The Reluctant Economist: Perspectives on Economics, Economic History, and Demography

by Richard A. Easterlin

Drawing widely on social science and history, economist Richard Easterlin asks: Where is rapid economic growth taking us? Why has its spread throughout the world been so limited? What are the causes of the great twentieth century advances in life expectancy and the revolution in childbearing that has brought fertility worldwide to near-replacement levels? Finally, to what extent have free markets been the source of human improvement? The opening chapter demonstrates the evolution of Easterlin's unique approach, and why he is a "reluctant economist".

Genres: Economics

Paperback

First published April 26, 2004

About the author

Richard Ainley Easterlin was a professor of economics at the University of Southern California. He is best known for the economic theory named after him, the Easterlin paradox. Another of his contributions is the Easterlin hypothesis about long waves of baby booms and busts.

Reviews

[Marcus · Rating 3 out of 5]

It took me 8 months, on and off to finish this book.

If you're an economics student that:
- has a tolerance for reading things written by economists
- feels brainwashed by your degree
you might be able to finish this book, eventually.

The basic premise is that the field of economics as a social science has developed a tunnel vision. Easterlin uses the approaches of other social sciences like sociology, psychology, demography, etc to rethink common economic areas of study.

It's not a bad premise, and Easterlin is not a bad writer. His ideas are usually clear even if his sentences are less so. Several times I found this book pretty interesting and insightful.

And now, a careless summary to expedite your battle against this book that refuses to finish being read:

Preface
Easterlin was 78 at the time of publication. Isn't that impressive?

Part One: Economics
1) Easterlin summarizes his academic career, how economics brainwashed him, how he became a "reluctant economist".
2) All the other social sciences accept subjective testimony as evidence but not econ. What gives, economists?
3) People are generally getting richer, but not happier, because happiness is mostly how rich you are compared to other people.

Part Two: Economic History
4) Some countries are developed and some countries are not because knowledge = development and some countries aren't very good at mass schooling.
5) Some stuff about Kuznets cycles.
6) Accelerated expansion of scientific knowledge led to both the Industrial Revolution and Mortality Revolution (where mortality rates dramatically decline). Science learned more of the physical world before the medical world, which is why the Mortality Revolution followed the Industrial Revolution. They are largely independent of each other.
7) Market forces were/are no good for the development of public health.

Part Three: Demography
8) A model of fertility is developed that takes into account how many kids couples want to have, how many kids they can have (health/social reasons), and the social + monetary costs of birth control.
9) Case studies in India and Taiwan using the above model.
10) Population growth and stability in northern US farm settlements. Something to do with intergenerational farmland endowment.
11) America's baby boom and bust was a result of a man's income relative to his father's income. Women in the workplace not really a big deal.
12) In the 70's to mid-late 80's, people chose to major in business because their parents were worried about the economic outlook of the country and influenced their kids to worship money. Then a bunch of Wall Street scandals made everyone hate business majors.

Epilogue
Psychology as a field has tunnel vision too. Let's everybody get interdisciplinary guys!