Some inequality clickbait from a new Piketty paper:And this par, with our brief emphasis:We observe a clear pattern of rising inequality: top income groups enjoyed relatively more growth, while the situation has been very different for the bottom. In China, top groups have enjoyed very high growth, but aggregate growth was also so large that even the bottom 50% average income grew markedly by +401% between 1978 and 2015. This is likely to make rising inequality much more acceptable. In contrast, in the US, there was no growth left at all for the bottom 50% (-1%). France illustrates another type of situation. Very top incomes have grown more than average, but this pattern of rising inequality happened only for very high and numerically relatively negligible groups, so that it had limited consequences for the majority of the population. In effect, the bottom 50% income group enjoyed the same growth as average growth (+39%).Related link:A Rodrik profile, including this on his ‘trilemma’: “It is not possible to have deep globalization, political democracy, and a competent nation-state.
David Keohane considers the following as important: Uncategorised
This could be interesting, too:
Alexandra Scaggs writes Reminder: Your “self-destructing” messages do not actually self-destruct
Matthew C Klein writes Real interest rates aren’t particularly low
Izabella Kaminska writes Further reading
Siona Jenkins writes Opening Quote: Hikma proves that generic copy is hard to churn out
Some inequality clickbait from a new Piketty...