4 ms·

"Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt http://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf http://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf

"Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt http://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf http://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf This book is an outstanding place to start. It addresses a myriad of economic concepts in simple language. It's available for free through the Mises Institute. "How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes" by Peter Schiff http://www.amazon.com/How-Economy-Grows-Why-Crashes/dp/047052670X http://www.amazon.com/How-Economy-Grows-Why-Crashes/dp/04705... This book gives a simple overview of macro issues and is an interesting and well-presented tale about how economies grow from the basic "man on an island" scenario to a complex market. It also covers Austrian business cycle theory which explains the boom-bust cycle in economies. Both of these books are from the "Austrian School" of economics, which is named for its Austrian founder, Carl Menger. I find these arguments compelling as they are firmly grounded in logic and are based on the principle that the human individual and her actions form the basis of all economic activity. The giants of the Austrian school are Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard (highly readable) if you want to seek out more advanced theory.

cpursley 13y ago
+1 on Mises Institute and Peter Schiff. Say what you want about Austrian / free market economic schools, but these people and groups predicted the financial crisis and housing bubble: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfascZSTU4o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfascZSTU4o
- snake_plissken 13y ago
  As did anyone else who was watching the Case-Shiller index when it's 2nd derivative turned negative late in 2006.
Locke1689 13y ago
Do not do this. The Austrian school of economics is neither scientific nor respected in the wider economic sphere. If you want a good introduction to economics that is 1) amenable to the perspective of an engineer (i.e., mathematical theory and significant amounts of modeling and game theory) and 2) close to how actual professional economists approach economic problems, the best free textbook is one originally authored by an economist at CalTech who is also Yahooo!'s head of an economic research team. http://www.mcafee.cc/Introecon/IEA.pdf http://www.mcafee.cc/Introecon/IEA.pdf
- jwallaceparker 13y ago
  > The Austrian school of economics is neither scientific This is a somewhat vague statement but I'm assuming you're referring to the Austrians' "a priori" approach to economics. > nor respected in the wider economic sphere. Given the adversarial stance that the Austrians take toward government intervention in the economy it is no surprise that their ideas are not endorsed by academics. Individuals should make their own judgement about the persuasiveness of the Austrian arguments and not dismiss them because they are unpopular. If you have the time, I'd welcome a critique of any argument contained in that Hazlitt book quoted above.
  - wutbrodo 13y ago
    I assume that the complaint was not "no one should ever read the Austrians" but rather that it's not appropriate introduction to economics. One may think that string theory is sound, but still think it unwise to introduce someone to physics starting with string theory. "Individuals should make their own judgment about the persuasiveness of Austrian arguments" I agree with this, but it seems wiser to do so once you have some basic knowledge of more mainstream economics so that you can critically compare the two schools of thought.
    - jwallaceparker 13y ago
      But that's a gross mischaracterization of Austrian economics. It's nothing like the 'string theory' of economics and is indeed rather simple. All the seminal works (especially "Economics in One Lesson") are very elementary. You need no prior exposure to economics. They say you can identify an Austrian work by flipping through it, as it will undoubtedly contain no graphs or formulas.
      - wutbrodo 13y ago
        The only goal of the comparison to string theory was that it's an alternative theory that an educated observer should judge on its own merits. I'm saying that the background of one's introduction to economics should be based in the mainstream, just as one's intro to physics should not be based in mainstream physics vs string theory (saying nothing of how advanced the intro curriculum need be). My fundamental point is that alternative theories are invaluable and essential, but being conservative and sticking with the mainstream is generally well-advised for beginners. Once you're confident in your grounding in the mainstream, you can approach alternatives with a critical, well-informed eye.

cpursley 13y ago

+1 on Mises Institute and Peter Schiff. Say what you want about Austrian / free market economic schools, but these people and groups predicted the financial crisis and housing bubble: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfascZSTU4o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfascZSTU4o

snake_plissken 13y ago
As did anyone else who was watching the Case-Shiller index when it's 2nd derivative turned negative late in 2006.

Locke1689 13y ago

Do not do this. The Austrian school of economics is neither scientific nor respected in the wider economic sphere. If you want a good introduction to economics that is 1) amenable to the perspective of an engineer (i.e., mathematical theory and significant amounts of modeling and game theory) and 2) close to how actual professional economists approach economic problems, the best free textbook is one originally authored by an economist at CalTech who is also Yahooo!'s head of an economic research team. http://www.mcafee.cc/Introecon/IEA.pdf http://www.mcafee.cc/Introecon/IEA.pdf

jwallaceparker 13y ago
> The Austrian school of economics is neither scientific This is a somewhat vague statement but I'm assuming you're referring to the Austrians' "a priori" approach to economics. > nor respected in the wider economic sphere. Given the adversarial stance that the Austrians take toward government intervention in the economy it is no surprise that their ideas are not endorsed by academics. Individuals should make their own judgement about the persuasiveness of the Austrian arguments and not dismiss them because they are unpopular. If you have the time, I'd welcome a critique of any argument contained in that Hazlitt book quoted above.
- wutbrodo 13y ago
  I assume that the complaint was not "no one should ever read the Austrians" but rather that it's not appropriate introduction to economics. One may think that string theory is sound, but still think it unwise to introduce someone to physics starting with string theory. "Individuals should make their own judgment about the persuasiveness of Austrian arguments" I agree with this, but it seems wiser to do so once you have some basic knowledge of more mainstream economics so that you can critically compare the two schools of thought.
  - jwallaceparker 13y ago
    But that's a gross mischaracterization of Austrian economics. It's nothing like the 'string theory' of economics and is indeed rather simple. All the seminal works (especially "Economics in One Lesson") are very elementary. You need no prior exposure to economics. They say you can identify an Austrian work by flipping through it, as it will undoubtedly contain no graphs or formulas.
    - wutbrodo 13y ago
      The only goal of the comparison to string theory was that it's an alternative theory that an educated observer should judge on its own merits. I'm saying that the background of one's introduction to economics should be based in the mainstream, just as one's intro to physics should not be based in mainstream physics vs string theory (saying nothing of how advanced the intro curriculum need be). My fundamental point is that alternative theories are invaluable and essential, but being conservative and sticking with the mainstream is generally well-advised for beginners. Once you're confident in your grounding in the mainstream, you can approach alternatives with a critical, well-informed eye.