3 comments about The Myth of Free Trade: The Pooring of America.

1. Well done. It's a shame however that Batra doesn't follow through on this topic in his later books, and gets side-tracked instead by other factors which at best have secondary impact on global economy and ecology. After suffering an entire generation (30 years) of decoupling of per capita productivity and per capita real wage, one wonders how much more stress the US economy can take before it collapses. Then again, what are the limits of human ingenuity and resiliency? Can these factors reverse the damage done by the Free Trade policy? Batra's addressing this factor would have been extremely helpful.



2. Batra has done a fine job of pointing out the problem. Some want more figures, but the key here is the concept of "averaging". For that, I wish Batra had given us a simple example like the one below:

   With some 6 Billion People on the planet, 5 Billion earn less than $1,000 per year (say $5 Trillion) - only about 1 Billion earn around $25,000 or more ($25 Trillion) - with 300 Million those in the USA. So, if 6 Billion people "share" the $30 Trillion total World GDP, that means an "average" of $5,000 for each person.

   While a peasant in China might be temporarily better off, it would mean the economic end of the USA, Japan and Europe, then total collapse for the West. If China's current goal is to conquer the West, they can do it without a shot fired - just keep exporting while we keep importing and closing factories.

   I only hope that Batra writes a follow-up book quite soon and offers up an overview that all of us can internalize. My further hope is that he can present his comments on CSPAN, CNET and CNN before the US election in November.




3. SMU Professor Ravi Batra's significant work outlines why America has become a debtor nation. The main cause is free trade. This policy has caused real wages to fall for 80% of the work force despite increased productivity because of manufactured goods falling relative price. This phenomenon is known as "agrification".
   Moreover, poor leadership has allowed foreign nations such as Japan, South Korea, and China to sing free trade's praises while following protectionist policies as tariffs, quotas, exchange controls and the like at home. The post WWII General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade rounds or negotiations have resulted in a lack of reciprocity for American exports. Before GATT lowered tariffs, to permit imports to flood U.S. markets, the country was largely a closed, self-sufficient economy. However, since we have become an open economy the country has become awash with red ink in the current or trade account.
   To remedy this critical situation, Dr. Batra suggests a national policy of "competitive protectionism". This solution entails raising the average tariff from 5% to 40% while promoting domestic competition to spur innovation by prohibiting most mergers and monopolies. The result might be an improved living standard for Americans. The standard of living has declined for most workers as measured by the real wage since 1973 - - the year the U.S.A. became an open, free trade economy.

No comments about The Theory of the Leisure Class (Oxford World's Classics).

5 comments about Irrational Exuberance: Second Edition.

1. This book has good info in it but man, does it get long. I read lots of analytical info with interest, but this book was very very slow for me, especially in the middle and later chapters.
   
   The good news is that the first couple of chapters make it worthwhile. It does present some very important and valid concepts. The easily-bored reader could read the first few chapters and the last chapter, learn a lot of good info, and not miss much in the long middle chapters.
   
   JD



2. If you have Invested more than ten dollars in the share market or real estate than you should read this book.



3. Last year in my country you can see some commercials in the TV inviting to invest in Mutual Funds, and I believe lots of people turned to that. The problem is that the very next year, beginning in January, the housing bubble burst and we know the rest of the story. Although this book was written before that, the book remain valid at explaining the particular behavior of the markets in these moments of furor, the "irrational exuberance", and the panic that follows it. In my opinion the book is a good investigation of the markets, you can see the author analyzing all the factors involved, including sociological and psicological (this make the book a little slow). Is good to invest in the financial system, but in awareness of its possible behavior.



4. not much food in the book overall..a very shallow and general talk, but i found it interesting to see his comments (p220) on the interest rate and other potential risks in the mortgage market back in 2005. some of the points he mentioned are indeed drivers of the recent subprime meltdown



5. Great book based on the phrase spoken by Greenspan to try and slow down the economy.

4 comments about Economic Logic, 2nd Edition.

1. Reading Economic Logic gave me a profound new understanding of how economics applies in the real world, especially in business and personal finance.

   My college economics courses, filled with perplexing theories like the paradox of thrift, GDP and Keynesian fiscal policy, were completely refuted in this excellent free-market textbook. Economic Logic focused on important, real issues like business profit-loss statements, entrepreneurship and the advantage of saving -- something my college professors never even touched.

   Although I am not currently a student or professor, I thoroughly enjoyed learning economics "right." I have found it helpful in gaining more insight in running my business -- as well as the wisdom of fiscal conservatism in our government policies.

   I highly recommend professors use this text in their economics classes. And students, if your professors don't use this text, get it for yourself so you can really understand the concepts and principles of sound economics.




2. Readers of Thomas Sowell's excellent _Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy_ may want to tackle this fine textbook next. Skousen presents basic economic concepts and principles in clear, crisp prose, and his presentation is the next level up from Sowell's: whereas Sowell eschews graphs and charts altogether, Skousen uses them sparingly and well in order to introduce, illustrate, and explain how markets work.

   The text is suitable for anyone with approximately a high-school education (and I'd love to see it used in actual high schools). As such, it's well adapted for self-study.




3. This is an excellent work; as both a text and for general reading. Microeconomics is regarded by most students as hard and boring. Skousen's work is neither. It presents real business economics in a simple and logical fashion. His diagrams are explained well and presented clearly. His topic headings are appropriate and at times, provocative, and his chapter summary, points to ponder and recommended reading are very useful. Another interesting feature of the book is a focus on one economist at the end of each chapter. This is an excellent way of getting the reader interested in both famous economists and some economic history.
   
   Although I switched to Heyne's book 'The Economic Way of Thinking' to teach my Business Economics class last semester, I will be using Skousen's work in the future. It is the better book!



4. This textbook is an all-in-one textbook for economics. Not only does it have an overview explaining economic thinking but it also has comprehensive sections on micro and macroeconomics. An added feature is its section on government policy, helping the economic student understand how society's interventions in the market affect the economy. Perhaps the best component is the afterward "What Do Economists Do?" which discusses career opportunities and trends, even with expected incomes!
   
   From an instructor's perspective, the book is designed to maximize learning while minimizing monotony. The text is illuminated with simple yet useful charts and diagrams. The explanation of principles is accomplished with modern scenarios, arousing the student's interest. Each chapter is followed with a summary, a list of important terms introduced in the chapter, and a brief biographical sketch of influential economists. Additionally, each chapter has "Problems to Ponder", including both abstract theoretical questions and practical, calculation-based questions. For supplemental study, each chapter has additional recommended readings.
   
   This book is user- and instructor-friendly, perfect for any beginner economic student - simple, direct, and comprehensive.

5 comments about Macroeconomics.

1. I am going to give this book four stars, however, I do have reservations about doing so. When I first picked up this book from one of the economics professors at my school, I was curious to read it because Gregory Mankiw was the Chief of the Council of Economic Adivsors. So I naturally thought, well this must be a brilliant man to have achieved a position so high. Well, now for the book. While the book is laid out in a fairly simple way and it is really easy to understand, sometimes too easy for an intermediate text, I began to notice Mankiw's economic philosophy slipping into the text. If anyone doesn't know, Mankiw is a New Keynesian. Well I thought that Keynesian economics was dead after the Reagan/Bush administrations failed with certain aspects of the economy. Please note, I said certain, such as the supposed tax cuts in the 80's that were offset by Social Security Tax hikes, and the out of control budget deficits. But I digress. Now, back to Mankiw. His text is filled with the ideas that he advised 43 on, and in fact 43 carried out.
   
   But I don't want to hate on Mankiw. I think that the book could have been more properly balanced with other ideas. Mankiw could have really out done himself if he would have supplied a book that had his approach, somewhat governmental, and another approach that lets market forces take over the economy and promotes less government intervention. But that is just wishful thinking. All in all, the book does have its highlites, such as: easy to read, easy to understand, well laid out, and the fact that hopefully Mankiw will be busy and come out with a second edition to make this one really cheap. So therefore, despite its inherent downfall due to Mankiw's economic philosophy, I give four stars, and would recommend it to anyone who might be interested in macroeconomics or wants to expand their library.



2. This is a clearly written and nicely organized upper-division macroeconomics textbook. Mankiw uses plain English and simple math to model the macroeconomy in the short-run (the IS/LM model), the long-run (the AS/AD model), and the very long run (the Solow growth model). He also devotes a lot of space to the Mundell-Fleming model of international trade and finance. One of the best features is the frequent use of short case studies that apply economic theory to "real world" problems such as the Great Depression or the Japanese slump of the 1990s. Mankiw's views are mainstream -- he doesn't even hint at the existence of alternatives such as Austrian economics or neo-Marxism -- but he is non-dogmatic about policy and quite candid about the limits of what economists really know about the economy. His book is a small masterpiece of clear economic writing for undergraduates.
   
   So why did I give it only four stars? I was disappointed by the relative neglect -- in spite of the many "case studies" -- of the micro-economic, historical, and institutional realities that underlay the graphs and algebra of conventional macroeconomic analysis. Let me give two examples of what I mean:
   
   -- According to Ben Bernanke, Asian countries responded to the financial turbulence of the 1990s by amassing huge foreign exchange reserves to defend their currencies against future attacks. These savings have for the most part been invested in the U.S., where they have financed trade deficits and fueled asset bubbles in the equities and housing markets. In other words, capital has flowed from relatively capital-poor countries to a capital-rich country, where it has paid for consumption binges.
   
   -- According to Robert Pollin, two decades of union-bashing, downsizing and free trade have led to widespread job insecurity in the U.S. With workers too intimidated and too worried about jobs to press for wage increases, the economy was able to grow in the 1990s without triggering a round of inflation, and the benefits of this growth were skewed towards upper-income groups. In other words, extra-market power relationships in the workplace directly affected macroeconomic performance and income distribution.
   
   I don't doubt that these developments can be captured and analyzed in the IS/LM or AS/AD framework. I'm not so sure, however, that many people steeped in this mode of analysis would have expected these developments ex ante. That would have required a knowledge of history, policy responses, and specific markets that is difficult to capture in abstract models. For my taste, any approach to economics that focuses on algebraic relationships between economic aggregates to the semi-exclusion of history and institutions is just too "otherworldly" to be satisfying. But maybe that's a problem with the way my mind works, not with macroeconomics. It certainly doesn't mean that Mankiw's book is anything less than excellent. Any student interested in learning basic macroeconomic analysis should read it.



3. i am a second year economics student from New Zealand. I ordered the complimentary set from Amazon because I heard of its great service and the books were cheaper than what we could buy them for back in NZ. To my amazement I received the student guide quite promptly expecting the complimentary text would arrive soon after. It has been over a month into my course and I still havent received it. Whats worse is the guide is almost useless (complimentary good) with out the good. Why cant Amazon send both of them together?



4. I read this book in preparation for a graduate course in macroeconomics. While it does provide a good overview, I found it went only slightly deeper into economic models than the basic text I used as an undergraduate. This book provided little in the way of the advanced math required for my graduate course where we used Advanced Macroeconomics by David Romer.
   
   I would expect an intermediate text, as this is marketed, to better illustrate the mathematics required for economics, given the heavy reliance on math in the field today.



5. I bought this book for my grad school macro class because I had realtively weak macro backround.
   I think this is the best book for studying a little before the original grad school text.
   For the seller, I would buy from them again anytime, fast shipping and cheap price. to be honest my book is kind of abused. there are several stickers on the cover and almost every page is highlighted but the binding is very good and i paid just 4 dollars for it so it is very acceptable for the price and it is good for the job.
   Altough my copy was not very good you can get a very nice one. I bought quite a few text books like this and I paid as low as 0.90 cents some of them. I had some practicly new books.
   So its all about luck, you can get a really nice one if you are lucky and if not it is still perfectly usable.

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 The Wealth of Nations (Modern Library Classics).

1. It's a big book, but not in any way complicated. In a nutshell, it details the mechanisms by which personal liberty -- accompanied by personal responsibility and a just system of government -- make nations, and the individuals who live in them, wealthy. I had a Marxist professor who did not like Adam Smith because Marxist theory prefers to emphasize class warfare, while Smith is saying that everyone is capable of providing for themselves and the less the government interferes, the better off we all are. Many conservatives, meanwhile, like Adam Smith because they seem to perceive a "survival of the fittest" philosophy in his works. They are both wrong.
   
   Really, The Wealth of Nations ought to be read along with Smith's other classic, The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Together, the message in them is that government should leave people alone as much as possible, but people ought to exercise that liberty without greed.



2. Not even Miami Beach could make me enjoy reading this book.
   
   This book is over 200 years old and the economic system has changed a lot since then. So why should you read it then? Because most economic fundamentals are being described in this book and give you great insight in understanding the current market more. Let's just hope they don't connect Wall Street to the price of grain anymore.
   
   It's a classic. It's a must read for economic studies. But it's a burden for the common man with his feet in the sand.



3. The Wealth of Nations is one of the most important books ever written. In some respects the Wealth of Nations was a tract for the times. Smith penned a crippling critique of the mercantilist `Policy of Europe'. Smith, along with David Hume and David Ricardo, refuted the mercantilist case for protectionism. Much of what we read in this book is still taught in modern economics classes. Modern day protectionists still have no answer to the principles of absolute and comparative advantage, and for the basic logic of Hume's specie flow mechanism.
   
   Smith was more than an ordinary economist. He was a visionary who saw some of the potential for progress through Globalization. Perhaps the most important concept of this book is the dynamics between division of labor, labor productivity, and the extent of markets. Smith conceived of Globalization as a process that would raise productivity as local markets expanded to national and then international scope. His example of division of labor in a pin factory is simple, but illustrative.
   
   The most widely known part of this book is that part of the `invisible hand of markets'. Invisible hand reasoning still pervades modern economic theory, though there are some variations in how economists interpret this concept. Smith does differ from Modern economists on certain issues. Smith thought of competition as a process and of monopoly as a government grant of privilege. In these areas Smith was ahead of many modern economists. Smith also explained market prices in terms of labor content. Here is Smith's great error. Labor value theory set economics on the wrong course. Labor value theory served as the basis for Marxism. This, of course, indicates the great influence of The Wealth of Nations on world history. Without labor value theory the Marxist idea of exploitation falls apart. Smith therefore played a posthumous role in twentieth century history, especially from 1918 to 1991. Of course, we cannot blame Smith for the misuse of his ideas. Smith would have surely opposed Marxism, had he been alive to do so.
   
   What we have in this book is a tremendous effort at discovering the proper limits between private and public institutions. Better still, Smith thought about society and institutions in evolutionary terms. This is another reason why the Wealth of Nations is preferable to modern economics texts. Smith understood the dynamics of capitalism better than many modern economists- who focus on static math models. Smith also influenced Charles Darwin with his ideas of social evolution. There is much evidence indicating that Darwin got the idea for the evolution of species by reading The Wealth of Nations. Smith therefore had great influence on the biological sciences.
   
   Modern economists reject Smith labor value theory (ever since Menger refuted it in 1870). However, there is no denying the influence of The Wealth of Nations. All members of the educated public should read at least part of this book. The question then in which edition should you buy? The Liberty Classics edition is unabridged. The Modern Library Classics edition has margin notes that could be helpful. Given the affordability of these editions, you might consider have both on your bookshelf (I do). I would avoid the Great Mind Series altogether. The Wealth of Nations should be read because it is both a book of great historical importance and a good source for understanding modern Globalization. The labor value theory part precludes a five star rating, but anything less than four stars would be absurd.



4. I was not impressed to find that this is an abridgement, especially considering that I found it by reading the reviews and could not discern it from the book cover at all. For this reason I have marked it down to three stars. Smith is necessary reading for anyone interested in the history of Western thought, the Enlightenment or economics, but it must be said that it is dry, if admirably clear, reading and difficult to chew and swallow. For that reason, it is disappointing to get so far in and then find that one is not getting the complete work.
   
   There can be few books that have had such lasting influence on the cultural milieu. Unlike Marx, Smith's ideas seem to have stood up to the tide of history without being washed away, although I write at a time when the finance system appears to have just collapsed, so who knows how a little more history will judge it. At any rate, the correctness of Smith's ideas is perhaps of less import for the student of Western thought than its place in the emergence of a rationalist, secular culture. For Smith was part of the conscious project of the Enlightenment to introduce naturalistic models of our world in place of the magical thinking, in the form of divine providence, which preceded it. Smith was building a model of economy which did not rely on an external, disembodied agency but which emerged deterministically and reached equilibrium through the rule-based interactions of its component parts. His "invisible hand" replaced another.
   
   At the same time, he was making a case for personal autonomy and the right of economic self-determination. As such, Smith combines the two most salient threads of the Enlightenment project - liberation from authority and liberation from magic. More than perhaps any other Enlightenment figure, Smith has shaped the way we think as a political culture today. As such, one must read this book to understand the legacy of the Enlightenment. It is hard going, as he was a very thorough worker and this is economics, the most dismal of sciences, but indispensable.
   
   There is one misconception that this reading corrected for me which I ought to share, and that concerns Smith's alleged scepticism about "corporations". For Smith, and presumably for his contemporaries, this did not, as I thought, indicate opposition to public companies and multinationals in the way we would currently understand it. Rather, he referred to, and condemned, the system of closed trades and apprenticeships by which the market for certain trades was until recently widely protected from competition. I demur from taking sides in this, but it is important to mention the misunderstanding which arises out of the word "corporation", incautiously read.



5. The item was exactly as described in the advertisement. The delivery time was very reasonable.
   DS

5 comments about On The Wealth of Nations: Books That Changed the World.

1. As Thurber said (I think/paraphrase?) "Only humor can safely approach the burning column of truth" so it is possible that the ~180 pages of O'Rourke can safely approach the 900 pages of the Wealth Of Nations.
   
   You will either "get it" or you won't but I doubt *you* will ever pack so much info as O'Rourke manages into so few words and paragraphs so entertainingly - this trick is *only* possible with humour.
   
   Thus any sort of critique cannot approach these columns safely so let the man speak for himself!
   
   
   ...For example, a passage from the aforementioned digression on silver:
   
   Labour, it ust always be remembered, and not any particulare commodity or set of commodities, is the real measure of the value both of silver and of all other commodities.6
   
   
   This can be powerfully condensed: 'Labour... is the real measure of...value.' In quoting Adam Smith,'...'is sometimes the most trenchant thing he said. And it may be that just such a trenchant ellipsis in The Wealth Of Nations was what sent Karl Marx off his rocker. Notice, reading Smith's original sentence, that no grand Marxist 'value theory of labor' was created. The more so because, three hundred pages later, Smith makes the same kind of argument about food grains: 'The real value of every other commodity is finally measured and determined by ...the average money price of corn.'7 Smith thus maintains that work (or something akin to it, such as our daily bread) provides a sensible index for determining how much other things are worth to us. Deciding whether to mow the lawn ourselves or pay the kid next door to do it - factoring in the likelihood that he'll eat us out of house and home at snack time and run the Toro over his foot, sue us, and we'll have to get a second job to pay the legal bills - is something everybody does all the time. Marxism, as various Marxist regimes have discovered, is something nobody ever does if he can help it. (Incidentally, if the labor theory of value were true, certain children would be less worthless than they are.)
   



2. I found this book both useful and entertaining. The summary of Smith's ideas was interesting for me as a non-economist and I also enjoyed Rourke's way of presenting those ideas. Of course this book would be disappointing for people who want to find an in-depth analysis of Smith's theories.



3. P J O'Rourke - he of Republican Party Reptile - is a gifted, witty and acerbic writer but one whose views, even when on his mettle, one should take wth a pinch of salt: more useful as an antidote to loony-tunes leftie thinking than as a properly constructive conservative alternative. As with all politically committed writers, left or right, his core analysis tends to be glib: the brushstrokes with which he paints the world are vigorous but, like many paintings that look good at a distance, they don't always bear close examination.
   
   Expounding on Adam Smith's classic The Wealth of Nations, then, O'Rourke both is and isn't on home turf. *Is* in that, superficially, Smith is the godfather of O'Rourke's libertarian, optimistic, Republican brand of economics in observing that the natural opposition of interests of buyers and sellers is a functional tension such that folks left to their own devices will, quite without meaning to, generally act is a way which is constructive and efficient in its allocation of resources. *Isn't* in that O'Rourke is a journalist and a polemicist not an economist, much less a moral philosopher (though to give him credit he makes no bones whatever about that) and Smith's 900 page tome is a far more nuanced volume than its hackneyed headline about the invisible hand - which is all most of us know about it: hence O'Rourke's book - suggests.
   
   To his credit, also, O'Rourke has also spent time assimlating Smith's companion (and much less well known) volume A Theory of Moral Sentiments, and does some good work to contextualise Wealth of Nations by reference to it.
   
   All the same, O'Rourke's simplistic economic viewpoint - and sardonic air - remain untroubled by Smith's nuance, and at times this entry drifts closer to representing O'Rourke's own theory of the Wealth of Nations rather than considering Smith's. Most readers will have far less interest in that, no matter how funny it might be, particularly as O'Rourke has had a go at that book already, a decade ago, in Eat the Rich: A Treatise on Economics, and more particularly because on this outing O'Rourke's wit isn't as sharp, nor his insight as valuable, as it can be.
   
   In any case you can be sure that P J O'Rourke wouldn't need 900 pages to expound his theory. You could write it on a cocktail napkin (Eat The Rich notwithstanding), and for all his praise of Adam Smith's pragmatism in the face of ideologically driven idealism (anachronistic though it may be, at the time of publication the dread socialism being still a good century and more hence) O'Rourke's laissez-faire view of the world is as idealistic as any, supposing as it does perfectly rational actors, a complete absence of government, ubiquity of perfect information and an omnipresent infinity of buyers and sellers, and (as we can now say in November 2008 with 20:20 hindsight) just as flawed: there are, we know know, times where even perfectly rational actors simply won't act and in these times the invisible hand without so much as a by-your-leave vanishes altogether and the only credible mechanic left to deal with the black swans carousing about is good old nanny state. And Warren Buffett.
   
   This is by no means a bad book, and for those interested in a *somewhat* deeper reading of The Wealth Of Nations, more pleasant than the one that can be had by actually reading it, step forward - but bring that salt cellar. For this P J O'Rourke book more than any, you'll be needing it.
   
   Olly Buxton



4. Adam Smith was no fool, but O'Rourke is. Post bank-bailout, PJ's wit comes off as quite pathetic.
   
   Smith was not afraid of contradiction. His great tome advocates free trade, but never expects it to be absolute, as some capitalists think it should be. And that's where the frustration sets in. O'Rourke obviously wrote this before the crash, so if he'd like to issue an apology, or remove his comical farce from circulation, that might be acceptable. For example, when Smith is trying to grapple with nuances of progressive taxation or privatization of government functions, O'Rourke makes blanket statements: "Everyone's confident in America except America's opinion-makers." He then mocks the trade deficit and the fact that our country doesn't really produce anything. I'd love to ask him if he thinks it's funny now.
   
   Save yourself the trouble of slogging through O'Rourke's tangential fallacies and read the cliff notes instead.



5. I purchased this as a gift.
   And the person who recieved it was very happy.

1 comments about Against Intellectual Monopoly.

1. First, I have not read the book in this form. I read a free version online. There might be some differences; I don't know.
   
   Anyway-
   I was pointed to this book while arguing that intellectual property is needed to overcome a public goods problem. After reading it, I've moved from confidently supporting minimal IP rights to tentatively advocating their abolition.
   
   The authors provide plenty of evidence and a few intriguing theoretical arguments to bolster their position.
   
   It definitely won't be the last word on this subject, but it will widen the debate and point it in new directions. Very much worth reading, if you're interested in IP issues.

5 comments about Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds and Confusión de Confusiones (A Marketplace Book).

1. This was the warning shot ahead of the internet bubble. Hearing about the Dutch tulip bubble in 1995 (when I first read the book) we should have been well prepared to duck when Amazon, Ebay and their fallen comrades shot to the moon. If only we had listened...
   
   The book clearly articulates why "The more things change, the more they stay the same" and helps us understand when to buck the herd. Perhaps a bit long, it is well written and worth the space on your nightstand.



2. Keep this book within handy reach for any time that you're getting a bit too smart for your britches. How otherwise intelligent and rational folk get themselves into these troubles is truly fascinating and instructive. The writing here is, of course, rather archaic to modern sensibilities (originally published in 1841) but the stories are interesting and very readable. It's tempting to read the tales as history but when I see Goggle trading at over $400.00 I scratch my head and wonder. And when I hear the president cutting taxes, increasing spending, and still assuring me that my Social Security payments are secure, well, I think there might be a few chapters still waiting to be writing in the book. A good read.



3. "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" and "Confusion de Confusiones" are both works that address speculation frenzy in early financial markets but which have continued to enjoy a surprising popularity among investors centuries after they were written. Perhaps that is because a certain romanticism and distance comes with age, while at the same time these stories of speculative bubbles tell us that nothing really changes in the markets no matter how sophisticated we get. A foreword by Peter Bernstein sets the stage for the 17th century proliferation of financial instruments and pursuit of wealth. Martin S. Fridson's Introduction comments on the enduring popularity of these works, their differing perspectives on market forces, and their debunkers.
   
   "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" was authored by Scotsman Charles MacKay in 1841. It was a favorite book of Bernard Baruch, who wrote the foreword to the 1932 edition, a much longer work than what we see here. Only chapters relating to financial markets have been included in this Wiley Investment Classics edition. MacKay recounts three speculation frenzies and their aftermaths: The 1717 Mississippi Company of John Law and France's misadventures with paper money under the regent Duc d'Orleans, the 1711 South Sea Company bubble, and, more briefly, the "tulipmania" that overtook Holland in the 1630s. MacKay concentrates on the human behavior that drove these bubbles rather than on financial minutiae. If you're interested in learning more about John Law, father of modern finance, Millionaire by Janet Gleeson is a very readable biography.
   
   "Confusion de Confusiones" author Joseph de la Vega wrote about what he knew personally: the stock market in late-17th century Amsterdam. The 1957 introduction by Hermann Kellenbenz includes a bio of de la Vega and helpful explanations of the types of transactions to which the work refers. The main text is a series of Dialogues between a Shareholder, a Philosopher, and a Merchant, in which the Shareholder explains the stock market, which he describes as "this enigmatic business which is at once the finest and most deceitful in Europe", the "quintessence of academic learning and a paragon of fraudulence." De la Vega uses stock of the Dutch East India Company as an example and lays the blame for price instability on syndicates of bears and bulls who conspire to move prices. I can't say that either of these works is useful -we have plenty of bubbles in our own time, after all- but they are engaging curiosities.



4. When reading this book you find that what's old is new and that
   somethings really don't change much over time. What does change
   is that the perception of market behavior can be quantified and
   measured easily, when in fact, it cannot. Some of the accounts
   of history date back over two hundred years, but yet are as relevant
   today as when they originally happened. The facinating information
   is that before the 17th Century, most of the wealth was concentrated
   in the hands of landowners and royalty. There was no need for
   grand financial markets since the ownership of the wealth was
   passed down by death of their owners. One of the authors even
   mentions "bubbles" which in today's financial lexicon is even
   more relevant. If someone wants to fully understand what is
   not understandable, they should purchase this book just to
   enjoy the fact that they too, are not complete morons, but just
   part of the crowd that thinks they are immune to the whims of
   the market.



5. It's always good to check a place like Project Gutenberg when you're considering older texts, especially things published before 1923. In this case, the book is in the public domain and you can download it for free.