5 comments about Who's Your City?: How the Creative Economy Is Making Where to Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life.

1. It's frustrating to read books like this. Florida's insightful observations are undermined by the number of errors in this book.
   
   Florida melds psychology, sociology, and economics to try to determine the importance of humanity's displacement from rural areas to cities and, now, megalopolises. Some of the ground he covers is well-trod, but he comes up with a number of ideas that I find insightful. I particularly liked his categorization of urban districts into such places as, e.g., strollervilles (wealthy neighborhoods full of two-year-olds being strolled around by nannies while Daddy is at the law firm and Mommy is either working or doing something else), designer digs (e.g., Aspen, La Jolla), ethnic enclaves (think Fremont, Calif.), preservation-burgs, and boho-burbs (chic neighborhoods, often on old streetcar lines, with lively shopping areas; e.g., the Sellwood district and N.W. 23rd Ave. in Portland, Ore.). The Rockridge neighborhood in Oakland, Calif., is both a strollerville and a boho-burb. Florida goes beyond the usual accolades one might expect to be conferred on such places to point out their drawbacks. It's very well done.
   
   If only Florida and his publisher had taken better care to vet the manuscript before publishing it! I'd read only a few pages before I started noticing typos: paarticular, New "Dehli" (must have excellent pastrami sandwiches), São "Paolo," Brazil (must have changed its official language to Italian). Then I started noticing factual oddities: Seoul, Korea, described in two different and seemingly mutually exclusive categories; San Francisco described as a place in which single women predominate when the accompanying map shows just the opposite. By the end of the book, the number of glitches had made me suspicious of every empirical datum Florida was presenting--so that when I read his statistic that only 1 in 20 U.S. households contains someone living alone, I couldn't trust it. It sounded too low. I went to the Internet and found an Associated Press report that "About 27.2 million Americans lived alone in 2000, accounting for about 26 percent of all households . . . ." That sounds right. A Population Reference Bureau web page confirms that Florida's statistic is highly inaccurate.
   
   In summary, the book is well worth reading for Florida's impressionistic observations, but I'd be careful about relying on any conclusion he draws that is based on empirical data.



2. Like all good things, there must be end; so goes this book; very relevant last year but with the real estate market as it stands, all bets are off. That being said, still very helpful and it does a great job at narrowing your options on where and why you would choose a particular place to live.



3. Read the charts of statistics in the back of the book, but skip the actual text. Unlike some other statisticians who employed co-writers ("Freakonomics" comes to mind), Richard Florida couldn't keep my mind on his prose. Statistics are recycled and explained over and over. Yes, every city has a personality...but where to live is hardly the "most important decision of your life," as the title implies. The statistics don't lie about such measures as happiness, but they also don't tell a compelling story worth reading.



4. I enjoyed some of "Who's Your City?". It's actually two books - one (Part 1 and 2) a fine discussion of economic localization and the second (Part 3) a ranking of various US places by a variety of usually not very interesting or persuasive metrics (that are supposed to help you decide where you want to live). The book would have been more interesting if Florida had just left off Part 3 and expanded Parts 1 and 2. For example, his Chapter 4 on the "Clustering Force" would have benefited by including the recent work by economists on the idea of 'increasing returns to scale'. Paul Krugman just won a Nobel Prize in Economics for his work in this area and his total absence from the book seems kind of embarassing. I would have loved a chapter comparing Jane Jacobs' work on cities and economic growth with Krugman's on 'economic geography'.



5. I placed order as new copy but found the product doesn't look like brand new one when I received it.
   Yet the content of the book is very interesting. It contains a lot of useful information.

5 comments about Obamanomics: How Bottom-Up Economic Prosperity Will Replace Trickle-Down Economics (Economics in the Obama Presidency).

1. As a non-economist there were many things about our current economic situation that are not explained in the press with any level of clarity. Talbert not only explains the current state of the economy but how we arrived at this point and how the Obama plan will return us to prosperity. Talbert offers an honest assessment of the Obama plan, including criticisms and insights for the return of our economy to health. He also identifies the consequences of not making dramatic changes now.



2. Quite simply the best explanation of our current financial crisis I have read. Especially if the markets confuse and frighten you. I wish the book was called something else. The subtitle perhaps would have been better. Anyway. READ THIS BOOK



3. I read this book with an open mind and a longing for the insights to Obama and while Talbott's writing was clear, it was a bit naive. His insistence on economic justice as the fix to our financial issues is nothing more than redistribution of wealth. His disdain for Americans who want a 12000 square foot house and a Hummer reveals a deep bias. Of course no one needs that much space, but in this country we value liberty and freedom to choose. It's not the governments place to decide what we need and/or want.
   One of Obamas campaign promises is to raise taxes on the wealthy, those making over $250K a year. Talbott says the current system 'gives money to top earners", when in fact the system allows top earners to keep more of the money they have earned. I think this basic difference in economic viewpoint is what irked me the most, being one of those 'lucky' few that Obama considers rich. He seems to know that the 'rich will not reinvest their extra money, they will put in a savings account. This is how it works. I have two kids in private college. They couldn't get into the UC system for their majors because they were impacted. I pay 40K a year, per student. I am too rich to qualify for any aid. So any and all extra money we get to keep is going to private colleges.
   Most people considered wealthy work just as hard as those who make less money, so it's very difficult to not see Obama's policies as nothing more than socialism wrapped in a pretty package and topped with a pinch of guilt.



4. This is perhaps the best summary of the issues facing America today - economic and political - that has ever been assembled in one place. The writing is concise, factual and well researched on a variety of topics - ranging from the current financial melt-down, to the cost and availability of healthcare, to the looming social security crunch. The analysis is crisp and logical, similar in style to "Freakonomics" by Levitt and Dubner. And while Obama's positions are indicated, the underlying text would stand on its own without it. To some extent, the "Obamanomics" title is a pretext for a work of much larger importance.
   While easy to digest, the simple fact that so many problems of immense proportions face the country is quite daunting and a little depressing.
   This book should be required reading for every student, politician and Republican. These problems have been addressed by other nations whose resources are far more limited - why not in America?



5. It sounds good, but if you really examine all the wonderful things Obama is going to do, it adds up to Socialism. All corporations are the bad guys and must be taxed and regulated, wealthy people demonized, economic justice that means taking away from one group to give to another. It's stealing--just like Obama and Talbott like to say that corporations are doing. If enough people are swayed by this pro-Obama propaganda, we will all have to live with the results. After he soaks the corporations and the so-called rich people and can't wring out any more blood, then he will come after you and soak you for the taxes he needs to fund his 'economic justice' and Socialist agenda.
   
   Seniors would do well to read this book and see what Talbott claims Obama's plan should include; withold medical care for people over 75 that may need end of life treatment. The reasoning? They are a drain on the "system" and productive people will have to pick up the tab. This goes beyond Socialism!
   
   A quote comes to mind:
   
   "The long road of history is lined with the ruins of nations which bought the souls of their people with the lure of a granted security, and then led them to ruin by that mirage. Security that is real and enduring is attained only by people who will accept their responsibility as duties to themselves and their fellow, and ask only that the State guard the avenues of freedom and keep them open."
   ~ Dr. Russell J. Clinchy

2 comments about The Great Depression and the New Deal: A Very Short Introduction: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions).

1. As a concise overview, this book is excellent. Rauchway covers the background of the Great Depression, its onset, and the major features of the New Deal in less than 130 pages of this small book. Rauchway presents the Great Depression as essentially a vicious downward economic cycle made possible by the destruction of the pre-WWI economic system, the nature of the postwar political/economic settlement, and American refusal to play the needed leadership role in postwar international affairs. This is followed by a concise description of the consequences of the depression and the inadequate response of the Hoover administration. Following the work of quite a few other historians, the New Deal is presented as a series of sometimes contradictory experiments to resuscitate the American economy, and in particular, maintain the major features of a capitalist economy. Rauchway in particularly good on the interaction, and sometimes synergy, between the economic and political goals of the successive Roosevelt administrations. Eventually, the New Deal would develop a 'countervailing power' strategy with significant regulation of the economy and use of Federal authority to empower individuals and interest groups who could oppose the power of business. With later success of the Roosevelt administrations in WWII, this approach became the basis of post-war liberal policy.
   Rauchway is appropriately critical of the failings of the New Deal, some of which were unavoidable and hence inherent in the nature of the American political and social system. A important point that Rauchway omits is the background of many New Deal reforms, which were rooted in an earlier generation of Progressive era thought and reformism.
   This book is written clearly and has an excellent bibliography.



2. The Oxford University Press publishes a series called "Very Short Introductions" written by authorities in their fields. The series helps to introduce busy and curious readers to a wide variety of subjects. The series numbers nearly 200 volumes and includes subjects from history, philosophy, religion, science, and the humanities. This series constitutes an admirable way for any person to learn something about new matters and to expand his or her intellectual horizons.
   
   Eric Rauchway's recent contribution to the series, "The Great Depression & the New Deal" (2008) offers, in 130 pages, a succinct, thoughtful overview of a pivotal and controversial period of American history. Rauchway is Professor of History at the University of California Davis. His books include ""Murdering McKinley: the Making of Theodore Roosevelt's America" and "Blessed Among Nations: How the World Made America." In his "Very Short Introduction" to the Depression and New Deal, Rauchway makes no pretense of offering a complete or a definitive account. Instead, he offers "some basic ideas for a first understanding of this profound crisis and America's still-influential legislative response." (p.2) Rauchway includes a good bibliography "on the principle that you will go on from here if you wish to fully appreciate the period." For the briefness of its approach, Rauchway's book offers good insight into the Depression and New Deal.
   
   In his opening chapter, Rauchway traces the origins of the Great Depression to the world-wide collapse of the economic order following WW I, with the tensions between the creditor nation, the United States, and the debt-laden rest of the world. He discusses the uncontrolled expansion of credit in the United States and the speculation-driven rise of the stock market. On October 24, 1929, the stock market crashed and the Depression soon followed. Rauchway offers a good discussion on the relationship between the crash and the Depression.
   
   Rauchway follows the onset of the Depression with a discussion of the steps the Hoover administration took in response. Rauchberg points out, contrary to some opinion, that Hoover took measures, particularly late in his administration, designed to get the Federal government involved in combatting the Depression. Rauchberg remains,however, highly critical of Hoover.
   
   The bulk of this short book describes the pervasiveness of the Great Depression and the actions of both Roosevelt and Congress to both end the Depression and to try to correct structural deficiencies in the American economy to prevent such a catastrophe from happening again. Rauchberg thus divides New Deal programs into those designed to end the Depression and those designed to prevent another. He also tries to assess those programs which succeeded and those which failed. For a short book, he considers the interplay of Roosevelt's New Deal with the activities of Congress, the Supreme Court, State and local governments, businesses, and ordinary people. Rauchberg argues that as the New Deal progressed it moved to a system of strengthening outsiders to economic or political power as a means of combatting the Depression and as an alternative to statism.
   
   Many people argue that the New Deal did not work to end the Depression. They point out that the economy exceeded its pre-1929 level only with the advent of war in 1940. Rauchberg acknowledges the crucial role of United States entry into WW II in stimulating the economy. But he argues as well that the New Deal was successful. He points out that the economy improved markedly in every year between 1932 and 1940, with the exception of a short recession in 1937. He gives Roosevelt and his programs a great deal of credit for the economic revivial and for making necessary changes which preserved the American way of life.
   
   Rauchberg concludes that the New Deal was a collection of many different programs and ideas some of which conflicted with each other. The New Deal did not effect a radical change in American life but rather proceeded in a haphazard, improvisatory manner. Rauchberg concludes that "the openly experimental, obviously fallible, always compromised quality of the New Deal programs and their progeny reflected the imperfect democracy that gave them birth.... The New Deal's evident imperfection invited criticism and further tinkering, making way for improvements to the American democracy in the years afterward and yet to come."(p. 131)
   
   Both the causes of the Great Depression and the remedies offered by the New Deal raise complex economic questions that cannot be fully described in a book of this brevity. Yet, Rauchberg has fulfilled his purpose of writing a good "very short introduction" which will encourage his readers to think further about the economic and social change wrought by the Depression and New Deal.
   
   Robin Friedman

5 comments about Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Example and American Prospects.

1. Orlov provided those who will listen with a grain of salt because he even insists that the reader take his ideas as the framework and not the blueprint for the collapse-a guide for the dark immediate future. Neither he nor anyone else knows exactly the detailed way the collapse will occur. This book is amazing in the way it cuts to the bone of the cultural and philosophical underpinnings that blind most of us. His speculation on the future fallout is instructive but sometimes a tad hyperbolic in my opinion. I could be wrong and I know that all the horrors he proposed as possible scenarios are realistic. I am a pragmatist but one who thinks it won't be as awful. Don't get me wrong. I am planning on getting property I can secure and sustain myself and some close friends!
   
   That said the collapse of America is inevitable, imminent and there are certain systematic failures he discusses that everyone needs to understand even better than him (that is quite a learning curve to take on) in order to survive and adapt. Good luck and read it.
   
   You must make his understanding your own to your immediate circumstances and start now. That is why you must know this better than him. Your future depends on it.
   
   This is one book that could save or rather salvage your future.



2. Well, first of all, it's funny. Really. I don't mean it's filled with jokes, but Dmitry Orlov has a very humorous and biting style. This humorous approach serves two important purposes:
   
   1. It makes the book enjoyable to read.
   2. It helps the reader develop a certain healthy detachment from the subject matter. If you can see the humor in the situation, it can lessen the melodrama of the Cold War in the past, and the collapse of both the Soviet Union (past) and its mirror twin the United States (very current).
   
   Orlov observes that the citizens of both the U.S. and the S.U. were targets of marketing campaigns that successfully developed intense brand loyalty. In each country, it was forbidden (either legally or through intense peer pressure) to advocate for the other brand. The U.S. was for capitalists (Yes, we're #1), and the S.U. for communists (Da, we're #1), and never the twain shall meet.
   
   Those benighted residents of countries other than the US and the SU were often forced to choose sides; particularly in the smaller countries when well-armed and well-funded sales reps showed up to make them a deal they couldn't refuse.
   
   Orlov's demonstration in the first part of the book of the similarities between the two countries helps further this detachment, just as he does later in the book with his description of the differences between both empires. What is perhaps most interesting and intriguing is his pointing out that although they appear to be mirror opposites, things are not that simple. Each contains yin-yang-like the opposite of itself, so that the Soviet Empire had a strong entrepreneurial nature (which manifests most obviously through the huge black market), and the American Empire has a strong communal nature, which manifests through community groups and the high-level support of charitable organizations. Orlov even states that Americans make better communists than the Russians, because they are much more willing to live communally.
   
   For the American reader, however, it is the differences in preparedness for collapse that are most important. It's not that the Russians intentionally prepared; it's that their society's condition inadvertently prepared them. The collectivization of agriculture changed, as Orlov says, Russia from Europe's bread basket to Europe's basket case. It was a massive failure. So Russians started their own kitchen and neighborhood gardens which eventually, although only 10% of agricultural land, were estimated to produce a staggering 90% of the country's agricultural products.
   
   Housing was another issue. The Soviet Union's housing program was as bad as its agricultural program. There was always a major housing shortage, and families were required to live in crowded conditions in ugly concrete housing monstrosities. And yet...everyone was housed and the state owned the buildings. When the collapse came, everyone was still housed, because there were no bankers to foreclose on their homes.
   
   Transportation was another important issue. The Soviet Union never dismantled its passenger rail system, as the U.S. began doing in the 1950s when the interstate highway system was being built. So intercity travel remained as good (and as uncomfortable in many cases) as ever. Within the cities, housing was built by the state only where public transportation was available. Few people could afford (and even fewer needed) automobiles. When the crash came, transportation continued as before. Buses, trolleys, trams, subways continued to move residents throughout their cities.
   
   In many smaller cities and most towns in the U.S., public transportation is poor at best, and transportation to outlying suburbs is nonexistent. A huge percentage of Americans are dependent on their personal cars for transportation. When the collapse comes and gasoline is prohibitively expensive (if even available), the choice will no longer be food or fuel. Except...millions of Americans need fuel to get to, or earn the money to pay for, food.
   
   The book is filled with useful information, but I think the most important is the need for "social capital". This is the good will and trust built up among people over time as a result of frequent social and cooperative contact. Orlov describes how the people in Russia who got by best were those who networked with friends and neighbors, giving when they had something, receiving when they didn't. This seemed to be even more essential than the barter system, which was also very important and heavily used.
   
   I've already given several copies of this book to friends. I think it's an excellent manual filled with useful tips, and even more importantly, a guide to the psychological and emotional attitudes that will be necessary to survive in much of the world as we all encounter the tribulations of Peak Oil and Economic Collapse.
   
   Mick Winter (www.DryDipstick.com) is the author of Peak Oil Prep: Prepare for Peak Oil, Climate Change and Economic Collapse



3. Reinventing Collapse is a collection of author's personal memories related to USSR collapse during nineties. Such experience is then generalized and projected into hypothetical US collapse (What???????????). The projection is done based on many similarities between both empires. Surprisingly, the collapse seems to be much closer than anybody would expect in the light of presented facts. However the purpose of the book is not to spread fear and doubts. It is exactly the opposite. It analyses the current situation, tries to model collapse in US and tries to find appropriate mitigation strategies and even opportunities (because there are always some, aren't they?) !!!
   
   Along with its very fresh, witty and readable style it is a kind of "must have" book. I very much encourage you to buy one!



4. I fully expected this book to be depressing, but it was also entertaining and hopeful, offering a few very concrete suggestions for wading through the coming (present) collapse of our system (walk more, change your diet NOW, figure out what is important -just to name a few). Orlov is just as critical of the Soviet system as the American one as he plows through the various social, environmental and political structures that need to be dealt with when an entire empire collapses around you. But his first-hand observations of both the Soviet and American models are as fascinating as they are undeniable!
   As someone who has been in a peak oil discussion group since 2002 and still feeling as helpless as the day I started, I found Orlov far more insightful than most as he makes his case for reshaping the paradigm that has gotten us in this mess. Highly recommended.



5. Orlov has written a thought-provoking book, predicting that the collapse of the United States will follow a path analogous to the collapse of the USSR. There are two unique and valuable aspects to the way Orlov approaches this idea. First, as a former Soviet citizen, he reminds the reader of how recent US history looks to the non-American. The alien view is startling and includes some obviously valid insights. I say "obviously valid" because I think anyone would agree with them, not because they are obvious to an ordinary American like me, who has never lived abroad. I say "some" obviously valid insights, because I disagree with much of what Orlov predicts. For example, it is not plausible to me that most Americans would become homeless in an economic meltdown - we would all pay some kind of rent to the banks that had foreclosed on our houses, because the banks need income, too.
   
   This brings me to the second unique and valuable aspect of this book. Orlov wrote it because he really believes what he is saying. He is not an assistant professor publishing a theoretical exercise to earn tenure. To the contrary, he is an engineer who has no axe to grind vis a vis the subject matter, and he is not motivated by anti-Americanism or other cheap sentiment. Orlov is driven, rather, by a strong feeling that the US is in for the same sort of humiliation in the coming decade that the USSR endured in the 1990s. Right or wrong, he is putting his true beliefs on paper. I enjoy reading the deepest thoughts and most strongly held beliefs of intelligent people (and Orlove is clearly very intelligent), even when perhaps overstated or incorrect. And there is always value in following the honest thoughts of someone who is coming from a completely new direction, trying to give a warning. I think this is a great book to take on vacation and discuss with your spouse, if you enjoy knocking ideas around in your free time.

5 comments about Rethinking the Great Depression (American Ways Series).

1. Based on new theories, Smiley has re-examined and re-assessed the forces that led to and prolonged the Great Depression. In clear non-technical prose, he shows what happened and why.

   This short book (163 pages plus sources and index) is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 gives a brief overview of how the worldwide depression began and how it created a domino effect throughout Europe and the U.S. Nothing new here-- in fact, this is basic stuff any high schooler should know.

   Chapter 2 is a more detailed examination of the economic crisis and the forces which led to it. Smiley explains the situation in basic terms that anyone can understand, allowing us to see the tragedy unfolding step by step.

   Chapters 3 and 4 show how President Roosevelt (who had little knowledge or experience of economics) attempted to pull the country out of this deep economic slump. Though some programs were successful, some were not, and only serve to create a depression within a depression in the mid-30s.

   Chapter 5 examines the legacy of the governmental response, and how economic policies initiated during this period has affected this country for decades afterward, and how certain government programs still exist long after their usefulness has passed. An examination of post-war analysis shows how Keynesian economic theory and government studies have misinterpreted the factors which brought this country back to recovery. He also examines the question of whether such an event can happen again, concluding that-- based on subsequent economic downturns-- it probably won't, though it can happen again should future leaders ignore the warning signs and lessons of the past.

   A fascinating and rewarding book, even for those who have little or no knowledge of economics.




2. Smiley has done a fantastic job with this book. It is well organized and very easy to read. He makes a statement and then follows up with the data and information necessary to support that statement. The second chapter on the cause of the great depression is my favorite and after finishing the book I went through that chapter again to really drill the information in. This book should be required reading for all college students. I normally give books away after reading them but I won't be giving this one away.



3. This is a brief and relatively easy to read monetarist review of 'the great depression'. It is unclear to what the title calls 'rethinking' might refer. My guess is that the author is rethinking Keynes, but it might be FDR. Since the difference between Keynes and monetarists is subtle to all but Keynesians and monetarists, I wouldn't recommend this as a introduction to the subject, nor as a survey.
   
   The text presents a matter of fact narrative, starting in 1929 and ending with the war efforts of 1940. The author find the source of economic contractions (recessions and depressions) in monetary policy established on a country by country basis. These contractions were caused by a shrinking money supply which could be correlated to effort to maintain a fixed relationship between gold and the national currency. Unaware of the relationship between money supply and economic goals (full employment, growth, etc), both Hoover and FDR made the necessary economic correction prolonged and painful. According to the author, the misguided new deal programs started by FDR have taken on a life of their own. The problems posed by 'New Deal' government programs consumes most of the concluding remarks. To end the book, Smiley writes "What failed in the 1930s were governments, in their eagerness to direct activity to achieve political ends... Attempts to stop international financial markets from working through the gold standard brough on the depression. Government efforts to combat the depression ... made the depression much longer and more severe in the United States. Governemnt attempts to reshape American society ... helped create a depression with the depression.'
   
   Though one might think this come across as a polemic against FDR and what the author calls 'socialism', the author takes pains to show that everyone, including all the economists, misunderstood the 'depression'. Despite his confident narrative, the author doesn't exclude himself in this assessment. In a telling comment near the end of the book, Smiley states 'Still, our continued inability to develop econometric models that can accurately predict contractions means that we will not be free of them.' In other words, argues that no one knows what caused the depression. All he can do is point out the errors of various theories.



4. This book is simple, clear and accurate. I've turned to it over and over again and can't recommend it too highly. Smiley is especially good when he gets to the second half of the 1930s. I have one copy at the office, one copy at home and carry one around in my backpack when there's room. Also great: Jim Powell's "FDR's Folly," "The Great Depression" by Thomas E Hall and J David Ferguson, Allan Meltzer, and of course Friedman and Schwartz. Superb but hard to get: Lester V Chandler.



5. Considering the current economic environment, this book should be read by anyone who wants to understand the differences between what really happened during a very, very difficult time in history vs. the odious comparisons some have made to it in an attempt to describe our present crisis. I found this book by reading Amity Schlaes very good book, "The Forgotten Man." Her book drew some very interesting contrasts to Conrad Black's epic biography of FDR.
   
   Although an academic, Smiley writes so clearly and picks his themes so wisely that, like Amity's telling book, I now understand the Depression to have been unnecessarily prolonged by government intrusion and the unwise application of high taxes and tariffs.
   
   The book is brief enough and well researched so that I can hardly add more here other than to highly recommend it.

5 comments about The White Man's Burden: Why the West's Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good.

1. Whilte the author has some important and sometimes hard-hitting points to make about foreign aid and its effectiveness (or lack thereof), it's obvious he still wants to get invited to the cool cocktail parties in New York. He correctly focuses on the aid community's penchant for big projects with no specific accountability vs. smaller, user-oriented ones. However, he seems obliged to maintain a veneer of "neutrality" by opposing military operations despite their proven success in cases like Japan and South Korea. He also over-uses statistics in questionable circumstances that make for heavy going and undermine his credibility. It's also a little pathetic that he has to make clear from little family vignettes that he is a vegetarian and imposes an artsy-fartsy lifestyle on his kids. Not a surprise that he's divorced. Still worth the read.



2. The main thing I do share with Easterly is his disdain for the rockers and the dreamers.
   
   However, beyond that, the main theme of this book is a simple tautology--if it works according to whatever criteria he stipulates, it's a "Seeker," if it doesn't, it's a "Planner." And lo and behold, the Planners are the bad boys, because they never succeed. There is nary a recognition of the fact that if you want to "seek" to help the poor somewhere, there are always those pesky governments to deal with. Just one example: he argues that the amounts of money that have been spent on roads in developing countries have ultimately had little impact in many situations, because roads deteriorate. So he recommends that donors need to build maintenance into their programs. Alas, in many parts of the world road maintenance is a job for the local government (which he acknowledges by citing how he deals with a pothole in the States). Now is his recommendation tantamount to suggesting that donors build up local government in developing countries, run by -- what, contractors? Interesting concept.
   
   The basic issue remains: the poor tend to be poor on a large scale largely because they live in countries with bad governments at all levels. The Seekers (sometimes known as do-gooders) can help provide bandaids, but lasting solutions depend on ratcheting up government performance in those countries. How to accomplish that? There are some answers to that, but don't turn to Easterly for guidance.



3. I highly reccommend this book to anyone interested in understanding the world as it is. Economic, political, and historic factors make the world we live in, with the sharp contrasts inside and inbetween countries. Easterly efficiently describes why such constrasts exist, and what can be done to reduce inequality, at several levels (e.g. national policies, political programs, local development). For anyone interested in social development, or just in knowing why some people don't have food in their tables everyday, three times a day.
   
   Make yourself conscious of the world you live in, and, even better, take action to modify reality.



4. Here, William Easterly lifts the veil of fog and proceeds to make a big dent in our collective ignorance about the "ways of global poverty" and in the process tells us what "not to do" in trying to surmount it. His trenchant critique gives a whole new meaning to the biblical philosophy: Give a man a fish and you feed him for one day, but teach him to fish and you feed him for a lifetime," as well as to the well-worn adage that "the road to hell many times has been paved with good intentions."
   
   Always sharp, relevant, wise and delivered with the authority of a man who has "been there, done that, and bought the tee shirt," This is the testimony of a man who has wrestled in the trenches with the problem of global poverty and lost so many times that he has now figured out what he and everyone else have been doing wrong. He is like the "Archie Moore of Global Aid programs." And at least in principle Easterly now knows the score and what needs to be done to get global poverty right. His experience, his logic, his tenacity, the crispness but lightness of his writing, and his bravery in taking on the conventional wisdom (and all of its embedded sacred cows), convinces me that Easterly is the real deal; and that if he does not know what he is talking about then no one does.
   
   His story has the full ring of truth. It is one born both out of compassion and frustration. He is tactful, and gingerly tips around the currently reigning gurus and heroes of the global poverty fight, and here I mean such heroes as Jeffery Sachs, Gordon Brown and even Madonna and Bono. His story can be summarized somewhat as follows:
   
   While beautiful heartfelt and compassionate ideas coupled with a plan and money (so far the West has spent more than $2.3 trillion with minimal results), does indeed constitute a "valid" global poverty eradication program, it does not in fact constitute a "viable" one. And here is the twist: The difference between "valid" and "viable" is not just semantic or symbolic fluff, but the difference between success and failure. The presently used "so-called" valid formulas have been tried and have failed so often that they have long since passed the point of violating Einstein's maxim of how insanity is defined: "repeatedly trying the same old techniques and expecting a different result."
   
   The reason this formula may be "valid" but not "viable" is that unlike the distribution system that got nine million copies of JK Rowley's book "Harry Potter" into the hand of kids in less than a week, once the boxcars of food are dropped off in some godforsaken Third world desert, there is no well-oiled, well-motivated distribution system available to see that they then get to the needy. Most of those in need have no way of knowing that aid is available, and because of poor infrastructure, could not get to it even if they did.
   
   The incentive under such circumstances is for the lucky handful to use the "the White Man's" largesse either for the benefit of the immediately available and powerful few, or as a basis to begin the process of bureaucratization, which in the end amounts to the same thing. But Easterly knows as well as the rest of us, that even under the best of conditions, and even in the First World, bureaucracies exist only to siphon-off the resources to better perpetuate their own existence, and not to service their client, the poor, or to end poverty.
   
   It is the author's repeated and vivid analogies that drive home all of his key points. For instance, one of the reasons his "motivated middleman strategy" seems to work when bureaucracies do not, is that middlemen "gets paid" only after the end product is delivered to the recipient - whether that product is drugs, prostitution, Harry Potter Books, or poverty eradication. On the other hand, "poverty bureaucrats" (in the U.S. we call them poverty pimps) get paid "up front" for merely showing up on the job. There is no accountability or follow-up or even penalties for undelivered products, and thus they remain unmotivated to get the products out to the recipient. When this disincentive is coupled with local obstacles, such as lack of distribution infrastructure, ignorance or local politics, then it is easy to see why poverty aid has become a magnet for bureaucratic corruption and political machinations rather than for the eradication of poverty.
   
   According to the author, we allow our poverty fighting institutions (from the UN Relief agencies to ad hoc AIDs groups) to get caught-up in this bureaucratic trap by asking the wrong question: "What can foreign aid do for poverty?" -- rather than the proper one: "What can foreign aid do for poor people?" In his most colorful analogy, Easterly compares setting goals and sending money and food before this question is answered to sending a cow to the Kentucky Derby and expecting that by properly training and grooming it, it will compete successfully against thoroughbred racehorses. No matter how well the cow is groomed, trained or how many oats you feed it, the cow has no chance of winning. So too is true for poverty eradication programs that rely only on top-heavy bureaucracies. (Bureaucracies eat oats too, don't they?)
   
   What is the solution to Global Poverty?
   
   Easterly thinks that grandiose goals must first be tapered or given up altogether: Ending global poverty is not going to happen any time soon, if ever. And "having ending it" as an immediate goal is impractical and ultimately self-defeating.
   
   However, if we keep our ears and our aid close to the ground where micro-management is implicit and becomes "built in" rather than explicit, we can make a big dent in poverty by creating opportunities locally where none existed before. When we educate poor kids, especially girls, and otherwise use what people on the ground need and know, we are actually leveraging that knowledge into a force multiplier, that ripples horizontally across the landscapes of the poor, and trickles across rather than telescoping downward as is the case with bureaucratically driven models. In doing so, grassroots approaches have just the opposite effect of getting trapped in cycles of bureaucratic red tape: They tend to maximize the distribution and immediate utilization of scarce resources rather than minimizing and even working against them.
   
   But also implicit philosophy is being "tapped" in Easterly's reasoning. It is the same philosophy that has shown proven results and has been successfully exploited by notables such as the Noble Laureate Muhammad Yunus in his micro-lending programs in Bangladesh. It is a philosophy that is so often ignored that it has become a leitmotif of bureaucratized Aid Relief Programs: People on the ground often know better how they are best to be helped than bureaucrats in capital cities, or those with good intentions writing impersonal checks in far away lands.
   
   What people need is not the equivalent of America's Thanksgiving day handouts of old canned goods, but the dignity and connections that go with being able to create ones own opportunities. It seems that the biblical adage of give a man a fish and feed him for a day, or teach him how to fish and he will feed himself for a life time, works better in the world of global poverty than does Aid bureaucracies.
   
   A valuable addition to the discussions and literature of poverty eradication, and to a potential mid-course correction to those many failing efforts. Five Stars



5. Well researched and very well written critique of foreign development aid. Very useful in challenging the conventional wisdom of much strategic aid policy

5 comments about Empire of Debt: The Rise of an Epic Financial Crisis.

1. I love this book. I must have read it thru ten times already.
   
   Don't let the title scare you. Bonner and Wiggin bring a dull subject to life with an irreverent but refreshing take on history.
   
   "Would the nation be better off if Lincoln had not slaughtered so many Southerners?" they ask. "Would world history have been worse if Wilson had not meddled in World War 1."
   
   Political correctness is cast aside. Party propaganda is ignored. National heroes get skewered. "The most popular American presidents were those who stole most beautifully," they intone, describing the logic of democratic larceny. These guys love to poke fun at pompous politicians.
   
   The authors do get serious. After relating the rise and demise of past empires, they report that America is headed for the same fate. She has moved away from her founding principles, away from the freedoms of republic and into the clutches of empire.
   
   With the inexorable rise of the state come delusions of grandeur and pseudo patriotism. Government intrusion crowds out free enterprise. Civil liberties are tossed in favor of fast money. Original thought gives way to corporate cool. History is relegated to the dustbin.
   
   We are consumed with the running of empire. We mind everyone's business but our own. We shred the Constitution for wars without end.
   
   Wave good-bye to the American Republic. Say hello to the Empire of Debt.



2. I just finished the book in time to turn on the news that my bank, WaMu, has been seized and sold in one motion. Now the boys in Washington are telling us that they were caught by surprise and have to craft a solution that needs to be passed in days if not hours. President George "Chicken Little" Bush has appeared to tell us that we will face the fires of hell if we don't pass his (and his cronies) best guesses at a solution. Hmmm, WMDs anyone?
   
   Bonner and Wiggin predicted the whole thing well in advance and since I don't subscribe to the divine revelation theory of economic analysis it is clear to me that the situation was clear to others as well. Evidently none of those people were at the SEC or in goverment until yesterday. Glad they could show up but I am seriously frightened by what they might do now that they are belly up to the bar.
   
   We, as a people, have got to get educated and yesterday would have been a good day to start. This book is an example of the information that is available. It is up to us to begin to us it.
   
   Bonner and Wiggin recommend gold but that is clearly indicated to be a strategy available to the less connected and less sophisticated investor. For the savvy folks who are in Martha Stewarts phone tree, they recommend investments in companys in contrast to stocks. The company performance is the criteria, not the stock and they require different approaches that are explained in the book. The basic difference is the amount of effort and the methodology for investment. Personally that phone tree looks pretty good to me...
   
   Good luck everyone.



3. Bonner can turn a phrase but his arguments get old after about half way through. The book is also dated. Instead of this one, try "Mobs, Messiahs, and Markets," where he has an outstanding writing partner in libertarian journalist Lila Rajiva. It is much better written on every level (especially if you like savage humor) and speaks to the current crisis in a very sophisticated but accessible way.



4. A prognosis most Americans have not wanted to hear for decades (until now when sadly the disease can no longer be ignored). Philosophical but easy to read for anyone willing to expend a little thought/effort, and read with an open mind. Almost everone who reads it will find something offensive to their perceptions of the world we live in, but that's the point. Some might see this as gloom & doom but it's excellent at cutting through perceptions to expose realities; and perhaps more important how reality and perceptions so easily and stealthily diverged from one another.
   
   I don't agree with every cause and effect or conclusion but overall Bonner is spot on. As a treatise to show the ill effects of blind trust, overreaching government, misleading press, ignoring history and human frailities - this would make excellent reading in HS or at least college where we want to teach that it's not just OK to challenge conventional wisdom and leaders, but that our long term freedoms rely on us doing so.



5. Unlike other doom and gloom books on American economy including "the Demise of the dollar","The Collapse of the Dollar and How to Profit from It", "The Bust Ahead", or "America's Financial Apocalypse", this book provides more indepth analysis and commentary about American economy, consumerism culture, and politics from a historical perspective. It's a 384 pages book, if you have plenty time and enjoy reading about economy and history like myself, you will enjoy this well researched and written book.
   
   There's no specific investment advice in this volume, but you do find gems and wisdoms about investing here and there. The major theme and idea of this book are succinctly summarized in much less pages in the newly released book and documentary/DVD "I.O.U.S.A."

5 comments about Economic Gangsters: Corruption, Violence, and the Poverty of Nations.

1. As Raymond Fisman and Edward Miguel explain at the beginning of their book, there are two main currents of thinking among those who opine on the wisdom of foreign aid: the "poverty trap" view, which holds that aid must be injected to end a vicious cycle in which inability to save leads to disaster in lean years, and the view that more such aid is simply sending good money after bad, straight into the hands of corrupt officials to be funneled away or otherwise wasted. Fisman and Miguel aim to look at corruption and violence in developing countries to determine how prevalent such evils are, how they are caused, and how they can be prevented--and, therefore, what the best way, non-ideologically-speaking, of raising up poor nations might be.
   
   The funny thing about corruption is that it tends to exist out of sight--at least, out of sight of official statistics and public measurements. No one reports the bribes he takes on his income tax returns. So Fisman and Miguel have to come up with creative means of measuring corruption of various types, and this is the most fun part of their book. Economic Gangsters is completely accessible to the general reader, with virtually no economic jargon or concepts more difficult than "incentives matter," but it perfectly captures the exciting, puzzle-solving nature of this kind of academic research.
   
   Fisman and Miguel's biggest, and most important, suggestion is the basic one that foreign aid and other solutions to developing-nation poverty be studied and implemented in an evidence-based manner. Without experimental data it's very difficult to determine whether a particular program is actually effective or not (or cost-effective or not). Randomized trials, like those carried out for developing medicines, are rare in the field of poverty reduction. But sometimes they are carried out. For example, local democratic control of public works projects is often touted as an antidote to corruption and skimming of funds. But in Indonesia a test was conducted to compare road building under local control, the thread of a federal audit, and no corruption prevention. Local control did little better than the control group, while those projects that were audited involved significantly less stolen money.
   
   The authors adhere to their intention to remain non-ideological, and their interest is clearly in going where the evidence leads them. Unfortunately, large-scale economic experiments are often impossible and unethical, so some things can never be tested. But those interested in solutions that actually work should use what information they can. Economic Gangsters provides some of that information, and an interesting look at how to find it. It also tells some great stories about the incentives economic gangsters respond to, the strange circumstances that sometimes create these incentives, and how governments and other groups can play with them to aim for better outcomes.



2. Eight years ago, as I crossed the Uganda-Kenya border, I was sequestered in a shack, interrogated, threatened with prison, and ultimately required to pay a bribe by border guards. After that harrowing experience, I returned to my hotel and recounted the story to the first friendly face I saw: my sympathetic colleague Ted Miguel. Ted and his colleague Ray spent the succeeding years studying violence and corruption in poor countries; and this sweet book is the latest fruit of those labors.
   
   What can economics tell us about corruption and violence around the world? More, perhaps, than you'd expect. Ray and Ted use surprise changes in a dictator's health to measure the value of political connections in Indonesia, rainfall to capture the effect of recessions on violence in Africa, and tricks in the trade data to reveal smuggling. (That's not to mention the parking tickets - Chapter Four.) They present their clever research in surprisingly clear English, and they draw on the related research of other economists as well. They really know how to tell a story: I was captivated by the opening recounting of Kenyan author Ngugi's woes and delighted by the creative policy making of Antanas Mockus, mayor of Bogota.
   
   It's hard not to compare popular economics books today to Freakonomics: Gangsters has the advantages of Ted and Ray's witty, pleasant voice, more of a thematic focus, and none of the self-adulation that took away some Freakonomics' shine.
   
   Despite the focus on corruption and violence, ultimately the book is presenting a miscellany of work that is related but isn't (and perhaps cannot be) circumscribed into a larger theory. Occasionally I found myself wishing a central theory like you find in Malcolm Gladwell's books. But then again, those theories usually aren't convincing for exactly the reason that Ted and Ray don't have one: they are careful and big, broad theories are not. I really enjoyed the clear policy recommendation of Rapid Conflict Prevention Support in Chapter 6, and I look forward to more clear recommendations in the next book. Again, Ted and Ray are careful and tend not to recommend policies that don't have clear evidence to stand on. Not all scholars are comfortable laying out strong recommendations on limited evidence; two books by scholars who are more comfortable are The Bottom Billion and The End of Poverty. (As I recall, that's also the self-definition given by an economic hit man!) The main policy recommendation, ultimately, is more evidence-based policy making, particularly randomized trials of development programs (but with a healthy view of the realistic scope for these kinds of trials).
   
   This book won't just show you that economists can be clever (although it will show you that): It shows that economics, cleverly applied, can illuminate some of the most intractable development problems of our time. I strongly recommend it. And if you don't trust me, Publishers Weekly said that in this "surprisingly spry" read, "fascinating insights abound" [1]. Take it from both of us and learn something.
   
   [1] Publishers Weekly, 6 October 2008.



3. A few years back, economists Ray Fisman (Columbia University) and Edward Miguel (University of California, Berkeley) caught the attention of the global media and the United Nations with their study of diplomats' unpaid parking tickets. At the time, diplomatic immunity allowed representatives to the international body to park in violation of city traffic codes, racking up fines. Fisman and Miguel looked at the list of traffic violations for UN plates over several years. They found that diplomats from some nations such as Canada and Ireland behaved themselves, parking lawfully and paying any tickets, while others such as Kuwait and Chad exploited their power, sometimes in ostentatious ways. Why? The ticket behavior, the economists suggested, is a proxy indicator for the intersection of culture and corruption.
   
   Now, in their recently published book, Economic Gangsters: Corruption, Violence, and the Poverty of Nations, Fisman and Miguel extend their corruption lens to the problems of conflict and development. They look for economic causes of conflict such as water scarcity or food crises to help explain everything from civil wars to witch trials. They ask whether more money or better governance is the key to economic growth for Africa, concluding that--although corruption and economic abuse is a key challenge to development--it won't really be possible to answer the big questions of the field until there is better quality, more scientific evaluation of the results of aid projects.
   
   Economic Gangsters is a pleasurable and fast read, written for a popular audience who may or may not know the context of the work. For development specialists familiar with the writings of Jeffrey Sachs, William Easterly, and Paul Collier, the broad contents of the book will be familiar. As other reviewers pointed out, there is also a certain sense in which discussions of warlords and blood diamonds brush up against diplomats' parking tickets or randomized sampling without connections between the topics ever being delineated. On the whole, however, Fisman and Miguel's presentation feels fresh and dynamic. Even seasoned development practitioners are likely finish with a few new ideas inspired by the book's creative approach to cross-pollinating approaches and examples.
   
   The book is available in print and in Amazon's Kindle e-reader format. The digital version suffers from occasional print type errors (for instance, writing budget as bud-get), but the charts and tables thankfully appear crisp and clear on the Kindle screen. I read in Kindle format and would be pleased to do so again.
   
   Economic Gangsters deserves to be widely read. The authors' tone is friendly and simple, approachable even. This is important, given the complexity and high stakes of the issues at hand. Indeed, the economics of conflict and corruption need to be more widely understood if donor countries' policy making is going to be improved. Yet, one finishes reading this book on the topics of war, poverty, suffering, crime, and interventionist failure feeling not overwhelmed, but rather empowered--equipped with intellectual tools for making the world better, little by little.



4. [Originally published at my blog, [...]
   
   I read this book recently. The authors (Ray Fisman and Ted Miguel) are development economists at big schools (Columbia and UC Berkeley; Ted's in the econ department, but I see him and his RAs all the time), and they've written this book to give laymen some insight into the research we (economists) do and how that research can be used to advance development around the world.
   
   Ray and Ted have structured their book around academic papers that they and their colleagues have written, omitting the tedious math and econometrics and adding explanations, stories and context to the questions at hand.
   
   Relative to an economic textbook, this book is much more accessible and intuitive; relative to other development books (Easterly's Elusive Quest for Growth, Scott's Seeing Like a State, and even Perkins' Confessions of an Economic Hitman), this book is, uh, boring and overly didactic.
   
   Yeah, sorry.*
   
   Perhaps I am a jaded reader -- I've read about 2/3rds of the papers behind the book, and I've been "doing" development economics for 5-15 years (depending on who you ask) -- but the book only grabbed my interest a few times, e.g., the mayor of Bogota who used mimes to shame those breaking traffic laws. Put differently, I can think of better ways to spend your time.**
   
   For those of you interested in the contents, here's a preview, chapter by chapter:
   
   1) Economic development is impeded by corruption.
   2) You can measure a company's political importance by watching its stock price when the corrupt dictator (Suharto in Indonesia) gets sick.***
   3) You can detect corruption in the discrepancy between figures of the exporting country and importing country (e.g., Hong Kong to China). Distorted tariff and trade rules encourage corruption.
   4) Some cultures are more corrupt than others. Ray and Ted discuss their brilliant paper, which showed that diplomats to the UN in NYC obeyed parking laws in rough proportion to their corruption at home (and attitudes towards the US) -- despite having the same immunity from prosecution. (I'm guessing that this paper was their book proposal.)
   5) No water, no peace -- conflict rises when water supplies fall.**** Global warming will make this worse. Ray and Ted overlook an important problem in this chapter. They claim that the Rich world will not do too bad with climate change, but they forgot the adverse impact of a sick environment on quality of life.
   6) When people are starving, they look for ways to reduce the demand for food. One way to do this is by finding and killing "witches". One way to stop the massacre of old women and children accused of witchcraft is to provide insurance against such risks, i.e., drought relief.
   7) Countries can recover from war pretty quickly, but it's harder to recover from civil war or when ex-militants are left in unemployed groups. Vietnam succeeded; Iraq is failing.
   8) Randomized trials (one village gets a new program, another "control" village is left alone) are a good way to evaluate anti-poverty programs.*****
   
   Bottom Line: Anyone REALLY interested in development economics (but who is not an economist) should read this book. Everyone else should keep reading and debating at economics blogs :)
   
   -------------------------------------
   
   * And who am I, a lowly postdoc without a book to his name, to question the output of two superstar professors? Just me, folks...
   
   ** Listen to this great podcast [...], in which Richard Epstein discusses inequality and happiness.
   
   *** Read this paper [...] to really understand how a developing country moves from the "Natural State" to the "Open Access Order."
   
   **** Check out the updated Environment and Security Water Conflict Chronology" [...] from Peter Gleick's Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security (yes, that's the full name). It's pretty exhaustive, but it's also pretty inclusive (it includes incidents when one person is attacked, "perhaps" over water...)
   
   
   ***** I'm still amazed that a PhD student (Ben Olken) was given [...] to study corruption in Indonesian road building. Holy Cow! That's enough to fund 200 "normal" PhD research projects!



5. I enjoyed this book and I think the research is compelling. Aside from a chapter in the middle of the book that veers inexplicably into Bush-bashing, Economic Gangsters is well written and very accessible. It is clearly written to introduce their ideas to readers who may have little or no experience with economics and there is little math or mathematical theory involved. I managed to breeze through it in about a week of before-bed reading.

5 comments about The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization.

1. This book provides a very good understanding of globilisation by integrating various issues and concepts with critical, illustrative and at times poignant examples. This helps appreciate what globilisation means currently and the historical summary helps explain how we got to where we are today. Consequently we are better able to forecast trends and determine meaningful business and social strategies that will enhance our lifestyles. It is an easy, informative and enjoyable read.



2. If you have a short attention span, then this book is not for you. I thought being a newspaper person would have made Friedman concise and to the point, but Friedman spends so much time talking about things that are not directly related to the point that I gave up on this book. I may have cheated myself (I thought the same of Ayn Rand but did make it through Atlas Shrugged which is one of my favorites.) but I don't have the time for his wanderings.



3. This is the first book I've read on the hot topic of globalization and I think it's fair to say I was disappointed, especially considering how popular this book is. What is most odd about this book is that it does not feel like it was written by a journalist at all: it rarely relies on facts or scenarios that actually happened. Much of the book contains dialogues (mostly among world leaders) that Friedman invented for literary effect. He also goes overboard on inventing his own terminology for the subject. But what is most annoying while reading the book is that while you would expect a book on globalization to be nuanced and subtle, Friedman comes off as arrogant and heavy-handed in his treatment of the subject. It occurred to me many times while reading the book that being a globetrotting journalist did not qualify Friedman to be the quasi-theorist that he thinks he is. Revealing, this book has aged very poorly, very quickly. Most of the companies he praises (Enron and Compaq for instance) have either gone completely defunct or been bought out by other companies. As if to further underscore his shallow understanding of the subject, his Golden Arches Theory was disproven soon after the publication of his book. Friedman is not without his insights but I imagine there must be much better books out there on the subject.



4. Had some good ideas but pretty heavy reading. Not for the short attention span person.



5. I read part of this book for a Globalization class I was taking, plus a few chapters from a different book "Globalization and Its Discontents" by Joseph Stiglitz. I initially liked what I read from Friedman. It seemed positive and interesting in comparison to Stiglitz (which focused on IMF economic policies and was VERY angry). However, upon reading the whole Stiglitz book and then going back to Friedman, I found Friedman to be poorly educated in economics and a waste of my time. It is indeed a cheerleader book for Globalization and has so many holes in it you can drive a car through.
   
   Friedman is a market fundamentalist with an agenda, which becomes very clear after reading a REAL book on economics. He embraces this "golden straightjacket" (or restrictions that globalization puts on an economy) as inevitable and advocates a rapid transition to free-market systems with abandonment of old systems. He also favors excessive deregulation of the economy and wants government to completely relinquish control. The success of this strategy isn't backed by any evidence. It's only Friedman's theory. For instance, he goes into great detail about the hardships that this golden straitjacket puts on government, the population and all the entrenched interests... but never proves with evidence that the countries that put it on are better off than countries that don't. The fact is, countries DON'T have to follow this golden straitjacket model. Southeast Asia in particular... with all the "crony" capitalism that Friedman complains lingered on for decades, was successful before the 1997 market crisis specifically because of this crony capitalism. They didn't follow the IMF, Wall Street, and the electronic herd who were all clamoring for them to immediately open up their markets and push down barriers and completely eliminate government interference in the economy. They kept those barriers up, built up their own businesses and industries, and when those industries were ready to compete in the global market, they slowly reduced trade barriers and integrated themselves into the global economy. This is the correct way to approach globalization, not the stupid way Friedman and the IMF and Wall Street lobbyists advocate (ensuring US companies dominate ALL competition in the developing world).
   
   I'll give another example of why Friedman is wrong. Look at Russia. Russia's transition from communism to capitalism was guided by the IMF and the US Treasury Department. It was one of the most radical transformations of an economy in the history of mankind and under Friedman's theory, it should have been an enormous success because "the quicker you adopt the golden straitjacket, the better". WRONG. They transitioned to free markets so quick that it was devoid of competition. There was no regulatory structure to compete fairly. Banks didn't operate well. Businesses were sold to well-connected, corrupt bureaucrats for next to nothing (who proceeded to strip the businesses of their assets and put most of the profits in foreign bank accounts). Corrupt government leaders shared in these profits at the expense of the state's wealth. The leaders further raided funds by taking out massive loans from international banks, the IMF and the US government at high interest rates and diverted much of the money into their bank accounts. Inflation ran wild for awhile and many people lost their life savings and retirement as a result. Exchange rates were kept artificially high which prevented exports. Crime and mafia control spread everywhere. People in abject poverty become commonplace (from ~2% of the population living under $2 a day under communism....... to after the market failure ~25% of the population under $2 a day and ~40% of the population under $4 a day. GDP per Capita went DOWN so people were poorer with capitalism than they were under communism). It was altogether complete chaos and an economic disaster.
   
   Compare this with China, who also moved from Communism to Capitalism but they started in the 70's and they did it much slower and much more carefully. Through protectionist barriers, they built up their own industries, significantly reduced poverty, became a major world economy and provided many of the amenities that first world economies have. While they aren't completely free-market yet, they are doing it very well and completely ignoring Thomas Friedman's "Golden Straitjacket".
   
   With that said, there are some good things about Thomas Friedman's book. First off, he explains a very popular... but failed... ideology very well. There is significant support for it in IMF, Wall Street and the Treasury Department and its important to understand. Secondly, he explains Capital Markets (or what he calls "short horned cattle") far better than my other book does. Capital Markets, or investment in currency, is a hard concept to understand and Friedman makes a very good effort at explaining it.

5 comments about The New Economic Disorder: Strategies for Weathering Any Crisis While Keeping Your Finances Intact.

1. THIS BOOK EXSPOSES FED.RESERVE,OUR GOVN'T,BANKS AND ETC. IF YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN THIS BOOK IS REVEALED IN THE BIBLE. SOME FOLKS MIGHT THINK THIS BOOK IS A JOKE BUT THEY ALSO THOUGHT NOAH WAS A JOKE ABOUT THE FLOOD. DO THE INVESTIGATION YOURSELF?



2. Dr. Bates really exposes the truth behind our currency and banking system and how it affects all of us in our daily lives. This is a must read for all trying to make heads or tails of the turmoil in our economy today. While it was written five years ago, the information and basic principles it uncovers are timeless and will be as true one hundred years from now as they are today. If you are concerened for your financial future or that of future generations, you will find solutions to the economic problems that we are facing today. For those who need to know what to do to protect their hard-earned assets, this is again, a must read.
   I am impressed with this book and recommend that every household read a copy. It should be required reading for all business and economic majors.



3. You will hardly find a book where the author will contradict himself as many times as in this one. You will also hardly find a book where the author will repeat himself as many times as in this one. The key point of the book is: monetary system is deeply flawed, it is going to collapse very soon, we are in danger, S.O.S. O.k., let's say, the system is going to collapse. And now what? Apart from excessive alarmism what really bothers me is that the author is trying to explain not how an average person can protect himself from this coming "disaster" but how an average person can make profit out of it. When you read this book you are put in the position to learn how to become accessory to what is supposedly going to happen. I found so many inconsistencies in the book that at certain point it becomes just confusing, there is no coherent picture that could possibly emerge out of it. Overall, this is a good material to be used to develop critical thinking skills.



4. Larry Bates sounds like an alarmist or something, but what he says makes sense and I have heard similar things from reliable sources. I would recommend this for anyone who wants to have an understanding of how the world economy and political system works. I also have bought The Bilderberg Group by Daniel Estulin. I have only started reading it, but it seems excellent so far.



5. I thought it was a good quick read book. He had a few things in it that were very very insightful. While it's not a deep in depth book, I thought he did pretty good. (I have to say he did good because he thinks just like me. lol )Besides he predicted was is now happening on Wall Street to the letter. He seems to know his stuff and doesn't tout himself as being a super intelligent PHDD EEconomic ID alien know-it-all. He simply presents his ideological opinion of the current economic banking system along with the Bible. Yes the bible. He was a banker, congressman and a pretty smart guy to foresee what is now happening on Wall Street. If you have any interest in the markets, this is a must read.