economist

This is a really original book. I have never seen Gandhi interpreted in this way. It has helped me understand why Gandhi was ignored when ideology ruled the world. And now that ideology has fallen apart, Gandhian method does look a viable alternative. This book outlines the method in a rigorous and yet accessible fashion.

Economics today is dominated by pragmatism. And what is considered pragamatic can change all the time. George Bush may have been elected on a platform of smaller government, but that has not stopped him from launching a major expenditure thrust that has converted a stable surplus budget into a major deficit one. If this change is good for America and the world, fine. But how can we be sure that he is not just doing what is expedient?

It is in such situations that a revival of Gandhian method could be useful. Pani manages to bring out a method from Gandhi's writings that can help ensure that pragmatism does not degenerate into expediency. He builds a consistent inclusive method and places it in the context of recent debates on economic methodology. As such an exercise has not been tried out before, some of its elements will surprise Gandhians. And some of the implicit recomendations, like the need to focus on the individual rather than national economies, will surprise mainstream economists. But at a time when ideology has failed, a scientific return to Gandhi does appear promising.

This book shows a new side of John Maynard Keynes -- one which is not particularly well known. It shows the man behind the economic genius and does this quite well. I loved this book.

Escoffier's book, part of a series called Lives of Notable Gay Men and Lesbians, admirably recaps the career of John Maynard Keynes, practical man, entrepreneur, aesthete, homosexual (well, probably)and, least I forget, the most important economist of the twentieth century.

The series, so far as I can tell, aims to provide biographies of prominent gay people targeted at bright adolescents. Escoffier's book fulfills its mandate, but does much, much more. In a very small compass it describes the period 1900-1945, discusses the political and economic questions that took up much of Keynes' life, and paints a rather engaging portrait of the Bloombury group. It is also a surprisingly balanced biography of Keynes. Without wanting to denigrate the series, I fear that the rubric under which the book appears will frighten off potential readers who are neither queer nor under 20 years of age.

That would be a mistake. Other than the massive three volume biography, and Heilbroner's witty synopsis of 40 years ago, there is a real paucity of good information about John Maynard Keynes, and an excess of misinformation, maybe even disinformation. This biography can be read in an afternoon, possibly at one sitting, yet it is good enough to recommend to anyone who wants to understand that political and monetary hopes and disappointments of the first half of the twentieth century. Escoffier is not afraid to call them as he sees them, but the result is surprisingly fair and balanced, even if I would not have phrased some things the way Escoffier did . His stress on exploitation as the hinge on which the Edwardian economy turned gave me pause, but it is not necessarily incorrect. So far as I can tell, Escoffier's views on a number of questions are quite different from those of Keynes, nor is this book a work of hagiography, which makes the overall fairness of the result even more remarkable. In short, I really do recommend that you read this book if you have any interest in any of its topics: Edwardian Britain, the Treaty of Versailles, economics, Bloomsbury, government finance (the Bush administration seems to be radically "keynesian" in a way John Maynard might not have approved), or being queer in the first part of the 20th century.

There are very few books that address the issue of innovations in economics as well as this one does. By mixing a list of the most important economics developments of the last century with a vivid description of the lives of those who uncovered them, the author is able to build a compeling image of what is generally a dry subject.

Instead of focusing on the specifics of the ideas, which would generally require a fair amount of mathematics, the book focuses on explaining the real life applications of many of these ideas, and therefore is able to connect the Nobel laureates with society's goals.

I highly recommend this book to the student of economics and society who would like to learn more about some of the more innovative ideas in the field but does not have the time to learn the advanced economics to read the originals.

This book gives a blend of economic theory, the people behind the theory, and how the concepts apply to everyday life. Very interesting and I highly recommend this book.

For a novice in economics, not an easy field to be a novice in, this was a helpful book. It got me started, by which I mean I wasn't completely lost when I read it.

This book provides concise and clear definitions of business analytics with practical applications. Excellent for the neophyte in business math. Helpful index and glossary to get started. Good guide to use if learning stats or marketing research.

A rarity, a lively and readable critique of economic thinking. McCloskey is an economic historian trained in the Chicago school and a pioneer in the study of economic rhetoric. A stylish and witty writer, well versed in technical matters but capable of writing lucidly for a non-technical audience, as demonstrated here, McCloskey is perhaps best known for the sex change operation which took place during the visiting professorship at Erasmus University in Rotterdam, where the lectures which this book reworks were given. In this volume McCloskey names the three principle vices of modern economics, all of which found their current form in the 1940s. They are: (1) the (Lawrence) Kleinian vice of mistaking statistical significance for scientific significance; (2) the (Paul) Samuelsonian vice of elevating blackboard proofs and other mathematical, but not necessarily scientific, values, and (3) the (Jan) Tinbergenean vice of social engineering, which presumes to know more than it can and threatens to infringe on individual freedom. In a brief epilogue, McCloskey endorses the adoption of "bourgeois" virtue as a counterweight to these errors. She recommends that Prudence -- the virtue that gave rise to economics -- not be seen in isolation. Economists, she says, should follow the example of Adam Smith and reconcile Produce with Justice and Temperance.

Deirdre McCloskey's little volume, The Vices of Economists-The Virtues of the Bourgeoisie, is a gem. Nothing less. Although it is short, it bulges with deep and important insights; although it is aimed principally at an audience of professional economists, it is relevant for anyone interested in the scientific method as well as policy; and although it is written by a professional economist, its prose is splendid.

The chapter of the book that strikes me as most important is Chapter 4, "The Arrogance of Social Engineering." The material here isn't simply another sermon on the complexity of the economy and society. It is, instead, a compelling explanation of why economists who make specific predictions about the future ("The price of tech stocks will rise over the next month" or "Megacorp's price-cutting will result in monopoly power") truly should be ignored.

And her conclusion! That is not to be missed. I especially like, and appreciate, her wise words of advice: "Know above all that you do not know."

Where is the Comparitve Statics section? Dynamic Analysis? Difference equations? Calculus of Variations? Optimal Control? Etc.

The book does not merely provide a sequence of theorems, but helps to develops mathematical intuition which is really critical for economists. I don't have any hesitation to strongly recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn the essential mathematics for economics. One of the best economics books I've ever read!

This is a marvellous introduction to many of the important areas of applied mathematics. The authors do a truly spectacular job of conveying the intuitive principles and pragmatic relevence of each topic, without falling into the "cookbook" trap to which many applied math texts succumb.

But my real point is that it is almost a shame that title specifies "for economists" - because this book will be extremely useful to people looking to improve their applied mathematics background for use in any number of fields. I'm a population biologist myself, and I turn to this book first when I need to brush up on a vaguely familiar subject or delve in to a new topic. Many of the examples are inded drawn from economics, but this is not hindrance - they are well-enough explained and defined that no economics background is required. The economics examples are so well-presented, in fact, that the relevence to problems in other fields will be very clear to even a moderately careful reader.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough!

The title of 'New Ideas from Dead Economists' is the most clever part of this book. The early sections on Smith, Ricardo, and Malthus lacked depth. Buchholz brought in too many contemporary topics in his discussion of Smith, and as is common, did not pay proper attention to Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. His discussions of Malthus and Ricardo are better, but he tries to hard to be entertaining rather than informative.

Bucholz fails badly with Keynes, Marx and Vebelen. What he discusses of Keynes is not wrong, but there is far more to discuss. His chapter on Marx suffers from similar problems. He hits on the better known aspects of Marx's life and Marxian theory. Most readers would benefit from greater detail. His section on Veblen is about the worst part of this book. His interpretation of 'The Engineers and the Price System' is just plain wrong. The author cites some simple statistics on the education of businessmen and engineers in an effort to refute Veblen. This proves only that he misinterprets this material.

The author's discussion of new institutionalists is on target, but brief. His discussion of Rational Expectations is hardly worth reading. He seems to want to mock RE, but with enemies like Buchholz, Bob Lucas has little need of friends. The section on Public Choice is so incomplete, that readers are better off ignoring this too.

He has a good discussion of Marshall. But Marshall is not a particularly interesting economist. Bucholz mentions Hayek from time to time, but should have had a separate chapter for him, along with Mises.

The key problem with this book is that the author was more interested in keeping his readers entertained than in informing them. Readers that need a book to be 'cute' are never really going to get into economics. Readers that will really get interested in these ideas are better off getting more of just that, and in a fittingly serious tone.

This book will complement any collegiate economics course in
basic economics or economic theory. The authors discuss important
economists of the past. For instance, Adam Smith's theories are
given quite a bit of space in this book. Smith taught that
the division of tasks into component parts will increase output
due to the shear specialization and learning curve effects.
He explained that free trade benefited England because goods
could be bought cheaper than they could be produced in the mother
country. As a result, English labor could specialize in areas
of comparative advantage. Malthus warned that the population
boom would result in greater poverty down the line. Economists
can argue this even today. Malthus argued for delayed marriage
to enhance the standard of living for married couples.
Ricardo argued that consumers could consume a greater variety
of goods with free trade regardless of the stage in the
advancement of trading partners. Marshall and Jevons
argued that marginal utility diminished with each portion.
That is, more of a good thing would lead to less pleasure
incrementally. If people consumed all of their income,
Says Law found that "Full Employment" could remain. This is
overly optimistic because consumers don't always have the same
level of demand for goods and services-particularly during
weak economic cycles. This book is a good supplement to
the existing library of Economics volumes.

Buchholz gives the reader a lucid book on introductory economics. I call it introductory because this isnt a book written for advanced economic analysis. Its not for people who already did many courses in economics. Its definately not for economic teachers. This is a must have book for all those people who are interested in understanding or at least knowing about this complex subject. Its will more than enrich you, in case you started reading the book with no knowledge of economics.

Buchholtz starts with the father of modern economics, Adam Smith and follows with giving (almost biographical) details of Malthus, Ricardo, Marshal, Keynes. The chapter on Monetarist and their attack on Keynes follows and its worth reading twice. Then he gives a brief description of all other important economists of last century. This is followed by chapters on new methods such as Public Choice and Rational Expectations. All chapters are written in a very informal, witty style and this helps the reader keep interest. Economics, being a rather dry subject is taught well here, with good illustrations and in a very non-technical way.

The downside of the book is not being able to cover more economists. The author talks about Rational Expectations without mentioning anything about John Muth or much of Robert Lucas. This was missing, but I assume he did that because anyone reading or learning about economics for the first time (the intended audience of this book) might not have to know about these economists. Like wise, Veblen, Galbraith, Samuelson and new economists such as Paul Krugman, Joseph E. Stiglitz are not covered. But again, its not possible to cover so many and I guess also due to the fact that teh author wanted to cover schools of economic thought more than individual economists themselves.

All in all, this book is very interesting to read as it is very well written. If you have read this review and have no idea of economics but want to have one, here we go, just buy the book!

Skousen says his book is meant to be an alternative to the history of economic thought presented by Robert Heilbroner in 'The Worldly Philosophers'. In that it largely succeeds, and Skousen's history is the more honest of the two because, unlike Heilbroner, he makes his ideological biases and point of view explicit to the reader. A pretty good overview of the main tendencies in economic thought can be had by reading both books.

Skousen's book is well worth reading, so it's too bad that it was so sloppily edited and carelessly proofread. Nassau Senior is called Senior Nassau (twice), Malthus is said to have died in 1934 (twice), words are misspelled, bibliography entries are not correctly alphabetized, sentences that should not have survived a first draft are left as written, etc. Corrections should have been made before the paperback edition was released.

Economist Mark Skousen has written an exceptional history of economic theory. He traces the development of economic thought from Adam Smith to the present from a free market perspective. One of the features of his book I liked the most are the ample biographical anecdotes and pictures of economists. One gains a greater understanding of the economists and their thought through these pedagogical devices. There is much here of value to students at all levels of the history of economic thought. I thoroughly enjoyed The Making of Modern Economics and am confident this will be the response of other readers.

Mark Skousen: The Making of Modern Economics

A book on economics of such extraordinary interest comes along only once in a blue moon. This is a book that ought to be read and read widely. It is lively, intelligent, thoroughly engaging, and even humorous. It tells a story that should be much better known, written from the perspective of Adam Smith's "invisible hand" doctrine of free markets. It puts each of the major economists into their own historical setting, giving not only the answers they provided but also the context to explain why they were interested in the problems they tried to solve. The book also provides an introduction to the controversies each of their theories then stirred up, including Keynesianism, Marxism and other criticisms of Smithian economics. It also tells a good deal about the personal lives of many of the great economic names of the past so that in this book there is an astonishing mix of the personal and the professional.

If you always wanted to understand economics but didn't know where to start, read this book. If you have studied economic theory but were curious how it ended up just this way and not different from what it is, then now you can find out. Economics will never be easy, but who would ever have thought that it could be made entertaining.

Landsburg's book should be entertaining for economic neophytes. His style is a bit questionable, in that he can occasionally be found lost in self-argumentative circularism without resolve. I found David D. Friedman's book 'Hidden Order: The Economics of Everyday Life' a more valuable book. As a singular example, his discussion of the price of popcorn in theaters seems, intuitively, better than Landsburg's.

What is particulary amusing about economists, in general, is their intractable belief that people make rational decisions. A recent body of thought, behavioral economics, would argue against that as a certainty. Dr. Kent Hickman et al. (Gonzaga University) published an interesting study on this topic in a Harvard edited journal, which examined bidding on the game show 'The price is right'. It's not difficult to read, but may require a search at a university library to find it.

Economics can be fun, and conceptually at least, isn't beyond the understanding of the common man.

The criticism of this book seems to be largely based on the feeling that rational economics leads to unsatisfactory political conclusions and even possibly that rational economics is itself a suspect theory.

My take is that this is a pretty fun read that illustrates some basic economic concepts via common examples. True, it is not comprehensive and the arguments presented are neither completely thorough or precise. But then again, that's not what I'm looking for from a book about economics with the word "armchair" in the title.

Anwyway, if rational economics isn't a good model, what is? Central planning? Keynesian economics? European socialism?

The criticism here is of a worldview, not this book. It should come as no surprise that to those whose political views tend to conflict with rational economics, this book is threatening and must indeed seem highly political. But imho, the political agenda is in the eye of the beholder. When you point a finger, there are 3 pointing back at you.

Quit picking a fight about epistemology with a country pastor.

Landsburg hits the nail on the head with this book. I was looking for a short and to the point explanation of economics for the benefit of my 17 year old daughter when I picked up this book and found that and more. His premise is that "people respond to incentives and the rest is just commentary." Landsburg takes off from there and explains economic concepts with simple but apt examples and deflates quite a few myths in the process(using no formulas or complicated math in his presentation but including endnotes with references for readers inclined to look behind the words).

College students would do well to read through this book before plunging into macro- or micro- economics because it puts the theory into perspective with real world examples and stories. Everyone else can benefit from having a better understanding of how our economy works.

I highly recommend this book as informative, thoughtfully written, and thoroughly entertaining.

This is the latest edition of this popular book. Potential readers need to be clear what this book is and just as important, is not. This is not a systematic history of economic thought or an introduction to economics. This is a basic overview of the ideas of a number of important economic theorists and the backgrounds against which their ideas emerged. Heilbroner is a good writer with an eye for telling anecdotes. He has considerable mastery of source material and is even handed in discussing his subjects. A recurrent theme is the way in which each important thinkers' ideas reflected the experience of capitalism in his time. Some chapters are better than others. I liked particularly the chapter on Marx which does a nice job of discussing the strengths and weaknesses of Marx's analysis. I would personally prefer a more demanding and systematic book but as a very readable and entertaining introduction, this book can't be beat. An excellent volume for an intellectually curious high school student or undergraduate.

I'll say it... I'm a politics major who hates math, but needs to know economics. This book won't get you out of Macro 101, but it provides a refreshing, intelligent, well-written synopsis of major economic thinkers from Adam Smith to Joseph Schumpeter. It is excellent at placing these theories in their historical context. Heilbroner acknowledges what a dry subject economics can be, and seeks to engage the reader by providing ample information about the economists' personal lives (very entertaining, all). This book should be passed out, along with a copy of the Constitution, to every American citizen when they turn 18. It is by no means a comprehensive volume, but it doesn't try to be, and it provides a laundry list for more extensive reading. It's best used as a base reference and a guide to which economic thinkers you should be familiar with.
Heilbroner manages to make economics seem impressive and important... no small feat. The initial chapter on the history of economics and the chapters on Marx and Veblen are the best.
Highly recommended... very informative and an enjoyable read!

This book reminds me of Will Durant's marvelous The Story of Philosophy, with which it shares many positive qualities. The first similarity is that the writing is extremely lucid, explaining many complex ideas in a direct way, which only superior writing can achieve. And like Durant, Heilbroner has a contagious enthusiasm for his subject matter. He really makes the economists come alive, both because of their personalities and their thinking. Finally, like Durant's work, this book has really made me eager to read the works of the men that the author summarizes.

When I became interested in economics, this book was recommended to me as the first one I should read. I'm truly glad I did.

I highly recommend this book. -Mykal Banta