从皮凯蒂的《21世纪的资本》到《资本与意识形态》:寻求旨在减少不平等的公共政策措施的统一建议

R. Grassi
{"title":"从皮凯蒂的《21世纪的资本》到《资本与意识形态》:寻求旨在减少不平等的公共政策措施的统一建议","authors":"R. Grassi","doi":"10.5935/1808-2785/rem.v20n1p.259-288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article seeks to compare Piketty’s two great books (2014, 2020) on the issue of inequality, seeking to capture changes in his thinking on the subject, specifically with regard to the proposition of public policies. Although both works are known for the proposal of a strong increase in the progressiveness in the collection of three types of tax (inheritance, income and capital), it is not difficult to find clear elements of rupture, especially when the author proposes the rationalization of various types of public spending that impact inequality (health, education, etc.), present in the first book, which completely disappears in the later work. Despite the differences noted, this article seeks to contribute to the debate by proposing a joint analysis of Piketty’s proposals, which reconciles the search for efficiency in public spending present in the first book with the broader scope of measures in the second (basic income, carbon tax, etc.), always based on an overview of the public budget. From this general framework of proposals, it is considered that the author, in addition to being a mandatory reference in the theoretical and analytical debate on inequality, can also be better recognized for his contribution to the discussion on public policies, including by incorporating relevant contributions from other authors.","PeriodicalId":34129,"journal":{"name":"Revista de Economia Mackenzie","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Piketty de “O Capital no Século XXI” ao de “Capital e Ideologia”: em busca de uma proposta unificada de medidas de políticas públicas voltadas para a redução da desigualdade\",\"authors\":\"R. Grassi\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/1808-2785/rem.v20n1p.259-288\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article seeks to compare Piketty’s two great books (2014, 2020) on the issue of inequality, seeking to capture changes in his thinking on the subject, specifically with regard to the proposition of public policies. Although both works are known for the proposal of a strong increase in the progressiveness in the collection of three types of tax (inheritance, income and capital), it is not difficult to find clear elements of rupture, especially when the author proposes the rationalization of various types of public spending that impact inequality (health, education, etc.), present in the first book, which completely disappears in the later work. Despite the differences noted, this article seeks to contribute to the debate by proposing a joint analysis of Piketty’s proposals, which reconciles the search for efficiency in public spending present in the first book with the broader scope of measures in the second (basic income, carbon tax, etc.), always based on an overview of the public budget. From this general framework of proposals, it is considered that the author, in addition to being a mandatory reference in the theoretical and analytical debate on inequality, can also be better recognized for his contribution to the discussion on public policies, including by incorporating relevant contributions from other authors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista de Economia Mackenzie\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista de Economia Mackenzie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/1808-2785/rem.v20n1p.259-288\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista de Economia Mackenzie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/1808-2785/rem.v20n1p.259-288","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文试图比较皮凯蒂关于不平等问题的两本伟大著作(2014年和2020年),试图捕捉他在这个问题上的思想变化,特别是关于公共政策的命题。虽然这两部作品都以大力提高三种税收(遗产税、所得税和资本税)的累进性而闻名,但不难发现明显的断裂因素,特别是当作者提出对影响不平等的各种公共支出(卫生、教育等)进行合理化时,这在第一本书中出现,在后来的作品中完全消失了。尽管存在上述差异,但本文试图通过对皮凯蒂的建议进行联合分析,从而为这场辩论做出贡献。皮凯蒂的建议将第一本书中对公共支出效率的追求与第二本书中更广泛的措施范围(基本收入、碳税等)相协调,并始终基于对公共预算的概述。从这个建议的总体框架来看,作者除了是关于不平等的理论和分析辩论中的强制性参考之外,还可以更好地认识到他对公共政策讨论的贡献,包括纳入其他作者的相关贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do Piketty de “O Capital no Século XXI” ao de “Capital e Ideologia”: em busca de uma proposta unificada de medidas de políticas públicas voltadas para a redução da desigualdade
This article seeks to compare Piketty’s two great books (2014, 2020) on the issue of inequality, seeking to capture changes in his thinking on the subject, specifically with regard to the proposition of public policies. Although both works are known for the proposal of a strong increase in the progressiveness in the collection of three types of tax (inheritance, income and capital), it is not difficult to find clear elements of rupture, especially when the author proposes the rationalization of various types of public spending that impact inequality (health, education, etc.), present in the first book, which completely disappears in the later work. Despite the differences noted, this article seeks to contribute to the debate by proposing a joint analysis of Piketty’s proposals, which reconciles the search for efficiency in public spending present in the first book with the broader scope of measures in the second (basic income, carbon tax, etc.), always based on an overview of the public budget. From this general framework of proposals, it is considered that the author, in addition to being a mandatory reference in the theoretical and analytical debate on inequality, can also be better recognized for his contribution to the discussion on public policies, including by incorporating relevant contributions from other authors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信