Crises of Elite Competition in the East and West

Re:Crises of Elite Competition in the East and West by eru on Monday November 29, 2021 @11:02PM (#29388808)

Yes, the labour share of income has slightly declined. I agreed with that?

But the extra has gone to land, not capital.

Piketty fails to make that distinction. See eg https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2015/07/22/piketty-... or https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/deciphering-the-fall...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crises of Elite Competition in the East and West by pfkurtz on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @12:22AM (#29389225)

Interesting. There seems to be some debate among the critics, but putting that aside...

If it's all gone to land, the situation seems worse as far as inequality goes. The top 1% of households own 40% of land in the US as of 2017. The next 9 percent own 42%.

So maybe it's inexact to call it "capital" vs. "labor", but... a class of people is dominating.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crises of Elite Competition in the East and West by eru on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @09:48AM (#29392673)

> So maybe it's inexact to call it "capital" vs. "labor", but... a class of people is dominating.

Not sure about 'class'.

But the policy implications are quite different:

Land value taxation can capture all that extra rent going to land without hurting the economy one bit. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax

By contrast, taxing capital is a really bad idea. Eg capital gains taxes hamper productivity growth.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Crises of Elite Competition in the East and West by pfkurtz on Monday November 29, 2021 @11:07PM (#29388842)

I was not aware of this paper, I will read it and see what further work has said, thanks (it's from 2015 there's gotta be something).

[ Parent | on HN ]