Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.76 AVERAGE
3.76 AVERAGE
informative
medium-paced
Was taking notes along with this and misplaced them so not sure how far I got. May pick it up again when I find them.
slow-paced
The entire thesis is to look at the whole picture when making economic policy instead of just those who benefit. I was hoping the author would be intelligent enough to give me some unexpected insights. Instead he peals back the first layer of policy, gets stuck on the second layer that assumes we are all robots with equal opportunities and backgrounds, and fails to go any deeper. The author is no more intelligent than than Regannomics grandfather spewing unfounded ideas at the dinner table.
An extraordinary book . Though it will take multiple readings to grasp . One wonders how could you add more wealth to a country if you could avoid inflation especially when new industries are constantly being created ( how does one account for innovation )
Similarly I don’t quite agree with the premise of public work , if anything some of our greatest technological innovations happen precisely because of public infrastructure ( the internet / phone networks / road networks / utility networks ) so need to re read
Similarly I don’t quite agree with the premise of public work , if anything some of our greatest technological innovations happen precisely because of public infrastructure ( the internet / phone networks / road networks / utility networks ) so need to re read
"What is prudence in the conduct of every private family, can be a folly in that of a great kingdom."
This book forms a perfectly good guide and introduction to dummies to the field of economics. Henry, throughout the book has tried to elaborately coin economics in general to be the science of recognizing secondary consequences and tracing of effects of some proposed or existing policy not only on some special interest in the short run but on general interest in the long run.
Divided into three parts: the lesson, the lesson applied and the lesson after a given period of time. (30 years). This book provides a basic understanding of economics to anyone who's a newbie in the field.
This book forms a perfectly good guide and introduction to dummies to the field of economics. Henry, throughout the book has tried to elaborately coin economics in general to be the science of recognizing secondary consequences and tracing of effects of some proposed or existing policy not only on some special interest in the short run but on general interest in the long run.
Divided into three parts: the lesson, the lesson applied and the lesson after a given period of time. (30 years). This book provides a basic understanding of economics to anyone who's a newbie in the field.
I felt the book was repetitive, every chapter reiterated a variation of the same point; I guess the author thought it important! However, it was the repetition that caused me to drop the book about 70% of the way through.
informative
slow-paced
Hazlitt makes a lot of salient points regarding the harm of overly controlled economic policy. He is extremely thorough in his explanations and they make sense.
That said, I don't think the books voice holds up well to the test of time. The author is very dry and matter of fact in his style. He repeats himself a lot. And his examples are completely outdated.
Not knowing that much about economic theory, I can't know for sure, but it seems Hazlitt likes to make a lot of strawman arguments. He characterizes the world into two types of people: bleeding heart big government socialists and free market economist. His views don't really help us understand how to make difficult decisions about fiscal priorities in complex environments.
That said, Hazlitt does impart a lot of sensible wisdom here. And the book is worth reading if not only to get a basic understanding of how the economy works in theory.
That said, I don't think the books voice holds up well to the test of time. The author is very dry and matter of fact in his style. He repeats himself a lot. And his examples are completely outdated.
Not knowing that much about economic theory, I can't know for sure, but it seems Hazlitt likes to make a lot of strawman arguments. He characterizes the world into two types of people: bleeding heart big government socialists and free market economist. His views don't really help us understand how to make difficult decisions about fiscal priorities in complex environments.
That said, Hazlitt does impart a lot of sensible wisdom here. And the book is worth reading if not only to get a basic understanding of how the economy works in theory.
This is one of those books that gets effusively praised by a certain kind of student of economics. Upon actually reading it, however, I think the problem lies mostly with the praisers: namely, that their favorite work doesn't actually do the work they say it does.
Oh, to be sure, Hazlitt has some fun rebutting various arguments for government intervention in an economy, and often those arguments come from those of a "progressive" or "leftist" mindset.
But Hazlitt deserves praise for his carefulness in rebutting the arguments alone, and not categorically dismissing every claim in itself. For example, he's not against unions, taxes, or public works per se: he just refutes certain claims that such things will work economic miracles.
That said, this book is very much a product of its time, that is, the immediate postwar period. My copy is from the 1960s. As such, Hazlitt had no opportunity to deal with the sometimes complicating factors that were revealed by more modern research in cognitive psychology and behavioral economics. That said, I don't think his arguments would be changed that much.
Overall it's an interesting little book that should at least serve as a concise example of "laissez-faire" economic thinking.
Oh, to be sure, Hazlitt has some fun rebutting various arguments for government intervention in an economy, and often those arguments come from those of a "progressive" or "leftist" mindset.
But Hazlitt deserves praise for his carefulness in rebutting the arguments alone, and not categorically dismissing every claim in itself. For example, he's not against unions, taxes, or public works per se: he just refutes certain claims that such things will work economic miracles.
That said, this book is very much a product of its time, that is, the immediate postwar period. My copy is from the 1960s. As such, Hazlitt had no opportunity to deal with the sometimes complicating factors that were revealed by more modern research in cognitive psychology and behavioral economics. That said, I don't think his arguments would be changed that much.
Overall it's an interesting little book that should at least serve as a concise example of "laissez-faire" economic thinking.
