Economics

Kapitał w XXI wieku

Kapitał w XXI wieku

  • Downloads：6579
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-06-09 09:53:33
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Thomas Piketty
  • ISBN：8364682369
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Download

Reviews

Alexander ，

Check out the Yanis Varoufakis critique of this book here: https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=wNLPO。。。。In this book， Piketty legitimizes economic inequality within mainstream economics。 He uses a large amount of data over a large timescale to argue that inequality is going to continue rising unless we do something。 However， Piketty fails to provide any solutions。Piketty argues that one of the major drivers of this trend can be captured in the formula r > g， where r is the return on capital （e。g。 re Check out the Yanis Varoufakis critique of this book here: https://www。youtube。com/watch？v=wNLPO。。。。In this book， Piketty legitimizes economic inequality within mainstream economics。 He uses a large amount of data over a large timescale to argue that inequality is going to continue rising unless we do something。 However， Piketty fails to provide any solutions。Piketty argues that one of the major drivers of this trend can be captured in the formula r > g， where r is the return on capital （e。g。 rent， dividends） and g is the growth rate of the economy （e。g。 income， abundance of goods）。Piketty's "solution" is a bit of a joke。 He basically proposes that we implement an international tax system。 This is the least risky "solution" Piketty could have proposed and he probably knows it is infeasible。I recently read "The Precipice" by Toby Ord， a book on the topic of existential risk。 The prominent theme throughout that book is the necessity of effective international cooperation to solve the existential risks facing our species。The current state of international cooperation is not promising because of game theoretic competition， shortsightedness， lack of mutual understanding and so on。 Thus， I am quite pessimistic about this。This book is very long and dry。 If you want a more engaging read with similar conclusions， check out "Good Economics for Hard Times" by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo。 。。。more

John Doez ，

Denso en sus ideas y en sus conclusiones， y， sin embargo， interesante。 Ahora entiendo por qué es un hito en la comprensión de la economía actual。

Jeremy Punnett ，

Needs a good edit IMHO。 Too long and repetitive in parts which colours the outstanding scholarship。

Joseph ，

Piketty's core hypothesis - that the rate of return on capital outstrips the overall rate of economic growth and that redistributive policies are needed to redress this mechanical imbalance - is pretty straightforward on paper。Why then， is the average person so turned off by tax policy， or employee share schemes， or multilateral controls on the flow of international capital。 Perhaps because it's much easier to blame the immigrant for taking your job， or the Marxist for stealing your hard earned Piketty's core hypothesis - that the rate of return on capital outstrips the overall rate of economic growth and that redistributive policies are needed to redress this mechanical imbalance - is pretty straightforward on paper。Why then， is the average person so turned off by tax policy， or employee share schemes， or multilateral controls on the flow of international capital。 Perhaps because it's much easier to blame the immigrant for taking your job， or the Marxist for stealing your hard earned cash， or even some elitist conspiracy。When capital （and the wealth that flows from it） insulates us from the injustices in society - it's easy to forget injustice exists。 It's easy to forget how lucky we are， and how - in fact - we aren't entitled to Mummy & Daddy's estate/business empire/trust fund。If we are to have any hope of averting future social catastrophe - we need to make the redistributive policies Piketty mentions in this book sound more appealing， straightforward， and common sensical than the neoliberal crap spewed out by 90% of the media。 。。。more

Arta ，

Quality content - 4/5Personal preferences - 2/5 😁

Zhijing Jin ，

See my bundled review here。 See my bundled review here。 。。。more

Phil Smith ，

A great book。 Dense/slow going but very well researched。People don’t talk about it much b/c it makes a great case for taxes that keep income distribution more even and as we learned during COVID， most people don’t care about others that way。

David ，

"El impuesto progresivo sobre el patrimonio individual es una institución que permite al interés general retomar el control del capitalismo， apoyándose en las fuerzas de la propiedad privada y la competencia。""Si es el caso， la progresión del impuesto puede ser intensa para las fortunas más grandes， y esto puede hacerse en el marco del Estado de derecho， tras un debate democrático。 Es la respuesta más idónea a la desigualdad r>g y a la desigualdad del rendimiento en función del capital inicial。" "El impuesto progresivo sobre el patrimonio individual es una institución que permite al interés general retomar el control del capitalismo， apoyándose en las fuerzas de la propiedad privada y la competencia。""Si es el caso， la progresión del impuesto puede ser intensa para las fortunas más grandes， y esto puede hacerse en el marco del Estado de derecho， tras un debate democrático。 Es la respuesta más idónea a la desigualdad r>g y a la desigualdad del rendimiento en función del capital inicial。"Thomas Piketty 。。。more

Lasse Skou Lindstad ，

Good stuff。Thoughts: Increasing inequality because of R>G could be solved by a sovereign wealth fund that distributed the capital gains equally amongst the population。

Fredrik Holmeide ，

Tung å komme inn i， som forventa。 Mye tall og statistikk som blir presentert， men ikke veldig vanskelig å forstå。 Går veldig grundig til verks og forklarer årsaken til vi i dag opplever økende ulikheter i verden， og hva som skal til for å reversere utviklingen。 Lært mye og anbefales sterkt！

Caleb Bornman ，

Helpful framework to understand terms in macroeconomics and make sense of how wealth has changed throughout the last 200 years。 Very data driven and I appreciated the visuals。

Håvard Estensen ，

Kapitalismen har blitt en veldig effektiv maskin som tar nesten hele produktivitetsøkningen i samfunnet。 Bedre teknologi blir til penger som for det meste går i lommen på folk som allerede er rike。 Dette kan løses med en global formueskatt。Inflasjon er formueskatt for de fattige。 Ulikhet er bra om det er til nytte for samfunnet！

Robert Negut ，

[EN: （RO below）]On a recommendation， this likely marks the start of a year or so of non-fiction， translated too， and it was far easier to read and less infuriating than I thought。 Current Leftist views of economics are necessary， the first part explains well and the facts and figures and explanations， as well as some of the points made， remain positive aspects throughout。 The attacks on economists， by an economist， were also rather refreshing， as was the statement that the current supposedly mer [EN: （RO below）]On a recommendation， this likely marks the start of a year or so of non-fiction， translated too， and it was far easier to read and less infuriating than I thought。 Current Leftist views of economics are necessary， the first part explains well and the facts and figures and explanations， as well as some of the points made， remain positive aspects throughout。 The attacks on economists， by an economist， were also rather refreshing， as was the statement that the current supposedly meritocratic justifications of inequality are worse than the past ones。 And saying that refusing to deal with numbers， and I'll add also politics， rarely goes in favor of the poor is a good ending。However， some parts are too technical， many of each chapter's， if not each part's， points could have been made in a handful of pages， much space which could have been better filled with some of the things strangely left in an on-line "annex" seeming wasted， and part four seems rather a train of thought， even a mind dump， just pushing one idea and going this way and that around it。 But the main problem is that， while pointing out the inherent flaws of capitalism， it clearly states， and proves throughout， that it doesn't actually attack it， nor inequality in itself for that matter， instead aiming to just tweak systems that are inherently flawed and need replacing。 It also focuses almost exclusively on the rich， barely mentioning the rest and the means of improving their situation。 There are also indefensible stances， like repeatedly emphasizing the benefits of population growth， enough on its own for me to consider the author an opponent; continual， albeit weak， growth in general being seen as， well， possible; or repeatedly stating the positive effects of inflation， with too little attention paid to the devastating effects it can have on the savings and plans of regular people。 Then again， what's clearly indefensible is that it starts by basically praising subjectivity even when it comes to such fundamental matters that define a society。。。 And including conclusions in the introduction is not a good practice either。[RO:]La o recomandare， asta probabil marcheaza inceputul a aproximativ un an de non-fiction， si traduse， si a fost mult mai usor de citit si mai putin enervanta decat credeam。 Viziunile economice de stanga din zilele noastre sunt necesare， prima parte explica bine si datele si cifrele si explicatiile， precum si unele dintre conceptele prezentate， raman aspecte pozitive pana la final。 Si atacurile la adresa economistilor， din partea unui economist， au fost destul de binevenite， si la fel si declaratia ca justificarile asa-zis meritocratice din prezent ale inegalitatii sunt mai rele decat cele din trecut。 Si a spune ca refuzul de a-ti bate capul cu cifre， si as adauga si cu politica， rareori e in interesul saracilor e o incheiere buna。Insa， unele parti sunt prea tehnice， multe din ideile fiecarui capitol， daca nu fiecarei parti， ar fi putut fi exprimate in destul de putine pagini， mult spatiu care ar fi putut fi umplut mai bine cu unele dintre lucrurile in mod ciudat lasate intr-o "anexa" on-line parand irosit， iar partea a patra cam pare o insiruire de ganduri aruncate， doar sustinand fortat o idee si divagand in jurul ei。 Dar principala problema este ca， desi prezinta defectele inerente ale capitalismului， spune clar， si dovedeste constant， ca nu il ataca， si de fapt nu ataca nici inegalitatea in sine， incercand doar sa aduca niste modificari unor sisteme care sunt inerent defecte si trebuie inlocuite。 Si se concentreaza aproape exclusiv pe bogati， abia mentionandu-i pe ceilalti sau metodele de a le imbunatati situatia。 Sunt si pozitii imposibil de aparat， ca sublinierea repetata a beneficiilor cresterii populatiei， suficient in sine ca sa-l consider pe autor un oponent; considerarea cresterii continue， chiar daca slabe， in general ca fiind， ei bine， posibila; sau prezentarea repetata a efectelor pozitive ale inflatiei， dand prea putina atentie efectelor devastatoare pe care le poate avea asupra economiilor si planurilor oamenilor de rand。 De fapt， ce-i clar de neaparat e ca incepe practic laudand subiectivitatea chiar si in privinta unor astfel de teme fundamentale care definesc o societate。。。 Si nici includerea concluziilor in introducere nu e o practica buna。 。。。more

Amanda ，

Pretty interesting， for a 500+ page tome about economics and theory。 Got a really good idea about how and why and when the USA have been more egalitarian than Europe， and the great 20-30 years many people had growing a middle class post WWII， followed by the rise of Reganism which led American into the mess it is today。

Philip Hartfield ，

Pros: very accessible; laudable endevaour in historical data collectionCons: undermined by a lack of theoryPiketty writes， "[t]o put it bluntly， the discipline of economics has yet to get over its childish passion for mathematics and for purely theoretical and often highly ideological speculation， at the expense of historical research and collaboration with the other social sciences。"To put it bluntly， Piketty needs to get over his obsession with historical research and present more clearly the Pros: very accessible; laudable endevaour in historical data collectionCons: undermined by a lack of theoryPiketty writes， "[t]o put it bluntly， the discipline of economics has yet to get over its childish passion for mathematics and for purely theoretical and often highly ideological speculation， at the expense of historical research and collaboration with the other social sciences。"To put it bluntly， Piketty needs to get over his obsession with historical research and present more clearly the theory underpinning his predictions。 Namely， in a 685 page book Piketty justifies the rational behinds his 'Second Fundamental Law of Capitalism' in just 90 words。Unlike the 'First Fundamental Law' this 'Second Fundamental Law' is anything but， it is a theory resting on implicit （and unconventional） assumptions; that Piketty is not transparent with regards to these is perhaps an indictment to his credibility。 What's more， this 'Second Fundamental Law' underpins Piketty's prediction of long-run growth in inequality and ergo justification for taxes on capital。The shrewd reader would do well to scrutinise this law more closely and not just take it as given，- a large literature on the subject exists。 。。。more

Marijn Verschuure ，

A tough read for those not inclined to economics， but nevertheless an important one。 Seven years after its publication， this book's warnings sound even clearer and seem more urgent than ever。 A tough read for those not inclined to economics， but nevertheless an important one。 Seven years after its publication， this book's warnings sound even clearer and seem more urgent than ever。 。。。more

Tobias ，

Hey？ You listening…？ So see I read this here book by this guy Pikkety says here Capital in the Twenty-First Century， Capital written in red can’t be anything but a Marxist， he even like imagines what a real socialist state would look like something Marx couldn’t do in 50 volumes， anyway it’s a real good book real useful stuff he says like we’re going to be super filthy rich and that when the rate of return on capital is larger than the economic growth in total inequality rises and that， look her Hey？ You listening…？ So see I read this here book by this guy Pikkety says here Capital in the Twenty-First Century， Capital written in red can’t be anything but a Marxist， he even like imagines what a real socialist state would look like something Marx couldn’t do in 50 volumes， anyway it’s a real good book real useful stuff he says like we’re going to be super filthy rich and that when the rate of return on capital is larger than the economic growth in total inequality rises and that， look here， drawings and all， inequality in the US is organized really smart see like the letter U and we’re just like right in time for the big money。Like fellows such as J。P。 Morgan， Vanderbilt and Rockefeller a century ago they were like pioneers for this inequality thing and really kicked capitalism into gear， a dollar spent a dollar earned， make workers pay double somehow for their own paycheck， their cars， their cats， their wives， wealth so concentrated regular people don’t even know what it is， same thing today。 But then he says the period after World War II was actually good because capital was destroyed I mean who destroys capital， you can’t just destroy capital these here pieces of paper， see， it’s like sticking a corporation in jail you can’t。Then he says something like we’re heading towards what he calls patrimonial capitalism， that a man just inherits a fortune and then he’s settled， but like what’s the problem where’s the fortune from we can’t just take a man’s money from him that’s stealing and we don’t steal we just sell that’s all。But I mean towards the end he just stops being nice and begins like proposing tax laws， tax the rich like 90 % like holy shit where does that money go， so see I think we should just move everything to Switzerland and Tortola and back again and keep doing it， this is the new trick you just do that and we get to keep everything and not pay tax at all and the only people who can do something about it will have to pay us to stop and I mean that’s just like some good smart business， right？______No， jokes， mimicry and Gaddis aside， but in all seriousness what a book。 Its reputation as a book of economics was quickly refuted， because this is the work of a social scientist who uses economics to prove its points and show in black and white the thing at hand and at play amongst all of us。 Economics are too important to be left to economists！ Ah， the meretricious price of our redemption。。。 。。。more

Alain ，

plus qu'une étude vulgarisatrice de l'économie， l'étude historique des revenus， travail et capital， de leur évolutions et de celles de leurs inégalités à travers le monde。 Livre avec sobriété d'opinion， de bonnes notions compréhensibles même pour les incultes de l'économie 。 plus qu'une étude vulgarisatrice de l'économie， l'étude historique des revenus， travail et capital， de leur évolutions et de celles de leurs inégalités à travers le monde。 Livre avec sobriété d'opinion， de bonnes notions compréhensibles même pour les incultes de l'économie 。 。。。more

Marcos ，

Finalmente consegui terminar。 Não é uma leitura fácil， mas o Piketty consegue usar uma linguagem acessível para um leigo em economia como eu。 Muita informação sobre a evolução da desigualdade e as dinâmicas do capitalismo。 Além disso， não é um livro 'puramente' sobre economia pois o autor se preocupa mais com dimensão social dos números。 Finalmente consegui terminar。 Não é uma leitura fácil， mas o Piketty consegue usar uma linguagem acessível para um leigo em economia como eu。 Muita informação sobre a evolução da desigualdade e as dinâmicas do capitalismo。 Além disso， não é um livro 'puramente' sobre economia pois o autor se preocupa mais com dimensão social dos números。 。。。more

Will S ，

Exceptionally well-researched （with supporting data to back up its claims）， this book lays out a very compelling case for a global tax on wealth。 The years since its publication have only strengthened its thesis。

Luca Bisio ，

Beautiful enquiry into the driving forces of inequality。

Alexis Chavez ，

Would have been five stars but the literary references were unnecessarily mentioned too often。

James Tate ，

Well I finally finished it。 It was not as exciting as I hoped。 Piketty got pretty repetitive - he seemed to drag out the explanations of each data point。 I admire the immense effort required to collect all the data and value his analysis， however。 I look forward to reading some counter arguments to his assertion that a strong progressive wealth tax is the best way to prevent runaway inequality。He had an interesting comment in the conclusion to the effect of "Society's experts are not fulfilling Well I finally finished it。 It was not as exciting as I hoped。 Piketty got pretty repetitive - he seemed to drag out the explanations of each data point。 I admire the immense effort required to collect all the data and value his analysis， however。 I look forward to reading some counter arguments to his assertion that a strong progressive wealth tax is the best way to prevent runaway inequality。He had an interesting comment in the conclusion to the effect of "Society's experts are not fulfilling their duty by simply giving us policy critiques。" A doctor that offers medical advice but does not contribute to the public debate on how best to implement that adviceand what comprimises to make is not a great doctor。 Just as an economist with an opinion on taxation must consider practical implications， long-run effects， etc。 They cannot simply say "taxes too high" or "deficit bad。" 。。。more

Jaguar Tiririca ，

First of all， this is a very important book， that is well written and very understandable。 It starts with quoting the end of the first article in The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen， made after the french revolution in 1789: "Social distinctions can be founded only on the common good。" I can definitely stand behind that quote， and even more so after reading Capital in the Twenty-First Century。 This is a solid book， using and comparing data from the last two Centuries and clea First of all， this is a very important book， that is well written and very understandable。 It starts with quoting the end of the first article in The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen， made after the french revolution in 1789: "Social distinctions can be founded only on the common good。" I can definitely stand behind that quote， and even more so after reading Capital in the Twenty-First Century。 This is a solid book， using and comparing data from the last two Centuries and clearly showing how the inequality have developed over time。 Opposite to what many of the economists post WW2 predicted the inequality will not automatically decrease。 But their models used data from only a few years， and in a situation where capital have been heavily rotated because of the turbulent times between WW1 and WW2 and because of government policies after WW2。When you have capital， you can invest this capital and get a higher rate for your capital than the growth rate （r > g）。 Also， the more capital you have， the higher rate you will be able to achieve。 The profit you get on this capital is little taxed and to many of the people benefiting from the free trade， hide away their own money in tax havens #dubblestandards。 Also， with the international competition on capital， governments reduce their companies’ taxes to get investments to their countries， leading to a downward spiral of taxation rates of companies。In combination these different effects results in bigger taxation for the poor and the middle class in percentages compared to the richest 10% or 1%。 With governments debts， big needs for green investments and increasing inequality， one could argue for a change where capital is more taxed。 I highly recommend this book， and I hope all decision makers reads it， so that they can find better ways to combat inequality on national and global scale。 And one last thing， economy is political， even though economists （mostly consisting of people within the richest 10%） sometimes tries to argue otherwise。 。。。more

Roger ，

This book was surprisingly easy and enjoyable to read。 Rather than being a book about mere economics， it is more a narrative history of wealth and income inequalities， the causes of the inequality， and the consequences。 While I do not agree with all of Picketty's proposed policy solutions， I welcome his emphasis on a classical notion of political economy over some kinds of rarefied and overly-quantified economic science。 One other thing this book demonstrates is that economics is approachable an This book was surprisingly easy and enjoyable to read。 Rather than being a book about mere economics， it is more a narrative history of wealth and income inequalities， the causes of the inequality， and the consequences。 While I do not agree with all of Picketty's proposed policy solutions， I welcome his emphasis on a classical notion of political economy over some kinds of rarefied and overly-quantified economic science。 One other thing this book demonstrates is that economics is approachable and understandable by anyone moderately engaged in current affairs and public debates。 And although it is presented largely in narrative form， it is backed by large amounts of data the author makes available online。 。。。more

Jeff ，

Okay， I have to get this off my chest: the graphs in this book suck。 They look like a high schooler made them。 That said， it's a really interesting book。 For me， it brought a fundamental question into focus: is capital more valuable than the labor it funds？ I won't give my own thoughts on the answer here， but I will say that the book provides a really interesting study of how the wealthiest people have earned their money， both historically and today。 The central thesis， I would argue， is that be Okay， I have to get this off my chest: the graphs in this book suck。 They look like a high schooler made them。 That said， it's a really interesting book。 For me， it brought a fundamental question into focus: is capital more valuable than the labor it funds？ I won't give my own thoughts on the answer here， but I will say that the book provides a really interesting study of how the wealthiest people have earned their money， both historically and today。 The central thesis， I would argue， is that because return on investment for large amounts of capital is much higher than ROI for labor and the sorts of investment that laborers can afford， there is a natural tendency for capital to accumulate in the hands of a few people that have sufficient capital to benefit from these superior investment opportunities。 For example， how many of your friends own a high-rise apartment building？Anyway， the point is made， and it gives you a lot to think about。 。。。more

Emmanouil ，

Ένα μνημειώδες έργο από τον Thomas Piketty。 Απόφοιτος της École Normale Supérieure του Παρισιού με ειδίκευση στα ανώτερα μαθηματικά που συνέχισε τις σπουδές του στην οικονομική επιστήμη πιστεύει ότι η άρνηση να μετράμε σπάνια λειτουργεί προς όφελος των φτωχών。 Το μεγαλειώδες βιβλίο του μετράει 722 σελίδες με πολλούς αριθμούς， διαγράμματα， οικονομικές και κοινωνικοπολιτικές αναλύσεις。 Παραθέτω λίγα χαρακτηριστικά αποσπάσματα από τον επίλογο του βιβλίου。σελ 725«Προσπάθησα σε αυτό το έργο να παρουσ Ένα μνημειώδες έργο από τον Thomas Piketty。 Απόφοιτος της École Normale Supérieure του Παρισιού με ειδίκευση στα ανώτερα μαθηματικά που συνέχισε τις σπουδές του στην οικονομική επιστήμη πιστεύει ότι η άρνηση να μετράμε σπάνια λειτουργεί προς όφελος των φτωχών。 Το μεγαλειώδες βιβλίο του μετράει 722 σελίδες με πολλούς αριθμούς， διαγράμματα， οικονομικές και κοινωνικοπολιτικές αναλύσεις。 Παραθέτω λίγα χαρακτηριστικά αποσπάσματα από τον επίλογο του βιβλίου。σελ 725«Προσπάθησα σε αυτό το έργο να παρουσιάσω το σημερινό επίπεδο της ιστορικής μας γνώσης πάνω στη δυναμική της κατανομής των εισοδημάτων και των περιουσιών από τον 18ο αιώνα και μετά， και να εξετάσω τι διδάγματα μπορούμε να αντλήσουμε για τον αιώνα που ανοίγεται μπροστά μας。»σελ 728«δεν διανοούμαι άλλη θέση για τα οικονομικά εκτός από την υπαγωγή τους στις κοινωνικές επιστήμες， δίπλα στην ιστορία， την κοινωνιολογία， την ανθρωπολογία， τις πολιτικές επιστήμες και τόσες άλλες。»σελ 729«Για πάρα πολύ καιρό οι οικονομολόγοι προσπαθούσαν να ορίσουν την ταυτότητα τους με αφετηρία τις υποτιθέμενες επιστημονικές τους μεθόδους。 Στην πραγματικότητα οι μέθοδοι αυτές βασίζονται κυρίως σε μιαν άμετρη χρήση μαθηματικών υποδειγμάτων， τα οποία συχνά δεν είναι παρά μια δικαιολογία για να καταλαμβάνουν το χώρο και να συγκαλύπτουν την κενότητα του λόγου。»     。。。more

Nandha Kumar ，

Finally， more than since 4 years since I started this book， it is now done。 For all those who wish to know what this book holds， save time by reading just the conclusion or watch the 20 min TED talk on YouTube。 A treatise for economists consisting 600 pages of facts after facts， I wish Mr。Piketty had written an abridged version for people with less patience。 The online technical appendix is great， would suggest people to have a look at it

Garth Kroeker ，

Everyone should understand the ideas in this bookWe all pay taxes， and most of us complain about them。。。 but few of us know much about the history of taxation， the history of wealth accumulation and inequality， and about reasons to change taxation schemes and other economic decisions for the betterment of all， and for the stabilization of our democracies。 This is a long book， hard for a non-economist to understand fully or digest， but it is worth investing time， and at least skimming through。 A Everyone should understand the ideas in this bookWe all pay taxes， and most of us complain about them。。。 but few of us know much about the history of taxation， the history of wealth accumulation and inequality， and about reasons to change taxation schemes and other economic decisions for the betterment of all， and for the stabilization of our democracies。 This is a long book， hard for a non-economist to understand fully or digest， but it is worth investing time， and at least skimming through。 A remarkable and detailed accomplishment by the author。 。。。more

Quinn ，

Pretty good modernization of Capital （at least from the parts I remember from reading Marx in college）。 I listened on audiobook for this one， and I found that was not a good format for me personally given the large number of figures and illustrations that are used to supplement the text， but someone who is a purely audio/verbal person might be fine with the format。 The central thesis seems fairly clear and I don't understand how any。 rational person could come to disagree with it （the idea that Pretty good modernization of Capital （at least from the parts I remember from reading Marx in college）。 I listened on audiobook for this one， and I found that was not a good format for me personally given the large number of figures and illustrations that are used to supplement the text， but someone who is a purely audio/verbal person might be fine with the format。 The central thesis seems fairly clear and I don't understand how any。 rational person could come to disagree with it （the idea that capitalism => inequality） ESPECIALLY in modern technological times where efficiency is key to success （see the relative success of the software sector compared to other sectors）， but I do not agree personally with some of the remedies （I personally think more is needed than just tax changes， and I believe that tax changes alone cannot even stop the problem， they can only slow the growth of inequality）。 Overall， a must read for anyone who wants tog et a good picture of the way the modern economy is structured， but be prepared to be working on this one for a little while （esp。 if you want to reference some of the examples to contemporary articles， Planet Money podcasts etc） 。。。more

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Kapitał w XXI wieku

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Kapitał w XXI wieku&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Kapitał w XXI wieku&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0