Most Piketty commentary (like the Deridre McCloskey review I blogged earlier) focuses on the theory, r>g, as well as and so on. After all, that's slowly as well as you lot don't accept to read hundreds of pages.
"Challenging the Empirical Contribution of Thomas Piketty's Capital inwards the 21st Century" by Phillip W. Magness and Robert P. Murphy is ane of the rootage deep reviews of the facts that I accept seen. I haven't read it yet, merely the abstract looks promising:
"Challenging the Empirical Contribution of Thomas Piketty's Capital inwards the 21st Century" by Phillip W. Magness and Robert P. Murphy is ane of the rootage deep reviews of the facts that I accept seen. I haven't read it yet, merely the abstract looks promising:
Thomas Piketty's Capital inwards the 21st Century has been widely debated on theoretical grounds, withal continues to attract acclaim for its historically-infused information analysis. In this report nosotros acquit a closer scrutiny of Piketty's empirics than has appeared thence far, focusing upon his handling of the United States. We respect show of pervasive errors of historical fact, opaque methodological choices, as well as the cherry-picking of sources to build favorable patterns from ambiguous data. Additional show suggests that Piketty used a highly distortive information supposition from the Soviet Union to accentuate ane of his nous historical claims nigh global “capitalism” inwards the 20th century. Taken together, these problems advise that Piketty’s highly praised as well as historically-driven empirical move may genuinely live on the book’s greatest weakness.Comments on the newspaper welcome. If I become a jeopardy to read it I'll post service some.
