Piketty’s wealth tax is a prime example of “solutionism”: a proposal intended to solve all of the world’s problems through tweaks to the current institutional architecture. He pays little attention to power, to politics, or any other drivers of change. The same can be said for a lot of other radical ideas that have recently become popular, like modern monetary theory, land value taxation, or universal basic income. These can all be understood as a kind of technocratic utopianism — they rely on the assumption that society can be transformed from above and that making one or two radical policy changes will completely transform the economy. Many of these policies are not incorrect or bad, but their adherents often prescribe them as the solution to all the world’s problems, without considering how we got to where we are in the first place. Policy prescriptions — from wealth taxes and land value taxes, to financial reform and housing reform — have to be situated within their political economic context. It is meaningless to speak of “policy” without speaking of power.
Piketty’s wealth tax is a prime example of “solutionism”: a proposal intended to solve all of the world’s problems through tweaks to the current institutional architecture. He pays little attention to power, to politics, or any other drivers of change. The same can be said for a lot of other radical ideas that have recently become popular, like modern monetary theory, land value taxation, or universal basic income. These can all be understood as a kind of technocratic utopianism — they rely on the assumption that society can be transformed from above and that making one or two radical policy changes will completely transform the economy. Many of these policies are not incorrect or bad, but their adherents often prescribe them as the solution to all the world’s problems, without considering how we got to where we are in the first place. Policy prescriptions — from wealth taxes and land value taxes, to financial reform and housing reform — have to be situated within their political economic context. It is meaningless to speak of “policy” without speaking of power.