IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aia/indrnl/2014-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

2014-16: Piketty in the Netherlands - The first reception

Author

Listed:

Abstract

The two papers brought together here are revised versions of: * Paul de Beer, _Wat kunnen sociaaldemocraten van Piketty leren?_ * Wiemer Salverda, _Ongelijkheid in Nederland_ S&D Volume 71 Number 3 June 2014 — pages 31-38 and 49-60 respectively. h2. What can we learn from Piketty? h3. Paul de Beer _Piketty’s book tells a compelling and ‘grand’ story. The practical lesson is to aim for a more balanced distribution of wealth without impeding growth: more home ownership without debt, less tax deductions for pension premiums paid by higher earners, more profit sharing for employees._ Capital in the Twenty-First Century by French economist Thomas Piketty has created a shockwave among economists. A few have already welcomed the book as the most important economic work since Marx’s Das Kapital. It is not just the title that has prompted this response, it is also the breadth and depth of Piketty’s analysis. In an age in which ‘big stories’ are supposed to have been dispensed with because today’s world is too complex to be expressed solely in simple formulas, this is exactly what Piketty has done. The essence of his book can be summarised in three elementary formulas: α = r x β, β = s/g and r > g. The latter inequality in particular has captured the imagination of the economist community in the past year, as if it were the formula for the holy grail. The Huffington Post even compared it with Einstein’s E = mc2. The formula has already appeared on hipsters’ T-shirts! Reducing the analysis of modern capitalism to three simple formulas that can be explained fairly easily to non-economists would seem to be an impossible task. Many economists who sang the praises over Piketty’s book seem to be desperately wondering why they had not hit upon the idea themselves, as it is not as if the formulas contain anything that is really new. h2. Wealth/income inequality – the significance of Piketty’s views for the Netherlands h3. Wiemer Salverda *Summary* It is not possible yet to draw a comprehensive comparison of wealth inequality in the Netherlands with the results for other countries found in Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-first Century survey, if only because consistent Dutch figures on wealth go back no further than the 1990s. By contrast, it is possible to study the ratio between national wealth and income in much the same way as Piketty has done, but from the mid-1990s on only. The results show that from an international perspective the wealth/income ratio in the Netherlands is considerable, and has been growing. Further research is required, first, to improve this comparison and extend it to earlier years and even centuries as in Piketty, and, second, to link that to the distribution of wealth over individuals and households. The discussion on Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty raises three important questions about the significance of his research for the Netherlands: What is the wealth-income ratio like; is it increasing here too? How concentrated among individuals or households is the possession of wealth, and is this concentration increasing or decreasing? How important is income from wealth in the distribution of incomes? For each of these questions, it is also relevant to know its development and level relative to other countries. I will attempt in this contribution to find a first answer to these questions, using Dutch income and wealth statistics, international macro-economic statistics (national accounts) and of course the top-income shares, which laid the foundation for Piketty’s theory about the role of wealth, economic growth and inequality. One hundred years ago, top incomes in the Netherlands accounted for an extremely high proportion of overall income, possibly due to colonialism, opportunistic profiteering from the First World War, or perhaps because that is simply how things were. In 1916, 53% of all income in the Netherlands, as in Sweden, went to the Top-10% and 29% to the Top-1%. That was considerably more than in Germany, the United Kingdom, or the United States at the time. As was the case elsewhere, the top shares showed a marked decline in the Netherlands, especially after 1945, until reaching their lowest points of 27.5% and 6.1% respectively in 1975. After that, the top-income shares diverged considerably from one country to another, as we shall shortly see. Because minor differences in definitions can have significant effects when it comes to income and wealth - the devil really is in the detail here - I will try to be as accurate as I can in what I have to say.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Beer & Wiemer Salverda, 2014. "2014-16: Piketty in the Netherlands - The first reception," Labour markets and industrial relations in the Netherlands - Working Papers 2014-16, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:aia:indrnl:2014-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://archive.uva-aias.net/uploaded_files/publications/2014-16-DeBeer,Salverda.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Skopek, Nora & Buchholz, Sandra & Blossfeld, Hans-Peter, 2011. "Wealth inequality in Europe and the delusive egalitarianism of Scandinavian countries," MPRA Paper 35307, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Bas van Bavel & Ewout Frankema, 2013. "Low Income Inequality, High Wealth Inequality.The Puzzle of the Rhineland Welfare States," Working Papers 0050, Utrecht University, Centre for Global Economic History.
    3. Frank Cowell & Karagiannaki, E. & Abigail Mcknight, 2013. "GINI DP 72: Accounting for cross-country differences in wealth inequality," GINI Discussion Papers 72, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    4. Wiemer Salverda & Christina Haas & Marloes Graaf-zijl & Bram Lancee & Natascha Notten & Tahnee Ooms, 2013. "GINI Country Report: Growing Inequalities and their Impacts in the Netherlands," GINI Country Reports netherlands, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    5. Frank A Cowell & Eleni Karagiannaki & Abigail McKnight, 2013. "Accounting for cross-country differences in wealth inequality," CASE Papers case168, Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, LSE.
    6. repec:cep:sticas:/168 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Anthony Atkinson & Thomas Piketty, 2007. "Top incomes over the twentieth century: A contrast between continental european and english-speaking countries," Post-Print halshs-00754859, HAL.
    8. Atkinson, A. B. & Piketty, Thomas (ed.), 2007. "Top Incomes Over the Twentieth Century: A Contrast Between Continental European and English-Speaking Countries," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286881.
    9. Virginia Maestri, 2012. "GINI DP 29: Imputed rent and income re-ranking. Evidence from EU-SILC data," GINI Discussion Papers 29, AIAS, Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aia:indrnl:2014-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kea Tijdens). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aiuvanl.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.