5 comments about The Good Life and Its Discontents: The American Dream in the Age of Entitlement.

1. This was one of the most intelligent, original, and colorful books that I have read this year. Most of the author's points are right on the mark. The great mystery of our time for political analysts is the large gap between peoples' evident satisfaction with their own life and their overwhelming disappointment with public life. Mr. Samuelson not only is perceptive enough to point out this overlooked paradox but diagnoses it well. This will be certainly a bold challenge for the next generation of public leaders.



2. If you are a conservative, you will enjoy this book. Samuelson truly believes in the system!

   If Samuelson spoke with Chomsky:

   Samuelson: I'm sick of hearing that there are ghettos; I'm tired of listening to people whine about how Washington is a function of corporate interests; stop crying about how the government has systematically squashed the interests of Labor. Things are not perfect and people should stop demanding a free lunch.

   Chomsky: What about health care? Do you realize we are the richest Country in the World, yet we are one of the only progessive "Democratic" states that doesn't provide some basic level of care to all citizens.

   Samuelson: If poor people want health care, than they should get jobs dammit! They are not entitled to a free lunch. No free lunch! No free lunch!...

   Chomsky: Isn't it true that you support a system that created NAFTA, which basically raises domestic unemployemnt, lowers wages and, yes, destroyes the very jobs you are telling poor people to get?

   Samuelson: I said the system works, it's not perfect. No free lunch! No free lunch!

   Chomsky: The system is filled with structural injustice: it fixes the betting in favor of corporations and against working Americans . . . and the best you can say is that it's not perfect. By the way, do you own stock in companies that routinely fire hard working Americans in order to raise profit and boost your portfolio.

   Samuelson: Um, well, um. You see, well. The system works dammit! No free lunch! No free lunch!




3. I wanted a book to use in conjunction with Barbara Ehrenreich to examine modern American society from different viewpoints. I opted for this book, and regretted it. The book contains few new ideas, a much-rehashed thesis, and repetive and circular arguing. The students in my high school, senior level economics class found these flaws without any prompting from me. If repetitive ideas, long-winded prose and turgid structure are you idea of a good read, then this is the book for you.



4. My review is based on the first edition of this book.
   
   I found out about this book when I happened upon an old issue of Newsweek I had kept around, from 1996. Its cover story was an article made up of excerpts from it, and was titled "Great Expectations". I read the article and found Samuelson's analysis just as prescient today as when he wrote it. I wanted to see more of what he had to say, and so I got this book.
   
   I was not disappointed, at least in the analysis department. The book is part economic history, and part sociological/political analysis. He starts with the Great Depression, describing what happened. I'm in my 30s, and I had not heard a detailed history of the Depression in school. Just that the economy was in the dumps for about 10 years, and that tons of people were poor, hungry, and unemployed, and it inspired FDR's New Deal agenda. He fleshes this out some, giving quotes from sources of the time, describing what conditions were like, and how people felt about their predicament and their future. He tries to give a psychological picture of what the Depression did to the people who lived through it. He also provides analysis about what caused the Depression, how the institutions of power groped for a solution to the problem, and that some of what they did worked, and some of it didn't. Interestingly, what he says worked was not necessarily what a lot of people thought fixed the problem.
   
   Then he moves into the post-WW II boom, the world that the Baby Boomer generation grew up in, and the psychological change this caused in people's minds about what was possible. His main thesis is that this period of time, the economic expansion from the end of WW II to the early 1970s, produced an exaggerated, somewhat distorted view of economic expectations. Part of this view was formed by what Samuelson would call mistaken notions of what got us out of the Depression. It was this time period which produced the idea that in the future, each generation would be financially and materially better off than the generation that preceded it. He calls this notion a myth, and proceeds to give his own explanation of why the expansion occurred, why it petered out in the 1970s, and why the notion that each generation would just get richer and richer has not held true. He does not blame government for failing to do its job to "make" things better. In fact he points out that government's attempts to shape the economy were based on flawed policy thinking anyway. He explains that the economy changed over time, more competitors entered the marketplace, and the idea that the entreprenuer was a dying figure in the U.S. economy did not hold true. He gives an alternative view of what has happened: that while incomes and living standards have not rapidly risen for all concerned, products that consumers buy have gotten cheaper, so in effect we've traded our former vision for making things more affordable to more people in the U.S.
   
   He also comments on the politics of the U.S. since WW II. He stresses that while government can do little to shape the economy, public figures, when running for public office, keep saying that they can. He gets into a realm of wishful thinking here. Election after election, the public keeps having this expectation, based on a notion that he contends is not real, that the government can control and shape the economy so that we can have rising wages and higher living standards, and whoever runs for public office keeps pandering to this mistaken view. The problem always occurs that when they get into office, the public realizes that they have not changed the direction of the economy, and so they become disillusioned and angry with the politicians for failing to accomplish something that was never realistic in the first place. He expresses a wish that somehow the public would disabuse themselves of this notion, and the politicians would choose to educate the public, rather than pander to their mistaken notions. It's a nice thought, but it isn't going to happen. Politicians know that it never helps their election chances to tell the public they're wrong.
   
   Where Samuelson falls down is in providing a clear vision about what we as Americans should do, or how we should think, in order to adjust well to the wrenching changes that have shaped the way in which we work and make money. He grasps at some possible things the country could do (policy changes) that would make dealing with this easier, but his suggestions are incoherent. So I give him good marks for analyzing what's happened to us and why, but he comes up short on solutions to the problems that we as workers face. Nevertheless, I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is serious about understanding our economy, and why our collective notions about it are not necessarily based in reality.



5. On January 11th, 1944 -- about fifteen months before his death -- American president Franklin Roosevelt gave an address to Congress outlining what became known as his "economic bill of rights." Cleverly interwoven into Roosevelt's harangues about more sacrifice for the (still ongoing) war effort was a startling list of new guarantees for the American people that he hoped would avoid future conflicts: the *right* to a job, to decent housing, to adequate health care, extending to protection for businessmen from "unfair competition," and the right of farmers to sell products "at a decent return." Roosevelt outlined his program very clearly and effectively: "The one supreme objective for the future ... can be summed up in one word: security."
   
   I mention the highlights from this underappreciated speech because it serves as a perfect introduction to Robert Samuelson's thesis: that lavish and unrealistic promises from large American institutions (primarily government) have created a public -- not to mention a body politic -- weaned on entitlement. Roosevelt didn't exactly say who was going to provide all this employment, housing, health care and "protection", but I doubt his listeners had many doubts. I'm rather surprised Samuelson doesn't mention Roosevelt's address since the author places huge emphases on the Great Depression and World War II as the defining historical events of his "age of entitlement."
   
   Samuelson begins this (1997) work by trying to address an odd -- and certainly still-relevant -- paradox: pollsters consistently show Americans fairly happy with their *individual* lot but witheringly cynical about the state of the country. How could this be? How did it come about? (Clues above.) And what does it mean for our future politics, culture, and industry?
   
   His argument is as clearly organized as it is novel: a first section explains the issue, the next two delve into the business and political encouragement and fallout of this phenomena and the last suggests approaches and solutions. This sounds simple, but given the vast tangents possible in his thesis Mr. Samuelson must be admired for his focus. I found my only minor complaints with his perspective in the last section, where he triumphs "responsibility" and other rather vague cure-alls for our entitlement hangover. I agree with the general idea, but it appears slightly tacked-on, as if the author was wary of simply defining a great problem without a solution.
   
   A few other points could stand a firmer basis. Samuelson at times certainly has axes to grind: he heads an entire chapter "the myth of management" and proceeds to trot out the usual big business shibboleths (myopia, inertia, bureaucracy, lavish corporate pay) to justify his attack on the very concept of management ("To `manage' is to run something. Beyond that, the word does not mean much."). This glibness is not uncommon. In a section on America's "colliding ideals", Samuelson concludes that the growth of huge companies in the late 19th century "undermined [the] confidence that individuals, with hard work and self-discipline, could control their own destinies. On the contrary, they seemed increasingly at the whim of massive enterprises that they could not influence *as individuals*." (Italics mine.) That aspects of the industrial revolution were de-personalizing is historically well-founded, but to invert the argument to say that individuals were unable to control their very destinies due to the "whim of massive enterprises" is pushing the rhetoric a bit far on a critical point.
   
   Still, Samuelson makes excellent points throughout and -- more importantly -- keeps a laser focus on his overall thesis. His only other major omission is hardly his fault: the events of September 11th 2001. The impact of the terrorist attacks doesn't dilute all his points, but some of them (e.g., balanced budgets, government appointees) grow a little paler through the lens of a global terrorist threat.
   
   Finally: Can you, dear review-reader, honestly answer the question: what do I expect government to do for me? Do you feel *entitled* to anything from your government -- much less "big business" or other large institutions -- based on what you believe they've promised? If you have any hesitation in answering - or are curious about the relevance of these questions in 21st century America - I heartily suggest you read this book.

1 comments about The "How To" Grants Manual: Successful Grantseeking Techniques for Obtaining Public and Private Grants, Sixth Edition (ACE/Praeger Series on Higher Education).

1. I had mailing issues which I think was due to me moving and the updating of addresses.

No comments about Financial Terrorism : Hijacking America Under the Threat of Bankruptcy.

5 comments about Free Money to Pay Your Bills.

1. I'm sure the information in this book is useful, but only if you're over 65, have kids, or need goverment assistance. Sure you can get free money for food he suggests signing up for food stamps. He also states money for rent, but it's through state run section 8 programs. I love the idea of if you need money to buy a house get a mortgage. Most of the information contained in this book is for families needing goverment aid or the elderly and most single people can't qualify for most of the programs. It's a great goverment phone number book but don't waste your cash most of what's in this book is common knowledge and there's no free gold at the end of the rainbow.



2. If you are out of work or are someone with a low paying job this book might be of some help. I would ask for a copy from the library first before I would buy it though or better yet, I would go out to the websites of HUD, HHS, or one of the other State and Federal Human services websites in your area and check out what the assistance programs you might be eligible for.
   
   For anyone else this is a waste of money.



3. In the infomercials it states "millionaires are eligible" and the title is "Free money to pay your bills" It is obvious that the author wants you to think of this book as a way to get rich quick. Thank God I at least checked mine out from the library. Seriously folks if the government was just giving away money we'd all be millionaires. That being said it still doesn't justify the authors tailoring this reference in such a misleading way. Using human greed to feed one's own greed...how ironic.



4. This book offered more disability programs and veteran programs available to those people, not just anyone. I expected to find out about things offered to people who did not fit this type of profile, but who might be able to acquire government grants or money through programs not known to the general public. Everyone knows about the programs offered in this book, or can easily find out about them through their local government offices. I was glad I did not pay the full $30 + price at a book store for this book. I would really have been upset. The only thing that might be useful to me specifically is college money for my daughter, who has already graduated with a Bach. of Science degree, but who may have to go back and take some additional classes in order to get her teacher's certification. I would not recommend this book to people I know as a great source of help.



5. this book has no use for anyone who lives in louisiana for sure. it sucks

5 comments about Economics of the Public Sector: Third Edition.

1. I found reading this book a very frustrating experience. The good things include:

   * Solid undergraduate discussion of the economics of taxation;

   * An introductory discussion of a great many of the fascinating policy controversies of our time;

   * Often a lively text by one of the most powerful minds in contemporary economics.

   Flaws include:

   * A failure to update many of the data and references carried over from the preceding (1988) edition;

   * Too much focus on American facts and institutions;

   * A failure to understand the Public Choice perspective;

   * A failure to appreciate the beauty and simplicity of the Flat Tax, and a refusal to cite the work of Hall, Rabushka, and Bradford in the area;

   * A failure to describe the work of Ronald Coase properly;

   * A sneering denigration of the stock market as a "gambling casino", without mentioning the role of the stock market in disciplining managers, in reallocating risks, and in diffusing ownership of large enterprises;

   * A failure to appreciate how problematic the taxation of realized capital gains can be;

   * A failure to appreciate the drawbacks of pay-as-you-go public old age pensions;

   * A failure to appreciate the merits of vouchers enabling parents to choose among private as well as public schools;

   * Finally, an unseemly deference to the Clintonista party line, unseemly in an academic.

   The tragedy is that politicians, judges, and the better cut of journalists could use a better text on this subject.




2. accessible text for beginners, but the text is NO preparation for the end-of-chapter questions. With no available answer key and no help from a teacher, the questions are IMPOSSIBLE to answer leaving the student/reader/taker of test extremely tired and hungry and unsatisfied with econ knowledge at 2 in the morning.



3. Excessive use of graphs and charts which are very difficult to follow. Some chapters read easily, others very difficult to understand. Would be better if it had a complementary teacher's guide. LRM



4. Although I deeply respect J. Stiglitz, I prefer H. Rosen`s Public Finance. I found it more effective to learn this subject due to the deeper treatment of the models and theories.
   The only aspect I would recommend it for is because it has Stiglitz wider view of the global tendencies intrinsically in some ways.



5. This book by Stiglitz offers a not-so technical introduction into Public Economics, and I would say it is on undergraduate level.
   There is very little mathematics involved, for an economics book, as his aim is to build up an intuitive recognition of the concepts.
   
   For international learners there is an obvious drawback in that the case-studies are all based on the US economy.
   But with a topic like this, I think writing a general book would be quite difficult, I haven't really come across one that is.
   
   For me this book was effective, I used this book more than my designated textbook.

4 comments about Public Dollars, Private Stadiums: The Battle over Building Sports Stadiums.

1. This was a very interesting book. Written by 2 scholars but easy to read and enlightening to anyone who wants a closer look at how sports teams and cities play off against each other and with competition (other sports teams and other cities).
   Also gives an interesting look at the regional dynamics of the different regions of the USA. Very interesting look at how people in various cities in the US see themselves and how the importance of spectator sports ranks relative to other economic and entertainment opportunities in various cities.
   A must-read for the average citizen to help make informed choices if and when governments in their area are evaluationg/pushing new stadiums.



2. This book was an eye opener on the shady practices employed by state and city governments in securing public financing for PRIVATELY owned stadiums.
   
   A great read, particularly if you live in a city that is in discussion with a sports franchise regarding building a new facility. Be wary...be very wary.



3. Well thought out and articulated arguments for part of what ills many cities and society as a whole. (And this is coming from a sports fan.) It was quite interesting to see how some communities are at the same time very much the same, while being so very different.



4. A very thorough scholarly analysis, and yet, quite an easy read. I recommend this book to any baseball fan, who is also a taxpayer and a voter. I also suggest that you read Curry, T., K. Schwirian, and R. Woldoff. 2004. High Stakes: Bigtime Sports and Downtown Redevelopment (Urban Life and Urban Landscape), after you finish with this book.

No comments about Jumping Into Empty Space: A Reluctant Mennonite Businessman Serves in Paraguay's Presidential Cabinet.

1 comments about Public-Private Partnerships: Principles of Policy and Finance.

1. Yescombe's "Public-Private Partnerships" is a welcome helpful book, especially for non-experts who have not been educated in law.
   
   Any contract or capital structure has peculiarities unto itself which general commentary can summarize. But this is an extreme challenge in the field of public-private partnerships.
   
   Public-private partnerships can take a variety of shapes and sizes, with asymmetric agency concerns involved. Yescombe doesn't address the full utility of individual agents and principals within asymetry (or work through complete n-actor, n-game game theory optimization), but the cautious reader can read between the lines as he walks through the details and he amply raises enough issues to stimulate thought.
   
   Sub-specializations can often develop difficult technical jargon, and Yercombe does an excellent job unpacking the sometimes bewildering use of terms, while sticking to a presumption of a readership coming from a "Black's" and common law perspective.
   
   Yescombe covers a wide range: from general policy developed by government authorities to technical financial analysis, capital structure, procurement, financial and legal venue issues. Yescombe's perspective as a practitioner gives a solidity to the subject matter, and provides an authoritative guide and reference for investors, bankers, companies providing infrastructure or services to public sector authorities and the public at large.
   
   For now, this is the single best work for anyone interested in a public-private partnership.

2 comments about Public Finance.

1. This is an extremely clear introduction to public finance, but it isn't the sort of book that will make students love public finance. There aren't enough current examples. It doesn't focus on the debates within public finance. It is just dry facts.
   
   Also, the book would be much better with more data. Students who take public finance would normally have had at least one semester of statistics. Why not integrate some statistics into the course. Nothing fancy. But making some numbers available and letting students do some very simple analysis would be useful for economics students.



2. I found this book easy to understand and comprehend. It may take a double reading just to ensure key elements are understood. The Masters Program for which this book was required helps people to grasp the concepts used by the government to spend on domestic "improvements" or welfare programs to stimulate the economy.

5 comments about Fiscal Administration.

1. Public Budgeting Systems by Robert D. Lee, Philip G. Joyce, and Ronald Wayne Johnson is written more clearly... if you have a choice, buy this book. The problem with Mikesell is that he has to write 200 pages (six chapters) to explain the concept of revenues in the budget process. Too many trees were wasted in the development of this book. Lee, Joyce, and Johnson can do this in 40 pages.
   
   The greater majority of my Public Budgeting Systems class at George Mason University feels that the Mikesell book is written in a manner to lull oneself to sleep... the benefit is that one could read the book rather than using drugs to induce sleep.
   
   However, if you are required to purchase the Mikesell book, you should go to the Amazon UK web site and complete your transaction there... you can save yourself about 70 to 80 dollars.



2. Although big (and pricey) this book contains very good illustrations and explanations of financial and budgeting concepts and principles. A must have for serious students in graduate programs.



3. This book is written so poorly I can barely get through it. Mikesell goes on and on with run-on sentences, excessive details that get in the way of the concepts, and very poor organization of the concepts. He shifts styles, meanders off topic, and fails to get to the point. He also uses very few graphs or illustrations. Instead, he includes large tables of numerical data (rather than a chart, like a pie, line, or bar graph, that would bring out the important message).
   
   Even though it's in the 7th edition, it reads like a rough first draft. It needs major revision. In order to get through it, I skim for the ideas and skip a lot of the text. When I try to "read" it (i.e. every word), I get so bogged down, I can't move forward and I don't retain much. Mikesell obscures the main concepts in a haze of excess words, unhelpful information, and pervasive use of the passive voice.
   
   Unfortunately, I have to use this book for my graduate Public Financial Management course. If you have the choice, find something better.



4. Almost perfect!The book is new,and reaches me on time.
   I find that the question marks printed in the book are all inverted,anyway, it doesn't affect reading.



5. This is a simple, clear, practical public finance text. It describes the basic processes of taxing, borrowing (and investing public funds), and spending, carefully delineating capital budgeting and operational budgeting from cash budgeting, their purposes and functions. My students, both in our executive program and regular MBA students find it much more approachable and useful than the other public finance texts I have used, in part because it relentlessly focuses on administrative matters. The text is also sensitive to jurisdictional issues in fiscal management -- federal. state. local.
   
   The questions at chapter ends are thought provoking and challenging without being overwhelming. I provide Excel set-ups for the problems I use, which allows students to perform a greater number of exercises in a timely manner and also for me to grade their work more easily. I'd also like to see more attention to mean variance analysis, which is one of the main integrating ideas in financial management, but otherwise I am quite pleased with this text and recommend it highly.