Leftist Economists Praise Their Hero Even Though His Data Is Bunk

Recently, a large group of heavyweight scientists debunked the “science” in the latest UN Climate Change hysteria report, and now one the Progressives’ economics heroes, Thomas Piketty, is found to have massively fudged his numbers to argue for wealth-redistribution.

Here’s the conclusion of Robert Murphy of the Ludwig Von Mises Institute:

In the interest of brevity, I had to limit my quotations from [Larry] Summers’ review. But I hope the limited excerpts above show my point: Summers was absolutely devastating in his critique of the theory underlying Piketty’s book. Yet Summers overall kept coming back to praise it, because Piketty gosh darn it had done “meticulous” work documenting the disturbing accumulation of wealth among the super rich over the last few decades. Except, as it turns out, that maybe a big chunk of those results were due to stupid mistakes or worse. (Be careful not to conflate wealth and income; that’s part of the confusion behind the various volleys of statistics from one camp to another in this debate.)

Plenty of progressives up till literally yesterday were saying yes yes, Piketty’s theoretical framework leaves much to be desired, but he’s a top scholar when it comes to the trends he’s documented. And now that much of that empirical work might be totally bunk, the defense is to argue that yes yes, the historical data might be the exact opposite of what Piketty claimed, but boy he offers some compelling theoretical predictions with which we must grapple.

Until this sorry episode, I had no idea just how much progressives hated rich people, and how little regard they had for intellectual integrity. Live and learn.

Ladies and gentlemen, the moral of the story is that when a Statist (on the “right” or the “left”) is presenting “documented” reasons why government needs more power and control over citizens’ lives and property (almost certainly using stolen taxpayer money for the “study”) he or she is almost certainly lying.