What do you think?
Rate this book
In Defense of Global Capitalism
Marshalling facts and the latest research findings, the author systematically refutes the adversaries of globalization, markets, and progress. This book will change the debate on globalization in this country and make believers of skeptics.
330 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
39 people are currently reading
810 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
October 28, 2015
Full of cherry-picked statistics which totally gloss over the reality of unfettered capitalism. The point where I nearly threw it against the wall was this:
OK, so let's tear this single paragraph apart:
1) Pinochet was a dictator who overthrew the previous democratic regime, in a coup backed by the CIA. (This is not conspiracy theory, this is real history!) The USA wanted to open up Chile's rich natural resources to exploitation by multinational corporations. They trained the advisers who told Pinochet to open up the country. The 'growth' that Norberg describes was entirely in the hands of the elite of the country, and inequality spiralled out of control. The population was so upset at the removal of social safety nets, the rise in the price of goods from the removal of trade tarrifs, and the massive unemployment resulting from multinationals taking Chilean resources, that they rioted, and were brutally suppressed by Pinochet's regime. PREVIOUS to this regime, yes, the country had a somewhat stagnant economy, but it was a democracy, and growing quite well, with year-on-year improvement in standard of living.
2) Note the the use of the buzzword "authoritarian": apparently the previous economic policy was "authoritarian" and other regimes in the region are "authoritarian"; well actually that economic policy was put in place by a parliamentary democracy, and the only reason more and more "authoritarian" regimes in the region were popping up was due to coups and unrest seeded by the USA. Those regimes put in place the same kind of liberal economic policy as soon as democracy was unseated, because it's the fastest way for those in power to make an absolute fortune, at the expense of the poorest in society.
3) This is the killer, for a book like this. Note the cherry-picked dates. He ignores the period of 1973-1975, which is when the liberalisation laws were actually brought in. THIS is when the economy really nosedived, due to massive unemployment and unrest. This period lasted until around 1983, when taxes were reinstated, free trade was restricted, and after lowered unrest, Chile's *nationalised* copper mine started to earn enough to pull the country out of its tailspin. So from 1983 to 1995, the economy recovered, and eventually Pinochet was deposed and democracy was *reinstated*. By choosing to compare from 1975 (post-liberalisation) to 1995 (post-socialisation) but claiming the events happened in the opposite order, Norberg tries to convince the reader that it was the free trade policies that were responsible for those improved statistics.
Every paragraph is like this: ridiculously cherry-picked statistics, glossing over or ignoring crucial historical facts, and using buzzwords to make the reader think that anything nationalised, or taxed, is evil. I am not opposed to capitalism per se; I think that competition and profit does drive toward efficiency and innovation, which can improve the lot of humanity. But that's why this book is so frustrating. You don't need to distort the facts to make an argument for capitalism. If every paragraph potentially has the same kind of misleading attitude as the one above, then the book's arguments just aren't trustworthy. I don't have time to fact-check everything; I'm reading non-fiction to be enlightened, not to do peer review.
Just another thing that almost caused me to stop reading at the start (but I promised a friend I would give this book a try so kept going): Norberg says that he doesn't consider capitalists who bribe politicians to be true capitalists. But this is crazy: surely the reason people indulge in capitalism is to make money. Large corporations, beholden to the highest principle (greed), MUST take actions which get them more money wherever possible. Of course this involves bribing politicians and buying the regulations you want. (Not to mention, in a book about *global* capitalism, there is no discussion of how being able to flee to more corrupt countries certainly helps one make more money, at the cost of some piddling human rights...) By simply saying "oh, that's not what I mean by capitalism", Norberg conveniently avoids having to discuss these serious downsides.
Just unreadable by anyone who can be bothered to fact-check. Avoid -- unless you want to know what sort of nonsense comes out of right-wing think tanks when you inject enough cash.
The Chilean example demonstrates the possibility of development, even in this region. When dictator Augusto Pinochet's continuation of the old policy of inflation and central control sent the economy into free fall, he began listening to market economists instead. Unlike other authoritarian regimes in the region, Chile replaced its authoritarian economic policy with liberalisation and free trade about 1975. Tremendous growth ensued, with real earnings more than doubling by 1995, at the same time as infant mortality fell from 6% to just over 1%, and average life expectancy rose from 64 to 73 years. Chileans today have almost a southern European standard of living, in stark contrast to their neighbours. Most important of all, the bloodstained dictatorship has been peacefully superseded by a stable democratic regime -- just as the liberal advisers advocated and prophesied.
OK, so let's tear this single paragraph apart:
1) Pinochet was a dictator who overthrew the previous democratic regime, in a coup backed by the CIA. (This is not conspiracy theory, this is real history!) The USA wanted to open up Chile's rich natural resources to exploitation by multinational corporations. They trained the advisers who told Pinochet to open up the country. The 'growth' that Norberg describes was entirely in the hands of the elite of the country, and inequality spiralled out of control. The population was so upset at the removal of social safety nets, the rise in the price of goods from the removal of trade tarrifs, and the massive unemployment resulting from multinationals taking Chilean resources, that they rioted, and were brutally suppressed by Pinochet's regime. PREVIOUS to this regime, yes, the country had a somewhat stagnant economy, but it was a democracy, and growing quite well, with year-on-year improvement in standard of living.
2) Note the the use of the buzzword "authoritarian": apparently the previous economic policy was "authoritarian" and other regimes in the region are "authoritarian"; well actually that economic policy was put in place by a parliamentary democracy, and the only reason more and more "authoritarian" regimes in the region were popping up was due to coups and unrest seeded by the USA. Those regimes put in place the same kind of liberal economic policy as soon as democracy was unseated, because it's the fastest way for those in power to make an absolute fortune, at the expense of the poorest in society.
3) This is the killer, for a book like this. Note the cherry-picked dates. He ignores the period of 1973-1975, which is when the liberalisation laws were actually brought in. THIS is when the economy really nosedived, due to massive unemployment and unrest. This period lasted until around 1983, when taxes were reinstated, free trade was restricted, and after lowered unrest, Chile's *nationalised* copper mine started to earn enough to pull the country out of its tailspin. So from 1983 to 1995, the economy recovered, and eventually Pinochet was deposed and democracy was *reinstated*. By choosing to compare from 1975 (post-liberalisation) to 1995 (post-socialisation) but claiming the events happened in the opposite order, Norberg tries to convince the reader that it was the free trade policies that were responsible for those improved statistics.
Every paragraph is like this: ridiculously cherry-picked statistics, glossing over or ignoring crucial historical facts, and using buzzwords to make the reader think that anything nationalised, or taxed, is evil. I am not opposed to capitalism per se; I think that competition and profit does drive toward efficiency and innovation, which can improve the lot of humanity. But that's why this book is so frustrating. You don't need to distort the facts to make an argument for capitalism. If every paragraph potentially has the same kind of misleading attitude as the one above, then the book's arguments just aren't trustworthy. I don't have time to fact-check everything; I'm reading non-fiction to be enlightened, not to do peer review.
Just another thing that almost caused me to stop reading at the start (but I promised a friend I would give this book a try so kept going): Norberg says that he doesn't consider capitalists who bribe politicians to be true capitalists. But this is crazy: surely the reason people indulge in capitalism is to make money. Large corporations, beholden to the highest principle (greed), MUST take actions which get them more money wherever possible. Of course this involves bribing politicians and buying the regulations you want. (Not to mention, in a book about *global* capitalism, there is no discussion of how being able to flee to more corrupt countries certainly helps one make more money, at the cost of some piddling human rights...) By simply saying "oh, that's not what I mean by capitalism", Norberg conveniently avoids having to discuss these serious downsides.
Just unreadable by anyone who can be bothered to fact-check. Avoid -- unless you want to know what sort of nonsense comes out of right-wing think tanks when you inject enough cash.
June 23, 2014
Johan Norberg's defense of capitalism is not a new book but brings common sense in times of Piketty's fifteen minutes of fame. I have not read Piketty yet but all the debate around his work seems to defy evidence of how millions of people are moving out of poverty year after year thanks to practices close to Capitalism than the Marxism that he defends. Johan Norberg showed, over 10 years before Piketty, case after case how solutions based on the respect of private property and classical liberal ideas have improve the lives of people all over the world. Indeed Norberg argues that more could be done if practices like immigration control and imposition of first world practices on third world were stopped. If Developed countries can care for the environment and reduce child labor is because they have achieved greater success, if we want developing countries to do the same we have to pull them quick instead of hold them back with additional burden.
June 14, 2013
There are definitely legitimate empirical and theoretical challenges that can be made to Norberg's defense of global capitalism. But, this is not meant to be an full academic review of literature on the topic. It is a polemic in the best sense - a strong argument for a legitimate but controversial viewpoint that is often poorly understood. I think he does a great job of presenting pretty strong empirical, theoretical and ethical arguments for global capitalism in an accessible and convincing manner. It isn't perfect. He glosses over some of the messiness and challenges of globalization, and there were some empirical claims that are debatable. I don't see, however, how someone could read this and not understand that there is an depth of thought, analysis, and indeed ethical reasoning, going into agendas to expand free trade and integrate global markets.
January 16, 2014
O kadar klişe bir dil kullanmış ki gerçek mi troll mü anlayamadım.
July 9, 2020
Definitely a must read for libertarians and those who are willing to learn about how capitalists think.
November 3, 2017
I really really really want to like this book but it's just so hard. So I'll divide this provocative book into the Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
The Good: an engaging title, the title itself enticed me to read it to find out what Norberg meant by "Global Capitalism". What he really means is that both economic freedom and civil liberty have improved our living conditions globally, the freer the people, the happier the people and there is less conlict. He used data to dispell all the myths surrounding capitalism, such as improved education attainment, literacy, nutrition, security, health and decreased poverty, corruption, famine. He stressed particularly the importance of free trade and mutual dependence of people which not only would bring peace, but also prosperity.
He offer many international examples as well as history lessons, particularly about Scandinavian countries and Sweden, and how poor they were until they started to move from feudalism to capitalism. I loved his simple, pure optimism and the love of human potential, he's truly blessed and his positivity was infectious.
The Bad: the book didn't really age well, many of the examples are outdated or new situations have developed to change his predictions. Though, not of his own fault, but the collectivisation of the society because of his beloved "democracy".
The Ugly: well, this is the hardest part that made me think twice about giving the book a 5 star. He had a few wrong premises: colonialism wasn't entirely bad, it was brutal but it civilized barbarians from their backward ways, and improved their lives for the better (some didn't even have wheels). The bleeding heart story of dead illegal immigrants were simply anecdotal evidences, not an argument since Norberg also acknowledged the problem with a welfare state. You must dismantle the welfare state and allow for private property rights before any "free" movements can happen. His estimations from think tanks about the need for immigrants was based on the presumption of a welfare state, which could be abolished without the need for immigrants.
He even quoted a dictator like FDR to prove his immigrant argument, which I found distasteful and it was not an argument. If Norberg were to write his book now, I am sure his humanist attitude would have changed since it was published before 9/11.
In conclusion: free trade is good, comparative advantages is good for everyone and has improved our living standards significantly and steadily. There is no such thing as free movement, border is the basic unit of private property and only a fully privatized society can allow for individuals to enter into other people's properties with consent. Norberg held a belief of a blank slate human nature that everyone is basically good, but he needs to know that some people probably will never learn to grasp reason and logic (despite they are living in the product of freedom) and we must safeguard agaist those animals.
The Good: an engaging title, the title itself enticed me to read it to find out what Norberg meant by "Global Capitalism". What he really means is that both economic freedom and civil liberty have improved our living conditions globally, the freer the people, the happier the people and there is less conlict. He used data to dispell all the myths surrounding capitalism, such as improved education attainment, literacy, nutrition, security, health and decreased poverty, corruption, famine. He stressed particularly the importance of free trade and mutual dependence of people which not only would bring peace, but also prosperity.
He offer many international examples as well as history lessons, particularly about Scandinavian countries and Sweden, and how poor they were until they started to move from feudalism to capitalism. I loved his simple, pure optimism and the love of human potential, he's truly blessed and his positivity was infectious.
The Bad: the book didn't really age well, many of the examples are outdated or new situations have developed to change his predictions. Though, not of his own fault, but the collectivisation of the society because of his beloved "democracy".
The Ugly: well, this is the hardest part that made me think twice about giving the book a 5 star. He had a few wrong premises: colonialism wasn't entirely bad, it was brutal but it civilized barbarians from their backward ways, and improved their lives for the better (some didn't even have wheels). The bleeding heart story of dead illegal immigrants were simply anecdotal evidences, not an argument since Norberg also acknowledged the problem with a welfare state. You must dismantle the welfare state and allow for private property rights before any "free" movements can happen. His estimations from think tanks about the need for immigrants was based on the presumption of a welfare state, which could be abolished without the need for immigrants.
He even quoted a dictator like FDR to prove his immigrant argument, which I found distasteful and it was not an argument. If Norberg were to write his book now, I am sure his humanist attitude would have changed since it was published before 9/11.
In conclusion: free trade is good, comparative advantages is good for everyone and has improved our living standards significantly and steadily. There is no such thing as free movement, border is the basic unit of private property and only a fully privatized society can allow for individuals to enter into other people's properties with consent. Norberg held a belief of a blank slate human nature that everyone is basically good, but he needs to know that some people probably will never learn to grasp reason and logic (despite they are living in the product of freedom) and we must safeguard agaist those animals.
April 23, 2023
One of the biggest collections of carefully selected logical somersaults.
June 12, 2013
Tärkeä kirja. On helppoa olla muutosvastarintainen ja vastustaa markkinatalouden globaalistumista mutta paljon vaikeampaa nähdä sen hyvät puolet; elintason nousun köyhimmissäkin maissa (pl. diktatuurit joiden kauppa ei koskaan ole vapaata), oikeusvaltion ja demokratian lisääntymisen taloudellisen vapauden myötä, lisääntyneen vaurauden mahdollistaman yhteiskuntien sosiaalisen, teknologisen ja koulutuksen kehityksen.
Kirjoittajalla on hyvin positiivinen, melkein julistava suhtautuminen kapitalismiin ja vapaakauppaan, mutta hän ei ole kritiikitön vaan myös tiedostaa haasteet ja tukee näkemyksiään viitteillä sekä tilastoilla. Norberg tuo esille että länsimaat eivät itse ole olleet kaikkein innokkaimpia talouden vapauttajia jos niillä on ollut omia taloudellisia intressejä suojeltavana (kuten maatalous kansallisine tukineen) ja tiedostaa että markkinoiden oikeanlainen sääntely on tarpeen: Vain vapaa ja tasa-arvoinen kilpailu mahdollistaa toimivan kapitalismin ja tämä edellyttää yhteisiä sääntöjä sekä kansalaisoikeuksia jotka ovat samat kaikille.
Kaikenkaikkiaan virkistävä puheenvuoro vapaamman markkinatalouden puolesta joka muistuttaa sen eduista ja hyvistä puolista näin taloudellisen synkkyyden keskellä.
Kirjoittajalla on hyvin positiivinen, melkein julistava suhtautuminen kapitalismiin ja vapaakauppaan, mutta hän ei ole kritiikitön vaan myös tiedostaa haasteet ja tukee näkemyksiään viitteillä sekä tilastoilla. Norberg tuo esille että länsimaat eivät itse ole olleet kaikkein innokkaimpia talouden vapauttajia jos niillä on ollut omia taloudellisia intressejä suojeltavana (kuten maatalous kansallisine tukineen) ja tiedostaa että markkinoiden oikeanlainen sääntely on tarpeen: Vain vapaa ja tasa-arvoinen kilpailu mahdollistaa toimivan kapitalismin ja tämä edellyttää yhteisiä sääntöjä sekä kansalaisoikeuksia jotka ovat samat kaikille.
Kaikenkaikkiaan virkistävä puheenvuoro vapaamman markkinatalouden puolesta joka muistuttaa sen eduista ja hyvistä puolista näin taloudellisen synkkyyden keskellä.
July 28, 2014
Norberg brilliantly rectifies the actual history of what happened during the South East Asian financial crises in 1997, at the same time explaining the simple and rational logic of good macroeconomic strategy.
He asserts the legal, ethical, economic and moral status of free trade, and (in the first half of the book) one by one demolishes left wing myths about the negative effects of globalisation.
It's a brilliant book, argued with lucid facts, and a fantastic contribution to the literature of classical liberalism.
He asserts the legal, ethical, economic and moral status of free trade, and (in the first half of the book) one by one demolishes left wing myths about the negative effects of globalisation.
It's a brilliant book, argued with lucid facts, and a fantastic contribution to the literature of classical liberalism.
May 3, 2013
العولمة ممتازة...ولم لا؟...فلقد ك��نت سببا في حداثة اوروبا وانعدام نسب الففر فيها...هذا ما يدور حوله هذا الكتاب تقريبا مع ذكر احصاءات عديدة وامثلة لدول اخذت بالعولمة والنظام الراسمالي فتقدمت ومن تركت تقهقرت..كتاب لطيف خصوصا بعد ازمات الاقتصاد العالمي فهو سبب قوي ليثير ضحكك ومشاكل العولمة والخصوصيات الثقافية و اتساع الهوة بين الاغنياء والفقراء في اوروبا نفسها...بالطبع يحاول اقحام فكرة ان من ليس مع العولمة فهو يساري او شمولي بالضرورة ...كتاب عنوانه باختصار(العولمة حلوة مفيش كلام)
May 21, 2010
Nice comprehensive defense of globalization, especially the vast empirical support. However, I did think the book was boring at times, and I felt Norberg could have used some additional explinations to elucidate some of his conclusive opinions.
January 28, 2011
Exciting description for why we need capitalism or free trade, free market and etc. Many interesting and great tables, figures and facts with inspiring ideas for scholars and students. Very useful!!!
March 28, 2019
This book is for everybody who complains that globalisation and free trade lead to poverty, unequality and other problems. The author uses facts, logics, statistics and economic theory to destroy all the myth about global capitalism. The book can be not easy to read but it worth it.
September 9, 2019
Everyone should read this book. We need to understand that capitalism is something good and necessary for a society to thrive and function. It’s not the demon that the left and social liberals pretend it to be.
April 2, 2011
I didn't see the appeal of this book.
May 13, 2018
Onekligen provocerande titel, men man ska ju inte bara läsa böcker som stryker ens egna åsikter medhårs. Men författaren anser att demokrati, frihandel och kapitalism är det som gör världen bättre och tar fram ett antal exempel som verkar vederhäftiga. Det blir lite Rosling-känsla över det hela, med optimism om att världen blir bättre. Boken är dock 15 år gammal och man skulle vilja veta mer om vad som hänt sedan, världsekonomin är inte min starka sida.
En del tankar och statistik får en att tänka till. Som att man tidigare undrat varför vissa fd kolonier gått ovanligt bra, medan andra gått dåligt och här hänför Norberg det till att de som gått dåligt haft planekonomiska inslag och mycket regler. Jag kan förstå raseriet som boken bemötts med för det innebär att skulden för var länderna befinner sig välfärdsmässigt ligger åt ett helt annat håll än man brukar ange.
En del tankar och statistik får en att tänka till. Som att man tidigare undrat varför vissa fd kolonier gått ovanligt bra, medan andra gått dåligt och här hänför Norberg det till att de som gått dåligt haft planekonomiska inslag och mycket regler. Jag kan förstå raseriet som boken bemötts med för det innebär att skulden för var länderna befinner sig välfärdsmässigt ligger åt ett helt annat håll än man brukar ange.
August 27, 2018
I decided to read this despite beginning to watch one of his Youtube videos about the topic. That video probably cost him lots of book sales as he seemed off topic and very self-absorbed. Bought a used copy anyway thinking the Cato Institute's stamp of approval surely means something. Unlike his talk, the book is to the point very readable as each chapter is organized into short sections of only a few pages making it useful as a reference book. It covers the whole gamut of issues on globalization, not just the economic aspects. Of the many myths he undermines, the one that stands out is the notion that globalization increases inequality. Granted, the original Swedish version was published in 2001 and the data may be old, but I still think it provides a great framework for viewing globalization and points to metrics that readers can get updated data on themeslves.
September 16, 2019
Johan Norberg, en av Sveriges mest tongivande globaliseringsdebattörer, argumenterar snyggt och effektivt för att spridningen av demokrati och marknadsekonomi har gjort världen till en bättre plats.
Några talande citat:
"I en dynamisk marknadsekonomi råder dessutom social rörlighet. Den som är fattig idag är det inte nödvändigtvis i morgon."
"Något förenklat är det likhet i chanser som är det viltiga, inte i resultat. Det viktiga är att alla har vissa grundläggande möjligheter, och sedan själva får pröva sig fram och nå olika resultat (...)"
"Ojämlikheten i världen beror på kapitalismen. Men inte på att den har gjort vissa grupper fattiga, utan på att den gör den som tillämpar kapitalism rika. Den ojämlika fördelningen i världen beror på den ojämlika fördelningen av kapitalism."
Några talande citat:
"I en dynamisk marknadsekonomi råder dessutom social rörlighet. Den som är fattig idag är det inte nödvändigtvis i morgon."
"Något förenklat är det likhet i chanser som är det viltiga, inte i resultat. Det viktiga är att alla har vissa grundläggande möjligheter, och sedan själva får pröva sig fram och nå olika resultat (...)"
"Ojämlikheten i världen beror på kapitalismen. Men inte på att den har gjort vissa grupper fattiga, utan på att den gör den som tillämpar kapitalism rika. Den ojämlika fördelningen i världen beror på den ojämlika fördelningen av kapitalism."
July 28, 2018
After reading the book i understood what falsification of history and politics mean. I' m afraid the author is missing contact to reality. In any case if you are pro or contra capitalism, according to what i have read so far in other books concerning the same subject, not worth spending time reading it. To many "gaps" not sufficient covered analysis. It is more a wish or a recommandation of what the author believes global economics should be in a world ruled by capitalism. Very dissapointed.
August 28, 2025
As the title already indicates, this was a stirring defence of globalization and the free market. It admits the challenges which are often leveled at capitalism but affirms that the system holds better promise than the concerns. Capitalism is not just about the promise of better incomes or cheaper goods; it leads to a more humane existence as people are able to make their own choices and live better lives. In the end, the call for global capitalism is really about living fully as humans.
August 27, 2017
Good rebuttal of recent attacks on capitalism, with supported data on capitalism success in fighting poverty globally, lots of well researched topics. Is getting outdated.
January 25, 2020
Buku yg dg tegas membela kapitalisme tanpa ragu ragu.
January 15, 2025
نویسنده مباحث پیچیدهی اقتصاد سیاسی رو به زبان ساده توضیح و به انتقادات مختلف رایج از بازار آزاد و سرمایهداری پاسخ میده. خوندن این کتاب رو پیشنهاد میکنم، هم به مبتدیها در این حوزه و هم به کسانی که آشنایی دارن؛ به ویژه به دو دسته: (1) کسانی که تجربهی کارآفرینی در هر سطحی رو داشتهان و با واقعیات سخت بازار بطور عملی مواجهه شده و دست و پنجه نرم کردهان، و (2) جوانان پرشور رویاپرداز و در عین حال کمتجربهای که نگاه ایدهآل، اونها رو فریفتهی درهای باغ سبزی کرده که نحلههای مختلف مکاتب چپگرا وعدهاش رو میدن. کتاب به فارسی با نام "در دفاع از سرمایهداری" ترجمه شده و نشر دنیای اقتصاد اون رو منتشر کرده.
June 10, 2007
A trite regurgitation of position papers from Cato, The Fraser Institute (an embarrassment to my home town and province) and the like with a cutesy "teenage anarchist learns to love capitalism" narrative thrown in as an introduction. I would not have purchased it were it not for the glowing review by Samuel Brittan, a columnist for the Financial Times, for whom I have much respect, now slightly diminished.
November 9, 2020
A must-read book especially in our current world, with the rise of anti-globalization movements. The book provides quantitative and reasonings behind how Global Capitalism can benefit every country in the world. The book contradicts the old fashion view of Communism and socialism and how that can lead to failed states and gives examples of country's that followed these approaches and compare them with other ones which followed a much-relaxed approach.
September 26, 2011
Bunch of Bullocks!
To attribute technological advancement and the spread of education to capitalism! come on!
And even to think that numbers, figures & tables would be a good measure to human well being!, that's such a sick & stupid tycoon ideology
To attribute technological advancement and the spread of education to capitalism! come on!
And even to think that numbers, figures & tables would be a good measure to human well being!, that's such a sick & stupid tycoon ideology
December 17, 2012
Ik heb het gelezen toen het pas verschenen was. Ik heb het toen ook aan een aantal mensen cadeau gedaan, wat niet in dank werd aanvaard. Interessant. Aanrader, nog steeds. Basisliteratuur voor iedereen.
January 8, 2016
Excellent read. Does a great job of using statistics and common sense to refute many economic ideas that are tossed around as "true" in the media and on Facebook. No need to be an economist to understand it.
Currently reading
August 12, 2007Finally, Ryan, I'm cracking this open...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews