No comments about Monetary Policy, Inflation, and the Business Cycle: An Introduction to the New Keynesian Framework.

5 comments about The Competitive Advantage of Nations.

1. 
   "The Competitive Advantage of Nations" gives insights into why and how industries, regions, nations or some social groups thrive or fall short. The book explains and presents the theory on the sources of sustained prosperity in the contemporary worldwide economy. This seminal work has assisted countries to develop national policy based on their international competitiveness.
   
   Porter methodically and systematically discusses why some nations achieve continual economic prosperity. He explains the roles of governments and companies in economic development. The author shows the distinction between competitive advantage as a source of wealth and the concept of comparative advantage which had been until recent years the paradigm on thinking about international competition.
   
   Porter based his research in 10 leading trading nations. The book introduced the author's "diamond" which is a new way of looking and comprehending the competitive advantage of a nation. His concept of "clusters" or groups of interconnected firms, suppliers, related industries and institutions in certain locations opened a unique way for organizations and governments to look at economies and assess the competitive advantage of locations and set public policy.
   
   This weighty tome is recommended reading for entrepreneurs, business executives, policy makers, economists and other readers who are interested in ensuring that companies can successfully face the future based on pragmatic assessment of how the firm can gain competitive advantage.



2. Recently pick up the book by lecturer recommendation, although its dry & boring with huge massive information but open up my mind and keep question the assumption in today market.



3. One of my favorites titles. I started my experience about Porter's Competitiveness by this book.



4. Will a firm that exports finished manufactured goods make more money than a firm that exports raw materials?
   
   The Raw Material depression that hit Latin America cause a massive deficit in the 1990s. Decreases in raw material commodity prices contributed to the increasingly large trade deficit with Japan. The US bought electronics and automobiles from Japan and Japan imported US agricultural. The continue drop in US agricultural commodity price accelerate the trade deficit.
   
   Every nation specializes in specific SIC code domains. US refrigeration and cooling domains as companies like Trane and Carrier establish position and global market share . Latin America could hold the key to removing US trade deficit. The US exports finished goods to Latin America, Wheat, Soybeans, Rice, and Corn to Brazil. Brazil consumes large quantities of US products, acquires easy credit, and the trade deficit shrinks. Local protectionism can not compete against global market price. US ethanol price drive demand for corn and wheat. The US imports biofuels and wood products. Commodity demand booms and a rise in commodity prices occurs. Government regulation attempts to soften fluctuations in commodity prices and appease local demand. Short term relief is possible.
   
   Decreased regulation, removal of trade barriers, and lower taxes help global firms become more competitive. Lower corporate taxes provide more foreign investment. The growth of firms will be associated with increased investment opportunity. Lower taxes help reduce the risk associated with return on investment burdens.



5. I once read an article by Michael Porter called "Strategy and the Internet". In it the author argues against mainstream ideas such as "the internet will change everything in businesses". I did not necessarily agree with the author, but its good to read something critical of popular ideas once in a while. This is why I bought this book, and the author did not dissapoint. Michael Porter challenges alot of "facts" in this book and does a good job. The book is very rich with information and is easy to read. The author picks countries from both the rich world and the developing world. My only problem is that he didnt chose China or India. I think if he was writting the book now he would have definately chosen both of them, but even so, they would have been a goodchoice 30 years ago, I think. Its very challenging to write about "the rise and fall" of economic advantage as a general theory, but the author did an excellent job. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in economics or business, but I dont think socialists will like what they read. The author clearly states that there is a role for the government to play, but not the sort of role communists have in mind. Infact he strongly argues that any interference the wrong way would destroy a nations advantage.

5 comments about The Chastening: Inside The Crisis That Rocked The Global Financial System And Humbled The Imf.

1. In Globalization and Its Discontents, Joseph Stiglitz claims that the Asian crisis could not have been achieved by market speculators and corrupt politicians alone: it required the involvement of economists, and more specifically of that breed of economists who populate the corridors of the International Monetary Fund, an institution charged with maintaining financial stability and extending credit to countries facing crises.
   
   Although not a professional economist, Paul Blustein provides a more balanced account. Instead of invoking arcane theories and denouncing other people's incompetence to make his point, he sticks to the facts and reconstructs the story of the Asian crisis as people experienced it on the frontline. His most fascinating pages are when he follows IMF economists on rescue missions, from Bangkok and Jakarta to Seoul and back again. You can almost smell the sweat emanating from those figures uniformly clad in white shirts and dark suits, envision the nights spent working on spreadsheets in air-conditioned hotel rooms, feel the tension that reigns once the team has unearthed some unsavory data, witness the embarrassment of the authorities who are asked to spill open their books and confess their best-kept financial secrets, imagine the relief when things fall into place and the program proposal is ready to go to the executive board for approval.
   
   One should not pity IMF economists. They live in poshy Washington, fly business class, stay in five stars hotels and, although they envy the paychecks of their Wall Street colleagues, manage to lead an international bureaucrat's life with a banker's salary. But one also has to acknowledge their high professional standards, their devotion to their tasks and their sense of discipline that contradicts the adage that economists can never agree with one another (remember Winston Churchill, who remarked that "if you put two economists in a room, you get two opinions, unless one of them is Lord Keynes, in which case you get three opinions.")
   
   Here is how IMF staffers are perceived by their colleagues from the World Bank, a sister institution located right across the street in downtown Washington:
   
   "Economists from the World Bank, who sometimes work in joint missions with the IMF, express awe at the almost military manners in which Fund staffers defer to their superiors. This protocol is in stark contrast to the code of conduct at the World Bank, an institution devoted to long-term development loans, whose economists or irrigation specialists or environmental experts might embark on a lively disagreement right in front of, say, a borrowing country's deputy finance minister. When an IMF mission enters a room to conduct a negotiation, it is often easy to tell who ranks where; one World Banker likens it to "a mother duck leading her baby ducks." The mission chief typically sits in the middle of the table and does most of the talking, allowing immediate subordinates to chime in on issues requiring their specialized expertise; lower-level staffers are likely to remain silent."
   
   Four year after its publication, the book still makes an interesting read. It could have been adorned with a more telling title (the "chastening" refers to the jacket of the hardcover edition which shows the IMF pilloried with a dunce's cap, as well as to the sense of awe when faced with the recurrence of financial crises that should chasten us all of any sense of complacency). It would also have benefited from the inclusion of a few pictures, and especially that famous snapshot that shows IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus standing, arms crossed, looking down at President Suharto as he signed the revised multi-billion bailout package that was to provide a short respite to the country as it spiraled into chaos. A tell-tale picture, indeed.



2. 1997, S Korea banking system was on the verge of collaspe, as result of violatile banking practices that had destabled the financial system threating the 11th largest economy of the world and created the possibility of financially crippling long term companies like Hyundia, Samsung, and Daewoo. At the time the IMF began analyzing S Korea's financial condition, S Korea bank reserves stood at $24 billion. IMF's, Neiss had no idea how close the S Korean banks were to default and when Neiss arrived in S. Korea the reserves had already fallen to $9 billion and dropping $1 billion a day. Foreign banks were demanding payment on loans come due and the practice of routinely extending payments month after month was canceled causing a massive amount of money due. The short term debt to foreigner was $20 billion. Foreigners on the currency exchange were dumping the won for the dollar and investors were executing a massive selloff of Korean stocks and bonds. When Neiss arrive S Korea was within a week of default. If S Korea defaulted, the default could cause a long and crippling cutoff of loans and neighboring Asian countries might also fall into default and investment confidence could be shattered globally and the world fall into a global recession. The S Korea economic collaspe affected the US economy; in 1998, the bond market ceased to function as a provider of capital to the world; the fed was forced into sharp cuts in the interest rate, but the fed could not tame the savage beast of the global market. The global market beast was enormous. Foreign investment in the selling and buying of stocks and bonds and other securities had reached $17.3 trillion by 1997.
   
   Neiss envisioned three responses to the crisis: 1. acquire a short term loan from Japan 2) gain permission to pay foreign loans in bonds rather than cash 3) stem the panic by showing the market that S Korea banks had plenty of cash. The IMF bailout infused $55 billion and $21 billion from the IMF. S Korea promised to cut budget amounts, raise interest rates, shutdown ailing financial institutions and close the doors, eliminate government direct bank loans, and allow greater freedom for foreign investors to buy stocks and bonds. The IMF bailout followed by a crash in the currency and economy of S. Korea. Financial credibility damage had occurred. IMF bailouts pattern of crashes after loan approval occurred with Thailand ($17 billion loan), Indonesia ($33 billion loan), Russia (1998 - $22 billion loan), and Brazil ($44 billion bailout loan). IMF bailout meant higher interest rates cooling fast growing economies. When a country fails to meet the target goals of the IMF, the IMF blames the government of the country for failing to meet the conditions of the loan. This tactic imposes censurorship and political influence entangling the IMF with the internal policies of the countries political machinery. 1999-2000, the IMF pronounced the Asia financial crisis over.
   
   In fast growing Asian countries, hot money had poured inot these economies. Hot money could be liquidated with a push of a computer button by commerical banks and brokers. Hot money destabilized the S Korean financial systems and increased the violatility in the system.
   
   Criticism of the IMF are it lacks expertise in banking issues, it closes banks and does not consider whether other banks can cover; it can not create money like the fed. In 2001, IMF war chest totaling $137 billion. IMF limitations to financial assets makes it vulnerable to rescuing failsafe countries that could trigger global financial collaspe. Once an IMF bailout is installed, the role of the IMF is too become the financial planner of the country forcing the country to reduce spending and increase income revenue.



3. Clearly the best book ever written on the IMF & its inner-workings. Great detail on the theater and players within the IMF and those that make policy. The book is a must read for anyone interested in the world economy.
   
   Regarding the crisis that hit the world financial markets the author does an outstanding job in educating the reader on all of the key elements from Nation/States to Hedge Funds.
   
   By taking individual chapters to break down the elements of the distressed finances of Korea, Indonesia, Russia, Brazil, Thailand & wall street the author takes us on a roller coaster ride of international politics, high finance, intrigue & history.



4. The Chastening is a ripping, white-knuckle read. This IS the best single book about the IMF, but it is also a lesson in political theory. Like Milton Friedman's "Monetary History of the United States," David Halberstam's "The Best and the Brightest," and Robert Conquest's "Harvest of Sorrow," this book is a case study in how superempowered and unaccountable bureaucrats tend make natural disasters incalculably worse. It is an object lesson in how policymaking ambitions are frustrated by human fallibility, especially when the policymaker in question fails to account for that fallibility. At every step, the Fund's planners made horrible missteps with smug confidence, thereby prolonging the suffering of untold millions of people. At every step, they were shocked when reality failed to coorespond to theory and their best intentions backfired. In a subtle way, the doctrinaire rationalist approach taken by the Fund during the Asian crisis presages the failure of the remaking of Iraq. The inherent weakness of theory-laden, top-down political and economic planning is a lesson we must apparently learn over and over again. (For those who appreciate this philosophical dimension to the book, I highly recommend James C. Scott's Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (The Institution for Social and Policy St).")
   
   The IMF is the most powerful single human force on the planet and yet it remains totally almost unknown to public at large. Blustein is to be commended for making the Fund transparent and accessible to all educated people.



5. There are many good reasons to bash the IMF but few reasons to do so if you don't know what you're talking about -- this books lets you do both.
   
   I've spent years in social circles that carry on a tragic lament of third world debt to first world countries, a lament I agree with but often find is expressed through oft-repeated anti-globalization mantras with no perception of how hideously complex the situation is.
   
   This book gives you the tools to make cogent criticisms of the IMF while simultaneously learning about the herculean chore the IMF has before it. Blustein describes the mechanics of how financial crises arose in the fateful year of 1997 in Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Korea, and later in Russia and Brazil. A combination of cookie-cutter shock therapy schemes, out-of-touch IMF officials, incompetent and often corrupt finance ministry officials and Wall Street Bankers converge to make it nearly impossible for countries to escape the wrath of an increasingly volatile group of investors the author appropriately dubs the "Electronic Herd."
   
   The pattern is now a familiar one -- irresponsible fiscal and monetary policy leaves a country exposed to predatory lenders and currency speculators. Investors and debt holders see the country's dwindling hard currency reserves as sign of imminent collapse and begin to sell off every asset they have there, creating a vicious circle of panic. The IMF is called in to make sure the country doesn't go bankrupt by providing loans of hard currency -- but who's being bailed out, the country itself of the lenders that put their money there?
   
   Blustein explains how this dynamic was repeated in each of the countries of the 1997 and 1998 crises, with the IMF response working in everyone's favor in only two cases among a string of dismal failures. He extensively explores the issue of "moral hazard," or the idea that big loan packages to economies in crisis just reinforces irresponsible behavior on the part of both the lenders and the borrowers.
   
   Can get a little tedious at times, and the sequence of events is sometimes hard to follow because so much is being explained at once -- but overall a well written work by a reporter who covered the subject for years.

5 comments about A Billion Bootstraps: Microcredit, Barefoot Banking, and The Business Solution for Ending Poverty.

1. The authors' main reason for writing the book seems that they want to convince their fellow millionaires stop donating and start investing their money in MF funds. They give a convincing explanation why MF has a much bigger "impact on investment" compared to donations and they help you with selecting efficient MF programs.
   However, although the authors discuss the history and principles of MF too, much more interesting books can be found for those who are interested in how MF works in practice and how to set up a MF institution.



2. This book provides a good introduction to Microfinance. The authors are genuinely enthusiastic about microfinance and want to spread their excitement to others through this book. Though I am familiar with non-profits, I learned that through microfinance, the same money can serve multiple people in say a 10 year period (as one six-month loan gets repaid, it is plowed into a new loan, and the cycle goes on. So your donation of say $[...] can be loaned to 24 people in a 10-year term).
   
   After reading this book, most people (that includes me) will likely consider providing Micro loans instead of donating cash as one-time donations. I have found that through [...] (ebay's philanthropic arm I think), one can provide the loan as well as get a 3% return on the invested amount.
   
   My only gripe (hardly so) is the book a bit too basic for my liking and contains too many stories.



3. The authors of "A Billion Bootstraps" have captured the essence of generosity in this fresh, challenging look at personal giving. Too often we give to feel good about ourselves. Smith & Thurman encourage us to look beyond our own self-fulfillment and find ways to have real-life, effective impact on our world. I am inspired to give, but to do so strategically...with an eye for meeting real-world needs, empowering those with fewer resources available and through a sustainable methodology.
   
   Read this book, be inspired and use what you've been blessed with to bless others.



4. Bought this book on the recommendation of someone. It is an excellent read. Very well written and not heavy at all. It is not a manual on how to do micro-credit. It is rather and "advert" for it.
   
   Worth buying



5. "A Billion Bootstraps" is a beautifully written and informationally rich guide for donors to what is perhaps the most effective method of poverty reduction and wealth creation in the developing world -- microcredit. Tiny empowerment loans are granted to underemployed men and women so they can launch their own small businesses - and lift themselves and their families out of chronic poverty, into self-sufficiency...forever.
   
   The authors, one, Phil Smith, a rags-to-riches oil entrepreneur, and the other, Eric Thurman, a world renowned microcredit expert, have rendered great service to those who wish to make a true difference in the alleviation of poverty in this world of ours.
   
   - Mike Schwager
   Founder, Editor-in-Chief
   Enrichment.com (www.enrichment.com)

5 comments about Flat Tax Revolution: Using a Postcard to Abolish the IRS.

1. Like any politically charged book this one (along with corresponding reviews) will likely get mixed reviews right along party lines. Conservatives will love it, progressives will hate it, blah-blah-blah. I think we've all had enough of it. So I figured it would be good to get a traditionalist's point of view, the opinion of a moderate, an independent.
   
   First, the current tax code isn't working, so I welcome any idea for changing it. Steve Forbes proposes a flat tax, or what he calls a "fair tax", in which anyone over a certain income pays 17% income tax. We all pay the same percentage, but obviously different amounts. The rich pay more, the poor pay less, and the really poor don't pay at all. The interesting part is that Forbes uses strong, compelling evidence to support his contention that this will increase (rather than decrease) federal government revenues, that the poor will not suffer under the plan, that the rich will not squeeze through the cracks, and the economy will soar. He cites several other countries who have implemented similar measures and how well their economies have done afterward.
   
   In addition, tax loopholes are closed so the rich can't use accountants to avoid paying their share, the IRS is disbanded, and we all pay our taxes with a simple 5 minute postcard. Sounds great. I'm sure there will be naysayers and "boos" and "hisses", but Forbes makes a strong argument here, at least one strong enough to be heard.



2. I agree. We need to simplify the tax rules. When I first read this book and heard Forbes speak about it I was all for it. Now that I have had some time to read some of the reviews of it and of the Fair Tax I am beginning to question both the Flat Tax and Fair Tax plans. I have always questioned the idea of taxing only consumption. We already know that sales taxes affect the way we buy. I believe the actions to avoid taxes would only increase if the Fair Tax was applied, especially as we are becoming more and more a global economy. So, I still believe that we require a tax on income and not mainly consumption. Again, leaning back to the Flat Tax. What really is Forbes discussing as a Flat Tax? In my mind his idea of a Flat Tax is really a scrapping of the current system with all of its exemptions and rules and rewriting it. Well, that is a great idea. The problem as many have pointed out is that the complexity of the tax codes comes from determining what is actually income. What I think Forbes is trying to say is that he wants to make a more general rule about what we call income. Sounds good to me. My concerns are that this plan will not actually give everyone a tax break. I understand his point that with a lower tax bracket there will be fewer people that feel the need to avert the system, but I am not convinced that that will outweigh the drop in the percentage paid by those who currently abide by the system. I also worry that this will not eliminate the need for the IRS. Someone has to police and monitor all of that money. No matter how few the number of rules there still has to be someone checking that they are followed. Yet, I am still on board, I just think that Forbes is making the Flat Tax sound better then it ever can be.
   
   I have another suggestion that I believe would simplify our paying and collecting of taxes. What if the IRS created a website/software that allowed us to calculate our taxes? This may be coming from my computer science side, but think about it. It would give us one single location to determine our correct tax amount that followed the tax code. It would already have all of the data already collected by the IRS that was sent in by our employers and financial institutions. So, really a lot of the calculations would already be completed. We would just have to enter in any other income, deductions, or credits into the system. Sure we would have to worry about the possibility for tampering with the system and determine how those without access would file, but I think it could definitely save me time I spend on my taxes. Yes, it would get a fight from any number of tax preparation companies, but they are going to get hurt by any good change in the tax code anyway.



3. Perhaps there is a government entity more corrupt than the I.R.S., but I am hard-pressed to say which one that would be. Imagine the results of finally banishing this unaccountable bureaucratic leviathan!
   
   Its time for the flat-tax. Formerly communist nations have used precisely this concept in conjunction with capitalism, to revive their defunct and shattered economies.
   
   Excessive taxation is immoral, unjust, and un-American. It kills initiative and cripples the economy. The present tax-code, as we well know, is a garbled and convlouted mess of inscrutable Byzantine rules and regulations. The intent of this chaotic and indecipherable bureaucratic monstosity is ultimately, to keep you confused and perplexed, to shake-down the American citizens for every last penny of profit. The fact remains, that despite the lofty promises of a supposed "benefit for the common good", only the most un-productive citizens ever see any return from the enormous taxes Americans pay.
   
   That includes not only welfare-rats, but career politicians.
   
   Does this enormous taxation really make government "work better"?
   
   The sad truth is, responsible hard-working citizens who strive to improve their earnings, ...are PUNISHED for doing so. Our present taxation system is designed to KEEP YOU IN YOUR PLACE.
   
   Read the book, and research examples of governments that actually put this practice to work. The Flat-Tax is FAIR, ENCOURAGES commerce,...and it works.
   
   Not surprisingly, this book is under attack by the usual leftist human-waste. The critics of this book are the very people who are completely dependant on the government for support of their "alternative life-styles", ...or government "careers". Thats YOUR hard-earned money at work.



4. The Forbes plan for tax reform is far less than ideal. It is not really a flat and simple tax, just a flatter and simpler tax. That being said, his system is preferable to the current monstrosity enforced by the IRS. Ideally, we should scrap the tax code and established a low flat tax rate. My ideal solution is not going to happen at this time.
   
   Our first priority should be to slash Federal spending. With Federal spending as high as it is there is no chance of real tax reform. High levels of spending require high levels of taxation. With high levels of taxation, people are going to lobby for tax exemptions, so we will likely be stuck with a complex income tax code.
   
   Forbes and other critics of big government should focus on restraining and then cutting growth in Federal spending. Then, after the spending problem is under control, we can talk about real tax reform. In the mean time, we might as well discuss the merits of more radical and ideal tax reform. In other words, Forbes advocates too little tax reform too soon. We should wait for an opportunity to really kill the IRS and the tax compliance industry. The IRS is a fundamentally evil organization, and the tax compliance industry is parasitic. Their time will come, and decent people who oppose them should be patient.



5. Though the title would not lead one to believe it, this book is rather interesting. The author makes some strong points in favor of converting to this tax and refutes a number of arguments against the tax. He points out its' effectiveness in other nations and how it enhances their economic competiveness. The current tax system is addressed with emphasis on the shortcomings including lack of fairness.

5 comments about Why Globalization Works (Yale Nota Bene).

1. Martin Wolf is worried that the combination of anti-globalists and the ambiguous attitudes of governments towards globalisation in developed and developing countries can halt even reverse globalisation. Martin Wolf is convinced that globalisation so far has only delivered a fraction of the potential benefits and that globalisation is the only way to maintain prosperity and solve the poverty problem of the world. The book covers globalisation comprehensively. After reading the book one has a framework to be able to judge which criticisms are groundless and which ones are justified. The book concentrates on economic policies and the role of government, the impact of globalisation and the causes of that impact. The book also contains a large number of very interesting statistical tables and charts to illustrate conclusions and recommendations.
   Globalization in the context of this book refers to increases in import and export and businesses that establish factories and offices in many countries.
   The author points out the enormous diversity of anti- globalist organisations and why their ideas are wrong. An important category is the Non Government Organisations (NGOs). People at large have considerable more confidence that NGOs are genuinely interested in their well-being than global companies and governments. Many if not most large businesses like GE, Shell and Unilever look at NGOs as stakeholders and engage in dialogues with NGOs like OXFAM and Greenpeace leading to benefits for both sides. NGOs are a part of the reality that businesses; governments and also economists have to accept.
   Martin Wolf refers to the globalisation as "'liberal capitalism". The words "liberal" and "liberty" mean different things to different people. To some it refers to libertarians promoting the simplified Washington consensus aiming for markets without restrictions, without capital controls, minimal taxes, and a minimalist government. The problem with the word "Capitalism" is that it leads people to think of capitalists which is misleading as the main providers of capital are pension funds and other institutional investors and not individual capitalists. To avoid misunderstandings one could also refer to the system as a "global free enterprise system".
   Martin Wolf points out that the cause of poverty is the wrong government policies. He writes on the final page of the book that if we want to make our world a better place, "we must not look at the failures of the market economy, but at the hypocrisy and stupidity that so often mar our politics, in both developing and developed countries". In Buddhism this "stupidity" is referred to as "ignorance" in the sense of short sightedness and ego-centeredness and not understanding causes and effects. Ignorance is a huge obstacle to progress of globalisation, not only at the level of governments but also at the level of businesses and people at large. This book makes an important contribution to reduce ignorance.
   Martin Wolf includes Joseph Stiglitz amongst the anti-globalists. Nevertheless the list of improvements in the globalisation process that Marin Wolf presents in the chapter "How to make the world a better place" on page 316, is very similar to the criticisms of Stiglitz. Martin Wolf is crusader for globalisation and Stiglitz is a crusader for globalisation from the perspective of the developing countries. The two books of Joseph Stiglitz, "Globalization and its discontents" and, "Fair Trade For All"- "How Trade Can Promote Development" are also very useful for understanding causes and effects in globalisation.
   Martin Wolf writes: "Economists are very uncomfortable with the notion of morality". That is one reason why many economists that write or make recommendations about globalisation contribute to the negative reputation of globalisation. Martin Wolf as an economist recognises the essential role of morality. He writes, "Markets also require, reward and reinforce valuable moral qualities".
   In summary "Why Globalization Works" should be read by all involved in or affected by globalisation, both by those in favour and those against.



2. This book is one of the best available books on globalisation. There is a historical perspective on the history of world trade from the high point of the 19th century through the nadir of the interwar years. The author explains the economics of globalisation clearly in non-technical language. He takes the criticisms of the various opponents and demolishes almost all of them. In many cases he shows the contradictions embedded in the critics positions. There is a wonderfully cruel but accurate demolition of Naomi Klein's ideas which he shows are both shallow and authoritarian. He is a lucid writer but the material can be heavy going (lots of numbers and laying out of economic ideas) but stick with it - you'll come out with a good grounding in the issues. As he makes clear in the book, ignorance and misunderstanding of economic ideas is distressingly widespread and impoverishes public debate. Read Jagdish Bhagwti's book before or after and if you don't understand the benefits of globalisation heaven help you!



3. I read this book a little after digesting Londonistan and almost as a coincidence we find both authors talking about the same thing but from differing perspectives. As one born in the baby boom years dominated by the cold war between two superpowers and living in a nanny socialist state of Great Britain, the last thirty years have been little short of revolutionary.
   
   While Martin Wolf uses the term Globalisation to mean the breaking down of barriers around the world, to trade and the factors of production, what we are really seeing is the re-establishment of the liberal order which dominated the globe prior to the onset of the first world war. This liberal order in the traditional, classical liberal sense, is not the same as it once was but a more modern version, changed and adapted to the different political and economic realities of the present. It is an order which brings about change, usually for the better, but like any other change, has winners and losers though in general all of the world benefits.
   
   Martin Wolf does an excellent job of making the case for globalisation, in a lucid and concise manner. Furthermore he not only makes the case for globalisation but dissects the arguements of globalisations opponents whether they be the French Attac movement or the neo-liberal turned socialist Professor John Gray or even his colleague Michael Prowse and shows them to be fallacious or based on false premises.
   
   Mr. Wolf is no dewey eyed idealist however. He neither professes undying faith in an unfettered free market nor does he articulate the need for a strong regulatory state. He argues from a realist perspective that government with a light touch is needed in certain areas not merely to correct externalities or produce public goods but also where some degree of social welfare is required. He develops an overwhelming case of why globalisation is good for us and looks forward to the future and assesses the risks involved in it's further development.
   
   In short this is an excellent non-technical treatment of a feature that is having an impact on all of our lives whether we notice it or not. I found in studying the text that it is of a very timely nature given the ressurgence of terror attacks throughout the world and the growing tendencies within the United States towards introversion and turning against external trading links. Combining this with the rise of a home based fundamental christianity, these developments suggest to me that the greatest threat to a resurgent international liberal order come from within the US rather than other nations. These have not been helped by the EU intransigence towards reduction of subsidies for the small minority of agricultural producers which causes so much hardship for thir world farmers.
   
   I am not saying either that I am in wholehearted agreement with Martin Wolf's case. While I broadly agree with the thrust of his agruement I believe that the private sector and voluntary sectors could play a much greater role if the role of the organisations of the state could be more restricted and restrained.
   
   There is a great deal to think about in this book and I think that thoughful readers will find it to be of excellent value.



4. In regards to globalization, the book made some valid and often frustrating points. The author didn't leave much room for disagreement. As someone that is skeptical of globalization, it was good to hear about the positive elements. It challenged my points of view. I am still deciding what to think on the subject and the book has encouraged me to think more deeply.



5. In coherent and readable style Martin Wolf lays out the case in favour of globalisation. Whether you are in favour or against you should read this book. In making his case, Wolf tells why a global market economy makes sense and why there is too little globalisation. In Part IV he sets out his arguments on why the critics are wrong. This part should be the most exciting for anti-globalisionists given that every chapter starts off with a number of arguments against globalisation (some of which struck me as somewhat bizarre). He then goes on to explain quite comprehensively why the critics should be wrong.
   I found Martin Wolf's book indeed a blueprint for a better world.

5 comments about A Consumers' Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America.

1. To say you are an America is to say that you are, de facto, a consumer.

   This word is a defining aspect of our American world... Consumerism covers daily life, whether it be drug discounts, tourism, marketers, insurance, cars, homes, technology or just plain old product reviews. We Americans are defined by our consumption.
   
   Lizabeth Cohen has given us a thoroughly researched, readable history on consumerism, and how it came to be such a force and part of our lives in America. She argues that after WWII the "Consumer Republic" was launched, full force, affecting life styles, government and even belief systems. Though the beginning of a consumers movement had occurred before 1940, the "Consumer Republic" took form and force after the second world war.

   Cohen's writing style is informative, to the point of being academic. "A Consumers' Republic" is a history book. Thus, it may be a bit more pedantic than most general readers would like.

   I found a few omissions that distracted from the overall excellence of the book. One being that Cohen does not investigate how consumerism has been incorporated into, and seriously affected, American Christianity. She does not address how Christianity, especially considering the `Protestant work ethic', helped to shaped and drive consumerism into being. She does not explore `why' Americans live to consume, "shop til they drop." Neither does she reflect on the effects that unbridled consumption have on both the social fabric of our nation or the ecological impact on our land.

   That said, this book is a "need to read" for students of American history, marketing, those involved as consumer activists, and business. Recommended. 3.5 stars




2. Lizabeth Cohen's "A Consumers' Republic" does much to explain how citizenship has been significantly redefined by consumerism in postwar America. The thoroughly readable book is full of insights and should interest all readers of 20th century American history. It will also prompt many to ponder how America might try to heal its frayed society while there is time available to do so.

   In the Acknowledgements, Ms. Cohen explains that this impressive book was written over the course of ten years. Her thesis profited from audience feedback at numerous college lectures and presentations she made during this time and with able assistance from a number of talented student researchers. With over 400 pages of text and 100 pages of notes, the book represents a remarkable achievement and is a testament to Ms. Cohen's intelligent use of the academic research process.

   Ms. Cohen is in top form when she chronicles the struggles of women and African-Americans to assert their rights in what she calls the "Consumers' Republic" of 1945 to 1975. The author provides background material by documenting how a variety of bread-and-butter consumer issues mobilized millions into action from the Depression through WWII. Ms. Cohen then shows how power gained by women and minorities through their contributions to the war effort later found expression in the Civil Rights, women's liberation and other movements of the 1950s and 1960s.

   However, Ms. Cohen explains that policy makers in the aftermath of WWII were influenced and corrupted by, among other things, unparalleled levels of corporate power and ideological rivalry with the Soviet Union. Mass consumption was seen as a solution to help keep manufacturing profits high and was propagandized in order prove to the world that the U.S. was practically a classless society. The reality was different, of course. The author discusses how racial, gender and class biases were reaffirmed and institutionalized by the GI Bill and other legislative acts. As a result of Ms. Cohen's extraordinary research, the reader comes to understand that the increasingly stratified post-WWII American society that resulted was not inevitable but was shaped by powerful interests who privileged private sector solutions at the expense of the public.

   In my view, the only shortcomings in this ambitious book are Ms. Cohen's failure to discuss the environmental consequences of consumerism and her omission of the student revolt against the military/industrial complex in the 1960s. But overall, these are minor quibbles. "A Consumers' Republic" delivers plenty of thought-provoking material and is a pleasure to read. The book is highly recommended to everyone who might want to gain perspective on contemporary American society and further consider where it might be headed.




3. The above quote from the book reveals its fundamental problem. Consumerism is stretched to include (for example) racial equality, housing policy, and politics: this dulls any edge the concept might have as an analytic tool. What is a consumer? We're told "the word's original meaning" - - "to devour, waste and spend" - - but not its current one. The author tries to distinguish between the "citizen consumer" and "purchaser consumer". The supposed dichotomy between these roles was no more obvious to me than to those consumer advocates who - - to the author's apparent surprise - - "found it possible to endorse both simultaneously".
   
   So the book is a kind of grab bag of the USA's post-war social problems, often using the author's home state as an example. At times, she seems on the verge of dissecting New Jersey as Mike Davis does Los Angeles (high praise from me), but never quite sustains such a level. For example, there's a fascinating account of how policies of "upzoning" were used to create homogeneous suburbs of large, expensive, detached houses. But when explaining how this led to racial polarization - - in an era of supposed desegregration - - she can only show us the 'after' map, not the 'before'. However, the use of photos, advertisements, and newspaper cartoons is exemplary: often amusing, sometimes shocking.
   
   Towards the end of the book, the author finds it necessary to expand the concept of "consumer" to "consumer/citizen", and finally to "consumer/citizen/taxpayer/voter": a clear sign of a dead end. On the final page, her vision is vague and feeble: we "could reinvigorate the liberating aspects of the purchaser" and "could seek to reverse the trend toward the Consumerization of the Republic by not shrinking from articulating the important things that only government can do". Hardly a programme of action. But maybe that's too much to expect.



4. I defer to the thorough review titled "Consumption and Greed" below for a synopsis of this book.
   
   The subject matter of "A Consumers' Republic" is engrossing and the book reveals many truths that are now forgotten and swept under the rug. Cohen uses an impressive plethora of examples to demonstrate her points, and in the end I know much more about the United States' economic and social history from the 30's to the present.
   
   Unfortuntately, Cohen's writing often becomes convoluted and difficult to read due to frequent lengthy and difficult to follow sentences. While reading, many times I had to re-read a sentence or paragraph in order to grasp the author's intent. A few times I even wanted to put the book down and pick up a less academic book - perhaps some fiction - to give my eyes and brain a break. Much of the book is well written and flows well, but these occasional roadblocks require determination to get through and prove frustrating. However, having finished this yesterday, I'm happy I persevered. The incredible amount of research and well thought out and supported thesis' are worth five stars, but the writing brings it down to four stars.



5. "A Consumers' Republic" is one of those kinds of books that exists on the premise that it illuminates some previously unknown phenomenon. The book purports to be a "bold, encompassing, and profoundly influential book." I humbly propose that this book is none of the above. "A Consumers' Republic" is certainly not a "bold" book. Quite tepidly, actually, the author makes a weak case that is essentially a rehashing (and a mediocre one at that) of mainstream academic criticisms of popular market culture. Certianly nothing new, the ideas lamely presented by this author were actually prefigured by a factor of centuries by actual scholars such as Smith, Marx, and de Toqueville. Not bold for sure, but also lacking nuance; "A Consumers' Republic" condescends to its readers and its subjects alike. And is this book "profoundly influential," as the jacket pompously asserts? I hope not.

No comments about World Development Report 2009: Reshaping Economic Geography (World Development Report).

1 comments about Reinventing Foreign Aid.

1. This book is actually edited by William Easterly and with a forward by Nancy Birdsall (President, Center for Global Development)

5 comments about The Real Wealth of Nations: Creating a Caring Economics (BK Currents (Hardcover)).

1. This book was my first interaction with the work of Dr. Eisler and I was deeply moved by the concept of partnership and the need to place a higher value on caring and traditionally 'feminine' values.
   
   The finance major in me was left very impressed at times, and rather disappointed at other times throughout the book. Dr. Eisler makes use of some great examples of companies that increase productivity, decrease turnover and breed hierarchies of actualization, specifically naming a software company that had daycare on site. She also discusses some great examples of how Scandanavian countries include fathers in the child-raising process, citing an example that requires couples having children take a combined 16 weeks off to care for the child and at least 6 of those weeks must be the working parent.
   
   I was a little disappointed that she used life expectancy and GDP as measures of how well women were treated in different countries. Her point is well taken, but statistics betray her. She discusses France and Kuwait having similar GDPs, but France having significantly more gender equality thus yielding longer lives, etc. This specific example is true enough, but women are treated much more as equals in Scandanavian countries than they are in Japan, and yet they live longer in Japan.
   
   She is rightfully very critical of executive compensation, short-term thinking, materialism and the ongoing dispute about what resources should be in public hands and which should be in private hands that plague globalization. She correctly points out that many resources and services can be most efficiently provided locally. As I turned the pages, I was hoping she would address some of the benefits of globalization, which in fact have gone a long way establish peace. Certainly the U.S. government worked hard to establish good relations with Pakistan and India, begging them to get along instead of prolonging the bloodshed over Kashmir. However, some of the greatest forces for good in that situation were none other than large, globalized communications firms with infrastructure and employees in both countries. Relative peace was brought about by these companies who provide employment and stability in these regions who had senior leaders sit down with government leaders and explain that their nervousness over their continued fighting would compel many investors to withdraw. Had Dr. Eisler mentioned this example (or countless others) I think she would have been able to more precisely point out improvements in globalization, rather than simply deducing that globalization isn't always the best solution.
   
   Dr. Eisler's diagrams of the missing pieces in measuring economics was most insightful and useful, as were the statistics she provided that showed spending more education now equals spending less on prisons later.
   
   Dr. Eisler risks alienating people who would be predisposed to be some of her most avid supporters when she takes excerpts out of religious texts and adlibs her opinions as if they were facts represented in the religious text. There is certainly no doubt that atrocities have been committed by those claiming religious titles, rights and missions, but even most of the examples she sites as the paragons of domination (the Taliban, the Ayatollah in Iran, Hitler and Stalin) are primarily secular in nature (the Ayatollah being the only religious figure). As a Christian, I will tell you that I want to vomit when I hear Falwell attribute 9/11 to feminism or Robertson attribute Katrina to tolerance of homosexuality. I will also tell you that 'love your neighbor as thyself' is very much a cornerstone of partnership (and there are many more examples of these).
   
   Dr. Eisler is also rightfully critical of the Bush Administration and their unilateral foreign policy, preemptive warfare doctrine, fiscal irresponsibility and environmental 'blinders.' I agree with most of her criticisms, usually for different reasons than the those she mentions. Having read an interview she gave after 9/11 where she surprises the interviewer by indicating that war against terrorism is necessary, I have to wonder what her opinion is of how western countries should address Iran. It's certainly valid to criticize preemptive warfare, but what if one of the premier dominators in the world is pursuing a nuke? Do we wait until he gains equal military power? Do we allow him to disconnect his society from the rest of the world where women continue to be subject to circumcision and mistreatment if they are not sufficiently subordinate?
   
   In this review I went to some lengths to justify my critiques, whereas I think my praise of Dr. Eisler's work speaks for itself. It may appear that I spent much more time discussing my critiques, and that is the reason why.
   
   This book is by far one of the best I've ever read and I hope someday to see it included as required reading in grade school curriculums (3rd grade or so).



2. Along with "The chalice and the Blade" and "Sacred Pleasure" this is the most profound, important and amazing book i have ever read - it changed my life! this should be a compulsory course at all self-respecting universities. Everyone in the world should either read or be aware of what these three books are talking about, then we'll not only have hope but a blueprint for a better world. i have half the mind to post it to our prime minister right now :)
   
   thank you Dr Eisler, from me and all the people and future generations that will benefit from your determination, knowledge and work!!!



3. I missed Riane Eisler's recent talk at the PARC Forum, but the abstract was so inspiring, I bought the book. As with many (all?) the other reviewers thus far, I support the basic notion of "caring economics": elevating the valuation of traditionally feminine activities such as caring and caregiving. I support partnership over domination (though don't know what to make of "hierarchies of actualization"), and the establishment of rules, tools and schools that offer a more comprehensive accounting - and accountability - within economics, that will incorporate the social and environmental dimensions more effectively, and eliminate "externalities" - costs that corporations can pass on to "external" stakeholders (as opposed to stockholders).
   
   The other reviewers have done a great job at highlighting many of the positive aspects of this book. I wanted to offer a slightly dissenting opinion, based on three issues that bothered me. One is that I believe the book is about twice as long as it needs to be. There is considerable redundancy, and by the last few chapters, I found myself growing increasingly annoyed as she repeatedly repeated ideas and themes covered [well] in other chapters. As with some other books I've read, it strikes me as a potentially fabulous journal-length article that was stretched too far. A brief perusal of her paper on "Work, Values, Caring" available on her PartnershipWay web site suggests that this paper may cover much of the content in the book, in a much shorter space.
   
   A second shortcoming I see in the book is a lack of reference to either Milton Mayeroff's classic work ON CARING or to Yochai Benkler's more recent paradigm-shifting book, THE WEALTH OF NETWORKS: HOW SOCIAL PRODUCTION TRANSFORMS MARKETS AND FREEDOM. The book is replete with many useful references, and every author must be selective about the references she or he includes, but I would think that either of the two aforementioned books would be required reading for anyone interested in caring economics.
   
   The third shortcoming I see in this book is its rather pre-emptory dismissal of "selfish genes". I recently [finally] read THE SELFISH GENE, by Richard Dawkins, and although I like to believe in (and practice) altruism, I had to admit that Dawkins makes a compelling case for how and why our genes are selfish operators ... and thus why altruism doesn't make sense at the genetic level. Now, we are not our genes, and I like to believe we are more than simply containers for them to propagate themselves, and as our actions - and inactions - have increasingly far-reaching impacts on others throughout our increasingly interconnected planet, there may be good reasons why caring for others (who do not carry our genes) is worthwhile, and why we might want to give up domination for partnership. However, Eisler's quick dismissal of "selfish genes" in several passages leads me to wonder whether she's read Dawkins' book, or simply the other references she invokes that take a contrarian view. She seems to be attached to making "evolutionary" claims with respect to caring economics. I think the impact can be just as strong without invoking evolution ... and invoking evolution while summarily dismissing what I view as its most compelling modern articulation only weakens the impact.
   
   I hope we will be willing and able to redefine economics to take into account the social and environmental costs and benefits that are currently ignored. I believe that THE REAL WEALTH OF NETWORKS offers some compelling arguments for how and why we can do this. I do not recommend that people not read this book because of the shortcomings I cited - I am still glad I read the book. I just wanted to offer a perspective that may be of some value to others who are considering the book, or at least to help set expectations (for anyone who shares my prejudices).



4. I found the book to be well worth reading. It should be particularly helpful for those who have not been exposed to new economic visions.
   
   However, I feel that we must move beyond the think tank musings and into an action stage. Some of the hopeful stories that the author tells -- the working conditions at a North Carolina software company for example -- represent a form of working that will not even exist in a Peak Everything world.
   
   We have to re-invent the way that we live our daily lives and in doing so we should integrate the partnership concepts that the author espouses. We cannot do this with letters to our political representatives or with one more conference. These actions have proven to have little or no impact on our direction. We must physically build a new infrastructure. I would like to see the author take a leadership role -- she has the credibility -- in this next step towards a more caring economy.



5. In The Real Wealth of Nations, Dr. Riane Eisler has created a powerful piece of critical literature for the 21st century. By peeling away layers of social unconsciousness and tradition, Eisler reveals what is fundamentally wrong with today's global economic measurements and explains what is required for humankind to create a sustainable economy and peaceful future for the world.
   
   Changing the world requires more than changing the way we act; it requires changing the way we think. In easy-to-read language, Eisler helps readers do this by challenging traditional systems of thought and urges us to consciously reflect on our personal as well as societal actions. She shows how quality of life is an infinitely more important measure of happiness than monetary prosperity and that partnership rather than domination is the social structure that will allow humanity not only to survive, but to thrive.
   
   I highly recommend this thought-provoking book to anyone who wants to help create a more peaceful and fulfilling life for themselves, their children, and their grandchildren.
   
   --Ken Beller, lead author of Great Peacemakers and The Consistent Consumer