@eatmoredumplings Picketty's not an example of someone who didn't read Marx. He's an example of someone who read a lot of Marx and read him well but didn't buy the post-hoc edits and rationalizations of Marxian heterodox economists. I mean, this article makes a point to identify a supposed error re:the minimum wage (the article linked ignores rate of change over time, making it useless) but doesn't address the transformation problem in Marx? My guess is the writer doesn't even know what it is. And if that's the case, he shouldn't be writing about Marx. Or any other economics.
This is baffling. Linking to right wing think tanks for empty criticisms of Piketty, critiquing models w/o a first-hand understanding of how the models work, relying on David Harvey (not an economist, not even a Marxist economist but a Marxist geographer) who, while great (love The Condition of Postmodernity), doesn't really tell us anything diagnostically? I mean, how does Harvey teach you about "capitalists" unless you just trust it implicitly? Tautology? Confirmation bias? No Keynes? No Minsky? No Austrian school? It's like reading an economics version of shitty karaoke.