If you want the "more than a nutshell, but less than a book" version, Piketty & co have two journal articles that cover the main historical data analysis in the book:<p><a href="http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PikettyZucman2014QJE.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PikettyZucman2014QJE.pdf</a><p><a href="http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PikettyZucman2014HID.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PikettyZucman2014HID.pdf</a>
3 Points about the the latest Piketty book:<p>========================<p>1) Churn in Inequality:<p>========================<p>12 percent of the population will find themselves in the top 1 percent of the income distribution for at least one year<p>39 percent of Americans will spend a year in the top 5 percent of the income distribution<p>56 percent will find themselves in the top 10 percent<p>73 percent will spend a year in the top 20 percent<p>Although 12 percent of the population will experience a year in which they find themselves in the top 1 percent of the income distribution, a mere 0.6 percent will do so in 10 consecutive years<p>54 percent of Americans will experience poverty or near poverty at least once between the ages of 25 and 60<p>Half of those who earned over $1 million a year did so just once during this period (1999 and 2007), while only 6 percent reported millionaire status across all nine years<p>Data analyzed by the I.R.S. showed similar findings with respect to the top 400 taxpayers between 1992 and 2009. While 73 percent of people who made the list did so once during this period, only 2 percent of them were on the list for 10 or more years.<p>via: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/opinion/sunday/from-rags-to-riches-to-rags.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/opinion/sunday/from-rags-t...</a><p>=========================================================<p>2) How much is the inequality being driven by Technology?<p>=========================================================<p>Sam Altman @YC: <a href="http://blog.samaltman.com/technology-and-wealth-inequality" rel="nofollow">http://blog.samaltman.com/technology-and-wealth-inequality</a><p>Albert Wenger @ USV :
<a href="http://continuations.com/post/52302452621/internet-and-income-inequality-we-need-to-think-ahead" rel="nofollow">http://continuations.com/post/52302452621/internet-and-incom...</a><p>=========================================================<p>3) How much of this technology led inequality is transistionary?<p>===========================================================<p>Innovation has brought great benefits to humanity. Nobody in their right mind would want to return to the world of handloom weavers. But the benefits of technological progress are unevenly distributed, especially in the early stages of each new wave, and it is up to governments to spread them. In the 19th century it took the threat of revolution to bring about progressive reforms. Today’s governments would do well to start making the changes needed before their people get angry.<p>Via: <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/21594298/print" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/node/21594298/print</a>
The HBR review, when I first read it, struck my as the establishment trying to downplay the importance of this book.<p>Krugman, who I sometimes do not agree with, but was right on in reviewing this book, rightly points out that the elites are freaking out over this book because the facts are against their position.<p>This is an important book depicting how bad income equality has become because of inherited capital.
N.N. Taleb has been seriously slamming this guy recently. I wonder if Picketty will respond<p><a href="http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/notebook.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/notebook.htm</a>
A more complete analysis by Solow:<p>Thomas Piketty Is Right:
Everything you need to know about 'Capital in the Twenty-First Century'<p><a href="http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117429/capital-twenty-first-century-thomas-piketty-reviewed" rel="nofollow">http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117429/capital-twenty-fir...</a>
i think a lot of people miss the joke about why piketty is so popular. it's not the theorizing about the cause of inequality, which seems fairly obvious if you read financial news and blogs. the "novel" piece - at least in polite conversation - is that his solution to the problem is a wealth tax, which goes after assets instead of income. (i say polite conversation, since wealth taxes normally apply in cases where there is a sovereign liquidity crisis, which is not a polite situation.)<p>so, we think the wealth tax this sounds like a great idea, let's go after the billions that accrued in offshore hedge funds for US citizens and take 30%, sounds fair since it avoided taxes in the first place.<p>of course, when it comes time to implement the tax, that money is gone, perhaps to some other jurisdiction, and they settle for enforcement by having the average joe write a check based on money in your bank or brokerage account, whatever meager amount over $100k you may have. and, probably convert 401ks into a myRA account, which gives the government a new forced buyer of treasury securities, while pretending it was for some other reason.