The FT is citing figures from the UK's official records. Shame on the FT for citing statistics that run counter to Piketty's own figures (which he asserted was 71%)?
Please provide proof that FT's data is "shoddy." Piketty admitted that he made up figures because none were available for certain time periods. It's hilarious that the FT is being accused of "shoddy" data (no proof yet), when Piketty could be accused of doing the same (proof available from Piketty himself).
Burden of proof is on you to prove that FT's data is shoddy since you made that claim. What specifically are you referring to and what sources are you citing?
Wow.