Take a photo of a barcode or cover
150 reviews for:
Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics
Henry Hazlitt
3.75 AVERAGE
150 reviews for:
Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics
Henry Hazlitt
3.75 AVERAGE
Not only is this book outdated, it's also obviously ideological. Don't read this book — get an Econ 101 textbook instead. You have to be *generally* wary of pundits who think they can explain an entire social science 'in layman's terms' — but especially those who wrote 70 years ago! You wouldn't think you could pick up the basics of physics or biology off of one ~200 page book, so why think the same for economics? I haven't read them, but if you *really* need a short book on economics, maybe try Thomas Sowell's works.
Henry raises valid points and lessons (broken-window fallacy, luddite fallacy, etc), no doubt. But his work is *way too simple*. It really vulgarizes the entirety of economics in service of making it understandable to layman. If you're one of these layman, please just put in a little more effort and purchase a textbook. Some chapters are plainly outdated, especially those on international trade — though, again, the general points are legitimate.
Henry raises valid points and lessons (broken-window fallacy, luddite fallacy, etc), no doubt. But his work is *way too simple*. It really vulgarizes the entirety of economics in service of making it understandable to layman. If you're one of these layman, please just put in a little more effort and purchase a textbook. Some chapters are plainly outdated, especially those on international trade — though, again, the general points are legitimate.
Good overview of economics.
I wish he had provided some proof for his statements.
I wish he had provided some proof for his statements.
challenging
informative
tense
slow-paced
I think it’s a good book but I don’t think I was ready to understand a lot of the concepts. If you’re interested in economics I wouldn’t recommend this as the first book. I wish the author explained what certain economic terms meant. I’m going to try a more basic economic book next.
This book is an excellent, concise introduction to one particular kind of economic thinking: the idea that an economy works best if left to free market forces alone, and that any kind of government intervention is bad and disturbs the economy, rather than improving it.
This is what I like about the book: I have never seen such a clear exposition of this line of thinking. And this is my greatest disappointment: That these ideas are presented as the only possible way to understand economics, the only conclusion that any rational mind would naturally arrive at. Those who don't are, in the words of the author: stupid, apostles of a different faith, enemies.
In other words, this book is not a rational treatise of economics, but a political pamphlet. You realize this a few pages in, and you have to live with it for the rest of the book.
That being said, many of the ideas are thought-provoking, due to the crystal clear simplicity with which they are stated. I constantly wondered: Is this right? Who would claim the opposite? Why? Who has the better arguments?
So in all, it's not a bad book. But you have to start thinking where the author left off.
This is what I like about the book: I have never seen such a clear exposition of this line of thinking. And this is my greatest disappointment: That these ideas are presented as the only possible way to understand economics, the only conclusion that any rational mind would naturally arrive at. Those who don't are, in the words of the author: stupid, apostles of a different faith, enemies.
In other words, this book is not a rational treatise of economics, but a political pamphlet. You realize this a few pages in, and you have to live with it for the rest of the book.
That being said, many of the ideas are thought-provoking, due to the crystal clear simplicity with which they are stated. I constantly wondered: Is this right? Who would claim the opposite? Why? Who has the better arguments?
So in all, it's not a bad book. But you have to start thinking where the author left off.
The book is loaded with various economic sophisms from areas such as price ceiling, subsidies, rent control, minimum wage etc., where policies catered to small special economic group appear beneficial to such groups in the short term but end up bringing much unwanted ills to the whole population in the long term - there are Seen and unseen effects of all economic policies. But the author's language is a mix of strong logical arguments mixed with emotional ones, so in some places I feel he leads you astray with some of his reasoning. He also seems to have such fundamental and deep belief in free markets which only works efficiently if all actors participating in such markets have all the information readily available to them. In almost all arguments this is taken as the ground reality. Very anti-Keynesian and propounds libertarian principles. But still this book is a solid introduction to economics.
For anyone who is interested in learning economics, this book should be on your list of books to read first.