Page 79 - Monocle Quarterly Journal Vol 1 Issue 1 Q4

environment, within laissez-faire capitalism, in which fewer and fewer have more and more power. It is precisely this accumulation of power that leads to higher rates of return on capital while a country experiences simultaneously lagging economic growth rates. Piketty points out that this inherited capital produces a class of rentiers who dominate politics with many negative consequences.
Piketty in the South African Context
Piketty stresses that South Africa is one of the most unequal countries in the world, and stated that “South Africa is very unequal and did not become more equal after the end of Apartheid, at least not as much as some people would have hoped. In some way, it has even become more unequal if we take the concentration of incomes in the top groups of the people.”
Ironically, Piketty’s visit, in which he proposes progressive wealth tax, a national minimum wage, worker participation at board level in companies, and signi cant land reform, was sponsored by the likes of AngloGoldAshanti, Audi, Coca-Cola South Africa, Vodacom, Rupert & Rothschild Vignerons and Douw Steyn, in his personal capacity. ese are extensions of the corporate entities that Piketty is criticising.
Despite being embraced by the South African elite, the progressive wealth tax that Piketty is suggesting – a proposed solution for inequality by which capital would be taxed annually at a rate of 10 percent – would have a signi cant impact on the founders of these very same companies. It would seem at odds with their personal narratives and he’d likely experience strong resistance from the same quarters that invited him to speak.
He further advocates that the lack of large-scale forced land redistribution in South Africa from the rich to the poor could be the reason behind one of the world’s widest income gaps. If one takes into consideration that Piketty’s work concentrated on western economies with long historical tax records, with little similarity to a South African context, it is at least a valid question to ask why he would advocate such a potentially socially dangerous solution to South Africa’s inequality problems.
If one considers the extent of damage to the Zimbabwean economy following their land redistribution programme it is further a valid ques- tion to ask why an economist who proposes these policies would be given
“He further advocates that the lack of large- scale forced land redistribution
in South Africa from the rich to the poor could be the reason behind one of the world’s widest income gaps.”
pIKetty: pRofIle of AN ecoNomIc ImpeRIAlISt
77