counter create hit New Ideas from Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Economic Thought - Download Free eBook
Ads Banner
Hot Best Seller

New Ideas from Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Economic Thought

Availability: Ready to download

Featuring brand new sections on the remarkable shifts in the world economy, this economic study is a relevant, entertaining, and fascinating guide for those seeking both a solid lesson on the development of economic theory throughout the past two hundred years and a balanced perspective of our current economic state on the brink of the millennium.By applying age-old econom Featuring brand new sections on the remarkable shifts in the world economy, this economic study is a relevant, entertaining, and fascinating guide for those seeking both a solid lesson on the development of economic theory throughout the past two hundred years and a balanced perspective of our current economic state on the brink of the millennium.By applying age-old economic theories to contemporary issues, Todd Buchholz helps readers to see how the thoughts and writings of the great economists of the past have vital relevance to the dilemmas affecting all our lives today.


Compare
Ads Banner

Featuring brand new sections on the remarkable shifts in the world economy, this economic study is a relevant, entertaining, and fascinating guide for those seeking both a solid lesson on the development of economic theory throughout the past two hundred years and a balanced perspective of our current economic state on the brink of the millennium.By applying age-old econom Featuring brand new sections on the remarkable shifts in the world economy, this economic study is a relevant, entertaining, and fascinating guide for those seeking both a solid lesson on the development of economic theory throughout the past two hundred years and a balanced perspective of our current economic state on the brink of the millennium.By applying age-old economic theories to contemporary issues, Todd Buchholz helps readers to see how the thoughts and writings of the great economists of the past have vital relevance to the dilemmas affecting all our lives today.

30 review for New Ideas from Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Economic Thought

  1. 4 out of 5

    Juan-Pablo

    A comprehensive but ideologically biased economics history There are a couple of points that are good to know before you pick up this short economics history. First, the title is misleading, it is not “new ideas”, but just “ideas” form dead economists. Second, it is not only theories (ideas), but also biography (at least sometimes). The latter is where the book fails the most. I’ll come back to this later. This is a history of ideas book, but it is also a saga of how modern economy (the dismal sci A comprehensive but ideologically biased economics history There are a couple of points that are good to know before you pick up this short economics history. First, the title is misleading, it is not “new ideas”, but just “ideas” form dead economists. Second, it is not only theories (ideas), but also biography (at least sometimes). The latter is where the book fails the most. I’ll come back to this later. This is a history of ideas book, but it is also a saga of how modern economy (the dismal science) came to life. This epics starts, naturally, with the Physiocrats and Adam Smith. Modern free-marketeers and Republicans have taken for themselves Smith’s theories. They place them in the ideological camp against Big Government. But “The Wealth of Nations” starts with a critique to Mercantilism and its focus on money. Wealth, in Smith’s view, is productive, not monetary. Of course the Spanish Empire learned this the hard way after bringing gold and silver from America. This new theoretical framework for wealth is the real revolution. One wonders what Smith would have thought of modern finance, with its obsession with paper money and fancy instruments that are several levels of abstraction removed from real wealth. In this sense, Adam Smith is more of an Economics Theory Foundation figure, and not so much a piece to place on one side or the other of the ideological camp. Buchholz traces how economics develops from this early foundation, explaining Malthus, Ricardo, Alfred Marshal invention of the economic supply and demand curves, and then moving forward to modern economics from Keynes to Behaviorists. The book is very successful in presenting all these theories in a coherent framework and a small package. There are, however, two big problems with “New Ideas from Dead Economists”. The first is how biography is misused. The book presents mainly ideas, and in most cases biography is used to move the prose forward. But when the author doesn’t agree with a theory, he spends more time on the economists’ flaws. Marx is portrayed as a drunken, money waster youth, negligent provider for his family. I don’t see how this is relevant at all in understanding his theories—it is a fun story, but that’s a different type of book. Buchholz critique of Marxism is tinted with this (irrelevant) biographical information. In my opinion, this is not a very honest way of debating economics. The other problem is his uses of examples. Marshall is praised with many illustrations that “prove” him right. Malthus, the opposite. With almost every economic theory on can find examples to prove or disprove it. So one wonders how these examples were chosen, and if this is just confirmation bias on the part of the author.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Veronica

    I fault myself entirely for finding certain subsets of economics rather dull. I don't know why, but when I open economics textbooks learning towards econometrics, I am rarely interests. Economics boasts mathematical rigor certainly but it's not as if economics is engaged in a kind of pure mathematics quest for Platonic perfection. It is highly pragmatic and so doesn’t raise metaphysical implications as philosophy and physics do. As a social science it involves daily realities and historical cont I fault myself entirely for finding certain subsets of economics rather dull. I don't know why, but when I open economics textbooks learning towards econometrics, I am rarely interests. Economics boasts mathematical rigor certainly but it's not as if economics is engaged in a kind of pure mathematics quest for Platonic perfection. It is highly pragmatic and so doesn’t raise metaphysical implications as philosophy and physics do. As a social science it involves daily realities and historical contingencies. It seems to be much more fruitful to study eternal things. And economics is so much a discipline wedded to both time and culture. But who could deny the importance of studying economics, as a window to understanding the financial structure of our society, as a conduit for better understanding solutions to global problems? And yet, I am often bored. I love reading economics journals. I love devouring trivia of national GDPs and growth rates, and reading about the current state of world economies. But when it comes to studying economic theory, it often feels too much like a needless chore. More than anything I’ve always believed that engineers and economists/businessmen are necessarily at odds with one another. Engineers are inventors and creators. Economists seem to be the individuals on Wall Street debating how and when to invest in the fruitful products of engineers on the other side of the country. I believe it is ultimately my naïve bias regarding this ‘apparent’ opposition that makes me reluctant to study economics in earnestness...But I am ready to confront my foolish stereotypes, to recognize that perhaps my disdain for the field comes from dogmatic assumptions that economists are the suited men in high rise NYC apartments with business graduate degrees trying to reap the benefits of the creative genius of an indie programmer on the West Coast. Please watch the documentary Inside Job, as it only ever confirmed my stereotypes regarding the pre-eminent economists in this country. Here is a sample of the Harvard/Columbia economists featured: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaXNq... I now recognize that it is wrong for me to characterize an entire field by a select few people, to disdain economics simply because it has real-world values and is not as immutable as metaphysical realism. (Oh, and how privileged I am to disdain things for being practical in the first place!) Nor is it fair for me to regard economics as devoid of creativity and passion and to consider esteemed economists of lauded institutions to be people who are otherwise incapable of invention. So: I admit to all of this. I am going to open my mind more and discard my assumptions. I will try to read more economics and to not roll my eyes when I read an algebraic equation that precisely describes the culpability of a person according to which a ‘person is negligent if the probable injury to the victim exceeds the cost of avoiding the accident’, that is P x L > C. I’ve decided to cast off my obsession with only learning ideas that I consider beautiful. I am doubly foolish to act as if learning things that are too worldly will sully me and to suppose that studying economics at all is just one perilous step from becoming an Investment Bank Analyst. How different, really, is the study biological or computational systems from the study of systems governing our economic structures? Economics is a science of the relationship of individual units to larger systems as much as physics and biology. “The really valuable thing in the pageant of human life seems to me not the State but the creative, sentient individual, the personality; it alone creates the noble and the sublime.” “Yes, we now have to divide up our time like that, between politics and our equations. But to me our equations are far more important, for politics are only a matter of present concern. A mathematical equation stands forever.” Albert Einstein /end Platonic rant.

  3. 4 out of 5

    Ahmad Ebaid

    I've read a few pages of it, and it was promising, and full of joyful small details. One of the Arabic translations has a lot misunderstanding of phrases meaning, though it had checked by a famous Egyptian economist, "Hazem EL-Beblawy". That translation published by "academic library". Luckily, there is another recent translation by "Arabic words", and it was so good. تحذير متأخر قليلاً، ولكن ترجمة "المكتبة الأكاديمية" لهذا الكتاب هي أسوأ ترجمة قابلتها على الإطلاق؛ فمعظم ترجمات العبارات مغلوطة تما I've read a few pages of it, and it was promising, and full of joyful small details. One of the Arabic translations has a lot misunderstanding of phrases meaning, though it had checked by a famous Egyptian economist, "Hazem EL-Beblawy". That translation published by "academic library". Luckily, there is another recent translation by "Arabic words", and it was so good. تحذير متأخر قليلاً، ولكن ترجمة "المكتبة الأكاديمية" لهذا الكتاب هي أسوأ ترجمة قابلتها على الإطلاق؛ فمعظم ترجمات العبارات مغلوطة تماماً، ولا تعكس مقاصد الكتاب من قريب أو بعيد حتى!. ولا أستطيع تخيل كيف آلت الأمور إلى هذا الهراء، وكيف واتتهم الشجاعة لنشره، ولا أستطيع أن أتخيل كيف أن الدكتور "حازم الببلاوي" موضوع اسمه كمراجع للكتاب. ومن حسن الحظ أنه هنالك ترجمة بديلة ممتازة، أصدرتها "كلمات عربية". وقد قارنتها بنفسي مع الترجمة الأخرى. ومن الجزء البسيط الذي قرأته، فالكتاب رائع وواعد، بتفاصيل صغيرة مميزة.

  4. 4 out of 5

    Jyontika

    i actually only read 228 pages of this book but i’m still marking it as read for compensation of the pain that econ symposiums brought me

  5. 4 out of 5

    Omar Halabieh

    The main premise of the book, is best summarized by the author: "It is striking that so many of the lessons of the great economists still speak to us. Each of their wisest theories has a practical point or analogy today. This book seeks their wisdom by looking at mainstream economics and asking, Who first had these insights and built these durable models? We can learn from the masters." Todd then embarks his readers on a journey through the contributions of the greatest economists of our time. Cl The main premise of the book, is best summarized by the author: "It is striking that so many of the lessons of the great economists still speak to us. Each of their wisest theories has a practical point or analogy today. This book seeks their wisdom by looking at mainstream economics and asking, Who first had these insights and built these durable models? We can learn from the masters." Todd then embarks his readers on a journey through the contributions of the greatest economists of our time. Clearly explaining how they analysed the existing models and theories of their time, and their own contributions to advance the filed of economics. He does so, in a very simple style that is accessible to any audience regardless of their background in that field. What truly sets this book apart is the breadth of content, spanning a period of several centuries. Sufficient depth is included so that one gains an appreciation and broad understanding. The included references make it easy for one to dive deeper into more details. A must read for anyone seeking an introduction and/or a broad understanding of the field of economics! Below are key excerpts from the book that I found particularly insightful: 1- "Russia's 1998 debacle teaches us that a market economy must rest on a dependable legal system. A free market does not mean utter chaos; it requires ground rules." 2- "Economics if the study of choice. It does not tell us what to choose. It only helps us understand the consequences of our choices." 3- "...as an economist isolates causes and estimates their influence, the degree of influence changes...Economics may not be a "hard" science. But that does not mean it is an easy science. Because it is so fluid, it is hard to hold in place and to study." 4- "Smith clearly defined the proper role for government: first, providing for national defense; second, administering justice through a court system; third, maintaining public institutions and resources such as roads, canals, bridges, educational systems, and the dignity of the sovereign." 5- "The point of Ricardo's analysis: free trade makes it possible for households to consume more goods regardless of whether trading partners are more or less economically advanced." 6- "By investing, the capitalist gives up the immediate gratification of buying goods. His return on investment pays him for waiting, for delaying his pleasure. If everyone consumes everything now, society will produce nothing new. Thus, profits play a crucial role." 7- "...four very important areas in which economists have dramatically transformed traditional legal analysis: negligence law; property law; criminal law; and corporate finance." 8- "There is clearly more to economics than prices, profits, rents, and costs. Laws, morals, fashions, and philosophies all contribute to an economy. They may support it, or they may tear it down." 9- "What does it mean to be Keynesian? Two basis propositions will suffice here: (1) the private economy may not reach full employment; (2) government spending can spur the economy into filling the gap." 10- "Keynes cleverly speculates that the way to make money in the stock market is not to be the best corporate analyst, but to be the best at guessing what others think is good." 11- "This movement, called monetarism, admits that the economy does have an accelerator and a brake, but insists that the accelerator should be marked "higher money supply" and the brake "lower money supply...the monetarists portray the Federal Reserve Board...as the driver." 12- "With perhaps uncustomary humility, Friedman claims that economists do not know enough about monetary policy to manipulate it wisely." 13- "We are all Keynesians now, thanks to Keynes. We are all monetarists now, thanks to Friedman. And we are all eclectics now, thanks to a turbulent world." 14- "This problem emerges again and again in democracies. Motivates organizations trample on the interests of consumers, who individually have a small stake in the outcome. Ultimately, the individual consumers are hurt badly as a national efficiency and income fall." 15- "Rational Expectations theory predicts that government stimulus does not spur the economy and that government contraction does not hurt...Why do most economists tend to agree with Rational Expectations theorists when they talk about the stock market, yet explode in disagreement when speaking of the macroeconomy? The fact is, the stock market is a more efficient...it is quite liquid...In contrast, real markets for goods and services show more complexity and rigidity." 16- "...each of the economists we have studied, despite their many differences, warned us that governments always face political pressures to take measures that can ruin good economies...Because even good economic policies often produce victims, economists have a very tough time persuading democratic governments to take good advice. Good economics may not be popular economics, especially in the short run." 17- "Parents must eventually learn to teach their children how to handle uncertainty - not how to ensure stability." 18- "For most of man's life on earth, he has lived no better on two legs than he had on four . Give the economist a little credit for explaining and depicting the brief, shining moments when there has been a difference."

  6. 4 out of 5

    Adrian

    A good introduction to economics from a conservative point of view (of which I consider myself far from). It floored me that this book is genuinely funny. So take note writers- If this book can be funny, anything can have humour dispersed. Ultimately the author achieved his aim of detailing the importance of economics and introductory concepts from the most notable economists. Sometimes it dragged during the tougher concepts but I blame the reader. Most egregious parts are- 1. The acknowledgement A good introduction to economics from a conservative point of view (of which I consider myself far from). It floored me that this book is genuinely funny. So take note writers- If this book can be funny, anything can have humour dispersed. Ultimately the author achieved his aim of detailing the importance of economics and introductory concepts from the most notable economists. Sometimes it dragged during the tougher concepts but I blame the reader. Most egregious parts are- 1. The acknowledgement of damning reports (2nd edition published in 1999) of future environmental degradation that is swiftly dismissed. 2. The Karl Marx chapter. Annoyed by the double standards when his personal life is eviscerated unlike the other featured economists. The author couldn't maintain his general impartiality here and his arguments suffered as a result.

  7. 4 out of 5

    Lucas Land

    I learned a lot about economics in spite of how poorly written this book was. Although the economic schools and personalities were generally organized chronologically, each chapter felt haphazard and unorganized. It felt like the author was trying to write a popular economics text à la Stephen Hawking for astrophysics, but it came off as your grandpa trying to be cool and hip with the kids these days. I lost count of the number of sentences that added nothing to the text and could have been dele I learned a lot about economics in spite of how poorly written this book was. Although the economic schools and personalities were generally organized chronologically, each chapter felt haphazard and unorganized. It felt like the author was trying to write a popular economics text à la Stephen Hawking for astrophysics, but it came off as your grandpa trying to be cool and hip with the kids these days. I lost count of the number of sentences that added nothing to the text and could have been deleted. Unfortunately, this would have made the book at least a third shorter and publishers probably don't like that. There were also so many throwaway lines in which critiques of one school or another were dismissed out of hand with no explanation. Left me with the idea that I should just trust the author's opinion on one thing or another with no evidence or support. Finally, while I acknowledge the importance of the context of the personalities that developed different schools of thought, the author seemed to dismiss people or ideas based on their character flaws where the time would have been better spent trying to actually explain different concepts more clearly. There HAS to be a better introduction to economic thought that doesn't treat the reader like a small child and actually engages with the ideas in a way that makes them more clear and understandable.

  8. 4 out of 5

    Joseph Taylor

    Like Empire of Wealth by John Steele Gordon, this is another economics book that is much more informative and useful than the much more popular Freakonomics. Like Empire of Wealth this is a book about history but this time it's a history of the study and theory of economics from Adam Smith to the end of the 20th Century. It is organized like a series of biographies each centering on an influential thinker and how their ideas contributed to all that we now know about economics in a way that is in Like Empire of Wealth by John Steele Gordon, this is another economics book that is much more informative and useful than the much more popular Freakonomics. Like Empire of Wealth this is a book about history but this time it's a history of the study and theory of economics from Adam Smith to the end of the 20th Century. It is organized like a series of biographies each centering on an influential thinker and how their ideas contributed to all that we now know about economics in a way that is informative about intellectual theory but still accessible to a layman (like me). I say these thinkers the book is written about "contributed" to economics but, as readers will notice, it's more like "up-ended". Often people criticize economists for discovering obvious things everyone already knows but as I read this book what stood out to me is that every time people think they've got economics all figured out some smart guy pulls the rug out from under them and shows that everything we thought we knew is wrong and we were all idiots for not noticing it sooner (only to have the same process repeated again and again). This is a book that will make you feel really smart and informed but also strategically humble.

  9. 4 out of 5

    John Igo

    This book was a good history for laymen of the main ideas in economics. I think - I need to read more economics textbooks to know for sure. Each chapter was a short biography of the economist in question interwoven with the contributions they made to the field. That made the book very approachable. The books lack of differentials is why I gave it 4/5. The only chapter that seemed out of place was the one on Marx. I guess the labor theory of value and Das Capital are important historically, but it This book was a good history for laymen of the main ideas in economics. I think - I need to read more economics textbooks to know for sure. Each chapter was a short biography of the economist in question interwoven with the contributions they made to the field. That made the book very approachable. The books lack of differentials is why I gave it 4/5. The only chapter that seemed out of place was the one on Marx. I guess the labor theory of value and Das Capital are important historically, but it seemed like they were included just so the authors could show how later economists shit on the ideas. Also, like how do people believe the labor theory of value? Like there are obviously more inputs to the value of an object than the labor that went into it. The fossil fuel and the technological innovations for instance. Anyway, solid book, I learned a lot. If you don't know any economics give it a shot.

  10. 4 out of 5

    John

    Provides a good summary of the main ideas of major economists who continue to have extraordinary influence in the field today. Also: astoundingly (and unwittingly) biased in its underlying assumptions and viewpoint (don't have the book in front of me, but others have offered some good quotes), which makes for great reading if you're paying attention. Some of the counterarguments given to criticisms of wage slavery, manipulative advertising, etc. are so thin as to be comical. Buchholz picks and c Provides a good summary of the main ideas of major economists who continue to have extraordinary influence in the field today. Also: astoundingly (and unwittingly) biased in its underlying assumptions and viewpoint (don't have the book in front of me, but others have offered some good quotes), which makes for great reading if you're paying attention. Some of the counterarguments given to criticisms of wage slavery, manipulative advertising, etc. are so thin as to be comical. Buchholz picks and chooses which ideas to laud and which to decry, with superficial analogies and examples in both cases. Great for reviewing some of the main themes of economics and economic history, but even better for understanding how mainstream economists think about economics, which helps to reveal why we are so entrenched in the current system.

  11. 4 out of 5

    Isabell

    In short: It's good at presenting economic ideas in a neat, little package. It's bad at staying neutral (Marx is a vulgar, unwashed, alcoholic; Russians beg Americans for jeans because they are so unimaginative, unmotivated, and undisciplined that they can't turn their own cotton into denim). As it is written in the 80s, and we are now writing the year of Trump and Brexit, it's also in urgent need of an update. A lot has happened since the 80s in terms of globalization and world trade, and not all In short: It's good at presenting economic ideas in a neat, little package. It's bad at staying neutral (Marx is a vulgar, unwashed, alcoholic; Russians beg Americans for jeans because they are so unimaginative, unmotivated, and undisciplined that they can't turn their own cotton into denim). As it is written in the 80s, and we are now writing the year of Trump and Brexit, it's also in urgent need of an update. A lot has happened since the 80s in terms of globalization and world trade, and not all developments would paint as optimistic an outlook as Buchholz has in this book.

  12. 4 out of 5

    Jan

    An extremely entertaining survey of economic thought through history; the author offers brief biographies of economics' most influential figures from each angle we might care to examine: their personalities, the intellectual development of their discipline, and their impact on the world, then and now. Most fascinating are the portraits of the "outliers" in economic history who don't really have a place in the mainstream anymore: Mill, Marx, Veblen.

  13. 4 out of 5

    Ine

    New Ideas is sapped principles of economic from our forefathers such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Keynes, also includes German angry economist, Karl Marx. Do not being fooled by its comical appearance, I red the book twice and still have blur vision of how macro economy works according to them. It is brilliantly presented by Buccholz with colloquial and witty metaphor. If you are interested in consumer-demand-price-supply tidbits, then read this one…

  14. 5 out of 5

    Maytham Abdulraheem

    It`s good book until now , well organized in ideas , but there is one little problem : The Examples! there is a lot of examples to help in explain the ideas but these examples almost from the American life so it`s hard sometime to get the point ( if you are not American ) as in my case :) But at the end all Economics Books are great ;) It`s good book until now , well organized in ideas , but there is one little problem : The Examples! there is a lot of examples to help in explain the ideas but these examples almost from the American life so it`s hard sometime to get the point ( if you are not American ) as in my case :) But at the end all Economics Books are great ;)

  15. 4 out of 5

    adam

    Boy, I thought this was really good! I'm kicking myself that I never really studied Economics in school, so I have to resort to reading books like this...but there's not much you could do to improve this as a solid, fun (what?) economics primer.

  16. 5 out of 5

    Mat

    A biased and inaccessible tract which occasionally presents the insight it advertises. Let’s talk about the labour theory of value. The labour theory of value was an idea in early economics that value is determined by the work that goes into a product, it’s in retrospect a very crude theory that has since been replaced. For a long time many economists used this theory in their writing, Marx among them. The author’s determination to dismiss (not criticize but dismiss) all value in Marx’s ideas beca A biased and inaccessible tract which occasionally presents the insight it advertises. Let’s talk about the labour theory of value. The labour theory of value was an idea in early economics that value is determined by the work that goes into a product, it’s in retrospect a very crude theory that has since been replaced. For a long time many economists used this theory in their writing, Marx among them. The author’s determination to dismiss (not criticize but dismiss) all value in Marx’s ideas because of his use of the labour theory of value can only be explained by ignorance or bias. As, of course he doesn’t fault Adam Smith or David Ricardo for using this. Marx is an economist unlike any other. Better known than most of them, definitely more controversial than many, perhaps more impactful than most. It’s debatable how scientific ‘Scientific Socialism’ was. It’s debatable too how far his predictions and models have held up. He’s so well known too that you might not even need to mention him in an economics book. But if you mention him you should talk about his ideas. Another bias is the page space the author devotes to ideas of the rational market over the findings of behavioral economics. The rational market is very useful for traders to know about but most audiences would probably be more interested in the work of Richard Thaler and the like. Besides bias, this book’s flow gets clogged up by technical jargon by the end. Here’s a sentence from near the end of the book ‘On the microeconomic side, officials can twist spending programs and regulations for political self-interest when information costs to voters are high compared with benefits derived.’ This is an introductory book right? Even textbooks are clearer than this. In summary this book is every bad (and in other cases usually unfounded) stereotype about economists. It’s needlessly complicated and leans slightly to the right of Attila the Hun. Go read the Undercover Economist or Freakonomics instead.

  17. 4 out of 5

    Ram Kaushik

    A decent attempt at an ambitious task - Buchholz traverses the sweep of Western economic history from Adam Smith, Alfred Marshall, Karl Marx, Milton Friedman and others in 300 odd pages. I liked the way he tried to set each economist's theory in his (I wish I could say her, but economics has been a sexist profession until lately) own era, with its historical context. Subsequent economists built refinements to the previously held theories, or were confronted with geopolitical situations where cer A decent attempt at an ambitious task - Buchholz traverses the sweep of Western economic history from Adam Smith, Alfred Marshall, Karl Marx, Milton Friedman and others in 300 odd pages. I liked the way he tried to set each economist's theory in his (I wish I could say her, but economics has been a sexist profession until lately) own era, with its historical context. Subsequent economists built refinements to the previously held theories, or were confronted with geopolitical situations where certain hypotheses didn't work. The attempts to connect their theories with the economists' personal lives seemed clumsy at best, and irrelevant. This book also does not cover more recent insights by behavioral economists like Kahneman, Thaler and others. Flawed but a useful book if you are looking for a lens into economic history since Adam Smith.

  18. 4 out of 5

    Николай Алексиев

    A very tidy and entertaining review of Western economic thought from Adam Smith to present day. The author has tried to remain unbiased and informative even though his personal evaluation towards the more collectivist figures is plain to see. I like Buchholz's optimism that pierces the book, as well as his simple and comprehensive style of delivering examples of different theories. The main drawback of the book is that Buchholz leaves politics and the political landscape a bit to the side when c A very tidy and entertaining review of Western economic thought from Adam Smith to present day. The author has tried to remain unbiased and informative even though his personal evaluation towards the more collectivist figures is plain to see. I like Buchholz's optimism that pierces the book, as well as his simple and comprehensive style of delivering examples of different theories. The main drawback of the book is that Buchholz leaves politics and the political landscape a bit to the side when considering the history of economic thought. I think this is a mistake because economic policy and trends in economic research closely resemble the Zeitgeist of the times, including the ideological and political discourse going on, not only in the home country of the economist, but in that of competing nations as well.

  19. 4 out of 5

    Mich

    New Ideas from Dead Economists by Todd Bucholz is a perfect breezy introduction to the evolution of economic thought. Focusing on the major economists including Marx, Smith, Locke, Mills, Galbreath, Keynes, Marshall, Friedman it also summarizes their theories in non technical terms. Although it has been revised to 2007, it could use a further revision to take into account the Great Recession.

  20. 4 out of 5

    Jonghyun Byun

    I picked this book and read because Mankiew's Principles of economics is a hard choice for someone who don't have any background in that field. Those ideas written this book was not that philosophical although it was not written in plain terms. Classics usually bring us firm foundations developing our ideas. In this sense, this book can be a good choice for a head start.

  21. 4 out of 5

    Robert Martinez

    Read this when preparing for A levels, weirdly one of the most influential books I've read in my life.

  22. 5 out of 5

    Mike Maughan

    Good, fun book. Nice easy intro to economics.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Oathofoblivion

    Presents important economic way of thoughts in a direct manner. But, the language used is quite difficult, which contradicts its purpose as an introductory book.

  24. 5 out of 5

    Kastan

    I don't think I read tooo much of this, but I remember liking it. Read for Econ at Andover.

  25. 4 out of 5

    William Garner

    Interesting comparative read, but should not be a primary source.

  26. 5 out of 5

    Fabian

    Clear bias in favor of deregulation in certain parts of the book. If the reader can read the implicit qualifiers that support this point of view, there are a lot of good takeaways.

  27. 4 out of 5

    Shashank Shekhar

    A great primer on Classical economics. Hurried and dense but worth it

  28. 4 out of 5

    Robert Parker

    A good re-introduction to Economic history and ideas.

  29. 5 out of 5

    Bakhit

    Dear economists, if someone ever dares to tell you that economics is easy, hit them in the head with this book.

  30. 4 out of 5

    Heeseo kim

    Great entry book into economics. Detailed, well written and gripping. Would definitely recommend to students just broaching the subject of economics.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.