“On a visit to Mumbai, the economist and author hopes India’s elite can ‘learn from the stupid mistakes of the other elites.’” Will they? I doubt it! But I applaud Piketty for trying.
Source: Thomas Piketty to India’s Elite: ‘Learn From History’ – The New York Times
Read the entire article here: History News Network | Why Tuition-Free College Makes Sense
This college building in Kansas was one of the first created under the 1862 Morrill Act
Inequality: “The godfather of free markets feared it would undermine the system he loved.”
Adam Smith has become such an icon that few venture to shatter the simplistic version of his ideas (outside of academia) known to most Americans. Few who hold this vision dear have actually read Smith’s Wealth of Nations, and if they have they read it from a modern perspective outside of the context in which Smith wrote it. And as a result, they misunderstand Smith’s ideas and his goals.
When it is read in context and with his other great work The Theory of Moral Sentiments, a different narrative emerges. David Lay Williams, in his article at Bloomberg View, explains some of the challenges to the dominate theory of Smith’s capitalism (self-interest, lassie-fare, the invisible hand, etc.) when the complexities of Smith’s worldview are factored in. In this article, Williams focuses mainly on Smith’s concerns about inequality.
What does Williams hope to accomplish by looking back on Adam Smith’s philosophy?
“First, it challenges arguments made by those who insist that inequality wouldn’t have been problematic for the intellectual founder of free-market capitalism. Second, Smith offers insights into the nature of economic disparity that should guide a more enriched contemporary discussion of the issue. Many of today’s critiques of inequality center on how it can stifle economic growth. This may be true. But as a professor of moral philosopher, this wasn’t the focus of Smith’s commentary. Third, Smith’s attention to inequality as opposed to poverty is a rejoinder to those who suggest inequality isn’t problematic in itself. Finally, Smith’s inability to offer a solution, one may argue, is manifested in our own failure to address inequality and its accompanying troubles. We have inherited a system that has made no provisions for a dilemma apparent at its very foundations.”
Please read the entire article here: Where Adam Smith and Occupy Agree: Inequality – Bloomberg View
When Thomas Piketty’s book Capital hit U.S. markets this year the response was both surprising and predictable. Surprising because a 700 page tome on economics became a bestseller! On the other hand the responses were predictable. The book received adulation from the Left and disgust from the Right. The polarizing effect of this book is immediately evident if one glances at the ratings of the book on Amazon.com. Out of 718 reviews 406 are 5 star reviews and 175 are 1 star reviews (viewed on June 26, 2014). Interestingly, the mean-spirted nature of the reviews was just as newsworthy as the book itself.
So I decided to take a look for myself. Like many comments on the internet, they were “nasty, brutish, and short,” to borrow Hobbes’ famous phrase. I only managed to make it about half way through the reviews, wishing that I had stopped sooner. The repetitive and spiteful nature of the reviews were making me nauseous. Here is just a sampling of some of the titles:
“Das Kapital Re-do”
“It’s Still Socialism/Communism/Facism[sic]”
“Don’t let this Marxist fool you.”
“Serious marx bull &&&&.”
“This book is nothing but re-hashed socialist BS”
“Das Kapital , by Karl Marx – has already been written , this is the same ideology !”
“Marxist propaganda”
“Piketty’s book would be better titled “The Communist Manifesto Lite”’
“Communist Propaganda at it finest”
“MARX Reincarnated”
“Karl Marx would love this book”
“Save your time and read Karl Marx’s Das Kapital instead”
“Communist Manifesto of the 20th century”
“Say Hello to the new Karl Marx”
“Karl Marx redux”
The content of these reviews didn’t add much to these titles (other than to flaunt the failures of socialism and demonize Piketty and liberals). The basic theme of these reviews was that Piketty’s book deserves a 1 star because it is pure Marxism.[1]
Tea Party Rally
When Thomas Piketty’s book Capital hit U.S. markets this year the response was both surprising and predictable. Surprising because a 700 page tome on economics became a bestseller! On the other hand the responses were predictable. The book received adulation from the Left and disgust from the Right. The polarizing effect of this book is immediately evident if one glances at the ratings of the book on Amazon.com. Out of 718 reviews 406 are 5 star reviews and 175 are 1 star reviews (viewed on June 26, 2014). Interestingly, the mean-spirted nature of the reviews was just as newsworthy as the book itself.
So I decided to take a look for myself. Like many comments on the internet, they were “nasty, brutish, and short,” to borrow Hobbes’ famous phrase. I only managed to make it about half way through the reviews, wishing that I had stopped sooner. The repetitive and spiteful nature of the reviews were making me nauseous. Here is just a sampling of some of the titles:
“Das Kapital Re-do”
“It’s Still Socialism/Communism/Facism[sic]”
“Don’t let this Marxist fool you.”
“Serious marx bull &&&&.”
“This book is nothing but re-hashed socialist BS”
“Das Kapital , by Karl Marx – has already been written , this is the same ideology !”
“Marxist propaganda”
“Piketty’s book would be better titled “The Communist Manifesto Lite”’
“Communist Propaganda at it finest”
“MARX Reincarnated”
“Karl Marx would love this book”
“Save your time and read Karl Marx’s Das Kapital instead”
“Communist Manifesto of the 20th century”
“Say Hello to the new Karl Marx”
“Karl Marx redux”
The content of these reviews didn’t add much to these titles (other than to flaunt the failures of socialism and demonize Piketty and liberals). The basic theme of these reviews was that Piketty’s book deserves a 1 star because it is pure Marxism.[1]
Tea Party Rally
History Chick in AZ 