This book seems surreal, but it is not unrealistic. Doesn’t its subject matter cover an ultimate dream? That of an absolute freedom of action, without conditions or pressure, of an education centered on creativity and imagination stimulated on all types of screens (television, platforms, apps, etc.), of a development of projects illustrating the most unusual passions without great competition, of fortunes exceeding the GDP of several Western countries thanks to tax optimizations in all legality, of a power defying the States, of a disruptive model of a new world at the antipodes of the current world order. In a concise and lively style, Christine Kerdellant engages in an audit of the futuristic visions of a handful of influencers who are both billionaires and Americans. Their actions could undermine the very foundations of capitalism. Their common denominator: their vision as a vector of social change with an extra-planetary scope. Opportunities for humanity or threats to democracy? Their power does not only come from the immensity of their fortune, but for some, from their high-tech activities in a monopolistic situation, and for others, from their dissemination of sensitive data to a fraction of humanity. For the author, this poses a problem of ethics and responsibility of the States. In her book, she arouses the reader’s curiosity in order to warn about the absence of limits and controls of these projects, resulting in a takeover of more than a third of satellites impacting military strategies, the deployment of implants on humans in a medical setting, the exploitation of billions of data for political purposes… These science fiction-passionate dreamers are not far from supplanting the State which, in their opinion, is content to tax them excessively. Is state control pure fiction? Is the Chinese pattern, where the state takes control of the activities of billionaires, more appropriate? Could the European model, where the state regulates by heavily taxing large fortunes, be an alternative? Doesn’t American capitalism, which includes the notion of economic freedom, reflect the American dream that offers the opportunity to prosper in complete freedom? Ideally, in all types of models, there should be safeguards (“wise men”). With a governmental support, the “billionaires stronger than the states” therefore continue to live their American dream. Christine KERDELLANT is an essayist and economic journalist. She studied economics at the University of Caen and joined HEC.  Alongside her career as a journalist, she has written more than fifteen essays and novels. Chronicle by Pona SAMNIK

This collective work brought together 22 of the most recognized American and French teachers and researchers on the subject of economic and social inequalities in the world. In the first part, the authors show their adherence to the thesis of Polyani (author of the bestseller “The Great Transformation”), according to which “the market economy is insufficiently anchored in society”. They question certain principles of the neo-liberal economy, in particular by challenging Friedman’s “trickle-down” theory, according to which market efficiency creates value for all actors in society. They denounce the silence of neo-liberals, inspired by the theories of Friedman and Hayek, on the often hidden negative externalities in the more or less long term, which are generated by the absence of market regulation. They express the views currently shared by post-Keynesian democrats in response to the ultra-liberal measures taken under the new US presidency. They take up the arguments initiated by Stiglitz, Milosevic and Piketty* by extending them to all forms of inequality, be they economic, social, political or cultural.  They identify the issues, trends and synergies, showing that these arguments have been developed – with varying degrees of success – by left-wing populist movements in Western countries. One of the interests of the book is therefore that it reveals the strengths but also the weaknesses of the reasoning developed by the American left parties. The second part, entitled “The New Light on the Facts”, highlights the 40-year decline of the labor market in favor of the capital market, and the decline in wages in favor of dividends and capital gains, due to a double movement of globalization of markets for goods and services (unfavorable to workers because of industrial relocations) and financialization of the world economy (favorable to large fortunes). The exponential growth in executive compensation (driven by increasingly sophisticated engineering combining salaries, bonuses, stock options, executive pensions, etc.) was stimulated by the soaring stock market (due to an increasingly “short-term” management) and real estate prices (fueled by unbridled money creation), which benefited the wealthiest assets.  In the third part, entitled “Policy Issues. Labor Markets, Education, Taxation, and Intellectual Property”, the researchers identify the political decisions and regulatory provisions that have directly affected the distribution of income and wealth in the United States, including those that have led to a stagnation of wages over the past 30 years, despite an increase in productivity in industry and services. The authors analyze the impact of the action of teachers’ unions on school results and find that this de-unionization has penalized teachers and students from disadvantaged neighborhoods and their access to employment. On another note, the authors argue that industrial and intellectual property rights, as well as certain employment aids, create near-monopoly situations and real rents (especially in the finance, health and digital sectors), which benefit the dominant shareholders of companies, who constitute half of American billionaires. During the 2007-2010 crisis, public funds allocated to banks and insurers thus mainly benefited the richest 1%. In the fourth part, devoted to “political contexts and future prospects”, the researchers analyze the evolution of discourse on income inequality.  They observe that these perceptions vary from one country to another because of their socio-cultural disparities. In some countries, such as France, discourses on the “social divide” may have encouraged various forms of discrimination without generating more social justice. The latest surveys show that the rising cost of higher education is making the debt of children from the most modest families increasingly unbearable and is depriving the nation of talent. The authors advocate the establishment of a federal employment guarantee upon graduation and baby-trusts to finance education at the lowest cost. Rudiger L. von Arnim is a professor of economics at the University of Utah and Joseph E. Stiglitz is a professor at Columbia University and a Nobel Prize winner in economics. * see other columns on this blog. note by Jean-Jacques Pluchart

The book’s subtitle is: the economics of degrowth. This sets the tone for the entire book. For the author, economic growth only benefits the richest: one only has to look at the persistence of the number of poor people. Inequalities are creating significant gaps for the poorest. Moreover, the wealthy are the source of the most pollution. A sentence from the author sums up his point: “degrowth, as a reduction in production and consumption to alleviate the ecological footprint, planned democratically in a spirit of social justice and in the interest of well-being” Is GDP the only important thing? It is neither more nor less than an “economic agitation” that does not take into account other factors such as human well-being or happiness. Well-being is not necessarily linked to changes in GDP. We must escape this “tyranny” of GDP. Currently, the race to improve labor productivity in order to increase growth is a goal that we must constantly try to achieve, at the expense of the environmental damage to ecosystems. Does economic growth reduce inequality? This is not accurate. It all depends on the distribution of this growth between wages and capital income. What do the proponents of degrowth propose? A shift towards sustainable degrowth, which would lead to a harmonious society. It means slowing down economic flows and turning to more sober and frugal lifestyles. The state should be the driver of this process, together with the representatives of the people. The goal would be to respect social justice by providing well-being, while respecting the balance of ecosystems. Any productivity gains would be oriented towards the well-being of workers: for example, by reducing working time. Suffice to say, this theory of degrowth generates a lot of criticism about its realism and how to achieve it. Indeed, what would happen to a country that adopted this new way of life, in a globalized environment? Wouldn’t it risk being marginalized, with disastrous consequences for its economic situation: capital flight and economic balances disrupted? It is up to each individual to form their own opinion after reading this well-documented and clear book. Timothée Parrique is a researcher in ecological economics at Lund University in Sweden. review by Renzo Borsato

The author approaches the European subject by probing the opinions of his high school and college students. The surveyed students were from Seine-Saint-Denis, the 5th arrondissement of Paris, and Tolbiac. Are young people passionate about the European project? Do they feel more European than French? Do they know the European institutions? Bagnolet high school students They are mostly from immigrant backgrounds and live in difficult family circumstances (some parents are unemployed). They note that Europe may be a market offering opportunities. Given its presence in the media world, the ECB is perceived as a monetary regulation institution. However, the other European institutions are less well known: the Parliament, the Commission, the Council. The Schengen area is highlighted for the convenience of traveling in Europe. It should be noted that all they have known is the euro, which facilitates trade. The Erasmus program makes them aware of their belonging to Europe. Preparatory students (Paris 5th and 16th arrondissement) Although they are of different sociological origins (more affluent social background), they adhere to the idea of a Europe that facilitates trade between its members. Tolbiac students Their approach is a little different: they know better the various workings of the institution. Like their prep colleagues, they recognize the importance of the role played by the European Central Bank (ECB). They also note the importance of collective action during the financial crises and the COVID-19 pandemic. In conclusion, no group of students mentioned the idea of a “Frexit”. It should first be noted that students see the practical side of Europe because of the existence of the Erasmus program: it is a way to open up to other horizons and other cultures. It was created in 1987. These young people were born after the creation of Europe and the euro: it would not occur to them to question it. Even the far-right political parties have abandoned this idea, which they had fiercely defended a few years earlier. One particular point brings negative remarks: the social aspect. Indeed, because of the commercial competition between members, employees earning minimum wage may find themselves unemployed. Some industries are relocated to countries with lower wages. This book brings us closer to the concerns of these young people: we must listen to them and enlighten them on the path of Europe: they are the ones who will be the actors of the next European advances. Frédéric FARAH is a professor of economic and social sciences, a teacher in preparatory classes and at the University of Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne. Chronicle by Renzo Borsato.