TO CLARIFY  WHO  THIS FELLOW IS, WE  GIVE  HEREUNDER SOME BIOGRAPHY NOTES,  HOW ONE CAN FIND BY WIKIPEDIA: Piketty was born May 7, 1971 in Clichy,  a Paris suburb. At 18, he was admitted to École Normale Supérieure (ENS) where he studied mathematics
Nice but with dangerous ideas to the worldand economics. At age 22, he obtained his PhD with a thesis on the redistribution of incomes written at the EHESS and at th London School of Economics under supervision of Roger Guesnerie.

After obtaining his doctorate,  Piketty from 1993 to 1995 has been an assistant professor at the Department of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  In the year 1995 was employed as researcher at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) and  in the year 2000 became director of the EHESS.

In 2002, Piketty won the award as best young French economist and, according to the list provided on 11 November 2003, is a member of the scientific committee of the association  La gauche en Europe, founded by Michel Rocard and Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Piketty in 2006 became the first principal of the Paris School of Economics, which he helped to establish. He left after a few months the role of economic advisor of the Socialist candidate to the presidential elections in France in 2007 Ségolène Royal. Piketty resumed teaching at the Paris School of Economics in 2007 and  is opinionist of French daily 'Libération' and  he writes occasionally for 'Le Monde' 
In April 2012, Piketty signed, along with 42 colleagues an open letter in support of Francois Hollande, the Socialist candidate to the French presidential election, won the following May against the President Nicolas Sarkozy.
From his biography we understand very well who's Thomas Picketty. Let me point out that I do not appreciate at all those people in question, and I wish: I would see them distributing their wealth to the poor. 
Very rich, very socialist and progressive. Great fucker I would like to see the very wealthy Mr. STRAUSS-KAHN, while distributing part of his wealth to the poor, he when in
New York lived in a hotel at $ 2,000 a night, and was also accused of,having raped an afroamerican handmaid.
They said him innocent, but let me think he's not, with this fierce predatory expression.
I was also very annoyed when watching a  similar story in a popular TV series of  New York  detectives,  becauset in that story  the french rapist (Strauss-Kahn) had become Italian.

Of course: it's clear that a debauchery violator can't be French..
This is another amenability of the damned leftists who organized to discredit my country through the whole world,, with the complicity of italian traitors, by mounting many false and defamatory accusations against the former Italy  Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, and more,they caused Italy's economic decay and big problems in EU Africa and middle East...
Mr. Berlusconi wasn't nice to Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel, since he didn't agree with them about the aggression against Libya and about the idiotic DEM policy of the United States by the afroamerican UU.SS. president , under the vassalage of Germany.

The upsaid brilliant statesmen, together with Obama the fool and Hillary the mad , provoked the invasion of Italy and Europe by hunred thousands clandestines and refugees, the economic crisis, and the unstoppable decline still ongoing.
At last they have also been the cause of the rise of terrorism.
God bless them!

THE MAIN WORK OF PICKETTY
Picketty is author of numerous articles and books. His principal work is his new book the "Capital in the 21st Century ", about social inequality and its economic effects, that is said having spurred a global debate about the causes of inequality.
Thomas Piketty did recently meet some characters unknown to me (Tom Clark, Polly Toynbee, Andrew Lilico, and Richard Wilkinson) to talk about his new book.
They debated about the social and economic inequality; and there Mr. Henry McDonald did also explain the context of the arrest of the Sinn Féin president , Gerry Adams, attributing it to social inequality.
In fact the socialist newspaper 'The Guardian' (Manchester) reports that the Picketty's book is full of data and a complex analysis: its central insight is that, because the return on investment (ROI) for existing wealth, as a whole, is generally higher than the economy growth rate, the rich gets much richer than all the others.
This idea seems to me an evident nonsense, if considered from the point of view of observing the standard individuals livings perhaps compared with the past, even with the not too distant one, .

SIMPLE DEFINITION AND EXAMPLE OF ROI ( 'Return On Investment')

ROI is an indicator used to evaluate the efficiency of an investment or to compare the efficacy of a number of different investments. In the case of a financial investment, it allows you to decide if you need to keep the investment or withdraw the money invested, or what is the convenience of investing in one security or another.
It also allows you - I used similar method when still at work- to evaluate the advisability or opportunity of making an investment to build or buy something, a house or a plant, or to evaluate the advisability of investing money to modify something that already exists.

 To calculate ROI,  the benefit (return) that you get from an investment is divided by the cost of the investment itself; the result is expressed as a percentage or a ratio.

Return On Investment (ROI) = ( G - C )/C

at is, if from an investment of 100 you get back 105,  you will have a ROI = (105-100) /100, namely a 5%. This obviously not considering the invesment lasting.
In the above formula if you have an investment income referring
Hazlo, pero solo si quieres ser genial interest. on buy an sell operation, the ROI  is a metric widely used  because of its versatility and simplicity.

Th at is, if an investment has a positive ROI, or if there are other opportunities with a higher ROI, the investment should not be made.

A down-to-ear example: I decided to install a new plant in my house, with solar panels and an inverter powered with 5 KVA, with its accumulators to store energy and equalize peaks.

It is clear from the beginning that the investment must be spread over some years. Questions are ;

1. How long does it take me to get back the investment?
2. When do I'll start to recover the investment
3. When do I'll start to and gain?
4. How much R.O.I.
   

To follow, here let's make a little table with the ipothetica data that must be taken into account:

CONCLUDING
In the example I gave above, considering the investment only from an economic point of view, it not as cost-effective as any other investment, considering the long time it takes to recover the invested capital and because the relatively short duration of the actual plants. However it can be practical in four cases

• if the interest rate is very low, and if in order to promote the production of green energy the State could offer contributions or other special conditions.
  If the entire capital is paid and no loan should be taken, taking into account only the annual maintenance. In this case, the capital can be recovered in 20000 / (2500-400) ~ 9-10 years which is the most favorable economic condition.
• If the investor is young and can afford the rate of the shorter annual loan fee, that is very convenient.
• In any case, the maximum of 15 years is advisable, and you should not take a too long loan. After a certain time, the profit goes to zero because as the number of years increases the interest rate cancels the advantage.

In any case, it is not convenient for me to do it at home, because only God knows if I am going to live long enough just to recover the money that I should have to spend to set the plant..
And well, the current technology does not give me still much confidence.

CRITICAL POINTS OF PICKETTY'S IDEA

the idea that is great - just to speak so - economist, it makes me cringe. First of all I would like to know how one can calculate that the return on investment (ROI) for existing weath is  as a whole generally higher than the economy growth rate.
From the experience  I know that certain calculations that involve the estimation of many variables and indices, are subject to interpretations and errors, and so should be taken with a grain of salt. 
To me the Picketty's uppersaid affirmation is totally free. In fact if we exclude purely paper speculations, that usually generate apparent and ficticious wealth  and cause periodically  economic collapse, and that surely should be prohibited, the real economic activities generate more jobs and therefore more wealth.

Quantity and quality of work.
So, typical of neo-Marxists, Pickett persists into the mistake, because he  considers only the quantity and not the quality of the work.
 It is therefore clear that the time of a surgeon work has for Pickety the same monetary value of an 'ecological' worker, it is street-sweeper. Mind  that from the moral point of view every honest work has equal dignity and deserves respect, but it also seems to be not right that those who perform a most requested higher quality's services, of which perhaps few are capable, is remunerated equal to others undertaking work for which there's no need for special expertise or commitment.

Singers, players, clubs, prostitution
So, typical of neo-Marxist,, perhaps Picketty did not consider activities at first looking to have a huge economic return for who practices them, but seem to generate little wealth. It's those activities with relatively modest investments generate a large money's collection and concentration.
What such a successful singer does? The ROI of its activities is stratospheric. And what does he produce? With relatively modest investments he produces mere sound vibrations that can make millionary incomes and move the editing industries.
And what makes thus the singer with his money? He invests it and lives of it. And since he cannot eat or drug or drink all at much,  obviously he buys things. And obviously somewhere someone has even produced the things that one buys, or is not it? 
Likewise could be said for  famous football players, with their millionaire earnings, and even about prostitution.

The rich richer and the poor poorer
That the rich becomes richer, much richer than everyone else, and that eats all the available wealth
  The Richness according to Pikettystarving the others is the usual socialist legend , based on the envy for  who's better or owns assets that others might reach but do not have.
Wealth, besides to be a moral category, is measured from the average level of the general society that you examine. In fact the inequality is greatest in the socialist societies while in the general situation of poverty there is by one side the intelligentsia who enjoys privileges and relative wealth .

Let's us make the example of Italy, my country: when I was a child, after the last world war, I could see a car going in a blue moon, the tramway seats were wooden and passengers smelled bad,. the streets were narrow, and the cost of an ice cream's cone of the wagon standing in front of my elementary school was 1 cent.  Rarely people ate some meat, and who had a car was considered as a rich. Only ten years later the streets were teeming with cars, the traffic was crazy and the economy climate had completely changed..The reviled consumerism did start.
Today we see even written on the walls certain things, such as meat = cancer and things like that, and there are  millions of tourists who go on holiday abroad,

Instead, if what Picketty says was true, I should wear patched trousers, move on an old crumbling car, while the people majority should be dressed in rags, going around on foot or cycle. Such as how happened in Cuba, and once in the People Republic of China. We all should also be slim as toothpicks. Occasionally one could see a fat and luster character sipping whisky in a Rolls Royce driven by a chauffeur. It should be, shortly, the typical situation that we find today in some Democratic Republic of Africa or somewhere like that..

THE SOCIAL INEQUALITY AND ITS REAL CAUSES 

The nineteen century has been harbinger of bad philosophical theories that influenced and, let me say have plagued the world for two centuries: Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were two Hegel pupils, theorizing the worst that one can imagine about the human society welfare.
Generally, the attempts to apply their philosophies led to aberrations genocides and massacres. Some say that, while causing disasters, however, those situations did prompt reactions leading to healthy and generalized positive changes in the society
Others say that the changes occurred in the society are due to the introduction of technological innovations and derive from marhets' globalization, and that the philosophers have nothing to do at all. in that.
And probably in most part this is right. For example, what is now the Russian billionaires, were once the large state-owned companies leaders. And the same happens in China mainland, where the state became a police state. However, thanks to the private sector thrive, perhaps today in China there are no more hunger deads, as until a few decades ago. However the social inequalities exist, and today have increased due to the financial crisis triggered by USA bankers. But I do not think that the redistribution of existing wealth could reduce inequalities, since it could not be enforced. Indeed, as experience teaches by the USSR bankruptcy, in that case the inequality will increase, and in the medium and long run will have disastrous effects

These as follow are root causes of inequality in my life experience:

• inadequacy of the school system that basically cannot communicate the ability to reason
  What Kind of teachers poor students! without been conditioned, nor to teach the logic to recognize the truth, and rarely communicates really positive values, because the thing comes from afar, triggered by the Communist attempt to overthrow the Western society with the so-called '68, which has negatively that affected for decades discents and and future teachers. Consequently generations of learners have suffered severe prejudices, and low mind opening, and the population 'morality' was compromised;
• absence of absolute values of reference directing the reason, because by the predominance of relativism: every idea and behavior have equal validity and dignity. In other words, the rational being has no absolute reference to help him distinguish truth from falsehood, good from evil. In absence of absolute rules, the man feels justified, even free, to commit any wickedness and abomination. To reach a goal wrongly or rightly considered advantageous, a man without absolute references uses without hesitation every means, inevitably damaging the whole society;
• the materialistic atheism and also today's predominant practical atheism. The atheism does not understand the human because it reduces it to mere matter, and thus implicitly opposes the vital processes of human freedom. In particular, the neo-communist atheism, thinks the spiritual thought as an attack on the essence of cultural-philosophical underpinning its historical justification, and thus creates e materiality religion which tries to impose itself in the world to establish a rules dictatorship in the name of an alleged freedom and equality
• the low level of religiosity of the population and religious ignorance, which lowers the ability of introspection and makes the human and civil virtues little practiced, those that once were recognized as positive, communicated by the level of religiosity of society.

The resulting effects are the spread of ideas arising from envy and class hatred, moral and habits corruption. Propagating neo-communist ideas and misunderstanding e evangelical teachings, spreading pauperistic or distributist ideologies means to destroy ability and freedom and favor a fewest smart ones.
Generating more hatred and envy, is obtains as a reaction the effect of reducing labor productivity and increasing poverty.
On the opposite side are equally execrable those who use the system to enrich emselves unfairly at the expense of others. They are the ones who do not base their work on the administration or management of wealth productive activities, but how those USA bankers they base it on guile ans pure speculative artifices, with destructive effects.

All the human beings are created equals because have the same basic rights, BUT ARE NOT equal, either for their physical and mental ability, nor for the environment, nor for wealth. Then they will never be equals at any point of the course of their lives.
Instead everyone have equal rights to be able to form themselves, to  study, work, and live decently or better as they can, but in freedom, and have to be protected against the abuses of the stronger and of malicious fellows. 
To achieve is goal definitely it's not needed to put into practice ideas like neo-communism, pauperism, or distributism, that destroy ability and freedom of men, minimizing the work's productivity equally distributing misery. Instead one must be confronting the root causes of this. 
Atheism and irreligion can also intelligently fought by each of us, in his own workplace and familiar environment. But, even if one do not act wrong, it will take generations to improve.

The rule which states: 'give to each according his needs and get from each according to his capacity' can't work,in a real world, for two reasons:

• individual needs cannot be determined but by notice of assessment and restricting freedoms. This is the real socialism, which damages the society freedoms and will implode by efficiency lack.
• But one could still calculate the standard needs on plans and programs basis fixed by bureaucrats, accepting to limit the economical freedom and mortifying the best, for e production capacity it goes even worse.
  Man is not an angel, far from it. He works and is working hard only if he has some interest to do it, at is, for his individual interest. A western worker, in much better living conditions than one of Communist Russia's, once produced several times more an the norm established by Communist government. At one Stakanov, which always exceeded the daily 'norm', they did build even a monument! Today we know what were living and working conditions in USSR! It was a quite different story of Pickettians myths!

Note to the reader,
I recently changed my password with a stronger one after experiencing changes in what I had written. The 'th' were deleted from the text and the html code, so width became 'width', the arthicle became 'e' and so on. Many sentences have been changed by introducing pleonasms and grammatical errors. I've found this all along mysite so I'm reviewing everything and I do not have time to add new things. Pardon me please