adde Figures 5.1 and 5.2

and minor fixes to appearance to get axes range similar to the original

Slides/slidesMaster-concordance.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+\Sconcordance{concordance:slidesMaster.tex:slidesMaster.Rnw:%
+1 80 1 49 0 1 46 2 1 1 208 60 1 1 0 3 1 7 0 17 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 %
+7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 17 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 %
+16 1 7 0 95 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 17 1 6 0 17 1 6 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 %
+1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 81 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 16 1 7 0 31 1}

Slides/slidesMaster.10.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.5. Income inequality in the United States, 1910--2010}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_5}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{The top decile share in U.S. national income dropped from 45--50\% in the 1910s--1920s to less than 35\% in the 1950s (this is the
+1950 1960 fall documented by Kuznets); it then rose from less than 35\% in the 1970s to 45--50\% in the 2000s--2010s.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.11.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.6. Decomposition of the top decile, United States, 1910--2010}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_6}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{The rise of the top decile income share since the 1970s is mostly due to the top percentile.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.12.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.7. High incomes and high wages in the United States, 1910--2010}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering % To Do: add 'excluding capital gains'
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_7}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{The rise of income inequality since the 1970s is largely due to the rise of wage inequality.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.13.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.8. The transformation of the top 1 percent in the United States, 1910--2010}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering % To Do: add 'excluding capital gains'
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_8}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{The rise in the top 1 percent highest incomes since the 1970s is largely due to the rise in the top 1 percent highest wages.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.14.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.9. The composition of top incomes in the United States in 1929}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_9}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{Labor income becomes less and less important as one moves up within the top income decile.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.15.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.10. The composition of top incomes in the United States in 2007}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_10}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{Capital income becomes dominant at the level of top 0.1 percent in 2007, as opposed to the top 1 percent in 1929.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.16.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+\frametitle{This presentation: three points}
+\begin{enumerate}
+\item
+The return of a patrimonial (or wealth-based) society in the Old World (Europe, Japan). Wealth-income ratios seem to be returning to very high levels in low growth countries.
+\medskip\newline
+Intuition: in a slow-growth society, wealth accumulated in the past can naturally become very important. In the very long run, this can be relevant for the entire world.
+\item
+The future of wealth concentration: with high r-g during 21c (r = `net-of-tax rate of return', g = `growth rate'), then wealth inequality might reach or surpass 19c oligarchic levels; conversely, suitable institutions can allow to democratize wealth.
+\item
+Inequality in America (``meritocratic extremism''): is the New World developing a new inequality model that is based upon extreme labor income inequality more than upon wealth inequality? Is it more merit-based, or can it become the worst of all worlds?
+\end{enumerate}

Slides/slidesMaster.4.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 1.1. Income inequality in the United States, 1910--2012}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_1_1}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{The top decile share in U.S. national income dropped from 45--50\% in the 1910s--1920s to less than 35\% in the 1950s (this is the
+1950 1960 fall documented by Kuznets); it then rose from less than 35\% in the 1970s to 45--50\% in the 2000s--2010s.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.5.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 1.2. The capital-income ratio in Europe, 1870--2012}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_1_2}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{Aggregate private wealth was worth about 6--7 years of national income in Europe in 1910, between 2 and 3 years in 1950, and between 4 and 6 years in 2010.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.6.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.1. Income inequality in France, 1910--2010}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_1}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{Inequality of total income (labor and capital) has dropped in France during the twentieth century, while wage inequality has remained the same.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.7.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.2. The fall of rentiers in France, 1910--2010}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_2}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{The fall in the top percentile share (the top 1 percent highest incomes) in France between 1914 and 1945 is due to the fall of top capital incomes.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.8.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.3. The composition of top incomes in France in 1932}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_3}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{Labor income becomes less and less important as one goes up within the top decile of total income. Notes: (i)~``P90--95'' includes individuals between percentiles 90 to 95, ``P95--99'' includes the next 4 percent, ``P99--99.5'' the next 0.5 percent, etc.; (ii)~Labor income: wages, bonuses, pensions. Capital income: dividends, interest, rent. Mixed income: self-employment income.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.9.vrb

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+\frametitle{Figure 8.4. The composition of top incomes in France in 2005}
+\begin{figure}[t]
+\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
+\centering
+\begin{knitrout}\footnotesize
+\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.969, 0.969, 0.969}\color{fgcolor}
+
+{\centering \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/bw/Figure_8_4}
+
+}
+
+
+
+\end{knitrout}
+\caption{Capital income becomes dominant at the level of the top 0.1 percent in France in 2005, as opposed to the top 0.5 percent in 1932.}
+\end{minipage}
+\end{figure}

Slides/slidesMaster.nav

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+\beamer@endinputifotherversion {3.33pt}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{1}{1/1}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {1}{1}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{2}{2/2}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {2}{2}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{3}{3/3}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {3}{3}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{4}{4/4}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {4}{4}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{5}{5/5}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {5}{5}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{6}{6/6}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {6}{6}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{7}{7/7}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {7}{7}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{8}{8/8}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {8}{8}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{9}{9/9}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {9}{9}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{10}{10/10}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {10}{10}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{11}{11/11}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {11}{11}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{12}{12/12}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {12}{12}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{13}{13/13}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {13}{13}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{14}{14/14}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {14}{14}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{15}{15/15}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {15}{15}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{16}{16/16}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {16}{16}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{17}{17/17}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {17}{17}}
+\headcommand {\slideentry {0}{0}{18}{18/18}{}{0}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@framepages {18}{18}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@partpages {1}{18}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@subsectionpages {1}{18}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@sectionpages {1}{18}}
+\headcommand {\beamer@documentpages {18}}
+\headcommand {\def \inserttotalframenumber {35}}

Slides/slidesMaster.snm

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+\beamer@slide {TitlePage_1<1>}{1}
+\beamer@slide {TitlePage_1}{1}
+\beamer@slide {Introduction_1<1>}{2}
+\beamer@slide {Introduction_1}{2}
+\beamer@slide {WTID<1>}{3}
+\beamer@slide {WTID}{3}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_1_2<1>}{4}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_1_2}{4}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_8_5<1>}{5}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_8_5}{5}
+\beamer@slide {ThreePoints<1>}{6}
+\beamer@slide {ThreePoints}{6}
+\beamer@slide {BrasilVersus<1>}{7}
+\beamer@slide {BrasilVersus}{7}
+\beamer@slide {BrazilUSTop1<1>}{8}
+\beamer@slide {BrazilUSTop1}{8}
+\beamer@slide {BrazilUSTop10<1>}{9}
+\beamer@slide {BrazilUSTop10}{9}
+\beamer@slide {BrazilInequality<1>}{10}
+\beamer@slide {BrazilInequality}{10}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_5_3<1>}{11}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_5_3}{11}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_5_5<1>}{12}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_5_5}{12}
+\beamer@slide {Table_12_1<1>}{13}
+\beamer@slide {Table_12_1}{13}
+\beamer@slide {Table_12_2<1>}{14}
+\beamer@slide {Table_12_2}{14}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_9_8<1>}{15}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_9_8}{15}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_14_1<1>}{16}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_14_1}{16}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_14_2<1>}{17}
+\beamer@slide {Figure_14_2}{17}
+\beamer@slide {Conclusions_1<1>}{18}
+\beamer@slide {Conclusions_1}{18}