Customer Reviews

New Ideas from Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Economic Thought (Plume)

5 star:		(24)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

I enjoyed this book. Todd Buchholz gives his readers a good, well-written introduction to most of the major schools of economics. His portraits of the "dead economists" who launched and powered these various schools are excellent, as are his summaries of each of these schools. (Fortunately, not all of Buchholz's "dead economists" are dead: Ronald Coase, Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, and Robert Lucas, among others, are thankfully still alive.)

I will recommend this book to non-economists who ask me for an accessible introduction to economic analysis.

Only a few nits are worth picking. One is that, from time to time, Buchholz mentions an interesting fact without providing a reference. For example, in his chapter on Public Choice economic, he illustrates the reality and size of pork-barrel politics by reporting the finding of an (unnamed) researcher who "calculated that for the price of the $200 billion highway bill [enacted by Congress in 1998], the U.S. could literally pave the streets with gold (gold-plating, that is)." I wanted to check out this study, but could find no citation to it.

Another nit is that, again in his chapter on Public Choice economics, he should have introduced his readers to the term, and concept, of rent-seeking.

A third (and really small) nit is that he mistakenly reports that Thomas Sargent shared the 1995 Nobel Prize in economics with Robert Lucas. Not so. Sargent is not, at least yet, a Nobel laureate.

Especially nice are (1) Buchholz's exploration of Keynes's attitude toward government, (2) his explanation of the deepest problems with Marxian economics, and (3) his very able treatment of rational-expectations economics. But please don't read this paragraph as suggesting that Buchholz performs well only in these areas. Again, from beginning to end, this is a very sound and very useful effort.

Note first of all that there are two editions of this book floating around: the one from 1989 and the one from 1999. Both of them have the same covers, the same author, the same everything: but there is a world of difference between the two.

In short, go with the latter, called (inconspicuously) the "Revised Edition." (Many websites are selling both indiscriminately; Amazon is not -- the one on this page is safe to buy.) The one from 1989 is ridiculously outdated: it still makes many references to the Soviet Union; the dollar is still strong; the Euro has yet to come into existence; the Asian Tigers have yet to rise, etc. It's like watching a TV show from the 70s!

Now, to the book itself: it is amusing and informative, but it is seriously misnamed. A more accurate -- but not as catchy -- title would have been: "A Precis of Modern Economic Thought via the Ideas of the Great Economists." For that is, ultimately, what you're getting. The ideas are certainly not "new," except perhaps from the point of view of someone who was previously ignorant of them.

The book proceeds -- in narrative fashion and without graphs -- to give a chronological history of economics by means of the ideas of the great economists. One strong point in the author's approach is that even when you feel he's ardently at variance with an idea whose discussion is required, he is still very fair to it.

Specialized knowledge of economics, math, or history is not required, and the author does much to keep the book readable.

Alas! the book gets bogged down in the later stages, when discussing the debate between the Keynesians and the monetarists. It just goes on forever: I don't feel that Buchholz did a particularly noteworthy job of reducing the complexities of this issue for lay readers -- or even making it interesting for them.

Despite these problems, you will learn something from reading this, unless you are already familiar with the economists and the ideas he discusses. But if that's the case, what you're doing with the book in the first place is beyond me.

Those of us who were cranked through government-run schools probably all had similar high school economics classes. I seem to remember spending more time studying the machinations of the Fed and doing words and terms than taking economics seriously as a branch of philosophy.

This book was a welcome surprise. Desperate for some much-needed education on economics, I took a recommendation and read this book. What a treasure! Buchholz entertains with wonderful biographical sketches of the more prominent economists; it is interesting to see how their lives influenced their thinking (John Stuart Mill's remarkable life-change is something I found striking). The analogies used to demonstrate certain principles, including such modern icons as the cast of Gilligan's Island, clarified the author's point while providing a chuckle. Buchholz seems to favor "laissez-faire" government and clearly prefers certain theories over others, but he gives fair treatment to all mentioned: Adam Smith gets significantly more ink than Thorstein Veblen, but Keynes and Marx, although the author is neither Keynesian nor Marxist, are written about in great detail and each have their own chapter.

Obviously, this book is not geared towards folks who already know about economics. But, unlike other introductory texts, this one is not only thorough but effective. After reading it, I felt very confident in my ability to comprehend today's financial headlines; I cannot recommend it enough.

If you're after a rough outline of how economics got where it is today, and who the people behind the subject's founding ideas really were, then the Dead Economists is a great place to start. Buchholz kicks things off with the invisible hands of Smith/Hayek, and then breezes through the lives and ideas of Malthus, Ricardo, Mill, Marx, Marshall, Veblen, Galbraith, Keynes and Friedman. The final two chapters get broader and cover Public Choice and Rational Expectations.

Strange as it may seem, there's nothing really on Schumpeter, Frank Ramsey, Robert Solow, Joan Robinson, Irving Fisher or Robert Mundell to name but a few - although, I suppose, these individuals didn't really lead economics off in truly new directions. But Nobel Prize winner Mundell was largely responsible for starting international economics as we know it. It's odd that he's not even mentioned.

Still for non-specialists, there isn't that much theory and what there is comes in easy to understand sketches of where the big ideas came from and what these mean for the world we live in today.

Overall I liked the Dead Economists, although I can understand why some people might think it a bit light. The author likes a joke. Some readers don't. It reads like pulp history. Some don't like that. My view is that if you already know your dismal science, then this is a nice, easy read and it gives lovely insights into the lives of economics' greatest thinkers. Alternatively, if you're a novice and you like a bit of history, then NIDE should suit your needs just fine.

I found the book to be a good and clear review of the concepts and ideas of a number of economists since the 'science' was founded by Adam Smith. The authors did a good job of convincing me that no economists or economic system has a monopoly on truth. But then they go and spoil it all by slipping in snide remarks about economists or economic ideas that they don't like. Galbraith and Marx really get in the neck and they don't seem to be able to decide what they think about Keynes. Friedman is elevated to sainthood and yet monetarism had distastrous consequences for the World economy in the 80's and from which economies - particularly the US and the UK - are only just recovering. I would recommend reading it but take it with a few spoons of Galbraith for leavening. Galbraiths jokes are also better by the way!

This books generally delivers what it promises, a review of major thoughts from economists evaluated (somewhat) in a modern context. If that's what you are looking for, it's probably worth reading. However I had three problems with the book. First, he says some incredibly, bizarrely wrong things (quantum mechanics is not a hard science, the internet was invented by private industry, California may float away into the ocean). Even though they are topics outside of economics, they made me generally suspicious of his knowledge. Second, from some of his comments it is clear his writing has a political/philosophical bias but he never comes out and states what it is. Since I'm not an economist (after all, that's why I'm reading this book), it seems impossible to figure out what his bias is and how to correct for it. Third, perhaps a minor point, but he keeps drifting slightly off-topic in order to include a cute saying or clever remark. I mostly found this annoying, but other readers might find it helps keep the book light and fun.

Buchholz gives the reader a lucid book on introductory economics. I call it introductory because this isnt a book written for advanced economic analysis. Its not for people who already did many courses in economics. Its definately not for economic teachers. This is a must have book for all those people who are interested in understanding or at least knowing about this complex subject. Its will more than enrich you, in case you started reading the book with no knowledge of economics.

Buchholtz starts with the father of modern economics, Adam Smith and follows with giving (almost biographical) details of Malthus, Ricardo, Marshal, Keynes. The chapter on Monetarist and their attack on Keynes follows and its worth reading twice. Then he gives a brief description of all other important economists of last century. This is followed by chapters on new methods such as Public Choice and Rational Expectations. All chapters are written in a very informal, witty style and this helps the reader keep interest. Economics, being a rather dry subject is taught well here, with good illustrations and in a very non-technical way.

The downside of the book is not being able to cover more economists. The author talks about Rational Expectations without mentioning anything about John Muth or much of Robert Lucas. This was missing, but I assume he did that because anyone reading or learning about economics for the first time (the intended audience of this book) might not have to know about these economists. Like wise, Veblen, Galbraith, Samuelson and new economists such as Paul Krugman, Joseph E. Stiglitz are not covered. But again, its not possible to cover so many and I guess also due to the fact that teh author wanted to cover schools of economic thought more than individual economists themselves.

All in all, this book is very interesting to read as it is very well written. If you have read this review and have no idea of economics but want to have one, here we go, just buy the book!

This book would make an excellent pre-100 level textbook for students interested in economics. Buchholz covers all major economic theories and their proponents from Adam Smith's Invisible Hand to the most currently vocal Rational Expectations theory. The detail never gets so deep as to actually present charts and diagrams, but is solid enough that the reader comes away with a general understanding of each theory.

The book suffers a little in the beginning as Buchholz seems uncomfortable simply presenting the dry facts and ends up regaling the reader with anecdotes and economist in-jokes that may play in the classroom but fall flat in textual form.

Buchholz really hits his stride when he starts talking about Keynes, though. Perhaps it is the benefit of having multiple economic theories at odds with each other by the early 20th century that make writing about it so easy. Whatever the case, his coverage from Keynes to the modern day is exceptionally well done. Focusing less on the character of the men and more on the value of their theories, Buchholz clearly describes Keynesian, Monetary, and Rational economic theories. He proceeds to play them off each other to the delight of the reader. Where the first part of the book failed to be dynamic, the latter half is exceedingly entertaining and informative.

The problem is that I'm not interested to know that Smith was a klutz or that Malthus was well-polished. Those things are only used by Buchholz to bring life to these dead economists. He could have brought them more to life with more focus on what keeps them alive than the things buried with them.

I recommend this book to anyone with an interest in getting an overview of economic thought. It will introduce you to just about all the important economic theories that have made an impact as well as the latest 'cutting edge' theories that present alternatives to the existing body of work. I hope to find a book that can replicate Buchholz's success with the modern era theories for those economists that I feel he short-shrifted in this one.

The first time I read this distinguished work by Buchholz, I began the book having half forgotten the economics which I took at college level, and ended the book self-congratulating myself for picking up most of what I had forgotten. When I re-read the book, this time the economic theories that I was taught in a post-graduate course still fresh in my mind, I was in awe with the brilliance and clarity with which Buchholz explains the insights of economic theories without compromising the insight and depth of difficult concepts. As economics comes increasingly under the grips of ever more esoteric mathematics, Buchholz shows the path toward a refreshing style of describing economic behaviors, sans mathematica, without compromising the dazzling insights elucidated by gurus from Adam Smith through Alfred Marshall, John Maynard Keynes to present day giants in the field (e.g. Coase, Friedman, Buchanan). While Buchholz clearly intended the book for the layman, it is actually an introductory economics text par excellence.

This is a very good book, but I was somewhat disappointed with it. The problem is the title, which is misleading. It should have been called "A Modern Interpretations of Some Great Economists". There are no new ideas, nor really any new interpretations of old ideas. Another possibility, to apply these ideas to contemporary situations, is done very superficially and with none of the wit and imagination the author uses in their exposition. As a professional economist, I did not find the book very useful. What the book is, is a very good introduction to the history of economic thought. If some day I give an economics course, in particular to non-economists, this book will provide its basis. The witty and light way in which some of the greatest ideas in economics are presented is very appealing. With a book such as this, the countless students who hate the subject of economics will see that it is a living and human endeavor. My congratulations to the author although I suggest he change the title.