2 ms·
Actually you are right - I missed it the first time. My mistake. Based on a quick skim, it looks like Piketty is assuming far more than r > g (which is of cours
by yummyfajitas 12y ago
Actually you are right - I missed it the first time. My mistake. Based on a quick skim, it looks like Piketty is assuming far more than r > g (which is of course necessary), but there does appear to be some sort of distributional theory.
Based on a first skim (I'll take a more detailed look later), inequality appears to be a function of (r - g). I.e., r > g does not imply increasing inequality, the magnitude of the inequality merely determines the level of inequality. Seems to disagree a bit with the newspaper summary of Piketty, but I'll have to read more carefully to be sure.