what do you think of people reading large books in public? >tfw

>>8798829
I consider them pseuds.

>>8798833
well what should i do instead during my commute?

most people sleep, listen to music, or are on their phone (normiebook or texting). i don't do any of these things, except sleep

>>8798829
Just read your book, nobody but losers with something to prove will care.

i'd say if:
1) you can read on these places
2) you can carry the large book around
3) you can understand what you're reading
you should just do it

>>8798843
>well what should i do instead during my commute?
Masturbate

File: 1480787082731.jpg (758KB, 1154x1500px)

758KB, 1154x1500px

>>8798843
>well what should i do instead during my commute?
considerations about kantian philosophy

Instead of reading Capital just get something by Thomas Sowell instead

>>8798829
>what do you think of people
I don't, you arse.

>>8799233
marxist economic theory =/= libertarian economic theory

gotta catch em all

>>8798829
Literally Rebbit: The Book.

>>8799268
>won the Financial Times (literally the only good newspaper) best book of the year award

>>8799276
>Financial Times (literally the only good newspaper)

Okay, champ.

>>8799276
This. You can cry about it being popular but probably should read it rather than sticking your head in the sand.

I don't
next

>>8799276

>

It actually has a lot wrong with it. Piketty's been called out all over the place for fiddling his figures/etc. Anyone trying to peddle a neo-Marxist creed must necessarily bend the truth, so it comes as no surprise.

>>8798829

As long as you're not waving it around like "HEY CHECK OUT HOW INTELLECTUAL I AM" no one can reasonably be upset at you.

I do read on public transit and sometimes they are big books but it's not to get attention and no one has ever treated me any differently than any other reading/silent passenger.

>>8799248
Piketty's method is much closer to Sowell's than Marx's. You can't really substantially call Sowell a libertarian since he believes a free banking system wouldn't function and governments gotta control the growth of the money supply, he's a "libertarian" like Friedman i.e. only superficially

>>8799319
And every such accusation of "fiddling figures" has been debunked again and again. Piketty's central evidence of the rich getting richer at a greater rate since the liberalization of economies is so bland and self-evident his work is just pointless. Some people are just pathologically afraid of admitting this obvious empirical process has been occurring and no amount of statistics is ever going to convince them.

>>8799361
>rich getting richer at a greater rate
>People who are good at making money are better at making money than people who are bad at making money
>People paid to read this

>>8799361
My issue with Piketty is not his research but his purposed solutions just come off as generic, liberal European policies; it felt like a really lackluster conclusion to such a well researched and presented book.

>>8799420
You're completely missing the point of the fact: the return on wealth ownership > the rate of economic growth

The rich don't magically "make money", they passively sit on assets and get a certain return for doing so. If a larger mass of societies resources are progressively going towards passive rentiers to consume, largly imported luxury goods, instead of being reinvested in the economy to employ and expand societies productive forces this will over time have all kinds of negative sociological and economic consequences.
The growth of wealth inequality will probably over the longer run lead to an establishment of a firm power elite (perhaps of close kinship). This type of development has always historically tended to have led to political collapse or authoritarian regimes establishing themselves.

>>8799586
So what you're saying is that people who are good at making money (the rich) are better at making money (the return on wealth ownership) than people who are bad at making money (those whose assets only increase at the base rate of economic growth).

>The rich don't magically "make money"
So how did they get rich?

>>8798829
nothing wrong with that, if you think otherwise you are pseud

NOBODY GIVES A SHIT

>>8798843
are you really this insecure and self-conscious?

>>8799870
People who "make money" are just functionaries in the system.
Millions of peoples lives in the 20th century were dramatically improved because of large investments being made in fixed-capital that required employing a lot of people and a general progressive taxation and regulation framework.
Fordism is dead today however.

File: IMG_0217.jpg (46KB, 637x361px)

46KB, 637x361px

Daily reminder that Piketty is wrong

http://economics.mit.edu/files/10422
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2016/wp16160.pdf

>>8798829
Just read your book, nobody in real life actually cares.

>>8800406
This

>>8800353
You realize Piketty has made extensive responses to his critics right? You're not just mining from Wall Street Journal articles trying to one up him are you?

http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.29.1.67

You should take any consensus amongst "experts" (i.e. a lot of learned ignorance) in a social "science" as being pretty much worthless. You really have to try actually understanding the data yourself.

I'm sceptical of Piketty mostly because of his methodology and sticking to a very narrow naive neoclassical framework.

>>8798843
read small books

>>8799319
>>8799361
Btw, I don't know why this needs to be said but Piketty is not a marxist and has never read Marx.

He just wanted to make money so he used the name, kind of cringe thing to do to be honest.

>>8799451
Happens in every single book, no one wants to say
>so this is why we should eat the rich
because it wouldn't be published but it's always implied.

>>8799268
>He is took pleb to read Piketty.

>He doesn't understand intermediate to advanced economic theory/thought.

>He hasn't studied economics enough to appreciate how good the book is.

>He's to pleb to understand the significance of Piketty's work.

>>8798829
Whenever I see a doorstopper in public I always think that the person reading it wants to show off. Carrying big books around isn't practical, and thats how simple my reasoning is.
But it's just a thought, I don't really care about strangers at all.

>>8802108
t. Studied economics and math

Faggot