No comments about International Migration and Economic Development: Lessons from Low-income Countries.

No comments about Corporate Power in an African State: The Political Impact of Multinational Mining Companies in Zambia (Perspectives on Southern Africa).

No comments about The Nature of Economic Growth: An Alternative Framework for Understanding the Performance of Nations.

No comments about An Almost Practical Step Toward Sustainability (Rff Press).

No comments about Economic Growth in the 1990s: Learning from a Decade of Reform (Lessons from Experience) (Lessons from Experience) (Lessons from Experience).

5 comments about Shoveling Fuel for a Runaway Train: Errant Economists, Shameful Spenders, and a Plan to Stop them All.

1. I was drawn to this book after it was suggested as an alternative here at Amazon to a so-called "perpetual growth" tome (a book, by the way, that actually points to no such thing), but I've decided against buying Czech's book for fear of becoming an overspent American. Sorry, but I'm not contributing to the royalty check of Czech.



2. The first 106 pages of the book are well written and present a number of interesting notions about the dangers of our society's high regard for economic growth. Czech's arguments against the practicality of infinite growth (even though it may be theoretically possible according to neoclassical economists) are clear and well documented.

   The underlying theme of the book is that neoclassical economists support a theory that the economy can sustain infinite growth, while the ecological economists claim that at some point, the growth will inevitably slow and then stop (more likely crash) because it is impossible in practicality to sustain growth forever. The book starts off with some interesting points about economic growth and sustainability in Part I, and then goes off the deep end in Part II as the author shares his proposed plan for achieving a 'steady-state economy.'

   The plan in a nutshell: everyone should live very modestly, regardless of their income level, and whenever they notice someone else spending more money than they feel is necessary, they should immediately judge them and try to shame them into changing their ways. The goal is for society to become repulsed by conspicuous consumption to the extent that those in the financial top 1% of society are pressured to reform themselves and give their extra money away to those in need.

   Although Part I is good enough to justify the purchase price, I would recommend skipping Part II in its entirety.




3. Brian has really impressed with his thoughtful analysis of our economy from both an intellectual and spirtual viewpoint. Unfortunately, none of this can be easily proved, but that is the case with the most important things in our lives, all of which have a spirtual base (religion, our role in society, role in the family, etc.).

   Brian has uncovered and clarified issues which have probably been rolling around in the back of many of our minds, for example the link between Darwinism, Maslow's heirarchy, and sexuality. (The real spirit of how things work is deeply embedded in our passions, sexuality, etc, and we must uncover these things to get to the root of all critical life issues). He also proposed a viewpoint of the role of the wealthy in our society, how their behavior impacts our economny and ecology, and how we all are capable of the same behavior if we had a few more dollars in our pocket, so perhaps a little better understanding of each other across "classes" is in order.

   Brian only loosely alluded to the role of addiction in the behavior of the wealthy (e.g. if you have a hundred million dollars, why do you need more, what are you trying to prove, and aren't you in a position to exercize the most important human / spirtual values?). Perhaps a closer look at the role of addiction and prevalance of addictive behaviors and how they contribute to "success" and sustain destructive behaviors and ego based delusions at the expense of a more spirtual well roundedness would be in order.

   Brian makes an excellent point about how a real solution requires a change in the mindset of the populace (very Jeffersonian) to be more aware and more involved in solving these problems, however he falls short with solid solutions. But then again, maybe there are no simple solutions. This book is about awareness, and it does a great job at it.




4. While the first part of the book provides compelling reasons for re-examining how we view economic policy, you can find all the same arguments better explained within the introduction of Herman Daly's excellent book Beyond Growth. Czech adds nothing to Daly in repeating him, and the second part of Czech's book is dangerous in its ignorance. Czech basically says that the more something costs, the more it wastes; and therefore the best thing to do to stop waste is to villify spending. He gives several extravagant examples of luxury by members of the upper classes as proof that they waste far more per capita than normal people and thus (psychological) class warfare (though he doesn't call it that) is the answer to our environmental problems.
   
   There are SO many things wrong with this view. First, a $100 bottle of wine doesn't waste any more or less than a $6 bottle of wine, nor does more expensive organic produce cause more environmental damage than cheaper conventional produce (quite the opposite). Did Czech entirely miss Daly's explanation of the difference between quantity/growth and quality/development? Second, if the large estates that Czech chides the upper classes for saves trees and land from cookie-cutter suburban housing developments, I for one am all for them (i.e. the large estates). Third, villifying *anyone* as part of the ecological economics revolution is counter-productive, particularly in that blaming the rich for their waste ignores the hideous waste of the lower classes themselves. (So richer people have more boats, perhaps, but what classes are more likely to have a beat-up car that leaves trails of grey exhaust?) Taking personal responsibility for the greater good is key to reaching a solution -- not passing blame on others. If, for instance, ecological damage (in production, use, and disposal) is taken into account in pricing goods and services (with the proper funds going toward mitigation of the damages rather than general government coffers), then it doesn't matter WHO is doing the purchasing. Czech presents good arguments for fundamental economic reforms; but these arguments are better presented elsewhere, and Czech's proposed solutions are quite awful indeed.



5. This book is an excellent introduction to the steady state economy. The idea of the steady state economy has been around for decades, but I think it may finally be gaining some traction (note the recent appearance of an article by ecological economist Herman Daly in Scientific American).
   
   Czech is a lively writer. I especially liked the chapter giving responses to the cornucopian Julian Simon's arguments. Part of the problem I see with modern environmentalism is that it spends nearly all of its time preaching to the converted, with the result that evidence and arguments against truly wrongheaded ideas don't get properly developed. This book takes on the best arguments that the mainstream economists have to offer, and demolishes them. Bravo!
   
   I appreciated Czech's suggestion to use the phrase "economic bloating" instead of economic growth. Words do count in this kind of high-stakes contest.
   
   Czech's ideas about using social disapproval to influence the consumption habits of the top 1% of society (the liquidating class) are interesting. I like the fact that it puts the influence of women on public opinion front and center. Whether it will really work or not, I'm not sure, but it might be worth trying.
   
   Czech talks about investment being bad because it will just waste more. I don't agree with this. I think the problem is that due to the enormous externalities in our economic system, resources are not being allocated correctly. This is what causes the waste, not investment as such. Investment in something that will provide long-lasting benefits or help in the conversion to a steady-state economy is GOOD, not bad. Czech also contrasts "bad" investment with "good" contributions to charity. I think he is correct that charity is more likely to benefit society, but this is not always true. Some charities engage in poorly-thought-out schemes that only encourage population growth beyond what an area can sustain. This helps no one in the long run.

No comments about The Disenchanted Isle: Mrs. Thatcher's Capitalist Revolution.

No comments about Scarcity, Conflicts, and Cooperation: Essays in the Political and Institutional Economics of Development.

No comments about Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare Volume 1 (Handbooks in Economics).

2 comments about Restoring Japan's Economic Growth (Policy Analyses in International Economics).

1. Posen does a good job of presenting his case that the Japanese recession can be alleviated through the effective use of fiscal policy. He supports his argument well by employing statistical evidence and economic tools.

   I believe, however, that Posen fails to address the psychological effect the current recession is having on the Japanese government & people. Structural Reform is being instituted rapidly because stagnation has brought about the realization that the current system needs serious overhaul.

   It also seems to be the case that fiscal policy needlessly pours money into the inefficient construction sector, leading to undesirable consequences in terms of sectoral allocation.

   Overall, Posen makes a strong argument in favor of fiscal policy. Hopefully he will update his book to explain the current apparent recovery of the Japanese economy.




2. This is an excellent little book. Posen, an increasingly influential monetary economist, gives us his view on what is wrong and what needs to be done in Japan. While this effort was published in late 1998, the diagnosis and medication prescribed are the same now as then.

   In Posen's view, all but one of the economic stimulus packages unveiled in the 1990s was equivalent to pouring money down the drain. Government money either wasn't spent at all because regional and municipal governments are bust or money was thrust at wasteful construction industries which add nothing to GDP. Also, monetary policymakers have decided that their new independence means they should do exactly the opposite to what everyone outside the BOJ thinks they should do. So policy is in a state of paralysis.

   Posen argues that Japan needs aggressive stimulus, both through fiscal and monetary policy channels. In his view, there is nothing terribly wrong with Japan - a very different view from consensus. He also shows that BOJ fears of igniting inflation if they loosen monetary policy aggressively are complete nonsense.

   This isn't a happy read for amateurs. It's quite in depth and needs some knowledge of the dismal science. It's very mainstream or Keynesian, just in case you were wondering. But it's a good read nonetheless.