12 of 12 people found the following review helpful
on April 22, 2006
Don't buy this book if you just want to know the history of supply-side economics -- it is so much more than that. If you want to know how economic policy making REALLY happens inside the beltway (including even the most boring parts, the ugliest warts, and more!), this book gives it to you straight.
What will you learn from this book? How both good and bad economic policies are distorted by the media and propagandized by politicians. The bottom line -- why DC politicians continue to produce economic failure after failure.
18 of 21 people found the following review helpful
on December 3, 2000
I read this book because I was studying the economic changes brought about by the Reagan victory in 1980. I've seen many favorable and unfavorable mentions of the "supply-side" theory, so I was looking for an account from a true supply-sider. This book fits that need. It desribes the immediate intellectual origins of the policy (but not the fundamental long-term origins). It then describes the political battles that went on in the legislative and executive branches from 1978 to about the end of 1981. I enjoyed reading how the free-market Republicans, Keynesian Republicans and liberals fought it out behind the scenes. These battles shaped the relatively vague "supply-side" theory into a specific government policy. This book is a good view into those years and provides perspective to the more recent government tax and spending issues.
4 of 15 people found the following review helpful
on March 6, 2008
Dr. Roberts has written a beautifully written and compellingly factual and detailed view of how the supply siders came into "power" and began to dominate economic policy formulation in Washington DC. If you want to know you must read his first hand account. However, I tried to follow up and get his more recent views to answer questions I had that he would not reply to (I know he's a busy man). I found disappointly that he's gone off the deep end politically so God only knows what his positions are today except anti-Bush and anti-American hegemony (his own myth). Too bad.