A number of other researchers have argued the relevant increase in wealth and equality really is centred in real estate and housing wealth. Do you agree? And if so, isn't it enough just to be a georgist? Can't we just do the redistribution there? Eo tlook at the top of the wetribution? A, i don't see alotof rel estate. I don't think matroly o, any one whos saying at te otries in peternet work, since he west, has anything to do his real estate. So not saying it's not improter, it is very important.
When it comes to the enormous reduction of income inequality during the 20th century, Thomas Piketty sees politics everywhere. In his new book, A Brief History of Equality, he argues the rising equality during the 19th and 20th centuries has its roots not in deterministic economic forces but in the movements to end aristocratic and colonial societies starting at the end of the 18th century. Drawing this line forward, Piketty also contends we must rectify past injustices before attempting to create new institutions.
He joined Tyler to discuss just how egalitarian France actually is, the beginning of the end of aristocratic society, where he places himself within French intellectual history, why he’s skeptical of data from before the late 18th century, how public education drives economic development, why Georgism isn’t sufficient to address wealth inequality, the relationship between wealth and cultural capital, his proposal for a minimum inheritance, why he turned down the Legion of Honor, why France should give reparations to Haiti despite the logistical difficulties of doing so, his vision for European federalism, why more immigration won’t be a panacea for inequality, his thoughts on Michel Houellebecq’s Submission, and more.
Read a full transcript enhanced with helpful links, or watch the full video.
Recorded March 8th, 2022 Other ways to connect