytic part, to which you can apply objective criticisms, to the political part, with which you can agree or not but which should have no bearing on the former part. Anyway if you want to be honest you can also link to Piketty's rebuttal to the criticism, e.g. http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014TechnicalAppendixResponsetoFT.pdf http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capital21c/en/Piketty2014Tec...

u_sama 11mo ago
Yes it is, and I because economics is political, I would appreciate putting an adjective describing the politics of the specific economists who are cited. If I cited a Hayek, as an "economist" it would be incredibly dishonest as his works are deeply libertarian and considered right wing. Mainstream neoliberal politics is right wing but not libertarian, very interventionist. But Piketty is left-wing, and it is dishonest leaving that part unsaid when citing him. I agree, there is a difference between the technical and political parts. Sorry if I seemed dishonest, but I cited both the 2014 critique as well as a more general 2024 PSZ critique (from right wing POVs) including other economists who usually post on the same subject of income inequality. I will edit my original comment to include Piketty's rebuttals.