TOKYO: Best-selling author and economist Thomas Piketty said Japan’s declining population will only exacerbate the tendency for inherited wealth to lead to a greater economic disparity in the nation.
A professor at the Paris School of Economics, Piketty made the comments at a symposium that was sponsored by The Asahi Shimbun and other organizations in Tokyo on Jan. 29.
His “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” has become an international best-seller. A Japanese translation published by Misuzu Shobo has sold 130,000 copies since going on sale in December.
A bookstore employee described the book as the “Harry Potter” of economic works. His book saw brisk sales despite the tax-inclusive price of 5,940 yen ($50.50) and the fact that it is more than 700 pages long.
In the symposium, Piketty said Japan’s declining population and slower economic growth rate will only heighten the value of inherited wealth. He called that a trend common in advanced economies whereby societies depended increasingly on inherited wealth, which leads to greater economic disparity.
One of the main themes of “Capital in the Twenty-First Century” is that the rate of capital return is greater than the rate of economic growth in advanced economies. He based his thesis on analysis of tax documents from various nations extending back several centuries.
In his Tokyo speech, Piketty called the immediate period after World War II an anomaly over the long term because both the affluent and poor segments of society from various nations experienced balanced economic growth. He attributed that seeming equality to the fact that war had destroyed most of the assets of many nations. There was also the spread of a progressive income tax system during a period of high economic growth so more taxes were collected from those with higher incomes.
However, Piketty said that from the 1980s assets became more concentrated in the hands of the wealthy in advanced economies.
He also said that one reason he wrote his book was to contribute to the democratization of economic knowledge. He said that economic issues were too important to be left up to a small number of economists and that in order for the general public to express their opinions, they would need a certain level of economic knowledge.
