Book Description

The Classical Economists Revisited conveys the extent, diversity, and richness of the literature of economics produced in the period extending from David Hume's Essays of 1752 to the final contributions of Fawcett and Cairnes in the 1870s. D. P. O'Brien thoroughly updates, rewrites, and expands the vastly influential work he first published in 1975, The Classical Economists. In particular, he sets out to make clear the shaping of a comprehensive vision of the working of an open economy, building on the great work of Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations, a development that was substantially affected by the contributions of David Ricardo. He shows that the Classical literature was in fact the work of a host of thinkers from a wide range of backgrounds.

Covering the intellectual roots of the Classical literature and its methodological approaches, and the developed theories of value, distribution, money, trade, population, economic growth, and public finance, and examining the Classical attitudes toward a rich variety of policy issues, The Classical Economists Revisited considers not only the achievements of the Classical writers but also their legacy to the later development of economics.

A seminal contribution to the field, this book will be treasured for many years to come by economists, historians of economics, instructors and their students, and anyone interested in the sweeping breadth and enduring influence of the classical economists.

... Read more

Reviews (7)

Age Does Not Wither the Provocative Appeal
Some of your other reviewers have said that they believe this book is outdated.

That is, I can't help but think, the reaction of internet babies, who are spoiled by the 24 hour round-the-clock updating of bloggers.

This is a printed book that gives evidence of having been written at a certain moment in history, and in a certain portion of the planet. So what? That is true of all great books, and the question for us is whether we can (a) appreciate that context while (b) taking from them something lasting.

The answer, for this book, is decidedly afirmative.

The Sky Is Falling, the Sky Is Falling
It's probably not a good sign when you find yourself laughing at what is supposed to be a serious, scholarly, economic work, which is exactly what I found myself doing at Jane Jacob's "Cities and the Wealth of Nations: Principles of Economic Life."

This book is definitely a product of its time. It was originally issued in 1984; a time when the United States, and most other industrialized economies, were finally emerging from what had been an almost 15 year economic malaise known as "stagflation". Stagflation was a new reality in the Western world. The West had not experienced a time in its recent economic history when inflation and unemployment levels were rising in tandem. There were many pundits at the time trying to figure out why exactly that was happening. "Cities and the Wealth of Nations" is Jacobs' crack at an explanation.

Her foundation is good: cities, in so far as they are the largest accumulations of human talent and intelligence, are the economic engines of nations. However, Jacobs goes astray by forgetting what it is that makes cities important, human ingenuity, and by treating cities as organic, almost sentient beings. Cities are important because they are the largest reservoirs of human skills and for no more.

Jacobs believes that cities should be given precedence over national economies to the point where individual cities would almost certainly function better as independent city-states. In a perfect world, this may be so; but, as we all know, we hardly live in a perfect world. There is a reason why city-states either voluntarily joined to form larger nation-states or were forcibly joined by more powerful neighbors: security.

Nation-states offer security from foreign coercion to otherwise unprotected cities. It's unlikely that the thriving cities of Europe like Paris, London, or Milan would have acceded to their current heights had they remained as independent cities. They would have been constantly exposed to raids and attacks by more powerful and jealous neighbors bent on taking their wealth. A people need to feel secure in their persons in order to concentrate their efforts on the business of business. That security is best provided by the nation-state.

Also, her premise that each city would be better off with its own currency is beyond funny. Reality has shown us that any time a business is forced to deal with many different currencies to provide for most of its revenues it will be restrained by transaction costs across those currencies. The largest multinational corporations derive most of their revenues from only a few currencies. They may deal in a large number of them but only a few supply most of their revenues. This arrangement reduces transaction costs and allows businesses to use their funds in a more productive fashion.

With "Cities and the Wealth of Nations", Jacobs was sounding the death knell of Western progress. According to her, New York, London, Boston, Frankfurt, etc. should be rotting corpses of their former selves by now. Instead, the past 17 years since this book was published has seen one of the most remarkable economic expansions in the history of the world, not to mention Western civilization. Western cities are thriving despite many serious problems that need to be dealt with.

Along with these thriving cities goes thriving nations. Western nations still reign supreme when it comes to economic and military might. That last one is important because Jacobs believes that a standing military is by nature a presage of decline. It's funny though how many of our current everyday economic tranactions involve items that were spurred by defense purposes: commercial airlines, microwave ovens, communications satellites, the interstate highway system, the internet, etc. Far from being a drain on economic wealth, defense spending, within reason, is a spur to economic development of the most important kind: high-tech, cutting-edge production.

"Cities and the Wealth of Nations" is good reading for getting a glimpse into the end-of-the-world paranoia that plagues us at the end of any long economic backslide. We didn't get too much of it in 1992 because that slide was so short-lived. Although I'm sure that many "chicken little" books like this one were starting through the pipeline when we started our recovery.

Wealth Creation
"Any settlement that becomes import-replacing becomes a city." Cities and the Wealth of Nations, Jane Jacobs

Written by an economist, this is a very unusual book. Ms. Jacobs is not hampered by orthodox preconceived notions, misleading postulated theoretical myths like utility optimization, rationality, or efficient markets. These standard phrases of neo-classical economic theory cannot be found in her book. Instead, and although her discussion is entirely nonmathematical, she uses a crude qualtitative idea of excess demand dynamics, of growth vs. decline. Her expectation is never of equilibrium. The notion of equilibrium never appears in this book. Jacobs instead describes qualitatively the reality of nonequilibrium in the economic life of cities, regions, and nations. She concentrates on the surprises of economic reality.

Jacobs argues fairly convincingly that significant, distributed wealth is created by cities that are inventive enough to replace imports by their own local production, that this is the only reliable source of wealth for cities in the long run, and that these cities need other like-minded cities to trade with in order to survive and prosper. Her expectation is of growth or decline, not of equilibrium. If she is right then the Euro and the European Union are a bad mistake, going entirely in the wrong direction. As examples in support of her argument she points to independent cites like Singapore and Hong Kong with their own local currencies. Other interesting case histories are TVA, small villages in France and Japan, other cases in Italy, Columbia, Ethiopia, US, Iran, ... .

The book begins in the chapter "Fool's Paradise' with discussions of Keynsian economics and Phillips curves (the Philips curve idea is demolished convincingly by Ormerod in "The Death of Economics"), I. Fisher and monetarism, and Marxism. These were all ideas requiring equilibria of one sort or another. Also interesting: her description why, in the long run, imperialism is bound to fail, written in 1984, well before the fall of the USSR. Her prediction for the fate of the West is not better. Jacobs is aware of the idea of feedback and relies on it well and heavily. She is a sharp observor of economic behavior and is well versed in economic history. This book will likely be found interesting by a scientifically-minded reader who is curious about how economies work, and why all older theoretical ideas (Keynes, monetarism, ... ) have failed to describe economies as they evolve.

I'm grateful to Yi-Ching Zhang of the Econophysics Forum for recommending this book.

An exciting, observant, and enduring work
Wow. Jacobs is so adept at explaining the complex currents of global, national and local economies that even the casual reader will be spellbound. The book is simultaneously radical (she essentially repudiates all modern macro-economic theory) and reasonable. This book is a great asset to anyone who wishes to comprehend the world around them.

One of the Best
I read this in 1984. It is one of the five best non-fiction books I have read. Really. It forced me to reconsider some long-held notions about the economic role of individuals, and their environments, in society. ... Read more

Book Description

This book covers the economic history of Latin America from independence in the 1820s to the present.It stresses the differences between Latin American countries while recognizing the similar external influences to which the region has been subject.Victor Bulmer-Thomas notes the failure of the region to close the gap in living standards between it and the United States and explores the reasons. He also examines the new paradigm taking shape in Latin America since the debt crisis of the 1980s and asks whether this new economic model will be able to bring the growth and equity that the region desperately needs.First Edition Hb (1995): 0-521-36329-2First Edition Pb (1995): 0-521-36872-3 ... Read more

Reviews (2)

The Definitive Economic History of Latin America
Bulmer-Thomas develops a clear and compelling case for Latin America's failure to achieve high levels of economic growth and equality, illustrating how productivity gains and exports in natural resource sectors were never translated into gains in non-primary product sectors. Along with studies by Coatsworth and Engerman & Sokoloff, this is one of the best sources of economic history for the budding Latin American scholar. A warning, though: this is no light read. A background in economics and several cups of coffee will present an advantage.

The Economic History of Latin America Since Independence
Not a single Latin American republic has achieved the status of developed nation after nearly two hundred years from colonial rule. The vast abundance of land, labor and natural resources has not delivered the long-awaited fruits of economic growth and economic development. Victor Bulmer-Thomas provides in this book an excepcionally detailled and balanced account of the factors that affect economic progress until the initial period of implementation of market-oriented reforms. It is in summary, an incomparable source of economic history information for those in love with the Latin American region. For a complete understanding of all the materials contained in the book, certain economic background is advisable. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Still highly relevant.
This book, written in the 1960's, couldn't be more relevant today, in our age of outsourcing and loss of jobs. In Jacob's thesis, cities must constantly evolve, developing new products, or they will stagnate and decline, as their old exports wither. She makes a good case that efficiency, as reflected in the large scale, focused enterprise, can often be the enemy of innovation. This kind of logic has been incorporated into mainstream thought, in that many large corporations try to foster growth by establishing small entrepreneurial units. Jacobs provides a historical basis for this paradigm, as well as the detailed economics which shows it is not simply a matter of encouraging people to be entrepreneurial. Even more interesting to me, was Jacob's well supported argument that the earliest cities preceded and fostered the development of agriculture, not the other way around. I have read Robin Wright's Non-zero, The Logic of Human Destiny and Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel, both great books, yet Jacob's thesis was still new to me. The Economy of Cities has a certain amount of unnecessary repetition, but not as much as Jacob's The Death and Life of Great American Cities, which I would also highly recommend despite that problem. Also, and this is not a major point, Jacobs recognizes that exports may contain inputs which have to be imported, but does not seem to see that import substitution may also rely on increasing the import of certain inputs - thereby overemphasizing the importance of import substitution relative to development of new exports (although if we could find a substitute for oil......). Despite having a mathematics and economics background, I did not find Jacob's D,N,A equation particularly enlightening, and advise the reader not to get hung up on it. Jacob's use of history as a series of case studies, and her ability to extract the proper lessons even when they defy conventional thinking, is far more important than any mathematical tools.

inspiring fresh inquiry into "development" processes
Economic theory has never been so engaging, so grounded, or so directly oriented towards social systems dynamics rather than broad extrapolations from decontextualized production and pricing statistics. Jane Jacobs develops a common sensical systemic description of the economic development cycles of urban communities, drawing on illustrative examples from the prehistoric to the contemporary to expose the dynamics of innovation and trade through colorful, down-to-earth stories. Her abstract models of import-substitution and invention dynamics emerge organically from the histories she analyses to explain the social processes of technological transformation.

She makes especially compelling points in her analyses of the different trajectories followed by neighboring Manchester and Birmingham during the industrial revolution. Manchester, quick to maximize the industrial efficiency afforded by large-scale production specialization, outpaced Birmingham in the short-term growth of its exports, but fell into economic stagnation the instant its sole production process was rendered obsolete by competitors abroad. Birmingham maintained low-level but longer-lasting economic growth by remaining inefficient as a local economic community, fostering diverse small-scale business ventures. Each of these small businesses had poorer prospects itself, and the net productivity of the city never approached Manchester's climax production level. But Birmingham's rag-tag assemblage of both diverse and in many cases redundant micro-industries proved far more resilient altogether as a hub of economic activity, allowing continued growth long after Manchester had decayed into poverty. The lesson Jacobs highlights with this tale of two cities is akin to modern environmentalists' rationale for treasuring biodiversity: a more varied and complex system of interdependent organisms or economic actors is less likely to be devastated by a change in conditions (such as the introduction of a new import which renders some major local industry uncompetetive).

Relevant for complexity science and software development
As one who has a newfound interest for complexity science, I felt that this book gave me the keys to observing cities as examples of complex systems. I don't know whether Stockholm qualifies as a "great city" (concering its size), but I think what she writes applies well to what I have observed here. Being able to apply what Jacobs writes about to what I see every day has reinforced my understanding of complexity science.

I also read the book with the hope to find out whether urban planning could serve as an analogy for software development. I think that it can, but I haven't thought about this enough to express the ways in which it's relevant. Jacobs writes that neighborhoods which have particular properties (short blocks, diversity of primary uses, etc.) will "work" -- that there are properties which, when present, almost guarantee that neighborhoods will thrive. I have a feeling that such properties exist for software development teams and the systems they develop; the question is what they are.

This book is one of those that stay with you, and influence your thinking in other areas.

Brilliance in dark corners
City Planning, a dismal field dominated by craven kleptocrats, shifty real estate developers, sleazy lawyers and lazy desk jokey bureaucrats, gets a much needed upgrade here.

From the outset, Jane Jacobs makes it clear that this is an attack on City Planning as it's done by most city governments. It's almost Jeffersonian in its recommednations: teh cities that are the most livable are those which are the least planned by top-heavy, over-manageed bureaucracies.

Like all whose insigts are brilliant, Jacobs' observations and recommendations are deliberately distorted or totally ignored by those who are actively involved in "city planning" in nearly every American City.

THE ECONOMY OF CITIES and Jane Jacobs' writings generally, serve to illustrate the major problems for those with brilliant insights, sagacious advice, and great wisdom: the people who should be the prime audience are not interested.

Best book on Economic Development ever written
The title of this book is slightly misleading, because the thesis of the book is that cities play an essential role in the process of economic development. Although its anecdotal style gives this book a disarmingly unsystematic appearance, this is a profound book. It is easily one of the most important books written during the 20th century. Economic development is something about which conventional marginal utility economics has very little to say. The Economy of Cities, therefore, fills a kind of void. It stands to conventional economics in much the same position as quantum physics stands to classical physics.

A simply wonderful book.

Lancelot Fletcher lrf@aya.yale.edu ... Read more

Amazon.com

Does the Information Age predate computers? Does it, in fact, predate the Industrial Age? Though this thesis isn't explicitly examined in A Nation Transformed by Information: How Information Has Shaped the United States from Colonial Times to the Present, the reader can't help but think about it throughout. Editors Alfred D. Chandler Jr. and James W. Cortada assembled a healthy mix of historians and management consultants to write the history of information services in America, and the very mild pro-business bias is more than balanced by the deeper insight into the companies and corporations that did much to spur technological change.

Fascinating nuggets of post-McLuhan media history lie within this sober analysis; it's startling to read of the antebellum U.S. Post Office refusing to deliver abolitionist materials to slave states, for example. These help to contextualize the information architecture we take for granted, as well as the innovations made possible by this architecture--imagine 50-story buildings without telephones. Though the editors profess no gift of prophecy for themselves or their authors, A Nation Transformed by Information will still give canny readers something to think about as they make their way through the Information Age. --Rob Lightner ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Good subject, but poor editing
I bought this book because my work is in information reporting and I thought it would provide an interesting perspective. It did succeed at that. Because I come from a technical background, I had a little trouble getting started with the book, until I released it was written from a sociology background. Once I got past that I enjoyed the book except for the ...

extremely poor editing. There were numerous grammatical and sentence structure errors, contradicting statements misspellings and general redundancy that really detracted from the information being presented.

Poor editing
This book was interesting, but the editing was so poor that I started to mistrust what I was reading. For instance the famous first telegraph message "What hath God wrought" was printed as "What God hath wrought." The book is full of typos.

An exciting history of information media.
This book is a collection of essays on the movement of information, and how it has transformed the United States from its colonial beginnings to today. At the very beginning, the founders of the country subsidized the transportation of newspapers through the postal system; this allowed the free flow of information between cities and states, across the entire continent. As technology increased, it inevitably speeded and expanded the amount of information flowing throughout the country--from the railroad, through the telegraph, telephone, radio, motion pictures, television, and on into computers.

This book is an exciting history of information media. Though written by no less than seven contributors, it pulls together into seamless whole, almost as if written by one author. The depth of information is breathtaking, and the conclusions reached are fascinating. Indeed, I think that they admirably proved their contention that there was continuity in the development of information media, and I myself repeatedly saw history repeat itself through their narrative, right up to today.

This is a fascinating book, and one that I recommend without reservation. ... Read more

Book Description

In his most widely appealing book yet, one of today's leading authors of popular anthropology looks at the intriguing history and peculiar nature of money, tracing our relationship with it from the time when primitive men exchanged cowrie shells to the imminent arrival of the all-purpose electronic cash card. 320 pp. Author tour. National radio publicity. 25,000 print. ... Read more

Reviews (14)

A Bit of a Flawed "History" But a Good Read
Jack Weatherford's "The History of Money" takes an interesting take on the development of money and man's evolving relationship its various forms. The book is a very good read for the lay person but it might prove a bit trying for those who are well versed in recent economic history.

Much of the information Weatherford presents is often misrepresented. One example of his misrepresentations is the US dollar has been in constant decline versus the price of gold starting from $35 an ounce in 1971 to $400 an ounce in 1995 and that gold has maintained its purchasing power. Not so. The price of gold peaked in January, 1980 at over $850 and has been in a deflationary trend along with other commodities for about fifteen years. Its early 2002 price is now about $280-290 an ounce. In the late 1930's, an American could buy a very nice mid-size car for about twenty ounces of gold or about $700.00. Even in 1995 using the $400 price, you could barely buy the cheapest new car on the market for the same weight in gold. Weatherford bemoans Nixon's actions to cut the dollar's final link with the dollar as inflationary despite the fact that it was inflation of the late 1960's and the gold drain from the treasury to other foriegn governments that would force the break in the first place. Other problems involve the supposive large declines in prices in the 19th century, with the starting points always during periods of war and high prices and the belief that the state (wildcat) banking period was really more stable than history says, which leads one to wonder what happened during the banking panics of 1819, 1837, and 1857?

Some information Weatherford presents is just wrong. For example, he states that in 1934, Roosevelt and the Congress a passed a law nationalizing silver in the manner similar to gold and as a result slowly debased or replaced the silver coinage with base coins which the result that by 1963 when the law was repealed 3.2 billion ounces was stockpiled by the government. Not quite. A proclamation by Roosevelt on August 9, 1934 (not the Silver Purchase Act of June 18, 1934 which required the government to purchase large amounts of silver from both foreign and domestic sources in order to support its price, that was the law repealed in 1963) did nationalize silver bullion but with the understanding that it would be used for coining. The intent was not to remove silver from circulation and create a reserve like gold was. In fact, the mintage of silver coinage except for silver dollars was greatly increased and the only reason that silver dollars were not minted in greater numbers was because people did not like using them and the treasury already had $500 million of them sitting unused in its vaults backing silver certificates. Unlike gold certificates which were no longer convertible to gold coin, silver certificates would remain fully convertible to silver dollars (the vast majority were minted before 1928, none after 1935) until 1963, then silver bullion until 1968. There was no gradual debasement of U.S. silver coins between 1934 and 1963. Until the Coinage Act of July 23, 1965 removed silver from dimes and quarters and reduced it in half-dollars (the rest was eliminated in 1971), the silver content in these coins remained constant from 1873 to 1964. By the way, the last vestiges of the nationalization of silver ended August 21, 1967 when silver began unrestricted trading as a normal commodity.

Other mistakes range from minor (the Bretton Woods Agreements were signed in July 22, 1944 not 1946 and the conference was held at the Mount Washington Hotel at the base of Mount Washington not Mount Deception as he wished the agreement to be named), to major (the banking and saving and loan disasters of the 1980's and early '90s were not caused by the great increase in housing prices in the postwar era but a combination of overlending to the oil and gas and the commerical real estate sectors during their respective booms then busts plus some good old-fashion banking fraud).

If Weatherford's history is shaky at times, his insight on the social aspects of money makes up for it. His observations on primitive money and its overall development through history are quite excellent as are more contemporary observations on the rich/middle class and the poor use money and the penalities the poor must endure in order perform necessary transactions. He also makes some observations about where money and society may be headed that one may or may not agree on but does make one stop and think a bit.

If you are looking for a good book on money as history, there are better volumes out there but if you interested in money as anthropology, this book will give you an good insight into that realm.

Economic history for the layman
I cannot comment on the veracity of what this book contains, being a layman in history and economics.

Other reviewers have contested particular points of scholarship (and I am similarly in no position to judge their accuracy). I can recommend this book because it provides a comprehensible survey of the development of money.

This is no small accomplishment, since it is all to easy for a history of money to get bogged down in details and to miss the big picture. Money is at once a fantastically abstract concept (try explaining it to somebody who has never used any) and so common place that it is like water to a fish, it is the very world we live within.

After reading this book, I felt for the first time that the curtains had been pulled aside, and I had a concept of what money "is". I have read few other books on economics that succeded in making understandable highly abstract concepts. That accounts for my 4 stars.

cursory history, but interesting
i've loved reading history books for the past several years. human history is so much more interesting than fiction, and well written history is (obviously) far more compelling. this book falls into that genre quite nicely.

however, it's a short book, and it's impossible to capture all of the facets of humanity's use of money in a small volume. take it at it's worth, however, and you'll see some themes that run through the book, and interesting ones nonetheless.

i'm not a historian, and so i can't discuss the accuracy of the history. if others question it, i suspect they may be right. hence, i wouldn't use this as a reference text. but the general story is interesting, even if it's just close to the truth.

by the end, weatherford spends a decent amount of time discussing how history has come to the present, with money becoming virtual for some, and hard currency for others, creating at least two classes of wealth conrol in the world. this made a profound impact on me, and one that's forced me to examine how to utilize capital with greater skill. this was quite unexpected from a history book, and welcome.

a disappointment, entertaining but questionable
This book has many little interesting tid-bits of information and they are fun to read, but by the end of reading this book I wish I had read a more serious book.

One of my biggest issues with the book is there are too many statements, speculations and presentations of material in the book that are in contradiction to what most economists or historians in the field would present. This left me with a feeling after reading the book that I didn't know whether half of what I read what complete BS or worth believing. For instance the authors presentation of currency switching off the gold standard and speculating about the future of electronic money. By the last third of the book I found myself saying "give me a break, this is pure wild speculation" or "this is BS" or "I won't be believing this, I wish I was reading an author I could take seriously".

If you are curious what Jack Weatherford thinks about these topics, this book is fine. Or if you just want to be entertained and don't care if what you read is what experts believe, this book is fine. But if you want a serious presentation of what most economists and historians believe in the field I would not recommend this book.

An Interesting Take on a Fascinating Topic
This is a pleasant essay - to call it a "history" is to give it more weight than it has - organized around the development of a truly transforming idea: money. And as innovations in money advanced those societies in which they arose, so this book must be a discussion of how money changed, and was changed by, the most "advanced" cultures of their time. Initially just the merchants needed something trans-national, and bars of raw gold and silver fit the bill. But it was the invention of coins, money that could be used by anyone, that started us down the path to the modern world, where all things - from pain and suffering to bushels of wheat - are commensurable in the one metric: money.

Jack Weatherford is an anthropologist, not an economist, so it is not surprising that he lingers over certain details that don't have a lot to do with his ostensible subject. Thus we are treated to the grisly spectacle of an Aztec human sacrifice, and how the Peruvian Indians who mine the silver that enriches others reconcile themselves to their poor and hazardous lives. Yet he does not stray far, and his depiction of the squeezing of the citizens of Rome for more and more taxes by successive emperors (plus their dilution of the currency) that led to the destruction of the free small-holding and business-owning classes, and with them the Empire, is chilling and instructive. The barbarians were kinder: they didn't use money.

The inventions of banking and of merchants' instruments (such as bills of exchange) are discussed, as well as the first national banks, in explaining the advent of paper money, the next great innovation. The pax Britannica is discussed, too, in a way: the British empire was not really as important, probably, as the British pound, backed by gold, and serving as a fixed monetary point, for a long period of world prosperity. For whatever logic inheres, or does not, to the "backing" of a currency by a precious metal, it did have the faith of many for a long time, and held currencies in rock-solid interrelationships for years.

Are things better now that all our currencies are floating, changing values relatively and absolutely every moment? Gold is a superstition, after all, so away with it! This book is at its best discussing the national hyperinflations that followed the Great War, the falling away from the gold standard, and the advent of the newer types of money and near-money. Electronic cash of various sorts, currency markets, and credit-card purchases that create private money are playing havoc with the traditional calculations of national money supply, and undermining the ability of governments to control their currency.

Where will it end? We'll have to surf this tidal wave of new money creation as long as we can without getting swamped: "The current electronic revolution in money promises to increase even more the role of money in our public and private lives, surpassing kinship, religion, occupation, and citizenship as the defining element of social life. We stand now at the dawn of the Age of Money." (p268) ... Read more

Amazon.com

Over 150 years ago, Scottish essayist Thomas Carlyle dubbed economics the "dismal science." But it certainly doesn't seem that way in the skillful hands of Todd G. Buchholz, author of New Ideas from Dead Economists. In this revised edition of a book first published in 1989, economics is accessible, relevant, and fascinating. It's even fun--for example, when he uses the cast of Gilligan's Island and Henny Youngman jokes to explain complex economic theories. "Why not have the last laugh on Carlyle by using the dead economists themselves to reverse their bad reputations and to teach the lessons they left to us?"

Buchholz surveys and critiques economic thought from Adam Smith's invisible hand of the 18th century to the depression-fighting ideas of the Keynesians and money-supply concepts of the 20th-century monetarists. He also relates classic economic principles to such modern-day events as the fall of communism, the Asian financial meltdown, and global warming. Buchholz includes plenty of anecdotes about the lives of the great economists: Karl Marx, for instance, was an unkempt slob; David Ricardo, the early-19th-century English politician and economist, was among the rare economists to get rich trading stocks; and Maynard Keynes was so homely his friends called him "Snout." Here's a lively and authoritative read for those interested in the past, present, and future of economics. --Dan Ring ... Read more

Reviews (18)

The economists are not all dead, and the ideas are not new
This is a very good book, but I was somewhat disappointed with it. The problem is the title, which is misleading. It should have been called "A Modern Interpretations of Some Great Economists". There are no new ideas, nor really any new interpretations of old ideas. Another possibility, to apply these ideas to contemporary situations, is done very superficially and with none of the wit and imagination the author uses in their exposition. As a professional economist, I did not find the book very useful. What the book is, is a very good introduction to the history of economic thought. If some day I give an economics course, in particular to non-economists, this book will provide its basis. The witty and light way in which some of the greatest ideas in economics are presented is very appealing. With a book such as this, the countless students who hate the subject of economics will see that it is a living and human endeavor. My congratulations to the author although I suggest he change the title.

Introductory Economics Text Par Excellence
The first time I read this distinguished work by Buchholz, I began the book having half forgotten the economics which I took at college level, and ended the book self-congratulating myself for picking up most of what I had forgotten. When I re-read the book, this time the economic theories that I was taught in a post-graduate course still fresh in my mind, I was in awe with the brilliance and clarity with which Buchholz explains the insights of economic theories without compromising the insight and depth of difficult concepts. As economics comes increasingly under the grips of ever more esoteric mathematics, Buchholz shows the path toward a refreshing style of describing economic behaviors, sans mathematica, without compromising the dazzling insights elucidated by gurus from Adam Smith through Alfred Marshall, John Maynard Keynes to present day giants in the field (e.g. Coase, Friedman, Buchanan). While Buchholz clearly intended the book for the layman, it is actually an introductory economics text par excellence.

Much Better Than Heilbroner's Worldly Philosophers
I've read both Worldly Philosophers by Robert Heilbroner and New Ideas From Dead Economists, by Todd Buchholz. I wanted to get a good rounded layperson introduction to great economists in the past.

First let me examine Heilbroner's book first since that's more widely known, has sold more, and more Economics 101 classes use it as a supplemental text. I'll then compare Heilbroner's book to Bucholz's and explain why I think Bucholz's book is far superior in every way.

I found Heilbroner's book to be neither useful to the layperson nor to people who have a good background in Economics. Let me explain.

Heilbroner spends a LOT of time in awe of these economists and spends a great deal of time explaining how great they were, how revolutionary, how brilliant, how much of a genius, how wonderful these men were, ad nauseum. Ok, I get the point. Unfortunately, all this fawning and fan worship clouds what should've been the more interesting and more important part of the book, which are the central economic ideas put forward by these thinkers. In fact, there's a lot of emphasis on putting their economic ideas in perspective to the prevailing moral philosophical thought at the time.

It's almost as if this books is written for people who have already taken Economics 101, and know all the basic economic principles and can nod, "yes, uh huh, I didn't know those personality quirks or their moral philosophical outlook about these economists - good to know. By the way, it's great that he didn't go over his economic ideas since I already know them."

For example, the entire chapter devoted to David Ricardo fails to mention the theory of Comparative Advantage anywhere in the chapter. Isn't that a MAJOR omission? That's just one example. Omissions such as this are everywhere.

So the layperson is stuck getting a vague feeling that these people were wonderful people, but that a little less fuzzy on their ecnomic ideas. It also leaves a person with economics background feeling like this is less a book about economics and more a book about Heilbroner's fan worship.

Neither audience is served. I can't recommend the Heilbroner book.

Right after I read this book, I read Todd Buchholz's New Ideas From Dead Economists.

Where Heilbroner failed, Buccholz succeeds in so many ways. He puts the central ideas of these economists as the main focus of each chapter. When talking about David Rircardo, the theory of Comparative Advantage is front-and-center. When talking about Marx, Heilbroner meanders and throws a lot of Marx's ideas around and you don't get a sense of how they all fit together in Marx's mind or why modern economists find fundamental flaws in his reasoning. In Buccholz's book, the central point is Marx's ideas, how they fit together and it's very clear why most economists (and the reader) will find Marx's basic premise wrong in light of emperical evidence. This goes on and on.

I initially thought Heilbroner would be a good read, since it was recommended by econ majors when I was in college and they'd never heard of Buccholz's book. I'm glad I read both.

Do yourself a favor - read the better book.

New Ideas from Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Ec
In an introduction explaining the plight of the economist--having to convey to popular political and social forces that in a world of scarcity one must choose--Buchholz implicitly illustrates his own dilemma. He improves upon Heilbroner's classic nonponderous history of economic thought, The Worldly Philosophers (6th ed., 1986), albeit at some sacrifice of breadth and depth. Nevertheless, his highly entertaining look at 200 years of economic thought via contemporary issues has far more hits than misses. His treatment of the giants--Smith, Marx, Keynes, is good, and the coverage of Marx, even before the political upheavals of the last 12 months, is devastating; the other standard names--Ricardo, Malthus, Mill, Marshall, Friedman, are all included; and, taken together, chapters 9 through 12 offer an excellent review of contemporary macroeconomic theories and issues. In a few instances, Buchholz's use of numerical examples seems awkward; some of his facts and formulations are wrong; and, despite the muted, somewhat flip apology with respect to the title (i.e., many of the economists he cites are living not dead), it's still a poor choice. But, everything being equal, as economists are wont to say, it does not get any better than this, and Buchholz deserves, and will certainly get, much credit for this solid contribution to our understanding of both the economists and the issues. Academic and public library collections.

Perfect intro to economics!
This is the most delightful book - I'm finding myself recommending it to everyone! I am a first year law student, and don't have much time to read outside of class. I took no economics courses in undergrad, and wanted to learn a little about economic theory on my own... I'm SO glad that I found this book, because it is really a pleasure to read. In addition to be humorous and very informative, it is a great learning aid because the author writes in a way that makes it easy to remember the material. Even my husband - who knows a lot more about economics that I do - is enjoying the book. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in the subject (or, actually, to anyone who thinks they are NOT interested in economics too)!! ... Read more

Book Description

The U.S. took in more than a million immigrants per year in the late 1990s, more than at any other time in history. For humanitarian and many other reasons, this may be good news. But as George Borjas shows in Heaven's Door, it's decidedly mixed news for the American economy--and positively bad news for the country's poorest citizens. Widely regarded as the country's leading immigration economist, Borjas presents the most comprehensive, accessible, and up-to-date account yet of the economic impact of recent immigration on America. He reveals that the benefits of immigration have been greatly exaggerated and that, if we allow immigration to continue unabated and unmodified, we are supporting an astonishing transfer of wealth from the poorest people in the country, who are disproportionately minorities, to the richest.

In the course of the book, Borjas carefully analyzes immigrants' skills, national origins, welfare use, economic mobility, and impact on the labor market, and he makes groundbreaking use of new data to trace current trends in ethnic segregation. He also evaluates the implications of the evidence for the type of immigration policy the that U.S. should pursue. Some of his findings are dramatic:

Despite estimates that range into hundreds of billions of dollars, net annual gains from immigration are only about $8 billion.

In dragging down wages, immigration currently shifts about $160 billion per year from workers to employers and users of immigrants' services.

Immigrants today are less skilled than their predecessors, more likely to re-quire public assistance, and far more likely to have children who remainin poor, segregated communities.

Borjas considers the moral arguments against restricting immigration and writes eloquently about his own past as an immigrant from Cuba. But he concludes that in the current economic climate--which is less conducive to mass immigration of unskilled labor than past eras--it would be fair and wise to return immigration to the levels of the 1970s (roughly 500,000 per year) and institute policies to favor more skilled immigrants. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

A cuban who doesn't like mexicans
what else is new? This book is like most academic work these days: start with a conclusion, then find supporting arguments.

Borjas's $8-10 billion estimate does not take into account the present value of a higher expected GDP growth rate due to faster capital accumulation. Elementary college economics.

Welfare and assistance costs apply more to legal immigrants or 2nd generation immigrants (including cubans) than illegal ones. Last I heard you need a Social Security number to apply for govmnt assistance.

In any case I am a strong believer in free markets and I think the market should decide who comes here who doesn't.
Ethnicity, education etc are arbitrary criteria and they just reflect Borjas's psychology and prejudices.

What people really want is $$$ and jobs, we want here whomever is going to make everybody rich, create wealth, create jobs, pay taxes, help us kick China's arse and fight terrorists. We don't necessarily need more Harvard economic professors.

And we shouldn't care if those people come from Mexico or from Mars, I personally don't ...

Required reading for study of modern immigration debate.
A very sound piece of economic work. Regardless of what you feel about Borjas's conclusions, you must acknowledge the value of his economic analysis. To truly have an understanding of the immigration debate, you must have read Borjas's work. His contributions to the field are immeasurable. While I do not always agree with him on the place of "ethnicity" in the realm of immigration policy making, I am more educated for even considering his proposal. In sum, I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in immigration issues--especially those interested in its economic impact. ... Read more

Book Description

"A powerful and original reconsideration of the thinking of Smith andCondorcet. This is a reinterpretation of Enlightenment political economy. Delightfully fresh, sensitive, sensible, and wide-ranging."

Keith Baker, Stanford University In a brilliant recreation of the epoch between the 1770s and the 1820s, Emma Rothschild reinterprets the ideas of the great revolutionary political economists to show us the true landscape of economic and political thought in their day, with important consequences for our own. Her work alters the readings of Adam Smith and Condorcet--and of ideas of Enlightenment--that underlie much contemporary political thought. Economic Sentiments takes up late-eighteenth-century disputes over the political economy of an enlightened, commercial society to show us how the "political" and the "economic" were intricately related to each other and to philosophical reflection. Rothschild examines theories of economic and political sentiments, and the reflection of these theories in the politics of enlightenment. A landmark in the history of economics and of political ideas, her book shows us the origins of laissez-faire economic thought and its relation to political conservatism in an unquiet world. In doing so, it casts a new light on our own times. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Invisible sleights of hand
This is a nicely done zoom level retrieval of the real Adam Smith (or one of them) before conservative ideologists appropriated his name and theories, resulting in amnesiac palpitations and the fulminations of Karl Marx. Adam Smith is an historically ambiguated figure whose reputation fluctuated very quickly between the era leading up and throughout the French Revolution and the era thereafter. We blame Rousseau for wicked deeds, in a snort at the Revolution, but similar 'misgivings' attended the radical Smith. This is a well done account, with a good critical history of the 'invisible hand' scenario, and a reminder of the dangers of historical hallucination curable only by hard labor at the historical record.

Truth in advertising
The title "Economic Sentiments" is intriguing. How can "sentiments" be "economic"? Is "sympathy" economic? Or "greed"? Or maybe the "desire to better one's conditions," which is neither greed nor thrift nor entrepreneurial adventurism, but maybe a little of each. Unfortunately Ms. Rothschild does not deliver on the promise of the book's title.She is very learned and obviously knows her stuff, but most readers will likely be disappointed by the slighting of Smith in a book that, judging by its title, presumably would treatSmith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. But close textual analysis is not Rothschild's bag (as Austin Powers might put it). There is, however, an extended discussion as to why Smith's "invisible hand" is just a big joke, but that is not a verifiable argument, nor can Rothschild draw on her considerable learning to make it. After all, how can you prove that a joke is a joke? And nothing prevents a joke from being both ironic and true. Emma invokes the reductio ad inegalitarium to argue that Smith could never have believed in an "invisible hand." It is argument by proximity. I know Smith, Smith is a friend of mine, and theSmith I know could never have assumed the inegalitarian vantage of the omniscient observer. Ergo the "invisible hand" is a joke. Is that convincing? She then launches on an extended comparision of Smith and Hayek that attempts to assimilate Smith to Hayek--as if Smith were not difficult enough to understand on his own. For a scholar who clearly thinks that historical context is the greater part of intellectual history, Rothschild's eagerness to make Smith relevant is at odds with her method. There is an interesting book here that Rothschild did not write, a book about Smith's portrait of this new man, economic man, the man who Smith in fact depicts in the Theory of Moral Sentiments. Unfortunately Rothschild has written a book that is half learned exposition, half contemporary polemic, and a whole lot less than the sum of its parts.

A new look at some old whipping boys
First, a romantic note - Rothschild dedicates this book to her husband Amartya Sen, and Sen dedicated his last book ('Development as Freedom') to her. So these books will lie side by side on my shelf. Both are well worth reading.

There is more than just a familial connection. Sen clearly used his wife's research on Smith and Condorcet in the writing of 'Development as Freedom' since the Adam Smith that appears in his book is not the cold and callous economist of myth. One suspects that Rothschild's perception of Smith and Condorcet had been coloured by Sen as she presents them as more than just economists as we understand the term, but concerned with a far wider range of phenomena in politics and sociology. In fact they were exactly as much an 'economist' as Sen himself is. As any reader of Sen knows, he covers an extremely broad range of factors in his work, not just GDP and income.

Rothschild argues that Smith's example of the 'invisible hand' that regulates free markets would have as easily been meant as a malign as a benign regulator. Traders who influence markets by bribery or trickery are as much an 'invisible hand' as an imagined self-regulating mechanism. In fact, the beneficient invisible hand was very much a product of later economists. Smith was not as negative on government regulation as he was made out to be by later writers, though strongly against price-fixing by government fiat, guilds which prevented fair competition, and over-zealous regulation of trade and commerce by insiders, profiteers and parasites.

Condorcet comes across as a very attractive human being, passionate and commited to his beliefs. Accused of Utopianism, he struggled with his conviction that he had no right to dictate opinion to others. Yet he believed that his liberal philosophy was best.He was concerned with the 'ordinary man in the street', and rejected any idea that he/ she should be indoctrinated with the 'right' ideas by a state-supported educational system. He wrote for the rights of women, believing that all humanity were entitled to equal rights.

I have to say the book is dense and quite difficult at times. However, it is the ideas that are difficult, not the presentation. It will probably repay a second reading.But I feel after reading this that I have had an excellent introduction to two first-class and important (in a world-historical sense) intellects.

In defence of the Enlightenment
To their enemies the Marquis de Condorcet was the epitome of the worst elements of the French Enlightenment, fatuously optimistic, subtly intolerant and dangerous utopian with his emphasis on the "perfectability" of man, while the notoriously absent-minded Adam Smith was the architect of a notoriously callous and philistine economic theory.Aside from that, the enthusiastic and idealistic Condorcet does not appear to have much in common with the quiet and discreet Smith.Emma Rothschild is the husband of the nobel prize winning economist A. Sen, whose most famous work shows the devastating effect dogmatically applied free market rules can have on worsening famines.Yet this book is a defense of the two from the critics of the Enlightenment.

To a surprising extent she succeeds.Conservatives will be unpleasantly surprised to read that in the decade after his death, mentioning your support of Smith did not prevent Scottish democrats from being transported to Australia by reactionary Scottish judges.For many years Tories did not view Smith as the great economist or philosopher.Instead Smith was the man whose account of his friend, the atheist philosopher David Hume on his deathbed, enraged the pious for showing Hume's complete calm, class and lack of fear of eternal damnation.Rothschild notes how the great economist Carl Menger noted how prominent socialists quoted Smith against their enemies.(Oddly enough she does not quote the passage in CAPITAL where Marx cites an enraged prelate angry at Smith for classifying priests as "unproductive labor.)Smith was an opponent of militarism, a supporter of high wages, and a supporter of French philosophy (and not unsympathetic to the French Revolution,either).Reading of his relations with Turgot and Condorcet, it will be much harder to defend the view of a sharp distinction between a good sensible Protestant Enlightenment, and a bad, Nasty, atheist one on the continent.

In discussing Turgot and Condorcet's support for the free trade in grain, which Smith also supported, Rothschild helps remind us that laissez faire did not simply mean watching while people starved.Confronted with the threat of famine in Limousin in 1770, Turgot preserved the freedom of the corn trade.But he also provided workshops for the poor, increased grain imports from other regions, reduced taxes for the poor, and protected poor tenants from eviction.Condorcet and Smith were both sympathetic to these policies.Rothschild also devotes a whole chapter to Smith's metaphor of the "invisible hand."She points out how rarely it was used in Smith's work, and how on the centennial of the publication of the Wealth of Nation almost no-one mentioned it, even at a special celebration organized by William Gladstone.She then goes into how the concept is used in Smith's works.The concept is complex, and in my view not entirely convincing.But she is successful in pointing out how Smith did not follow Hayek in viewing pre-existing structures as the product of an infallible "organic" wisdom.In contrast to the cant of a Calhoun or a Kendall, Smith realized that the most tyrannical acts of government are those that are local and unofficial.

One should point out the defense of Condorcet as well.In an age where Francois Furet, Keith Michael Baker, Mona Ozouf and others have castigated the French Revolutionary tradition as inherently totalitarian, it is good to be reminded that Condorcet is firmly in the liberal tradition.Like Smith, Condorcet was a great supporter of public education, in contrast to the conservative critics of both.Rothschild discusses his views as an economist, and as a theorist of proportional representation.Surprisingly she does not discuss what were Condorcet's most admirable views, his support for female emancipation and suffrage.But she is excellent in pointing out how Condorcet opposed the crassness of the utilitarians.She notes how Condorcet had a view of the limits of truth and scientific inquiry that would have been approved by Karl Popper himself.She notes that he did not believe that voting could or should create a General Will, in the Rousseauean Sense. He did not believe in using education as a form of propoaganda in civic studies, while his opinions were closer to the reservations of a Herder, a Holderin or a Kant than previously believed.

The book is not perfect.Although studiously documented, most of the quotes are from Smith and Condorcet themselves.More historical context could have been provided.There should have been more about actual historical studies of famines, and more on the political and social context of modern Scotland would have been very informative.And her defense of Condorcet would have been stronger if Rothschild had confronted the well-deserved reputation of Condorcet's colleagues in the Gironde for hypocrisy and demagoguery. But this is an important work, and it helps link one of the most familiar of "english" minds into a full international context.That in itself is praise enough.

Interesting but Frustrating
The subject is interesting. Putting Adam Smith in a historical context can reveal much about what he really wanted to say. But Emma Rothschild's writing style is frustrating. Time and again I would read a sentence and then ask "what did she just say?" and realize that it was a banal generality or that she could have expressed herself more directly. I studied history when in college and have read many well written books on intellectual history. Rothchild's book isn't one of them. ... Read more

Book Description

The Marketplace of Revolution offers a boldly innovative interpretation of the mobilization of ordinary Americans on the eve of independence. Breen explores how colonists who came from very different ethnic and religious backgrounds managed to overcome difference and create a common cause capable of galvanizing resistance. In a richly interdisciplinary narrative that weaves insights into a changing material culture with analysis of popular political protests, Breen shows how virtual strangers managed to communicate a sense of trust that effectively united men and women long before they had established a nation of their own. The Marketplace of Revolution argues that the colonists' shared experience as consumers in a new imperial economy afforded them the cultural resources that they needed to develop a radical strategy of political protest--the consumer boycott. Never before had a mass political movement organized itself around disruption of the marketplace. As Breen demonstrates, often through anecdotes about obscure Americans, communal rituals of shared sacrifice provided an effective means to educate and energize a dispersed populace. The boycott movement--the signature of American resistance--invited colonists traditionally excluded from formal political processes to voice their opinions about liberty and rights within a revolutionary marketplace, an open, raucous public forum that defined itself around subscription lists passed door-to-door, voluntary associations, street protests, destruction of imported British goods, and incendiary newspaper exchanges. Within these exchanges was born a new form of politics in which ordinary man and women--precisely the people most often overlooked in traditional accounts of revolution--experienced an exhilarating surge of empowerment. Breen recreates an "empire of goods" that transformed everyday life during the mid-eighteenth century. Imported manufactured items flooded into the homes of colonists from New Hampshire to Georgia. The Marketplace of Revolution explains how at a moment of political crisis Americans gave political meaning to the pursuit of happiness and learned how to make goods speak to power. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Well-written, but a stretch?
Breen writes a nice book here with lots of detail on colonists as consumers, and how the so-called market revolution impacted America prior to the Revolution. He suggests that this mass consumerism was the bond that tied Americans together and was the reason they were able to unite and rebel in 1775. My concern is that when he does expand upon the idea that this consumerism is what made colonists have something in common and allowed them to act in 1775 as a coordinated community, evidenceis lacking and Breen mostly speculates. It must have been so thus it was so, seems to be Breen's basis for conclusion. ... Read more

Book Description

A witty and accessible tour de force that is immersed in the latest economic thinking, Culture and Prosperity is an indispensable guide to the world around us and destined to become a classic text for understanding the politics of globalization.

Guided by the belief that a combination of lightly regulated capitalism and liberal democracy -- the American business model -- is not just appropriate for America at the dawn of the twenty-first century, but a universal path to freedom and prosperity, the United States is an unrivaled colossus seeking to remake the world in its own image.

After a decade of successive market revolutions around the world, beginning with the collapse of the Berlin Wall and continuing in countries as diverse as Argentina and New Zealand, the effectiveness of the market economy as a route to prosperity and growth is not in question, but a more sophisticated appreciation of the strengths and limits of markets is urgently required.

In this new and illuminating analysis of the nature and evolution of the market economy, John Kay attacks the oversimplified account of its operation, contained in the American business model and favored by politicians and business people. He even questions whether it offers an accurate description of the success of the American economy itself.

In an absorbing argument that rewards close reading, and rereading, Culture and Prosperity examines every assumption we have about economic life from a refreshingly new angle. Taking the reader from the shores of Lake Zurich to the streets of Mumbai, from the flower market of San Remo to the sales rooms at Christie's, John Kay reveals the connection between a nation's social, political, and cultural context and its economic performance.

Reviews (5)

A book for social democrats and europhiles
New Keynesians, Europhiles, and those who like to set up a straw-man model of the American economy and then have it will like this book a great deal. Mr. Kay has an elegant and confident style that inspires belief that his pronouncements are the way things are. He does not have much use for the Chicago school of economics, nor of the idea that small government and lower taxes can add vibrancy to an economy. He is a Social Democrat who sees little difference between Mao, Stalin, and the management at Ford Motor Company.

This idea is so strange as to seem laughable to me. Mao and Stalin brutalized entire peoples and mismanaged entire countries. Ford, an international company, is still a miniscule part of the American economy and any mismanagement it might engage in has much more limited effects. Employees who dislike working at Ford and consumers who become disenchanted with its products have other places to work and other products to buy. The citizens of the USSR and China had no such option.

Mr. Kay also says, strangely, that European productivity is higher than that in America but really doesn't explain the way the measurement is made nor the effect the recently higher Euro against the Dollar has played in that measurement. I am not declaring him wrong, I simply would like to have a more complete demonstration of his claim.

A most egregious mistake he makes, like many who dislike capitalism, is to equate greed with self-interest. He claims that many people do things that are not directly related to acquisition or more money or material goods and claims this to be a proof that people don't act as capitalism claims. Adam Smith and other explainers of the capitalist model and any of us who believe it in always talk about rational self-interest NOT naked greed, which is a form of irrationality. That people want to build concert halls or have parks or shelters for the indigent is not irrational nor against a person's self-interest. However, opponents of capitalism need to have greed as the straw man to knock down however silly the claim that it is a foundational principle of capitalism.

Does the book explain why some nations are rich but most remain poor as the subtitle promises? I think that Hernando Desoto's "The Mystery of Capital" is much more convincing. But I have my own beliefs, and while I am a fan of European history and culture, I think that Socialism has cost Europe a great deal. However, you may believe differently and if you do, you will likely enjoy this book more than I.

A description of how complex comparative economics is
There have been many arguments put forward as to why some nations seem forever destined to remain poor and others, primarily European in cultural heritage, are prosperous. Those arguments range from the extreme believers in absolutely free markets as the reason for wealth to the relentless and continuous exploitation of the poor as the reason for poverty. As is nearly always the case when there are two extremes, the truth is somewhere in the middle, with each nation having different reasons for their economic performance. However, there are some general reasons, and Kay cites them with examples.
The first requirement for prosperity is a government whose members are not concerned solely with increasing their personal wealth. Although there are many others that he could have used, Kay cites the example of Joseph Mobutu in the Congo (Zaire). In terms of natural resources, the nation is extremely wealthy, but under Mobutu the country, with the exception of his cronies, was completely bankrupted. Kay also places a lot of blame on Western institutions that supported the Mobutu regime, lending billions of dollars that have largely vanished with no physical evidence remaining. Organized mineral production in the country has largely ceased.
In general, the countries of sub-Saharan Africa all suffer from the problem of greed and weak, incompetent government. In an excellent quote, Tom Friedman states, "Come to Africa- it's a freshman Republican's paradise. Yes, sir, nobody in Liberia pays taxes. There's no gun control in Angola. There's no welfare as we know it in Burundi, and no big government to interfere in the market in Rwanda. But a lot of their people sure wish there were." These examples also demonstrate that free markets are not the answer. Some of the freest markets in the world are in these countries, where bandits rule by controlling mining and then sell their ill-gotten gains to the highest bidder. Government leaders also readily sell their decisions to the one willing to pay the most. It is very sad to note that in many of these countries, economic productivity is now lower than it was when they were still under colonial rule.
Stable governments with honest leaders are also not enough. Kay cites the example of Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere, one of the few honest leaders to emerge in sub-Saharan Africa. Nyerere ran a government largely free of corruption and tried to develop factories and a stable economic infrastructure. Under his rule, Tanzania was considered one country that could possibly rise from the muck that is the disaster of Africa. Unfortunately, despite all of the aid and advice from Westerners, the GDP of Tanzania was lower when Nyerere retired than it was when he took office. One giant factory designed to supply the entire country with shoes was a disaster and never operated at more than 5% of capacity before it was closed.
Kay also has a true sense of history, something often lacking in modern commentators on economics. He reminds us that the early industrial revolution in England was very hard on the social structure, people and the environment. Thousands were herded into slums to provide the labor pool, and left to fend for themselves when they were no longer needed. Children were forced to work very long hours at dangerous jobs that required someone of their size and dexterity. Westerners travel to sweatshops in third world countries and are strongly critical of the conditions they find. It is often forgotten that the conditions they find are much better than when Europe industrialized. The reality is that economic conditions eventually dramatically improve, it just takes some time.
In examining the conditions that lead to a country being prosperous, Kay concludes that the following conditions must hold:

* Stable, honest government.
* Laws that clearly define property rights and that are enforced in an even-handed way.
* A sense of community, where people do not blindly follow the path of personal self-interest.
* A spirit of innovation, where new ideas are constantly generated, tried in small experiments and then only executed in the large when they have passed the initial tests.

Kay also spends a great deal of time on the American stock market bubble fueled by the dot-com craze of the nineties. His statements and conclusions regarding the behavior of the American economy will not please those who praise it as the model of efficiency. He considers the descriptions of the American economy to be vastly oversimplified and even whether they accurately describe how it functions.
I enjoyed the book, especially the examples of economic successes and failures. So much so, I wished there had been more of them. A large section is spent on describing the fundamentals of markets, which I largely skimmed. One thing is very clear. In performing a comparison of the economic performance of countries, you realize how complex economic productivity is. Those who argue that all will be well if only free markets and democracy take hold are misguided and/or simple-minded. Societies and cultures are extremely complex and Kay demonstrates that even well intentioned actions can be detrimental.

Analysis of the intersection of culture and economic theory
The subtitle to this book describes the content succinctly - "Why Some Nations are Rich but Most Remain Poor". Author John Kay, a prominent British economist, postulates that one of the reasons is due to cultural factors. These cultural norms may both free and confine the society when it comes to prosperity. If international trade benefits both rich and poor countries then why do poor countries remain poor? In a brilliant exposition of economics he argues that it is not the free markets and constant search for materialistic acquisition that has made America prosperous but it is largely a factor of the various institutions we have in place. That is one reason why many countries have been unsuccessful in trying to emulate the American economic machine. If our success were based entirely on free markets then bringing them to other countries would allow them to prosper, but they often do not. If you were taught the traditional Adam Smith and Keynesian economic models you will be delighted with this additional perspective on the international market and why our models often don't work in other countries. By the same token the models that work in their cultures may not work at all in ours. A fascinating read and a fresh view of international economics, "Culture and Prosperity" is a highly recommended book.

Illuminating if a bit dense
John Kay is one of those writers with the rare knack for making economics understandable, and his skills are in full display in this book. Kay offers a sophisticated critique of the assumption that markets can, on their own, guarantee prosperity, and he shows how culture and institutions play a crucial role in driving economic growth. At the same time, he rejects facile attacks on capitalism, arguing convincingly that markets remain the most powerful engine of prosperity ever invented.

Kay's style is generally quite readable, but at times here -- more so than in his FT work -- he gets bogged down in theory and detail, and there are ponderous passages to wade through. On the whole, though, this is illuminating stuff, and anyone interested in understanding why some parts of the world are rich while others are poor should take a look.

Informative and entertaining
This excellent book is an illuminating introduction to the key economic issues of our time. I had never imagined that a book on economics could be interesting, yet this work has shown me not only that the label of 'the dismal science' is unjustified, but also that the workings of the market economy can be explained with wit and lucidity. Highly recommended. ... Read more

Book Description

This book in microeconomics focuses on the strategic analysis of markets under imperfect competition, incomplete information, and incentives. Part I of the book covers imperfect competition, from monopoly and regulation to the strategic analysis of oligopolistic markets. Part II explains the analytics of risk, stochastic dominance, and risk aversion, supplemented with a variety of applications from different areas in economics. Part III focuses on markets and incentives under incomplete information, including a comprehensive introduction to the theory of auctions, which plays an important role in modern economics. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

lucid exposition and very modern focus
Wolfstetter has given us a book that is very much focused on modern microeconomic theory. It is indeed, as the title suggests, a "topics" book, not a universal micro theory textbook. For instance, he does not cover general equilibrium theory at all. But by concentrating on the fascinating newer insights of information economics and industrial economics, he is able to go deeper than most other textbooks, see for instance the outstanding chapter on auction theory. There is even a chapter on matching theory, a topic not usually covered in textbooks at all.

The reader from Pasadena is right when he says that this is a book for academics. This is the audience the book was written for. But this reader is highly unfair for blaming the book for the fact that he is not an academic. In fact, for academics, this is an excellent book, and clearly deserves 5 stars!

A Book for Academics
I believe it was George Bernard Shaw who said "every profession is a conspiracy against the laity." Topics in Microeconomics by Elmar Wolfstetter would fit this quotation. In between the very well written prose are scads of algebraic equations and supply and demand charts that only confuse most readers. This books is written for academics. On the back cover are kudos from other academics who are members of the self-congratulations society. I'm sorry I bought the book. Read Ronald Coase if you want to read an economist who avoids unnecessary abstractions.

It is an excellent book
This book provides an extremely thorough and comprehensive treatment of important topics in microeconomics. This work manages to be both rigorous and pleasant to read. ... Read more