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

by Todd G. Buchholz, Martin Feldstein (Foreword)

Featuring brand new sections on the remarkable shifts in the world economy, this economic study is a relevant, entertaining, and fascinating guide for those seeking both a solid lesson on the development of economic theory throughout the past two hundred years and a balanced perspective of our current economic state on the brink of the millennium. By applying age-old economic theories to contemporary issues, Todd Buchholz helps readers to see how the thoughts and writings of the great economists of the past have vital relevance to the dilemmas affecting all our lives today.

Genres: Economics, Nonfiction, History, Business, Politics, Finance, Philosophy

352 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1989

About the author

A well-known American economist and a former senior economic advisor at the White House, Buchholz holds advanced degrees from Cambridge University and Harvard, where he won the Allyn Young Teaching Prize. Buchholz is known for being on the short list for Federal Reserve considerations in 2006. He frequently writes for newspapers such as The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, in addition to appearing as a commentator on NBC, CNBC, Fox News, and PBS. His books have been translated into over 15 languages.

Buchholz resides primarily in San Diego, California, but travels around the world speaking to various companies, including Microsoft and Citibank, about the worldwide economic issues. Buchholz is involved in several business, real estate, and design companies, including Wetamorph and the Two Oceans Fund. He is one of the founding producers of Jersey Boys.

Reviews

[Juan-Pablo · Rating 3 out of 5]

A comprehensive but ideologically biased economics history

There are a couple of points that are good to know before you pick up this short economics history. First, the title is misleading, it is not “new ideas”, but just “ideas” form dead economists. Second, it is not only theories (ideas), but also biography (at least sometimes). The latter is where the book fails the most. I’ll come back to this later.

This is a history of ideas book, but it is also a saga of how modern economy (the dismal science) came to life. This epics starts, naturally, with the Physiocrats and Adam Smith. Modern free-marketeers and Republicans have taken for themselves Smith’s theories. They place them in the ideological camp against Big Government. But “The Wealth of Nations” starts with a critique to Mercantilism and its focus on money. Wealth, in Smith’s view, is productive, not monetary. Of course the Spanish Empire learned this the hard way after bringing gold and silver from America. This new theoretical framework for wealth is the real revolution. One wonders what Smith would have thought of modern finance, with its obsession with paper money and fancy instruments that are several levels of abstraction removed from real wealth. In this sense, Adam Smith is more of an Economics Theory Foundation figure, and not so much a piece to place on one side or the other of the ideological camp.

Buchholz traces how economics develops from this early foundation, explaining Malthus, Ricardo, Alfred Marshal invention of the economic supply and demand curves, and then moving forward to modern economics from Keynes to Behaviorists. The book is very successful in presenting all these theories in a coherent framework and a small package.

There are, however, two big problems with “New Ideas from Dead Economists”. The first is how biography is misused. The book presents mainly ideas, and in most cases biography is used to move the prose forward. But when the author doesn’t agree with a theory, he spends more time on the economists’ flaws. Marx is portrayed as a drunken, money waster youth, negligent provider for his family. I don’t see how this is relevant at all in understanding his theories—it is a fun story, but that’s a different type of book. Buchholz critique of Marxism is tinted with this (irrelevant) biographical information. In my opinion, this is not a very honest way of debating economics.

The other problem is his uses of examples. Marshall is praised with many illustrations that “prove” him right. Malthus, the opposite. With almost every economic theory on can find examples to prove or disprove it. So one wonders how these examples were chosen, and if this is just confirmation bias on the part of the author.

[Ahmad Ebaid]

I've read a few pages of it, and it was promising, and full of joyful small details.
One of the Arabic translations has a lot misunderstanding of phrases meaning, though it had checked by a famous Egyptian economist, "Hazem EL-Beblawy". That translation published by "academic library". Luckily, there is another recent translation by "Arabic words", and it was so good.
تحذير متأخر قليلاً، ولكن ترجمة "المكتبة الأكاديمية" لهذا الكتاب هي أسوأ ترجمة قابلتها على الإطلاق؛ فمعظم ترجمات العبارات مغلوطة تماماً، ولا تعكس مقاصد الكتاب من قريب أو بعيد حتى!.
ولا أستطيع تخيل كيف آلت الأمور إلى هذا الهراء، وكيف واتتهم الشجاعة لنشره، ولا أستطيع أن أتخيل كيف أن الدكتور "حازم الببلاوي" موضوع اسمه كمراجع للكتاب.

ومن حسن الحظ أنه هنالك ترجمة بديلة ممتازة، أصدرتها "كلمات عربية". وقد قارنتها بنفسي مع الترجمة الأخرى.

ومن الجزء البسيط الذي قرأته، فالكتاب رائع وواعد، بتفاصيل صغيرة مميزة.

[Jyontika · Rating 2 out of 5]

i actually only read 228 pages of this book but i’m still marking it as read for compensation of the pain that econ symposiums brought me

[Minh Nhật · Rating 4 out of 5]

giờ mới biết có 1 bản dịch chương 6 nói về Marx của 1 thành viên x cà ngày xưa, mà đã bị kiểm duyệt thẳng thường trong bản in của nxb tri thức in lần đầu hồi 2008 . hy vọng cuốn này có tái bản lại thì đưa chương này vào lại cho hoàn chỉnh, giờ chắc cũng đỡ nhiều rồi. Mà giọng điệu của tác giả khi nói về Marx chua cay quá :)), khác hẳn nói về mấy bác khác.

https://goo.gl/oAD11F

[Adrian · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good introduction to economics from a conservative point of view (of which I consider myself far from). It floored me that this book is genuinely funny. So take note writers- If this book can be funny, anything can have humour dispersed.

Ultimately the author achieved his aim of detailing the importance of economics and introductory concepts from the most notable economists. Sometimes it dragged during the tougher concepts but I blame the reader.

Most egregious parts are-
1. The acknowledgement of damning reports (2nd edition published in 1999) of future environmental degradation that is swiftly dismissed.
2. The Karl Marx chapter. Annoyed by the double standards when his personal life is eviscerated unlike the other featured economists. The author couldn't maintain his general impartiality here and his arguments suffered as a result.

[Omar Halabieh · Rating 5 out of 5]

The main premise of the book, is best summarized by the author: "It is striking that so many of the lessons of the great economists still speak to us. Each of their wisest theories has a practical point or analogy today. This book seeks their wisdom by looking at mainstream economics and asking, Who first had these insights and built these durable models? We can learn from the masters."

Todd then embarks his readers on a journey through the contributions of the greatest economists of our time. Clearly explaining how they analysed the existing models and theories of their time, and their own contributions to advance the filed of economics. He does so, in a very simple style that is accessible to any audience regardless of their background in that field.

What truly sets this book apart is the breadth of content, spanning a period of several centuries. Sufficient depth is included so that one gains an appreciation and broad understanding. The included references make it easy for one to dive deeper into more details. A must read for anyone seeking an introduction and/or a broad understanding of the field of economics!

Below are key excerpts from the book that I found particularly insightful:

1- "Russia's 1998 debacle teaches us that a market economy must rest on a dependable legal system. A free market does not mean utter chaos; it requires ground rules."

2- "Economics if the study of choice. It does not tell us what to choose. It only helps us understand the consequences of our choices."

3- "...as an economist isolates causes and estimates their influence, the degree of influence changes...Economics may not be a "hard" science. But that does not mean it is an easy science. Because it is so fluid, it is hard to hold in place and to study."

4- "Smith clearly defined the proper role for government: first, providing for national defense; second, administering justice through a court system; third, maintaining public institutions and resources such as roads, canals, bridges, educational systems, and the dignity of the sovereign."

5- "The point of Ricardo's analysis: free trade makes it possible for households to consume more goods regardless of whether trading partners are more or less economically advanced."

6- "By investing, the capitalist gives up the immediate gratification of buying goods. His return on investment pays him for waiting, for delaying his pleasure. If everyone consumes everything now, society will produce nothing new. Thus, profits play a crucial role."

7- "...four very important areas in which economists have dramatically transformed traditional legal analysis: negligence law; property law; criminal law; and corporate finance."

8- "There is clearly more to economics than prices, profits, rents, and costs. Laws, morals, fashions, and philosophies all contribute to an economy. They may support it, or they may tear it down."

9- "What does it mean to be Keynesian? Two basis propositions will suffice here: (1) the private economy may not reach full employment; (2) government spending can spur the economy into filling the gap."

10- "Keynes cleverly speculates that the way to make money in the stock market is not to be the best corporate analyst, but to be the best at guessing what others think is good."

11- "This movement, called monetarism, admits that the economy does have an accelerator and a brake, but insists that the accelerator should be marked "higher money supply" and the brake "lower money supply...the monetarists portray the Federal Reserve Board...as the driver."

12- "With perhaps uncustomary humility, Friedman claims that economists do not know enough about monetary policy to manipulate it wisely."

13- "We are all Keynesians now, thanks to Keynes. We are all monetarists now, thanks to Friedman. And we are all eclectics now, thanks to a turbulent world."

14- "This problem emerges again and again in democracies. Motivates organizations trample on the interests of consumers, who individually have a small stake in the outcome. Ultimately, the individual consumers are hurt badly as a national efficiency and income fall."

15- "Rational Expectations theory predicts that government stimulus does not spur the economy and that government contraction does not hurt...Why do most economists tend to agree with Rational Expectations theorists when they talk about the stock market, yet explode in disagreement when speaking of the macroeconomy? The fact is, the stock market is a more efficient...it is quite liquid...In contrast, real markets for goods and services show more complexity and rigidity."

16- "...each of the economists we have studied, despite their many differences, warned us that governments always face political pressures to take measures that can ruin good economies...Because even good economic policies often produce victims, economists have a very tough time persuading democratic governments to take good advice. Good economics may not be popular economics, especially in the short run."

17- "Parents must eventually learn to teach their children how to handle uncertainty - not how to ensure stability."

18- "For most of man's life on earth, he has lived no better on two legs than he had on four . Give the economist a little credit for explaining and depicting the brief, shining moments when there has been a difference."

[Abdul · Rating 4 out of 5]

أعجبني الكتاب كثيرا خصوصا انه يتحدث عن موضوع قليل من الناس يعرفه وكثير من الناس يخاف منه ألا وهو الاقتصاد. في الحقيقة ليست لدي خلفية كبيرة عن الاقتصاد إلا ما قرأته من بعض الكتب المشهورة مثل Freakonomics و thinking fast and slow. بعد قراءة هذا الكتاب قررت أن اخذ دوره اكاديمية فيما بعد الاقتصاد عن طريق موقع رواق الإلكتروني الذي يقدم حضرات اكاديمية متخصصة.

هذا الكتاب بشكل عام يتطرق لتاريخ علم الاقتصاد والمؤثرين فيه والمدارس الاقتصادية بالإضافة إلى أثر كل فكر أو مدرسة اقتصادية على حياتنا اليومية.

[Robert Jeens · Rating 4 out of 5]

The worst thing about this book is that it was written in 2007, when it was widely presumed that economics was more important than politics. Further, because it was written in 2007, all the examples and ideas are from twenty years ago or more. Ignore the preface unless you want a time capsule summary of 2007. Post-2008, Brexit, Trump, and Bidenomics, politics has come roaring back to slap economics across the face.
On the other hand, this would be a good, succinct Economics 101 textbook rather than the one your boring economics professor made you read. It tackles mainstream economic thought in a funny and accessible way. Buchholz has an eye for detail and a clever phrase. He gives pithy examples. He won the prize for the best professor of introductory economics at Harvard University, and you can tell.
He introduces all the big names: Smith, Ricardo, Marx, Mill, Marshall, Keynes, Friedman and more. He doesn't just summarize their ideas but also goes into an extended discussion of them, their lives, where their ideas came from, and comparisons to other economists. He makes clear that many of these people knew each other, and so he probes their relationships and their theoretical and policy values. Bucholz has his opinions, and he is not afraid to share them.
In the first paragraph, I wrote about the disadvantages of being a somewhat dated book. But here is a good thing. The book is not particularly partisan. Although Buchholz was an economic advisor for the first George Bush, he does not dwell on the policy failures of any one side, but rather that economics is the study of choice. We can't have everything we want. And our choices have consequences. And as far as that sentence about politics slapping economics across the face, Buchholz spends plenty of time explaining how economics slaps back.

[Colson Brooks · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sometimes the author’s jokes went over my head because I’m not that educated, but overall a great introduction into economic thought.

[Lucas Land · Rating 1 out of 5]

I learned a lot about economics in spite of how poorly written this book was. Although the economic schools and personalities were generally organized chronologically, each chapter felt haphazard and unorganized. It felt like the author was trying to write a popular economics text à la Stephen Hawking for astrophysics, but it came off as your grandpa trying to be cool and hip with the kids these days. I lost count of the number of sentences that added nothing to the text and could have been deleted. Unfortunately, this would have made the book at least a third shorter and publishers probably don't like that. There were also so many throwaway lines in which critiques of one school or another were dismissed out of hand with no explanation. Left me with the idea that I should just trust the author's opinion on one thing or another with no evidence or support. Finally, while I acknowledge the importance of the context of the personalities that developed different schools of thought, the author seemed to dismiss people or ideas based on their character flaws where the time would have been better spent trying to actually explain different concepts more clearly.

There HAS to be a better introduction to economic thought that doesn't treat the reader like a small child and actually engages with the ideas in a way that makes them more clear and understandable.

[Ram Kaushik · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent attempt at an ambitious task - Buchholz traverses the sweep of Western economic history from Adam Smith, Alfred Marshall, Karl Marx, Milton Friedman and others in 300 odd pages. I liked the way he tried to set each economist's theory in his (I wish I could say her, but economics has been a sexist profession until lately) own era, with its historical context. Subsequent economists built refinements to the previously held theories, or were confronted with geopolitical situations where certain hypotheses didn't work.

The attempts to connect their theories with the economists' personal lives seemed clumsy at best, and irrelevant. This book also does not cover more recent insights by behavioral economists like Kahneman, Thaler and others.

Flawed but a useful book if you are looking for a lens into economic history since Adam Smith.

[Isabell · Rating 3 out of 5]

In short:

It's good at presenting economic ideas in a neat, little package.

It's bad at staying neutral (Marx is a vulgar, unwashed, alcoholic; Russians beg Americans for jeans because they are so unimaginative, unmotivated, and undisciplined that they can't turn their own cotton into denim).

As it is written in the 80s, and we are now writing the year of Trump and Brexit, it's also in urgent need of an update. A lot has happened since the 80s in terms of globalization and world trade, and not all developments would paint as optimistic an outlook as Buchholz has in this book.

[Salim Alghamdi · Rating 4 out of 5]

مفيد جدًا للفضوليين ومفيد أكثر للدارسين ويعتبر الخيار الأمثل للمطالعة وفهم النظريات الاقتصادية على مر التاريخ بأبسط الأمثلة المرحة الذكية والفكاهية ..

[Alexy Chu · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.4 stars rounded down

I liked this book, but reading it for economics made me dislike it.
In every chapter, Buchholz introduces the lore of a new dead economist (“Oh my god, I just unlocked John Stuart Mill's lore!") and it's fine and all, but it’s kind of silly.
You can very clearly tell that Buchholz doesn't approve of some economist’s theories. For example, in the Marx chapter, Buchholz uses Marx’s alcohol addiction as a way to discount his theories or ideas, which is obviously biased…but I’ll let it slide.

I did learn new stuff, and the way Buchholz introduced the ideas was nicely organized.

Aaron Burgoa, please give me an A next semester. I know you don’t like me, but please. (If you don’t, you WILL be the next dead economist and I’ll write a chapter for you! 😆)

[Aries Eroles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Todd Buchholz's "New Ideas From Dead Economists" by Aries

A book review on Buchholz's attempt on the history of economic thought along Anglo-American tradition.

Read on Substack

[Adam Russ · Rating 5 out of 5]

A rare review from me, but this is an elegantly written and essential work, especially for anyone developing an interest in the field. I only wish it had been available when I was heading into my A levels!

[عطاء · Rating 5 out of 5]

كنت اتمنى باكولز يبقى دكتور جامعي ويدرسلي بطريقة ما

[Viorel Mionel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelenta, metodica și scrisa pe înțelesul oricărui individ. Este una dintre cele mai bune cărți de doctrine economice pe care le-am citit!

[Joseph Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Like Empire of Wealth by John Steele Gordon, this is another economics book that is much more informative and useful than the much more popular Freakonomics. Like Empire of Wealth this is a book about history but this time it's a history of the study and theory of economics from Adam Smith to the end of the 20th Century. It is organized like a series of biographies each centering on an influential thinker and how their ideas contributed to all that we now know about economics in a way that is informative about intellectual theory but still accessible to a layman (like me).

I say these thinkers the book is written about "contributed" to economics but, as readers will notice, it's more like "up-ended". Often people criticize economists for discovering obvious things everyone already knows but as I read this book what stood out to me is that every time people think they've got economics all figured out some smart guy pulls the rug out from under them and shows that everything we thought we knew is wrong and we were all idiots for not noticing it sooner (only to have the same process repeated again and again). This is a book that will make you feel really smart and informed but also strategically humble.

[John Igo · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was a good history for laymen of the main ideas in economics. I think - I need to read more economics textbooks to know for sure. Each chapter was a short biography of the economist in question interwoven with the contributions they made to the field. That made the book very approachable.
The books lack of differentials is why I gave it 4/5.

The only chapter that seemed out of place was the one on Marx. I guess the labor theory of value and Das Capital are important historically, but it seemed like they were included just so the authors could show how later economists shit on the ideas.
Also, like how do people believe the labor theory of value? Like there are obviously more inputs to the value of an object than the labor that went into it. The fossil fuel and the technological innovations for instance.

Anyway, solid book, I learned a lot. If you don't know any economics give it a shot.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Provides a good summary of the main ideas of major economists who continue to have extraordinary influence in the field today. Also: astoundingly (and unwittingly) biased in its underlying assumptions and viewpoint (don't have the book in front of me, but others have offered some good quotes), which makes for great reading if you're paying attention. Some of the counterarguments given to criticisms of wage slavery, manipulative advertising, etc. are so thin as to be comical. Buchholz picks and chooses which ideas to laud and which to decry, with superficial analogies and examples in both cases. Great for reviewing some of the main themes of economics and economic history, but even better for understanding how mainstream economists think about economics, which helps to reveal why we are so entrenched in the current system.

[Ine · Rating 3 out of 5]

New Ideas is sapped principles of economic from our forefathers such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Keynes, also includes German angry economist, Karl Marx. Do not being fooled by its comical appearance, I red the book twice and still have blur vision of how macro economy works according to them. It is brilliantly presented by Buccholz with colloquial and witty metaphor. If you are interested in consumer-demand-price-supply tidbits, then read this one…

[Jan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An extremely entertaining survey of economic thought through history; the author offers brief biographies of economics' most influential figures from each angle we might care to examine: their personalities, the intellectual development of their discipline, and their impact on the world, then and now. Most fascinating are the portraits of the "outliers" in economic history who don't really have a place in the mainstream anymore: Mill, Marx, Veblen.

[Sofia Espinosa · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a really good book. Helped me understand so many difficult concepts of economics and finance. The author used a lot of real life examples and related them to a topic to help us understand. It's an extensive read that you have to do when you are in the right mood but it is definitely worth it.

[adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

Boy, I thought this was really good! I'm kicking myself that I never really studied Economics in school, so I have to resort to reading books like this...but there's not much you could do to improve this as a solid, fun (what?) economics primer.

[أحمد كشيكش · Rating 4 out of 5]

من جهة الكتاب أكبر من سابقه - كتاب الببلاوي - و أكثر تفصيلا و من جهة أخرى أسلوب الكاتب أكثر سهولة و إمتاعا من أسلوب الببلاوي

[مؤسسة هنداوي للتعليم والثقافة · Rating 5 out of 5]

تحميل مقتطفات من هذا الكتاب مجانًا

http://www.hindawi.org/kalimat/50264207/

[Mat · Rating 2 out of 5]

A biased and inaccessible tract which occasionally presents the insight it advertises.

Let’s talk about the labour theory of value. The labour theory of value was an idea in early economics that value is determined by the work that goes into a product, it’s in retrospect a very crude theory that has since been replaced.

For a long time many economists used this theory in their writing, Marx among them. The author’s determination to dismiss (not criticize but dismiss) all value in Marx’s ideas because of his use of the labour theory of value can only be explained by ignorance or bias. As, of course he doesn’t fault Adam Smith or David Ricardo for using this.

Marx is an economist unlike any other. Better known than most of them, definitely more controversial than many, perhaps more impactful than most. It’s debatable how scientific ‘Scientific Socialism’ was. It’s debatable too how far his predictions and models have held up. He’s so well known too that you might not even need to mention him in an economics book. But if you mention him you should talk about his ideas.

Another bias is the page space the author devotes to ideas of the rational market over the findings of behavioral economics. The rational market is very useful for traders to know about but most audiences would probably be more interested in the work of Richard Thaler and the like.

Besides bias, this book’s flow gets clogged up by technical jargon by the end. Here’s a sentence from near the end of the book ‘On the microeconomic side, officials can twist spending programs and regulations for political self-interest when information costs to voters are high compared with benefits derived.’ This is an introductory book right? Even textbooks are clearer than this.

In summary this book is every bad (and in other cases usually unfounded) stereotype about economists. It’s needlessly complicated and leans slightly to the right of Attila the Hun. Go read the Undercover Economist or Freakonomics instead.

[Luvemma · Rating 5 out of 5]

현재 대부분의 나라는 "자본주의", 즉, 노동자와 자본가가 자신의 노동력, 자본을 공유하면서 작용을 해나가며 이루어나가는 경제체제를 따른다. 이러한 경데시스템을 구축하기 위하여 여러 경제학자들이 힘을 기울이는 반면, 빈부격차, 환경오염 등 여러 문제의 근본으로 삼아 새로운 경제시스템을 구축해 나가려던 경제학자들도 존재하였다. 이 책에서는 크게 자본주의의 원리, 그리고 그 자본주의 수정해하는 이유와 반대하여 없애야한다는 이유의 생각을 지닌 경재학자들의 살아있는 생각들을 생생하게 알려준다.

우선, 자본주의는 자본가와 노동가가 자신의 이윤을 극대화 시키려고 노력을 하며 성립된다. 경제학자 애덤 스미스는 국부론이라는 책에서 "공익을 추구하려는 의도는 없고 자신이 공익레 얼마나 이바지 하느 조차도 모르는이, 오직 자신의 이익 만을 도모하는이는 그 과정에서 보이지 않는 손에 이끌려 의도하지 않았던 부수적 결실도 얻게 된다"이라고 하였다. 구체적으로, 시장의 물품이나 자본이 공급 만 된다면, 자신의 이익만을 추구하는 대부분의 사람들이 알아서 시장을 이끌어나간다고 한것이다. 하지만, 그의 사상은 1차 세계대전 이후 붕괴하게 된다. 그 이유는, 1차 세계대전 도중, 여러 공장들은 다 무기를 생산하는 공장이 되어갔다. 그 공장들은 모두 자신의 이익을 위해서, 최대한 많이 팔기 위하여서 공급을 폭등시켰다. 하지만, 독일이 큰 타격을 받아 항복하게 되고, 1차 세계대전이 어느 순간 종료되었다. 결국에는 모든 공장들 창고에는 여러 전쟁관련 용품들이 한웅큼씩 쌓여 있게 되었다. 그것을 본 사람들은 소문을 내였고, 그 공장의 주식을 가졌던 부에 속한 사람들은 자신의 이익을 위하여 모두 팔기 시작하였다. 어느 순간 여러 공장주들은 파산하고, 그 공장에 속한 모든 사람들은 갈길을 잃게 되고 만다. 그렇게 비참한 날들이 흐르던 중이었다. 케인스 이라는 사람이 정부에게 뉴딜 정책, 즉, 정부가 남아도는 세금을 공장주나 사업주에게 주어 자신의 공장을 살리고, 일자리를 고용시켜 경제를 다시 살리자는 획기적인정책을 제안하였다. 이러한 그의 주장으로 인해 인류 전체의 암흑기는 곧 소멸하게 된다. 하지만, 곧 그의 주장도 성립이 불가능하게 되었다. 그 이유는 다름이 아닌 정치가들의 부정부패에 있었다. 구체적으로, 케인스라는 사람은 모든 관료는 절대로, 냉정하고 충실하게 자신에게 주어진 명령만을 이행하는 사람이 없을 것이라고 주장하며, 케인스의 경우가 성립한 이유는 모든 정치가들도 간절하여. "하베이 로드의 전제", 즉, 정부란 "최고의 지식인들이 당면한 사회문제들에 대헤 격렬한 토론을 벌이는 곳"이라는 전제를 충족시켰기에 가능하였다고 주장하였다. 반면, 자본주의를 아예 파멸 시켜야 한다고 주장하는 경제학자들도 존재한다. 카르 마르크스는 자본 주의에 반하는 사상, "공산주의"를 주장하였다. 카를 마르크스는 자본가로부터의 횡포를 심하게 받음으로서, 하루 하루의 삶을 비참하게 보냈던 노동자였다. 그의 아이들은 가난에 찌들어 병에 걸리거나 굶어 죽어나갔고, 그는 이러한 모든 문제는 자본주의 시스템에 있었다고 생각하였다. 그는 자본주의 체계속 "자본가"층은 오직 자신만의 삶을 위하여 잘못된 분배와 횡포, 차별의 길을 걷는다고 주장하였다. 결과적으로, 그는 국가가 모든 돈을 책임고 모든 사람들이 번돈을 국가가 배부하여 나눠야한다고 주장하게된다. 하지만, 그의 사상은 이윤추구동기의 이유가 소멸된 사람들과. 부패한 정치로 인해 결국 암흑기를 걷게된다.

인류의 궁극적인 목표는 이세상의 모든 문제를 과학적, 수학적 등등의 방법으로 해결하는 것이다. 하지만, 나는 이 책의 저자와 같이 모든 인류를 포옹하고, 배려와 양보를 바탕으로하는 경제학 사상만이 이 인류의 궁극 적인 목표를 해결하는데 있어서 도움이 된다고 생각한다. 오직 사람만이 도덕의 존재를 알며, 많은 사람들의 목표는 금전적 획득에 있으며, 이 모든 문제의 시작은 인류와 돈의 만남이었기 때문이다.

[علاء برنجي Alaa Brinji · Rating 4 out of 5]

"ذو أهمية كبيرة"، "ممتع وسهل الفهم"، "دليل شديد الأهمية"، "شرح ممتع وذكيّ". تلك عبارات مقتبسة عما كتبه مبرزون في ميادين الاقتصاد والصحافة والرأي، فيها ما يكفي من الإشارة إلى مكانة هذا الكتاب وقيمته الكبيرة في مجاله، وهو بحق كتاب استطاع أن يجمع أبرز وأهم النظريات والفلسفات الاقتصادية لكبار المفكرين، منذ ولادة علم الاقتصاد الحديث قبل قرنين من الزمن على يد (آدم سميث) صاحب نظرية السوق الحرة وعراب الرأسمالية، مرورا بمن جايلوه أو أتوا من بعده شارحين لنظريته أو مستدركين ومطوّرين، من أمثال (جون ستيوارت مل)، (جون مينارد كنز)، (ألفريد مارشال)، وغيرهم ممن أسهموا في ترسيخ مبادئ النظرية الاقتصادية ورسْم ملامح تطوّرها،. وحتى أولئك الناقدين أو المتنبئين والمبشّرين بانهيار الرأسماليّة من أساسها، وأعني هنا خصم (سميث) على الضفة المقابلة، عرّاب الاشتراكية الاقتصادية، الثائر الغاضب (كارل ماركس).
استطاع (باكولز)، الذي درس علم الاقتصاد في جامعة (هارفرد)، وعمل مديرا للسياسة الاقتصادية في البيت الأبيض، أن يجمع كل أولئك الاقتصاديين العظام، ويقدمها بأسلوب أدبي، وعرض سهل ورائق، وقالب مفهوم ومبسط، لمحةً وافيةً، وتحليلاً ممتعاً وذكياً لأفكارهم ونظرياتهم الاقتصادية؛ مثل: السياسات التجارية والنقدية، التضخم، الدور المناسب للتدخل الحكومي، القضاء على الفقر، معدلات النمو الاقتصادي، خفض معدلات الضرائب، وغيرها من القضايا التي تصنع رفاهيتنا، وتمس واقعنا بشكل مباشر أو غير مباشر.

اقتباس:
"من المدهش أن كثيرا من الدروس التي قدمها المفكرون الاقتصاديون العظماء لا تزال صالحة للتطبيق، فكل نظرية من نظرياتهم الحكيمة بها عنصر قابل للتطبيق، أو تمثيل لما يحدث في عالمنا اليوم. وهذا الكتاب يسعى وراء حكمتهم من خلال دراسة المبادئ الاقتصادية العامة". ص33