Does Picketty address the real problem?

This article claims that while Picketty is right in what he asserts, he doesn't address the real problem that we cannot sustain the kind of growth we used to, for it lives beyond the sustainable means of earth's carrying capacity. True, but Rifkin addresses this move from capitalist consumption to commons sharing, thereby aligning with a sustainable biospheric capacity.


The likes of Picketty's tax-the-rich scheme may still operate in the capitalist system, but it might also be a necessary fix at that level to set up conditions toward the sort of Commons on which Rifkin reports. I also said previously that I see that as the transitional role of Senators Sanders and Warren, though they also seem to want to implement some of those infrastructural bases from which to support the Commons: net neutrality, investment in science/tech paid for by getting adequate tax revenue from the rich, punishing polluters and creating better environmental standards, creating a fair playing field where the average Joe can start an RE business, etc.