>>1048687 The book reads very easy, he doesn't use any graphs or difficult words. You won't get any practical stuff out of it but it is enjoyable with all the examples and can be quite handy later when you are having a discussion with other people.
>>1048687 It is an excellent book for having economic discussions because he abstracts the underlying theories to a conversational level, and provides a lot of examples.
If you're looking for something to study economic theory though, there are much better options. It's like Cosmos is to physics. You can understand what's going on, but you aren't really becoming a physicist.
A laymans introduction to how to think about economics? Yeah that book will do, you should also check out "Naked Economics" and What's the "Economy for anyways". They're both good laymans introductions.
If you want to actually develop a more theoretical understanding I can recommend from my bachelor course we had "Microeconomics" by Goolsbee and Steven Levitt (the guy who did Freakonomics). For Macroeconomics I had a similarly titled "Macroeconomics" textbook by Blanchard. And then if you want to get into trade and international economics consider "international economics" by feenstra. These are all textbooks by the way, but from my memory, they weren't "dry" like most textbooks are, they are filled with real-life applications.
Also read the Ascent of Money and The Wealth of Nations. They're both good for developing some history about what money even is and the historical thinking of how economics developed.
>>1049135 Krugman is an idiot who spurts fallacies like no one else I know, but his books do form the orthodoxy of contemporary economics. I an Austrian and I still reference Krugman and Keynes in my essays. It grinds my gears but my professors genuinely believe what they taught.
Uncle Thomas Sowell... That nigger hates niggers more than any nigger hater that ever done lived. Enjoy your book, fucktard. It'll make an excellent piece of the kindling in the trash can fire you'll be warming yourself by if you listen to a word that nigger say.
>>1048687 If you want text book understanding out of it, no
If you want a basic run down of economics for the layman, its good. By layman I mean middle aged person who has a general idea of what economic/financial terms mean because they watched the news and managed money for a few decades. But you can just wikipedia shit if you don't understand.
The added chapters on international wealth disparities really drag though. You just want to move on and he keeps assaulting you with example after example.
Also, it's a mostly neutral book. Most of the contents are basic bitches and aren't heavily debated among different schools of economics, but they are explained and emphasized in a way that a chicago school economist would. As for things that are debated, he explains the differences between Keynesian thought and Chicago thought, and leaves the answer ambiguous. He doesn't pretend to know everything, and he doesn't tell the reader what to believe when the jury is out. This is good because a lot of free marketers outright reject keynes when a good chunk of his contributions are not seriously debatable.
Doesn't change the fact that he has been wrong numerous times. He can fool people with his fast talking verbosity but he has been wrong at many crucial points just like a majority of economists and their models quantifying fucking human behaviour.
>>1056101 its mainly because sowell is generally conservative, but his books on economics are usually neutral on the most part. he talks about incentives, inventories, trade, why new york rent control damaged the industry and taxi licences if im not mistaken.
His other works like about intellectualsd is pretty conservative though
>>1056113 Recently krugman made a statement how he was wrong that interest rates cannot go into negative(view was held by some keynsians, but not monetarists). And 2 other things about monetary policy which i forgot. To his credit he is one of the few economicsts with high readership who is willing to acknowledge his mistakes and improve, which i respect alot.
>>1056121 that would be kick ass if there was a site soley for tracking financial predictions/theories that also provides links to current data, someone make it happen.
anyway thats cools that krugman admitted what he ws wrong about-thats not a common thing to do publically I dont claim to be knowledgeable enough to "know better" but he seems to remove human element, as if people always made rational decisions/give a fuck about "the economy"( personally i want shit that works not stuff that works then breaks so i can go buy more of it and "get the economy moving" )
i will be checking out all the recommendations ITT though
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.