5 comments about Basic Writings.

1. While having one of the most abstract writing styles, Heidegger's intellectual bravura is worth reading. As a student of philosophy it was one of the most eye-opening - if not life changing - statements on how to live in a technological world that is increasingly separating man from nature.
   
   This is a good introduction to Heidegger as it contains much of his important writings. In particular, I recommend Being and Time, the Letter on Humanism, and the Question Concerning Technology (the last of which is worth the book itself in my opinion).
   
   Heidegger is very much a philologist, a lover of words. He uses this strength to construct a philosophy revolved around the 'original' (i.e. Greek) meaning of words (which the Romans mistranslated into Latin) in order to show how we, or the individual, can come to terms with their "Being." This is why it takes time to get through what he is saying. Much of his philosophy is his own re-reading of the history of philosophy, which he contends since Plato to Nietzche has taken us away from the meaning of "Being." Admittedly, it was helpful to be taking a course on Existentialism at the time of reading this book for my instructor made it easier to discern what the argument was and what the meaning of the words like "ex-sist" (standing out), "a-letheia" (truth as uncoveredness), "Gestell" (enframing), "putting forth" and "setting upon".
   
   While at first I didn't want to read Heidegger because of his personal, moral failings, I found that this 'philosopher of being' was worth studying. But one should keep this caveat in mind.
   
   In all, I recommend this collection as a good introduction to Heidegger's thought. Just be patient, re-read portions again and again, and you'll be fine.



2. This an excelent translation of several works by Martin Heidegger. It is a good edition.



3. The best introduction to Heidegger's thought is a close reading of Being and Time itself. As many of the reviewers point out, the essays in this volume are a good collection of several of Heidegger's key essays, representing his intellectual development throughout his long life. They mark the many transitions and shifts in emphasis and thought. After writing Being and Time, Heidegger spent the rest of his life explicating and developing the many treasures one finds in the pages of that magnificent work - he went both into it, expanding ideas that were only hinted at in it, and far beyond it. For those who will not be reading Being and Time in its entirety, by having the introduction to Being and Time, this volume provides the next, though distant, best thing; for it is in these few pages that Heidegger first announces how radical and revolutionary a rupture his thought is from the history of philosophy.
   
   Just a word about the review titled 'Are you *sure* you want to do this to yourself?'. Firstly, I am not sure whether this person has actually read Heidegger in the German, but he is absolutely wrong that Heidegger is not different or no less difficult in German than he is in English - what Heidegger is doing is far more apparent in the original German. This reviewer's comments are typical Anglo-American or 'analytic' propaganda. Such comments arise out of an inability to deal with Heidegger's complex thought and an unwillingness to undergo the profound discomfort that such a thinking entails. I have indeed read the philosophers he names and, with the exception of Wittgenstein, the others, though quite important in 20th century thought, don't hold a candle to Heidegger, as Wittgenstein himself, who had thought Heidegger an incomparable philosopher, would have readily admitted. His comments are based on a long tradition, arising in the 20th century, that claimed that 'clarity' is something that is not only possible in philosophy, and language for that matter, but also desirable. Philosophy makes uncomfortable. It is meant to do so. It is the opening of new worlds and whoever has traveled can attest to the discomfort that arises from such displacement, such being out of ones home or place of dwelling. New worlds are created through language and to be forced outside `our' everyday language is to be violated. Deleuze and Lacan, both of whom he also mentions, were also incomparable philosophers who are quite difficult and who built the most profound of worlds through discomforting languages. Such journeys require a willingness to be uprooted, something which this reviewer, for whom the failure lies within these thinkers and not within himself, cannot even begin to understand.



4. This is a good place to start if you are interested in getting an overview of Heidegger's writings. There are some obvious disadvantages such as the fact that some parts are included while others are not, but what is inside is generally good enough as a starting point for Heidegger's other writings.
   
   I would recommend reading the other translations though such as the Pathways, Parmenides and Language and Thought if one is already serious about Heidegger studies as these have the important writings as well and in complete form.
   
   There are some Heideggerian writings that are especially relevant to life in Singapore and perhaps to other urban and technological cities as well and the student of philosophy may want to see how everything fits together in the works on art and technology.
   
   Tony See
   Philosopher in Residence
   (Singapore)



5. This volume, published by HarperCollins in the sixties and edited by translator David Farrell Krell serves as the perfect compendium to the thought of Martin Heidegger, one of the most significant thinkers of philosophy in the 20th century. Heidegger's methodology is necessarily difficult, as he is trying to remove himself from the `average-everyday' language we employ; and he is trying to approach the meaning of being concretely and originally. Therefore, stop complaining about the obscurity of his style and work your way through this text, for it will remain one of the major works of European thought.
   
   The first essay is the introductory chapter to Heidegger's opus Being and Time. It is actually rather senseless to read it without going on to read the complete text. However, for those readers who simply want a taste of Heidegger's basic philosophic project and methodology, it is summarized here. He says at the outset: "This question has today been forgotten-although our time considers itself progressive in again affirming `metaphysics.' All the same we believe that we are spared the exertion of rekindling a gigantomachia peri tes ousias [a Battle of Giants concerning Being,' [Plato, Sophist]. But the question touched upon here is hardly an arbitrary one." (41). For Heidegger, philosophy has lost touched with the question `what is the meaning of being, as such?' However, in order to resolve the question of the meaning of Being, you must examine the Being of the questioner, (Dasein), leading us to do fundamental ontology.
   
   The second essay in the collection is titled What is Metaphysics? It is an inaugural address the delimited many of the major ideas he would later expand in Being in Time. In it, Heidegger again examines the meaning of Being, but he also discusses the unheimlichkeit (the uncanny), and Dasein's confrontation with "the nothing" (100), and with attunement and Nihilism generally. This is a particularly famous, though cryptic essay, the major ideas in it are expanded at great lengths by Heidegger in his book `Introduction to Metaphysics,' published later in 1953.
   
   The next essay is titled On the Essence of Truth, and it is particularly difficult. Heidegger begins with: "Our Topic is the essence of truth. The question regarding the essence of truth is not concerned with whether truth is a truth of practical experience or of economic calculation, the truth of a technical consideration or of political sagacity, or, in particular, a truth of scientific research or of artistic composition, or even the truth of thoughtful reflection or cultic belief. The question of essence disregards all this and attends to the one thing that in general distinguishes every `truth' as truth (115). Heidegger will later suggest in the essay that the essence of truth is freedom, or unconcealment. Heidegger does not adhere to radical skepticism, nor does he believe in eternal truths. He is interested in the essence of this question with regard to Da-Sein's `liberation' for `ek-sistence.'
   
   The Origin of the Work of Art is unlike any essay in the history of aesthetic philosophy or criticism, because Heidegger is not at all concerned with the beauty of art, nor with the thinking of the artist. He is interested in the capacity for art to reveal worlds. He writes: "The temple-work, standing there, opens up a world and at the same time sets this world back again on earth, which itself only thus emerges as native ground. But men and animals, plants and things, are never present and familiar as unchangeable objects, only to represent incidentally also a fitting environment for the temple, which one fine day is added to what is already there" (168). Heidegger values the art of poetry more than any other. He says, "Art happens as poetry. Poetry is founding in the triple sense of bestowing, grounding, and beginning" (202), and he valued Holderlin, Trakyl, and Rilke above all other poets. Art is an origin, and it serves to preserve the historical existence of man.
   
   One could go on and on. This volume also contains the Letter on Humanism, Modern Science, Metaphysics, and Mathematics, the Question Concerning Technology, Building, Dwelling, Thinking, What Calls for Thinking?, the Way to Language, and the End of Philosophy and the Task of Thinking. They will keep you busy for quite a while.

5 comments about Microeconomic Theory.

1. This is not only a text book but also a very sourceful handbook of microeconomics. It is worth owning all your lifetime. Even one day when, we are old, we at least could see all we knew about the microeconomic world at that time.



2. This book is aimed at economics grad students.
   
   Usually economics grad students are guys who are trying too hard to be accepted by an established "academic community". Since most of them lack self-esteem, real world experience and confidence, they must find a way to show the world how smart and special they are. So those people accept being fed such a nonsense like this material.
   
   Dont be fooled. The pseudo-scientific kind of math this book adopts does not add to real world analysis or understanding of a single economic problem. Its all "math rhetoric" to impress the layman.
   
   The economics that really matters is as real as sex. If you have done it, you know what it is, even if you do not fully understand the captions of a pornographic book written in ancient greek. But please dont tell that to an econ grad student. They dont know what sex is.



3. Mas-Colell is a great text to have on the shelf of any graduate student of econcomics. I am working on my Phd, and I refer to it whenever I need to establish a firm understanding of any Microeconomic theory.



4. Nothing special. I needed this for my coursework.
   It will be useful for economics dictionary purpose.



5. I got the brand new book as advertised within the prescribed time limit. 100% satisfaction.

5 comments about Economics (Cliffs Quick Review).

1. This book saved me in economics. It takes long winded and confusing concepts and boils them down to a concise explanation. I recommend this book to anyone in the midst of an Economics class!



2. I just took both micro and macro economic CLEP tests, and passed both with a 63 and 60 respectively. The only studying I used was this book, coupled with a little online research and the offical CLEP practice tests. It worked great! However, this book does not cover the exchange market, so I suggest that you research this a little before taking the test.



3. I purchased this book for my business library. I have many books on economics and this book allows me to quickly review some of the subjects without having to read a more detailed explanation found in most economics text books.



4. These reviews on Economics Cliffs Quick Review are outdated. Do not take the econimics CLEP tests if you have never taken a CLEP test before. If you want to take the Economics CLEP tests and you want really high grades you can go ahead and buy this book but it should not be your only resource. You should buy the REA guide(s) CLEP Microeconomics (Rea) - The Best Test Prep for the CLEPCLEP Microeconomics W/CD (Rea) - The Best Test Prep for the CLEPfor these CLEP tests which are not out yet but should be available in about 3 months. Yes these reviews are outdated-since then they have added questions about externalities which are not well explained (for CLEP test purposes) in this book. Be careful. Don't get in a hurry. By all means be patient and get the CLEP credit that you deserve!



5. I used this book as a study guide along with some online review test for the microeconomics CLEP test and did great! It breaks everything down really well and provides a really good basic overview.

5 comments about Hidden Order: The Economics of Everyday Life.

1. What David Friedman has written here is a good, but very serious, micro-economics book in a relatively conversational tone. In a number of places on the back cover and in the early text, the book makes the claim that it is a "popular" economics book along the lines of Freakonomics; it isn't. It is a far deeper dive into the nuts and bolts of the tools of micro-economics rather than a light read about fascinating applications of those tools.
   
   That doesn't preclude this from being a good book; for the most part it is, but a lot of people are likely to feel like a victim of a bait-and-switch if they read this book expecting another Freakonomics.
   
   Hidden Order lays out the micro-economic theories of the Chicago School, a n approach to economics originated largely by David Friedman's legendary father Milton Friedman. The economics of the Chicago School are proving to have far more validity over time than the main rival, Keynesian economics which makes reading a book like this very worthwhile for someone willing to invest the time to understand economics better.
   
   This book can make you a better thinker, voter and judge of information from the media. Recommended for anyone who values such things.



2. It's an excellent book. Although I enjoyed reading Freakonomics, "Hidden Order" is a much deeper and broader book in terms of issues discussed.
   What I really like about it that in additional of covering existing issues, it helps to learn how to approach new problems.
   
   The sad thing is although the book was written in 1996, we(and politicians, and TV/Radio talk heads) are still using the same uninformed reasoning during the discussions.
   
   It would be great if the book became a required reading in the high schools and colleges.
   
   After getting it from a library, I bought it for my friends.



3. This book attempts to explain the dry, boring field of economics in an engaging and painless manner. It fails at doing that. The text itself is often times confusing and dry, coupled with graphs that are basically incomprehensible to anyone without an economics degree. I was more confused after reading than the book than before it. To anyone interested in reading about economics actually displayed in an interesting, fun way, I would highly recommend Naked Economics by Charles Wheelan. It is a tremendously informative and funny book, and actually fun to read.



4. I have to say I didn't read too much of this book before being turned off by it. I will give you a few examples of what immediately caught my eye in the beginning of the book. He claimed that getting rid of the practice of buying used textbooks would not increase sales and then basically said that if you disagree it is because you are stupid. His argument was that the price of selling the book after being used factored in to the cost the consumer would pay. As anyone who has ever attended college knows, you don't get to choose whether or not you will a text book. You have to buy it for the course and the people dictating what book you must buy do not feel the costs themselves and often do not even have much interaction with those that do. This is why my statistics textbook cost over a hundred dollars despite being of far lessing quality than Statistics for Dummies.
   
   In another one of poorly hatched ideas, he claims that poor people do not want universal health care because they are choosing not to buy it; better to have food than antibiotics. And being that government health care would be paid with taxes, we would be forcing those people to forgo basic shelter for medicine. He would have us believe that a person could somehow afford something that costs more money than that person has in the bank or that insurance companies would even insure the dirt poor (and therefor prone to illness) with unreliable, low income workers. And in the whole analysis he seems to forget that virtually every modern country in the world has a progressive tax system.
   
   That's enough of that I suppose. I just wanted you to get an idea of what kinds of things you will be coming across in this book.



5. Not everyone has heard of David Friedman, son of the Milton Friedman, but he's a professor of economics and has written several books. I had a different book on my list to read first, The Machinery of Freedom, but I came across this title and it looked interesting enough, so I picked it up and I'm glad I did.
   
   Friedman tries to bring economics, the study of the allocation of scarcity, into everyday life situations, job hunting, wife hunting and why kids behave as well as discussing how economic policies on a larger scale (government edict) effect everyday life, purchasing power, costs, production, etc.
   
   His effort is a mixed of insights and confusion, and he notes near the beginning of the book that if a reader understands all the concepts, even upon a second read, that person might as well be teaching the stuff. I have to agree I was lost in much of the explanations and didn't completely understand a good portion of the logic and how it all worked, however, I did grasp a basic understanding of the overall concepts and even in areas that I couldn't explain myself, I have a better picture of how it all works.
   
   One of the reasons this book, and others like it, are important reads is simply because economic policy decisions by our elected leaders make such a long range impact upon our normal lives, it's not that any one voter has much of an effect upon an election, and Friedman goes into depth explaining why most people don't really spend much time or effort to learn about issues or politician's that they are casting votes for, if everyone's basic understanding level was increased, it might have a positive impact upon our lives. Perhaps. Perhaps not.
   
   One of the interesting things about how politics work, from an economic viewpoint, is explained by Friedman. He shows how a major bill, whether trade tariff, tax or what not, is huge to a small group, but small to a huge group. Think of it like this; if a bill will cost every American a few dollars in increased costs, but delivers a benefit to a small group in the millions of dollars, who will spend the time and money to see to it that the bill passes? Obviously the small group can focus time and money, it's worth it to them, the large group however, not only is harder to coordinate (assuming someone even tries), it's not necessarily in someone's interest to spend time and money to save a few dollars, so because the cost is spread out, it's harder to coordinate a concentrated effort to stop such a bill.
   
   Think of the implications of the economics in the explanation there, a thousand bills passed in congress, each costing you only a few dollars each, cost you thousands a year, yet each one by itself is only a negative of a few bucks, so how much time is it worth it to you to defeat that particular bill? However each of these thousand special interests has millions to gain, so to them, spending thousands and thousands has a positive expectation.
   
   The other areas that I found very interesting in this book were the discussions of criminal law and the economics faced by the accused, how the D.A.'s allocate resources (plea agreements), the prisoner's dilemma and other such interesting ways to look at normal everyday problems of society through the lens of economics. There is a little bit of discussion of the drug trade and other libertarian ideas, but mostly the book concentrates on explaining the economics of policy's and laws and of course, supply, demand, monopoly's and the like without much pontificating on Friedman's part about what choices are better or worse for society.
   
   There is a discussion of trade and tariffs, how wheat can be turned into cars and how lot's of stuff you hear on the news is uttered by people that have no idea what they are talking about, and often make pronouncements that are the polar opposite of reality.
   
   In conclusion, I'd highly recommend this work to anyone even slightly interested in how economics works, and also how they may have been fooled into thinking certain things about laws, trade, benefits, anti-trust, supply and demand and such that are simply wrong and misleading. It may change how you vote, it will certainly challenge the way you view the current political world.
   
   Highly recommended.

5 comments about The Theory of Investment Value (Fraser Publishing Library) (Contrary Opinion Library).

1. The Theory of Investment Value is clearly an important work, as reflected in Benjamin Graham's citations to it and the prevalence of the dividend discount model in valuing stocks. The theories expounded in this book are of particular import to those to seek to by stock at a value less than the intrinsic value of a company as they determine it to be.
   
   The book itself initially appears intimidating, as there are a lot of mathematical equations, but in reality, the math is nothing more than simple algebra, mostly different models related to computing dividend values going forward.
   
   I found the book to be an interesting read, but it is highly theoretical in nature. The central theme of the book is that stocks are worth the present value of their dividends, paid in perpetuity. It does not discuss earnings manipulation, effect of dilution, securities with superior or inferior claim to payment, etc. Moreover, as Graham points out in Security Analysis, companies that have a high return on invested capital would be well advised to reinvest their profits, while less successful companies would be better off paying higher dividends (relative to book value). This would, of course, tend to make the practical application Williams' theory somewhat complicated, insofar as it makes computing future dividends more difficult.
   
   Readers looking for a more practical guide to valuing stocks might be better served reading Securities Analysis by Benjamin Graham, or any number of more "practical" books related to stock market analysis, particularly as those analyzing financial statements to determine the intrinsic value of a company. Some readers might also find "The Aggressive Conservative Investor" by Marty Whitman and Martin Shubik to be a good read for a competing view, since the authors of that book take the position that, with respect to non-controlling shareholders, a company's stock is worth the net after-tax cash that they expect to realize in the future, whether from dividends, liquidating events, etc. However, if a reader is truly interested in obtaining an understand of how dividends affect stock prices, the book is a worthy read.



2. This is probably one of the oldest, if not the first, serious academic works on valuation. The coverage is highly theoretical compared to the more practical valuation books of today (dividends are used instead of free cash flow, continuous time is used instead of discrete time, and "cookie cutter" product cycle scenarios are presented instead of more complex business forecasting).
   
   The real value of this dissertation-turned-book though is its general insights. Although Warren Buffett doesn't tout this book as often as Graham's "Intelligent Investor", you will find that he utilizes the insights from this book almost as frequently.
   
   Robert Stephenson-Padron
   MSc student (economics & finance)
   University of Navarra, Spain



3. This is an excellent copy of an investment classic. VERY happy with the seller, the shipping and packaging were superb. Thanks again!



4. A fantastic accomplishment. All investors should study this book to learn the real value of a stock.



5. This book laid the foundation of business valuation for making investment decisions using the technique we now call Discounted Cash Flow. The fundamental idea of the book is that a business is worth the dividends it will pay in its entire lifetime, discounted at an appropriate interest rate. This idea of true or intrinsic investment value was proposed earlier by other authors, but it was developed and matured in this book. These days many companies do not pay dividends but the underlying principle of valuation is the same.
   
   I found this book interesting because it is a rigorous derivation of the mathematical formulas used in valuation. I also consider it a masterpiece because of the intense insight of the author, which goes way beyond most of the modern day economists and investors. In fact, this is probably the most impressive book on investing I have studied. But it takes effort to read, requires good mathematical skills, and as it is posed as a scientific thesis it does not lend itself well to practitioners looking for a quick how-to guide.
   
   So in spite of this book being an impressive intellectual achievement I have deducted one star in its rating, because it is certainly not for everyone and there are more recent books which will serve the general investor audience better.

No comments about Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain.

2 comments about The Wealth of Nations, Books IV-V (Penguin Classics).

1. This book is a classic of economic thought!



2. Adam Smith like Marx sees changes in the economic system as a logical, inevitable sequence of events. For example the power of the landed aristocracy declined as a consequence of the increasing importance of the towns. Good government was a result of this decline as people that had worked on the estates in conditions close to slavery moved to cities where they had considerable freedom. The difference between Marx and Smith is that Smith considered all of these changes leading to steady improvements whereas Marx considered the results of capitalism and industrialisation and urbanisation disastrous. Marx living about one hundred years later than Smith. The system had not produced wealth for all as Smith foresaw. Smith believed that if governments would refrain from interfering in the economy prosperity would increase for all. Marx considered that a revolution whereby the capitalist class would be eliminated and private property is abolished a necessary consequence of the exploitation of the workers. Smith believed the opposite in that private property was the main driving force for progress. Their analysis of the historical development looking at it now shows many serious mistakes. However many more of the ideas of Adam Smith are still valid in hindsight than those of Marx. Somewhat surprising both being persons with interest in morality do not ascribe any importance to that subject. Both are imprisoned by the concept that "mechanical" or systemic changes in society can explain changes in the economic system. Many economists to day still fall in the same trap. They do not believe that moral standards can play an important role in the development of economic system. They therefore typically reject new developments such as "socially responsible investing ". Like "Capital" of Marx, the "Wealth of Nations" presents many interesting facts about for example the near slavery conditions in the large agricultural estates throughout Europe. This information is a good antidote to the romantics that believe conditions in the countryside in the past were very pleasant. The Wealth of Nations is lucidly written and shows quite clearly the dependence of wealthy creation on essential but minimal government.

5 comments about The Road to Serfdom Fiftieth Anniversary Edition.

1. Considering it my duty as an economics major, I took it upon myself to read this book, with little expectations as to its brilliance, and was completely swept away. Not only is Hayek extremely eloquent in articulating the case for free trade, he supports his arguments with facts (e.g. what was then going on in Nazi Germany) and with theory (e.g. why without even the historical evidence that we do have we must conclude that a centralized system cannot equally favor everyone).
   
   Since it is my tendency to look at the 1 star reviews before making a 5 star one, I recognize that some people don't like Hayek because he doesn't recognize the great things about socialized medicine (like how a guy in Canada signed up for a CAT scan under his dog's name because animals are not covered under their highly efficient centralized health care...true story by the way) or the kind thoughts of socialist thinkers (please don't make me choose my selection of Marx quotes). But what Hayek does is present a prima facie case against socialism; before anyone can advocate socialism, they MUST address Hayek's arguments.
   
   This is why I think before any socialist and libertarian face each other in a squabble, both must have read The Road to Serfdom so that they can hit on the applicable issues instead of babbling on about poverty statistics. Are you a socialist and disagree with Hayek? Fine, but read the book so that you know where your opponents stand. I really think that socialists think lovers of capitalism are greedy and have no ethics. But if you read our spokesman Hayek, you'll see why we think that the free market is actually BETTER for society.
   
   Let's change the scope of the argument. Socialists should stop arguing about how some people are poor...yes, some people are poor...and demonstrate how a centralized system can make people BETTER than they would be under the free market system. How planning the systems of production would be more efficient and prosperous than under the system of competition. How giving all our freedoms to one entity would guarantee them for all. If you can effectively address these issues and the many more that Hayek brings up, we will soon see a blessed change in the current headache of debates on socialism.



2. The only, effective way to reject socialism is by attacking it's fundamental philosophical ideas. That collectivism is good and the individual must be sacrificed for the "good of the people". Attacking a philosophy such as communism or socialism, because it is not "practical" is a contradiction and undercuts any argument against such a corrupt philosophy. These ideas are not good in theory but bad in practice. They are evil in theory and therefore evil in practice.
   
   I would like to also recommend Ayn Rand's, "The Virtue of Selfishness". This is THE work to understand Man's Individual Rights based on His Rational Nature. It is from these fundamental Truths that the ONLY proper function of a legitimate government is derived - The protection of Individual Rights.



3. Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom was written at a time when the Labour Party of Britain was openly socialist. Although modern social democrats renounce the 's' word, socialism is indeed the root of their thinking, and in this exposition, his magnus opus, Hayek unabashedly sends socialism to the gutter where it belongs. Hayek's thesis, that socialism and totalitarianism are two birds of the same feather, has stood the test of time, and it continues to show up today in the cases of Venezuela or Bolivia. Hayek was arguably responsible for Labour's (and the Democrats') turn to the right, set in stone by former PM Tony Blair (and former President Clinton). This book is, however, still very relevant, exemplified by the Democrats' plan to invade the health care sector, the countless bureaucracies located in Washington, and President Bush's reckless invasion of privacy (which is related to Hayek's arguments about war time and peace time). Although Hayek often comes off as soft on a number of issues, he could not be nearly as dedicated as Milton Friedman to absolute freedom because the intelligentsia was on the far-left in the 40's.
   
   For classical liberals, modern leftists, and conservatives alike, The Road to Serfdom is extraordinarily eye-opening.



4. Another book that Dr. L had us read. During the 2008 presidential debate I see one party is trying to buy votes even though the failures of socialism have been proven time and time again throughout history. This is the singular short work on the failures of socialism.



5. Friedrich Hayek, the Nobel prize winning economist, wrote this brilliant classic as a critique of government intervention and manipulation in markets. I am neither an economist nor a political scientist, but I was led to this book after watching with horror the recent outrages that are consciously being inflicted on us by our elected officials, most recently the bailout and socialization of the two giant mortgage lenders, Freddie and Fannie. I couldn't remember that I ever received any share of the loot when those companies were making huge profits and their CEOs were earning tens of millions per year, but now I find that our elected officials have written a blank check in my name, the taxpayer, to bail out these companies' losses and stupidity, and then handed the check to a group of unelected officials (and, surprise, surprise, those two companies spend hundreds of millions on congressional lobbying). Privatize the gains, socialize the losses: sounds like a win-win situation for somebody.
   
   This kind of disastrous socialism is exactly what Hayek critiques in devastating form in this book, specifically government control of the economy. Apparently, they say, this book has been very influential, but a layman could certainly never tell by looking around. Hayek was writing from the perspective of a central European who had recently witnessed first-hand the unfolding development of National Socialism (Nazism) in Germany, and he is warning that the exact same attitudes and policies that had been followed in Germany were uncritically being followed by the Allies, merely at a few years distance.
   
   He begins by recollecting the ideals of old, classic liberalism, "the forgotten road". Of course, in Hayek's context, "liberal" means the true, historic liberalism of limited government, free markets, and private property, not "liberal" in the bastardized sense somehow hijacked by Leftists to mean unlimited government, socialized markets and massive forced wealth redistribution. He looks at the rise of collectivist thinking versus individual (it's all for the greater good); the problems of central planning in a democracy (someone in power makes the economic decisions for everybody else); the downfall of the Rule of Law (government is no longer bound by fixed rules announced beforehand but instead possesses arbitrary power limited only by its own discretion); the inextricable link between centralized economic planning and totalitarian regimes (if we're going to follow a plan, someone's got to force everyone to follow it); the problem of deciding how the society's production will be distributed; a chapter showing that "nothing is more fatal than the present fashion among intellectual leaders of extolling security at the expense of freedom" (Republicans apparently didn't get the memo); how in a socialized economy the worst individuals inevitably rise to the top (Really? Can it be? Obama and McCain?); the necessity of manipulating truth in a socialized society; and the fact that Nazism was a direct outgrowth of socialism and socialist ideology.
   
   The relevance of the points enumerated above does not require comment. We are running madly down the road to serfdom, which is the road of socialism. Unfortunately for those of us who are being dragged along against our will, history is not neutral, and we will suffer the consequences of other peoples' decisions, just as the Jews in Germany did and the Russians in the Soviet Union did. Socialism has always led to poverty and oppression, and freedom, on the rare occasions it has been tried, has produced unparalleled prosperity. Hayek shows in detail why. We've decided to give socialism another try. God help us.

5 comments about Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (Commemorative Edition) (Princeton Classic Editions).

1. I'm not even sure I'm qualified to pass judgement on this book, but what I understand, I give 5 stars without hesitation. The authors discuss almost every class of game (2-person, 3-person, zero-sum, non-zero-sum, etc.) and even a very simplified version of poker.

   You basically have to be a mathematician to get full value from this book. This book is absolutely full of equations and complex proofs. For a beginner with little math, I'd recommend Game Theory by Morton Davis, or for someone with some university math I'd recommend Games and Decisions by Luce and Raiffa. However, if your math is good, you might as well go straight to this book, which started the whole field of game theory.




2. Let me start out by acknowledging that this is THE BOOK that started Game Theory as it exists today. While Bayesian statistics are an obvious precursor, everyone agrees that von Neumann's and Morgenstern's work was ground breaking.

   That said, this is not the best written Game Theory text out there. Like all seminal works, it suffers from the basic fact that we've learned a lot of new things since the time it was written. Many people have gone on to build and expand on the insights contained in this book, especially in the area of bargaining and cooperative game theory.

   This is a very impressive book to keep on your shelf, and the discussion of poker and the role of bluffing is very interesting, but, owing largely to the 60+ years that have passed since its initial publication, it's not the best reference work or study material available.

   Another word of warning: The review below is correct that the level of math that you must understand to fully appreciate this book is quite substantial. This book is more for the mathematically sophisticated who want to develop an appreciation for the origins of game theory.




3. I am in the middle of this book now. I chose it because it was the first in this field. It presents so much information, it can overwhelming. Perhaps I should have chosen a simpler book for my first. Oh well, I will plod along. My limited math skills meas I miss out on a lot of the book, but the stuff in between the math is great and is helping me to better understand the ideas.
   I'm giving it four stars. It is jam-packed with great research and the reader can learn quite a bit, but the heavy math emphasis makes it difficult for many to consume.



4. This book is very important for the quality of argument by two big personalities. The lecture is nice for the richness of particulars about several aspects of the theory. The student can understand the singular properties very cleary. The historical importance of this book is very strong.



5. This book is a must for high level math or econ. majors. To truly understand all the math you need advanced calculus, but the book is still worth while if you only have a basic knowledge of math. The work von Neumann did was revolutionary, with game theory being a joke before this work. You should read it.

5 comments about The New Financial Order: Risk in the 21st Century.

1. Shiller is a visionary economist. The problem with visionaries is that they do not always see the world the same way as everyone else.
   
   This book outlines how Shiller believes a range of innovative risk management products could change the international financial system, and at the same time raise the living standards of ordinary people. Shiller wants to create derivative products which would allow people to use financial markets to hedge against loss of income, or the decline in the value of their house, for example.
   
   Now this is pretty daunting stuff for the average reader, and I doubt that most of the people Shiller wants to help would fully appreciate the complexities of the things he advocates.
   
   The other problem I have is that I simply don't believe all of Shiller's ideas are feasible. Moreover, even he would have to admit it is impossible to eliminate risk from life, yet that is what he tries to achieve.
   
   I think it is a terrific book for those who want to ponder "what if." It can be a hard read though.



2. This book is very interesting, but I think that the author in may be a bit full of himself. This is the same guy who wrote the book 'Irrational Exuberance' months after the stock market peaked in January 2000 and claims to have predicted it. I feel that most of the hype about Robert Shiller is Irrationally Exuberant. However this does not mean this book is not worth looking at. It has some interesting proposals, although many of them are either far-fetched or dangerously close to a creating a corporate Orwellian state.



3. What an odd book. Shiller reviews the up-sides of multiple forms of insurance without a thought to the down-sides. How much would being insured for every possible eventuality cost the user?
   
   At times, I tended to agree with the reviewer quoted on the back cover -- 'pleasantly utiopian'. At other times, I more agreed with my father, who said, after I read aloud a passage about the draconian surveilance measures needed to enforce some of the insurance contracts Shiller advocates: 'He's a very bad man.'



4. The major problem with this book is Shiller's basic misconception of what the major problem is concerning decision making about the future ,given the incomplete amount of relevant information available in the past and the present,based on what D.Ellsberg called ambiguous probabilities, J M Keynes called probabilities with low weight(uncertainty),and Benoit Mandelbrot called wild risk(as opposed to the mild risk of the normal probability distribution).Shiller bases his understanding on the "new"behavioral economics associated with the work of Tversky,Kahneman,Thaler,etc.This kind of approach emphasizes not the major problems of ambiguity,uncertainty,or wild risk of Ellsberg,Keynes,and Mandelbrot,but relatively mild problems associated with the Allais Paradox(certainty,reflection,translation,and preference reversal effects plus other assorted anomalies).The problem is that the Tversky-Kahneman approach ,and other associated approaches allied with them, are based fundamentally on the view that the normal distribution is the correct distribution to use for educated,rational decision makers.The problem ,then,is that decision makers in general are not rational;they are irrational and uneducated decision makers ,who allow their emotions,combined with their hopes and fears,to influence their decision making .All the anomalous behavior can be traced to the basic irrationality and ignorance of decision makers,who supposedly resort to all kinds of heuristic shortcuts because they have not mastered the fields of statistics and probability correctly.The position of Ellsberg,Keynes,and Mandelbrot is completely different.The decision maker is rational,but must "rely" on probabilities that he knows are unreliable,vague,ambiguous,unclear,and uncertain.In such a world the attempt to gain additional information,as in the stock market,leads to herd,crowd,and cascade effects as each individual decision maker attempts to obtain a little, additional amount of relevant information from other sources that he feels are better informed.Thus,it is the ambiguity or uncertainty of the future that leads to the creation of bubbles,manias,panics,and crashes.These events have little to do with the Tversky-Kahneman approach.The normal probability distribution is completely worthless as a guide to action in the stock market and other financial markets in the face of ambiguity ,uncertainty,or wild risk.In his preface(pp.ix-x),Shiller claims that"...economic thinkers have been limited by the state of relevant risk management principles of their day".Shiller claims that Keynes did not have command of such risk management ideas.The fact is that Keynes,Ellsberg,and Mandelbrot have forgotten more about these ideas than Shiller will ever know.All seven of Shiller's new types of markets and new types of insurance totally ignore the fundamental problem of ambiguity/uncertainty.They are put forth in the misbelief that the kind of decision making problems examined by Tversky-Kanheman are the main explanation for the boom-bust nature of financial markets , the volatility that results,and the unstable nature of such markets in a capitalist system.Shiller needs to completely rewrite this book and base it on a foundation of Keynes,Ellsberg,and Mandelbrot.



5. Robert J. Shiller proposes the use of mass insurance policies to cure many of society's ills. Think he's crazy? Read the book and judge for yourself. The author makes alot more sense than you might think at first blush.