Take a photo of a barcode or cover
69 reviews for:
Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
Ha-Joon Chang
4.06 AVERAGE
69 reviews for:
Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
Ha-Joon Chang
4.06 AVERAGE
Nice takedown of neoliberalism and free trade and why it doesn't work and free trade is something the Imperial core imposes on the periphery which keeps it underdeveloped with slow growth and high inequality. I don't think any normal people believe in the "Lexus and olive tree" BS anymore it is good that it is broken down in clear language why no country ever got rich adhering to free trade. Uses the infant industry concept to argue for protectionism (not a dirty word). Good stuff.
This was interesting. Chang definitely bucks convention with a lot of his arguments. Some I found more persuasive than others and sometimes I felt he was misrepresenting the other side. It led to an enlivening discussion in book club for sure.
informative
slow-paced
4.5 stars
Super insightful. Ha-Joon Chang overturns neoliberal ideology solidly and with a practical bent as well, referring to most Bad Samaritans (of today) as just “doing the easiest thing” instead of necessarily having ill will. The book is so full of historical examples that I often had to slow down to really process the vast amounts of macroeconomic history he was discussing. At times I felt quite left behind by my lack of macroeconomics intuition, but by the end of the book the takeaways were abundantly clear anyways.
Super insightful. Ha-Joon Chang overturns neoliberal ideology solidly and with a practical bent as well, referring to most Bad Samaritans (of today) as just “doing the easiest thing” instead of necessarily having ill will. The book is so full of historical examples that I often had to slow down to really process the vast amounts of macroeconomic history he was discussing. At times I felt quite left behind by my lack of macroeconomics intuition, but by the end of the book the takeaways were abundantly clear anyways.
don’t remember why I added this to-read, must have been recommended by someone. but it was way more economic theory that I thought it would be and mostly went over my head. wasn’t a critique of capitalism overall just a critique of a specific type.
challenging
informative
slow-paced
As economics books go, this is an interesting read with lots of interesting ideas about a subject I knew very little about. The central point is that many developed economies are forcing poorer, developing countries to embrace economic models which work against their own best interests and help the developed countries to do well.
This book is more relevant now than ever, even though it was written in 2007, just as the global economy was starting to go into meltdown. The economic crisis in Greece over the last few years would be an excellent example of the way that rich nations enforce detrimental policies onto poorer countries by adding conditions to loans.
It’s not a fun or lighthearted read but there’s substance behind the theories that are put forward. It’s probably slightly polemical at times, with very little of the other side’s arguments put forward other than for them to be torn down.
I agree with the idea that countries that are better off need to be more supportive of those that are less well off. This book does an excellent job of pointing out how counties such as America and the UK have rejected free trade while they grew their economies and then fully embraced it once they were in a position to dominate.
A regular analogy used in the book is that these countries have reached the top and use free-trade policies and trade agreements to kick the ladder away to stop the poor from reaching them at the top. It’s a bit bleak but it’s hard to dispute based on the evidence of this book.
I already had sympathies with the arguments that this book contained, so didn’t take a lot of convincing to be won over. If you’re more of a subscriber to the Ayn Rand philosophy of life then it may feel like leftwing propaganda, but it’s certainly an interesting read.
This book is more relevant now than ever, even though it was written in 2007, just as the global economy was starting to go into meltdown. The economic crisis in Greece over the last few years would be an excellent example of the way that rich nations enforce detrimental policies onto poorer countries by adding conditions to loans.
It’s not a fun or lighthearted read but there’s substance behind the theories that are put forward. It’s probably slightly polemical at times, with very little of the other side’s arguments put forward other than for them to be torn down.
I agree with the idea that countries that are better off need to be more supportive of those that are less well off. This book does an excellent job of pointing out how counties such as America and the UK have rejected free trade while they grew their economies and then fully embraced it once they were in a position to dominate.
A regular analogy used in the book is that these countries have reached the top and use free-trade policies and trade agreements to kick the ladder away to stop the poor from reaching them at the top. It’s a bit bleak but it’s hard to dispute based on the evidence of this book.
I already had sympathies with the arguments that this book contained, so didn’t take a lot of convincing to be won over. If you’re more of a subscriber to the Ayn Rand philosophy of life then it may feel like leftwing propaganda, but it’s certainly an interesting read.
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Very interesting. Sort of contrary to what I learned in college. It seems clear that, in the long run, free trade is best. But in order to develop economies in poorer and less developed countries, protectionism is necessary. It's just not fair to impose free trade on these countries, particularly because (as the book points out) the dominant economies of today gained power through protectionism.
informative