Having a decent share of the national wealth for the middle class is not bad for growth. It is actually useful both for equity and efficiency reasons.
Interpretation
The middle class's share of national wealth contributes positively to economic growth and fairness.
In this quote, Thomas Piketty argues that a healthy distribution of national wealth, particularly among the middle class, is beneficial not only for economic growth but also for promoting fairness in society. He emphasizes that equitable wealth distribution enhances both efficiency in the economy and social equity, suggesting that policies supporting the middle class ultimately benefit everyone.
In practice
In a discussion about economic policy, one might use this quote to advocate for policies that support the middle class.
Contrary to a tenacious myth, France is not owned by California pension funds or the Bank of China, any more than the United States belongs to Japanese and German investors. The fear of getting into such a predicament is so strong today that fantasy often outstrips reality. The reality is that inequality with respect to capital is a far greater domestic issue than it is an international one.
The main force pushing toward reduction in inequality has always been the diffusion of knowledge and the diffusion of education.
Over a long period of time, the main force in favor of greater equality has been the diffusion of knowledge and skills.
There is one great advantage to being an academic economist in France: here, economists are not highly respected in the academic and intellectual world or by political and financial elites. Hence they must set aside their contempt for other disciplines and their absurd claim to greater scientific legitimacy, despite the fact that they know almost nothing about anything.
When the rate of return on capital exceeds the rate of growth of output and income, as it did in the nineteenth century and seems quite likely to do again in the twenty-first, capitalism automatically generates arbitrary and unsustainable inequalities that radically undermine the meritocratic values on which democratic societies are based.
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.
People who live in poor countries have to be entrepreneurial even just to survive.
I've never been on Wall Street. And I care about Wall Street for one reason and one reason only because what happens on Wall Street matters to Main Street.
Trade and commerce, if they were not made of Indian rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way.
The evidence of history speaks with a single voice. I do not know any exception to the proposition that if you compare like with like, the freer the system, the better off the ordinary poor people have been.
A nation's economy is more than its markets, tastes, technologies and property rights.
Large fortunes are all founded either on the occupation of land, or lending or the taxation of labor.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.