Macroeconomics

this has to be the most superficial and simplistic account on the new means of consumption; i.e., malls, theme parks, casinos, etc. it is hardly believable that ritzer takes in a seriuos manner his naive arguments, that in several occasions turn into pure idle talk, or worst pure stupidity. just to give one example, when he mentions that malls have their roots in the ancient greek and roman markets. although he states that his work is heavely influenced by the writtings of baudrillard he never explains in his matter why we consume in the first place. even worse, he never gives a concrete argumentation of why this world is disenchanted in the first place and why it has to be enchanted. so please do not make the same mistake that i did and do not buy this book. it is the first time that i have read something by this author but i think i had enough of him for the rest of my life. i might be a joy-killer to use the term of ritzer to describe an anthropologist but i least i am not as simplistic and stupid as he is.

Well, he even talks Amazon.com as a cathedral of consumption, and brings up such facts as doing what I am doing, reviewing books on amazon.com. I found it to be hypocritical for him to badmouth consumption so much, yet he profits from the things he badmouths, such as my purchase of his book at amazon.com He claims most are subject to consumption. Well, unless you go around naked, live in a cafe and eat sticks, everyone is. This book serves as a valuable tool to look into the methods of consumption that rule our daily lives, but don't get too caught up it how bad it is, consumption feeds the author and his family also.

This book changed the way I view my own habits of consumption. I found his analysis of contemporary trends in consumption interesting and provocative. Also interesting was his conclusion that as people grow accustomed to the new means of consumption that they have to be continually impressed by something new. I thought his remarks on the architecture of the "cathedrals of consumption" were also very important. The most unsettling aspect of the book was Ritzer's comparison of modern styles of consumption with religious institutions, and even the conformity of religious institutions to this new means of consumption (i.e., the mega-churches of today). It was a good read, too, not too dense or pretentious. Very engaging.

I could have written this book in six words......."Because it makes you feel good!"

The book could have given you the message in half the pages. I found about ten pages of really good information but a lot of fluff as well.

Pam Danziger has a clear understanding of the realities of today's marketplace and the trends for the future. She explains clearly and succinctly just how businesses can reap their share of the nearly 42% of spending Americans devote to discretionary items, backing it up with statistics and quotes from highly reliable sources. Examples throughout the book include the good, the bad and the ugly in manufacturing and retailing today. Far from merely promoting a simplistic "feel good" mentality, Danziger conveys an understanding of the various types of buyers, the justification they need to make their purchases, and how suppliers can deliver that message. Her observations speak volumes: "The consumer's feelings often may have more to do with the act of purchasing than with the object." This is a must-have marketing reference to read and re-read and then implement to reach your maximum sales potential.

This review ONLY pertains to AP Macroeconomics: Compared to The Princeton Review's study guide from AP econimcs courses, Kaplan's is much longer, possibly too long. Each section is followed by review questions that, while not reflecting AP type questions, test your knowledge of the chapter. While doing these review questions, I noticed that they were far more detailed that what the AP test covers--very general macroeconomic concepts. With too many AP tests to prepare for, I dropped the Kaplan review after 2 or 3 chapters and picked up The Princeton Review's more concise study guide. TPR (The Princeton Review) offers a very good review with great practice exams (I didn't try Kaplan's exams). While taking the AP exam, I felt well prepared and very comfortable with the general concepts, as I did not encounter any detailed questions about economics concepts. As for the accuracy of my recollection, I'm writing this review three days after taking the Macro exam. In general, TPR is more concise than Kaplan, which is not to say one is better than the other, but time can become in issue during May testing. Also, FYI, I believe the Kaplan reviews from 'Apex Learning' are some kind of new edition(s); several AP teachers at my school recieved free copies for marketing/feedback purposes. In order to provide a helpful review, I'll try and remove any ambiguity by stating that I recommend TPR's AP Micro/Macroeconomics (5 stars) over Kaplan's.

I bought this book to review for the AP Micro-Macro exams with little consideration of other options. I'd advise you to do otherwise, namely, to buy another book.

To me, the review of concepts in this book seemed minmal. Although the book's cover says it includes 2 sample tests, it really only includes 1 -- 1 micro and 1 macro.

It's not that Apex Learning's book is terrible, because it's not -- I just think that, after reading some of the reviews of the Princeton Review Economics book, I regretted buying this one.

The French Revolution was good, right? This book glosses over the atrocities and the reign of terror to praise the accomplishments of the Jacobins... It makes them out to be less than radical egalitarians, because it conveniently ignores the Jacobin ideology at its extreme.

I instead recommend Fire in the Minds of Men: Origins of the Revolutionary Faith.

For the past three decades the history of the French Revolution has been dominated by revisionism. Often strongly critical of the revolution, much revisionism insistently invokes the terror of the Year II. Yet surprisingly little revisionism is about the Jacobin Republic. It is the surpreme value of Jean Gross' book that it provides a detailed discussion of the difficulties and achievements of the the years 1793-94. One is struck by its plentiful archival research, in marked contrast to much recent revisionist work. Much of our image of the Terror concentrates on the grand terror in Paris, and such horrors as the destruction of Lyon, the bloody surpression of the Vendee and the mass drownings at Nantes. Yet this crimes cannot be considered the core of Jacobinism, or even typical. Gross concentrates on the hard working deputies such as Romme, Paganol, Saint-Andre. In contrast to the vague view that the Jacobins were proto-Stalinist fanatics, Gross reminds us of their place in the geneology of liberal democracy. By looking at such matters at rehabilitation, land reform, progressive taxation, food rationing, a burgeoning welfare state and plans for compulsory education, Gross shows how Jacobins tried to make a difference. Although confounded by the traumas of war, the everpresent fiscal crisis, and the Thermidorean reaction, Gross does reveal some genuine improvement. More important Gross makes clear that the Jacobins were not fanatical egalitarians, but believers in fairness. Contrary to conservative cant, Jacobins believed not in equality of outcome, but in equality in opportunity. But they were well aware you cannot have the second if society is wealth is radically maldistributed and hierarchial. This is an important book all those with an interest in the French revolution should read.

This book is terrible. The author is for one thing extremely dull. Worst though is the questions he expects you to answer at the end of most chapters. The examples he gives while reading the chapter are totally different from the questions he asks at the end of the chapters. As a result of this you are left asking yourself, when the hell did we do this?????? To make matters worse their is no answer key to any of this, so even if you attempt to answer the questions, you will never even know if you did them right or not! Stay away from this book if possible, take a teacher who uses another book, because this book is very poor. In my class, probably half dropped because of this!

This book is just wonderful because while you read it, the author gives you illustrative examples whereby you understand general policies and ideologies within the economy. It is just a five and odd star winner!!

Sitglit-Walsh macroecon book is the most biased econ text in the market. It is riddled with conceptual mistakes (I'm an econ professor), and the fundamentals are presented with flaws. One sales rep told me that the book is really meant to serve the liberal, left-wing leaning students/instructors. We had to chunk the book in the middle of the semester and went with another. What a waste of money for students and my time.

Joseph Stiglitz has written an excellent introduction to macroeconomics, including a complete introduction to ISLM economic theory at full employment and with significant unemployment. There is an excellent introduction to monetary theory by this nobel laureate economist and former official of the World Bank. This is a book that undergraduates students and teachers can appreciate. Conservative proponents should recognize that learning from a master economist no less worthy than appreciating the wisdom J.M. Keynes or James Tobin.

The main subject of this book is that Britain has been in decline for over one hundred years and that decline was inevitable.The book suggests that until the government of Margaret Thatcher there was no sign of the decline being solved, as although the political elite of the last hundred years were aware of the decline the policies they implemented seemed to have no effect in stopping it.Another point the book debates is what the Thatcher era really was.Was it the response which brought decline to an end or was it just the last chapter in the episode of the hundred years decline? The book was written to underline how and why Britain declined,to show how decline had been defined and explained,and to examine the various political strategies used to tackle the decline.

This book has a very interesting new point of view on how poverty is changing. We have to focus not only on the level of income or expenses of a household but also on how the income structure has changed. According to this book, peruvians are more dependant from income transfers and self-consumption rather than income labour in late 90s. This situation is becoming an important policy problem because of the impact of economic recession in peruvian living standards through the labour market.

Congratulations Raul!!

This books is a courageous effort, not only in the difficult topics it deals with, but also in its attempt to unify competing economic models and theories. The preface of the book shows that the author is aware of the challenge his or her ideas may face, and brilliantly invokes Schumpeter, Keynes, and even Confucius. Judging from the amount of self-reference, it is also clear that the evolution of the book has been long and painstaking.

The results of that evolution include that the fact that first three chapter are well done and represent valuable reference for graduate students in economics. However, while each chapter demonstrates innovative and rigorous use and (re)interpretation of various neoclassical economic theories and models, a new theory does not seem to have arisen from this writting. Consequently the "grand vision" intended by "a long and laborious process to systematize the ideas presented in this book" is blurry.

I would fault the eclectic approach adopted than the ideas presented themselves. Clearly the interactions between capital and knowledge are known to exist and it is refreshing that someone has made a credible effort to explaining them. Even so, the clarity of the ideas which Capital and Knowledge is marred by too many silly tpyos and grammatical errors. For instances. in "... we provide a few examples of economic dynamics to show how sensible nonlinear dynamic systems are ..."(p.14), one can easily see that "sensible" refers to "sensitive". But encountering similar stuff again and again is ultimately discouraging. Second, I find it hard to believe that the book calls a TV set capital. When used solely to receive knowledge at home through say a long distance training program, a TV set may be accounted as capital. But does it suddenly becomes a consumer good when the study program is over and a movie comes on? More needed said about things like that.

Third, other poor choice of words are more serious and could provoke unnecessary criticism. For example, to say that "an increase in the total capital stock increases the capital stock employed in the industrial production", is a triple falacy of composition, false cause, and false effect. I see more double counting of capital than causation in the statement just cited.

Capital and Knowledge is a good book that could have been better with careful editing.

my only concern is that there are supplementals to up grade the publication every quarter