<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: No Economic Experts Agree with Piketty</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/no-economic-experts-agree-with-piketty/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/no-economic-experts-agree-with-piketty/</link>
	<description>taking the most charitable view of those who disagree</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:48:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.32</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/no-economic-experts-agree-with-piketty/#comment-453073</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Martin]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 01:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=4075#comment-453073</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sometimes one jumps to a conclusion that subsequently gets simply indefensible. And I think that happened here.

First, it is simply not the case that &quot;Brad DeLong speculates that Piketty himself would have answered “disagree” to the poll.&quot; What he does is provide a quote by Piketty directly contradicting the content of what was suggested to the panel to be a Piketty position. This is rather different than &quot;speculating.&quot;

Second, yes, Piketty himself has now stated that he disagrees with the statement provided to the panel. Weissmann asked him, the most relevant part being, I guess &quot;So this indeed has little to do with r&gt;g&quot; (Piketty!), see last paragraph here:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/10/15/piketty_igm_forum_economists_did_not_just_reject_capital_in_the_21st_century.html

So, we have a) a quote by Piketty from before the panel session contradicting the panel question; and b) Piketty himself disagreeing with the panel question. The title suggestion that &quot;No Economic Experts Agree with Piketty&quot; is supported by nothing, at all - they were responding to a misinformation.

How ist it possible to not think, at this point, that the one who formulated this alleged Piketty position got it wrong, rather than your title conclusion? I&#039;d also point out that you not only insulted Hoynes, but did so in a post in which you did not manage to get it right yourself.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes one jumps to a conclusion that subsequently gets simply indefensible. And I think that happened here.</p>
<p>First, it is simply not the case that &#8220;Brad DeLong speculates that Piketty himself would have answered “disagree” to the poll.&#8221; What he does is provide a quote by Piketty directly contradicting the content of what was suggested to the panel to be a Piketty position. This is rather different than &#8220;speculating.&#8221;</p>
<p>Second, yes, Piketty himself has now stated that he disagrees with the statement provided to the panel. Weissmann asked him, the most relevant part being, I guess &#8220;So this indeed has little to do with r&gt;g&#8221; (Piketty!), see last paragraph here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/10/15/piketty_igm_forum_economists_did_not_just_reject_capital_in_the_21st_century.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/10/15/piketty_igm_forum_economists_did_not_just_reject_capital_in_the_21st_century.html</a></p>
<p>So, we have a) a quote by Piketty from before the panel session contradicting the panel question; and b) Piketty himself disagreeing with the panel question. The title suggestion that &#8220;No Economic Experts Agree with Piketty&#8221; is supported by nothing, at all &#8211; they were responding to a misinformation.</p>
<p>How ist it possible to not think, at this point, that the one who formulated this alleged Piketty position got it wrong, rather than your title conclusion? I&#8217;d also point out that you not only insulted Hoynes, but did so in a post in which you did not manage to get it right yourself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arnold Kling</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/no-economic-experts-agree-with-piketty/#comment-453063</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Arnold Kling]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:39:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=4075#comment-453063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In view of the fact that Piketty&#039;s defenders say that he would have said &quot;disagree&quot; with the question as asked, I stand by my disparagement of Hoynes&#039; answer.  I will grant that I could have made it less ad hominem.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In view of the fact that Piketty&#8217;s defenders say that he would have said &#8220;disagree&#8221; with the question as asked, I stand by my disparagement of Hoynes&#8217; answer.  I will grant that I could have made it less ad hominem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Bishop</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/no-economic-experts-agree-with-piketty/#comment-453054</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Bishop]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:33:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=4075#comment-453054</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What&#039;s the purpose of insulting Hilary Hoynes?  Sounds like you know little to nothing about him/her.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s the purpose of insulting Hilary Hoynes?  Sounds like you know little to nothing about him/her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aidan</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/no-economic-experts-agree-with-piketty/#comment-453044</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Aidan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:37:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=4075#comment-453044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That Saez disagreed with the question should have given and indication that the question was flawed as a representation of Piketty&#039;s views. &quot;Income and savings inequality increases are now fueling US wealth inequality. Down the road r-g will be central as predicted by Piketty&quot; - it&#039;s not clear if you read the book, but there is no way Saez could be described as disagreeing with Piketty.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That Saez disagreed with the question should have given and indication that the question was flawed as a representation of Piketty&#8217;s views. &#8220;Income and savings inequality increases are now fueling US wealth inequality. Down the road r-g will be central as predicted by Piketty&#8221; &#8211; it&#8217;s not clear if you read the book, but there is no way Saez could be described as disagreeing with Piketty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
