What do you think?
Rate this book
The Invisible Heart: An Economic Romance
A lively, unorthodox look at economics, business, and public policy told in the form of a novel.A love story that embraces the business and economic issues of the day?
The Invisible Heart takes a provocative look at business, economics, and regulation through the eyes of Sam Gordon and Laura Silver, teachers at the exclusive Edwards School in Washington, D.C. Sam lives and breathes capitalism. He thinks that most government regulation is unnecessary or even harmful. He believes that success in business is a virtue. He believes that our humanity flourishes under economic freedom. Laura prefers Wordsworth to the Wall Street Journal. Where Sam sees victors, she sees victims. She wants the government to protect consumers and workers from the excesses of Sam's beloved marketplace.
While Sam and Laura argue about how to make the world a better place, a parallel story unfolds across town. Erica Baldwin, the crusading head of a government watchdog agency, tries to bring Charles Krauss, a ruthless CEO, to justice. How are these two dramas connected? Why is Sam under threat of dismissal? Will Erica Baldwin find the evidence she needs? Can Laura love a man with an Adam Smith poster on his wall? The answers in The Invisible Heart give the reader a richer appreciation for how business and the marketplace transform our lives.
The Invisible Heart takes a provocative look at business, economics, and regulation through the eyes of Sam Gordon and Laura Silver, teachers at the exclusive Edwards School in Washington, D.C. Sam lives and breathes capitalism. He thinks that most government regulation is unnecessary or even harmful. He believes that success in business is a virtue. He believes that our humanity flourishes under economic freedom. Laura prefers Wordsworth to the Wall Street Journal. Where Sam sees victors, she sees victims. She wants the government to protect consumers and workers from the excesses of Sam's beloved marketplace.
While Sam and Laura argue about how to make the world a better place, a parallel story unfolds across town. Erica Baldwin, the crusading head of a government watchdog agency, tries to bring Charles Krauss, a ruthless CEO, to justice. How are these two dramas connected? Why is Sam under threat of dismissal? Will Erica Baldwin find the evidence she needs? Can Laura love a man with an Adam Smith poster on his wall? The answers in The Invisible Heart give the reader a richer appreciation for how business and the marketplace transform our lives.
282 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
42 people are currently reading
706 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 131 reviews
February 14, 2016
How do you get teenage girls interested in economics?
Write a romance novel of course.
Just kidding. The Invisible Heart: An Economic Romance by Russell Roberts is a terrific read almost impossible to put down. Sam Gordon is an economics teacher at a prestigious high school for the wealthy elite of the DC area, Laura Silver is the new literature teacher. Using their budding friendship and romance, Roberts explores various ideas and arguments in the economic world, from paychecks to exporting business to Wal Mart, all in a clear, understandable way. Sam's classroom teaching also give unique opportunities to learn.
Though the title, "an economic romance", certainly sounds odd, I learned a great deal reading this book. It helped put the economic lectures in perspective, challenging my own beliefs, and forcing me to reevaluate some of the things I took for granted.
The romance was sweet, but kind of....lame. The arguments and economics, though, are facinating, even if you disagree with the more libertarian viewpoint. Several plot twists took me by suprise. I found the book did more then give arguments, it made me think. It stretched me. And overall, that is why I reccomend this book. Maybe you agree with Sam Roberts, maybe you don't. Sure, the romance is kind of weird. And there are several long paragraphs of conversation just to make one point. But the story makes you think, and using a fictional medium proves not only easier, but more enjoyable than a textbook.
There are many interesting themes, like going with the flow and swallowing what the media says, intermixed with more traditional issues, like is it morally right for a CEO to disband a factory? Should a teacher be fired for teaching his beliefs, even if they go against the flow?
While having at least some backround (like half a credit in high school economics) does make the story easier to understand, I would thoroughly reccomend the book to teenagers and adults of all ages and types. Teachers especially should read it.
I'll end with my favorite two quotes from the book.
"After all, under capitalism, man opresses man. But under socialism it's the other way around."
And
"Only a dead fish swims with the tide."
Write a romance novel of course.
Just kidding. The Invisible Heart: An Economic Romance by Russell Roberts is a terrific read almost impossible to put down. Sam Gordon is an economics teacher at a prestigious high school for the wealthy elite of the DC area, Laura Silver is the new literature teacher. Using their budding friendship and romance, Roberts explores various ideas and arguments in the economic world, from paychecks to exporting business to Wal Mart, all in a clear, understandable way. Sam's classroom teaching also give unique opportunities to learn.
Though the title, "an economic romance", certainly sounds odd, I learned a great deal reading this book. It helped put the economic lectures in perspective, challenging my own beliefs, and forcing me to reevaluate some of the things I took for granted.
The romance was sweet, but kind of....lame. The arguments and economics, though, are facinating, even if you disagree with the more libertarian viewpoint. Several plot twists took me by suprise. I found the book did more then give arguments, it made me think. It stretched me. And overall, that is why I reccomend this book. Maybe you agree with Sam Roberts, maybe you don't. Sure, the romance is kind of weird. And there are several long paragraphs of conversation just to make one point. But the story makes you think, and using a fictional medium proves not only easier, but more enjoyable than a textbook.
There are many interesting themes, like going with the flow and swallowing what the media says, intermixed with more traditional issues, like is it morally right for a CEO to disband a factory? Should a teacher be fired for teaching his beliefs, even if they go against the flow?
While having at least some backround (like half a credit in high school economics) does make the story easier to understand, I would thoroughly reccomend the book to teenagers and adults of all ages and types. Teachers especially should read it.
I'll end with my favorite two quotes from the book.
"After all, under capitalism, man opresses man. But under socialism it's the other way around."
And
"Only a dead fish swims with the tide."
December 14, 2016
An economics novel? How does that work?
Surprisingly enough, it works pretty well.
The main characters are high school teachers, Sam Gordon, teaching economics, and Laura Silver, a literature teacher. Sam is very, very conservative when it comes to economics, while Laura is a little more easy-going about it (not a full-blown socialist, thankfully, for the sake of realism). The novel is supposed to be a romance (at least in name only), but it really isn't much of one. It only gets that title because the two slowly start to become interested in each other.
So most all the economics in the book is done in the form of arguments, disagreements, and regular conversation. So it feels natural for the most part. It teaches a lot, and it's easy to follow.
But it does get a little unrealistic just how much they talk about economics. I mean, who does that? I can understand it being a point of conversation, but not that much conversation.
However, the twist towards the end of the book is absolutely genius! I don't know if it really could have been guessed, it was that well done!
Thankfully the author fixes a lot of the unrealistic aspects of the book by not rushing the plot. Also, the ending was satisfactory and not a predictable fairy-tale ending, so thumbs up for that.
Overall, I'd say try it out. Even if the story isn't too amazing, you might learn a lot.
Surprisingly enough, it works pretty well.
The main characters are high school teachers, Sam Gordon, teaching economics, and Laura Silver, a literature teacher. Sam is very, very conservative when it comes to economics, while Laura is a little more easy-going about it (not a full-blown socialist, thankfully, for the sake of realism). The novel is supposed to be a romance (at least in name only), but it really isn't much of one. It only gets that title because the two slowly start to become interested in each other.
So most all the economics in the book is done in the form of arguments, disagreements, and regular conversation. So it feels natural for the most part. It teaches a lot, and it's easy to follow.
But it does get a little unrealistic just how much they talk about economics. I mean, who does that? I can understand it being a point of conversation, but not that much conversation.
However, the twist towards the end of the book is absolutely genius! I don't know if it really could have been guessed, it was that well done!
Thankfully the author fixes a lot of the unrealistic aspects of the book by not rushing the plot. Also, the ending was satisfactory and not a predictable fairy-tale ending, so thumbs up for that.
Overall, I'd say try it out. Even if the story isn't too amazing, you might learn a lot.
August 27, 2012
Russell Roberts’ main character states “Capitalism involves struggle, but it has an invisible heart beating at its core that transforms people’s lives.”1 in his first novel The Invisible Heart, an Economic Romance. Capitalism, like Wall Street, the 1%, Big Oil, and many other economic entities are the popular scapegoats of the media and politicians, and because the public has little economic knowledge, they are easily manipulated to believe the myths, half-truths and downright lies about our economy and the capitalistic system. The novel is Roberts attempt to shed light on these myths and he engages the reader to test their preconceived notions of what is good and bad about Capitalism.
In the scene mentioned above, Sam, a high school economics teacher, is speaking with Laura, a high school literature teacher, about the struggles of Sam’s grandfather. His grandfather quit school at age 12 to go to work. He started a business that failed in the Depression. He then became a peddler “where his days were long, money was mediocre and the work didn’t exactly challenge his mental abilities.”2 But in the midst of his struggle, he saved enough to send Sam’s father to college and Sam, the grandson, has an even better life. Sam recalls that the sacrifices of his grandfather paid many dividends in the long run.
Sam’s story is like so many in America. My grandfather left school in the eighth grade, even though he had a great aptitude for math, but his efforts were needed on the small family farm; it was just scraping by in southern Ohio before the Depression (that family farm did not have indoor plumbing until I was a child.) When he married, he tried opening a grocery store in the county seat, but that failed during the Depression. He then moved to the city of Cincinnati, where he worked in a bakery and made deliveries. When World War II started, he joined Cincinnati Milacron where he worked the rest of his life. When the engineers were struggling to fix the design of a machine, they often came to my grandfather to have him figure out the solution. Even with his eighth grade education, he often had more insight than the trained engineers did on how to solve problems. My grandparents were handy and frugal. They would buy properties, fix them up, and “flip” them – before the term was in vogue. My mother was the first in her family to attend college, and my grandparents sent money to me while I was in college. Now my grandfather has two great grandchildren who are engineers (the math ability skipped my generation, but I have been an entrepreneur like my grandfather.) Hard work, and an emphasis on education, allowed my grandparents and their descendants to live the American Dream. As Sam states to Laura in the book, “it is possible for the poor person in America to rise. We have seen it done generation after generation here. And we know the secret in America: hard work coupled with decent education.”3
Laura expresses the doubt that many share about the attainability of the American Dream for the poor in today’s society. Charles Murray is creating quite a stir with his latest book, Coming Apart, where he postulates that America is dividing into a two-caste society – one of an affluent, working, married, religious, and educated class, and another where people are much less likely to be married before having children, less likely to go to church, less involved in their communities, and less likely to be in the workforce.4 His main concern is that the two castes do not intermingle anymore because of where they live, work and go to school, and because of that lack of interaction, the lower caste will be doomed to its’ disadvantaged state. He writes, “the American Project… consists of the continuing effort, begun with the founding, to demonstrate that human beings can be left free as individuals and families to live their lives as they see fit, coming together voluntarily to solve their joint problems. The polity that was based upon that idea led to a civic culture that was seen as exceptional by all the world. That culture was so widely shared among Americans that it amounted to a civil religion. To be an American was to be different from other nationalities, in ways that Americans treasured. That culture is unraveling.” 10
Increasingly, Murray believes the two castes are divided by education; affluent children attend private schools and then prestigious colleges while poor children are left in underperforming schools with few options to escape the cycle of poverty, and poor role models from the adults in their lives on how to overcome their circumstances. It is ironic that Sam and Laura are teachers at what the book calls the most prestigious private high school in Washington, DC.
My husband and I started our careers in Washington, DC in the 80s and I know just what type of school upon which the story is based. Washington is divided into quadrants – the northwest includes some of the most high-priced real estate in the country. Decision makers, international expats, lawyers, and lobbyists drive the income level up beyond the American average. The other three quadrants include some of the most squalid outside of the central area of the governmental buildings. The public schools in Washington, DC are a national disgrace. But even President Obama defunded the vouchers that allowed some of those students to escape their failing neighborhood schools to go to private schools where they might have been able to mingle with the affluent class.5
A new report from The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that supports education reform, found that 44 percent of current United States senators and 36 percent of current members of the U.S. House of Representatives "had at one time sent their children to private schools."
"Among the general public," the report says, "only 11 percent of American students attend private schools." What's more, the Heritage report found that one fifth of members of the 11th Congress attended private high schools themselves, which is nearly twice the rate of the public at large.5
If anything, the above statistics support Murray’s hypothesis, and Sam even echoes some of these concerns when he says, “what better way to fight poverty than to improve the education of poor kids?...Between the welfare system and the public schools, we’ve destroyed a generation of children. We’ve got to try something different.”6
I do not believe that America is doomed. In Winston-Salem, NC, where my business is based, education, business, religious and cultural leaders are working to rebuild the social capital needed to preserve the American Dream. Programs such as Read to Me by the Junior League teach young mothers parenting skills and improve school readiness by reading aloud to children from birth to age five. Angel Investors work with new businesses in disadvantaged areas providing funding and skills transfer. The Chamber of Commerce recruits and trains mentors for high school students to encourage them to graduate. Crisis Control Ministries provides medicine and transportation to medical appointments for the poor. Senior Services has one of the largest and most successful Meals on Wheels programs in the area staffed by hundreds of volunteers. The local Food Bank has created a training program for chefs and restaurant personnel providing jobs for the unemployed – they will be the caterers at my daughter’s wedding this summer. Many of my clients are non-profits, including the United Way. Winston Salem has been in the highest per capita giving cities for the United Way for many years, the first to start an Arts Council in the United States. Sam talks about the rolls of charitable organizations in his story. I was surprised when he said, “What changed with the Great Depression was an enormous increase in the involvement of the federal government giving away dramatically larger sums of money. Just like Acme Charity, the government drove the private charities out of business. Private charities in the 1930’s couldn’t raise any money. They effectively went out of business.”7
Giving statistics compiled by the American Association of Fundraising Counsel for 20108
• Americans gave more than $290.89 billion to their favorite causes despite the economic conditions. Total giving, when adjusted for inflation, was up 3.8 percent in 2010. This slight increase is reflective of recovering economic confidence.
• The greatest portion of charitable giving, $211.77 billion, was given by individuals or household donors. Gifts from individuals represented 73 percent of all contributed dollars, a slight increase from 2009 figures.
• Charitable bequests, which are made by individuals, totaled $22.83 billion or 8 percent of total giving. Charitable bequests rose an estimated 18.8 percent. The sum of gifts by individuals and charitable bequests is $234.6 billion or 81 percent of total giving.
• Foundations gave $41 billion, accounting for 13 percent of all philanthropy in the USA.
• Individual, bequest and estimated family foundation giving combined were approximately $254.10 billion or 87 percent of total giving.
• Corporate giving, which is tied to corporate profits, rose an estimated 10.6 percent to $15.29 billion. This reflects an increase in corporate in-kind donations. Corporate giving accounted for 5 percent of all charitable giving. (Corporations do invest additional advertising dollars in cause-related marketing as a business expense.)
However, these numbers show that Americans are investing in many charitable endeavors since the Government tried to drive them out of business after the Great Depression. Civic-minded individuals’ invisible hearts beating at its core to transforms people’s lives will make the difference in improving the social, educational, cultural and religious capital of America, many times in spite of the efforts of government to get in the way. I typically donate half my time to the charities I work with creating donor management systems and data mining and fundraising management software as a means of social capital creation. Besides the United Way, I have worked with The Boys Scouts of America, Ronald McDonald House, Koman Race for the Cure, and the Children’s Center for Exceptional Children. Because of my applications, these charities are able to raise greater amounts of money and do more good for the community. Having the freedom and resources to volunteer, give, and make a difference offers a different kind of utility, but I consider the consumer-producer “surplus” to be immeasurable. I share Sam’s optimism when he says, “I love America. It’s still the place of possibility, the best place to dream of what might be. And that’s because of a deeply held conviction many Americans have in the power of being left to one’s devices. The power of liberty to unleash the human spirit and let it soar….It is what the American Dream is all about. Not the dream of riches, but the dream of the pursuit of happiness as the individual perceives it.”9
1 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 170
2 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 169
3 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 171
4 Coming Apart, The State of White America 1960 - 2010 by Charles Murray
5 Obama Wrong on D.C. School Vouchers and Hypocritical, Just Like Congress by Peter Roff, US News and World Report 4/22/2009 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/p...
6 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 166
7 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 166-67
8 http://www.nps.gov/partnerships/fundr...
9 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 229-230
10 Splintered by William McKenzie (Dallas Morning News) Arkansas Democrat Gazette 3/4/2012
In the scene mentioned above, Sam, a high school economics teacher, is speaking with Laura, a high school literature teacher, about the struggles of Sam’s grandfather. His grandfather quit school at age 12 to go to work. He started a business that failed in the Depression. He then became a peddler “where his days were long, money was mediocre and the work didn’t exactly challenge his mental abilities.”2 But in the midst of his struggle, he saved enough to send Sam’s father to college and Sam, the grandson, has an even better life. Sam recalls that the sacrifices of his grandfather paid many dividends in the long run.
Sam’s story is like so many in America. My grandfather left school in the eighth grade, even though he had a great aptitude for math, but his efforts were needed on the small family farm; it was just scraping by in southern Ohio before the Depression (that family farm did not have indoor plumbing until I was a child.) When he married, he tried opening a grocery store in the county seat, but that failed during the Depression. He then moved to the city of Cincinnati, where he worked in a bakery and made deliveries. When World War II started, he joined Cincinnati Milacron where he worked the rest of his life. When the engineers were struggling to fix the design of a machine, they often came to my grandfather to have him figure out the solution. Even with his eighth grade education, he often had more insight than the trained engineers did on how to solve problems. My grandparents were handy and frugal. They would buy properties, fix them up, and “flip” them – before the term was in vogue. My mother was the first in her family to attend college, and my grandparents sent money to me while I was in college. Now my grandfather has two great grandchildren who are engineers (the math ability skipped my generation, but I have been an entrepreneur like my grandfather.) Hard work, and an emphasis on education, allowed my grandparents and their descendants to live the American Dream. As Sam states to Laura in the book, “it is possible for the poor person in America to rise. We have seen it done generation after generation here. And we know the secret in America: hard work coupled with decent education.”3
Laura expresses the doubt that many share about the attainability of the American Dream for the poor in today’s society. Charles Murray is creating quite a stir with his latest book, Coming Apart, where he postulates that America is dividing into a two-caste society – one of an affluent, working, married, religious, and educated class, and another where people are much less likely to be married before having children, less likely to go to church, less involved in their communities, and less likely to be in the workforce.4 His main concern is that the two castes do not intermingle anymore because of where they live, work and go to school, and because of that lack of interaction, the lower caste will be doomed to its’ disadvantaged state. He writes, “the American Project… consists of the continuing effort, begun with the founding, to demonstrate that human beings can be left free as individuals and families to live their lives as they see fit, coming together voluntarily to solve their joint problems. The polity that was based upon that idea led to a civic culture that was seen as exceptional by all the world. That culture was so widely shared among Americans that it amounted to a civil religion. To be an American was to be different from other nationalities, in ways that Americans treasured. That culture is unraveling.” 10
Increasingly, Murray believes the two castes are divided by education; affluent children attend private schools and then prestigious colleges while poor children are left in underperforming schools with few options to escape the cycle of poverty, and poor role models from the adults in their lives on how to overcome their circumstances. It is ironic that Sam and Laura are teachers at what the book calls the most prestigious private high school in Washington, DC.
My husband and I started our careers in Washington, DC in the 80s and I know just what type of school upon which the story is based. Washington is divided into quadrants – the northwest includes some of the most high-priced real estate in the country. Decision makers, international expats, lawyers, and lobbyists drive the income level up beyond the American average. The other three quadrants include some of the most squalid outside of the central area of the governmental buildings. The public schools in Washington, DC are a national disgrace. But even President Obama defunded the vouchers that allowed some of those students to escape their failing neighborhood schools to go to private schools where they might have been able to mingle with the affluent class.5
A new report from The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that supports education reform, found that 44 percent of current United States senators and 36 percent of current members of the U.S. House of Representatives "had at one time sent their children to private schools."
"Among the general public," the report says, "only 11 percent of American students attend private schools." What's more, the Heritage report found that one fifth of members of the 11th Congress attended private high schools themselves, which is nearly twice the rate of the public at large.5
If anything, the above statistics support Murray’s hypothesis, and Sam even echoes some of these concerns when he says, “what better way to fight poverty than to improve the education of poor kids?...Between the welfare system and the public schools, we’ve destroyed a generation of children. We’ve got to try something different.”6
I do not believe that America is doomed. In Winston-Salem, NC, where my business is based, education, business, religious and cultural leaders are working to rebuild the social capital needed to preserve the American Dream. Programs such as Read to Me by the Junior League teach young mothers parenting skills and improve school readiness by reading aloud to children from birth to age five. Angel Investors work with new businesses in disadvantaged areas providing funding and skills transfer. The Chamber of Commerce recruits and trains mentors for high school students to encourage them to graduate. Crisis Control Ministries provides medicine and transportation to medical appointments for the poor. Senior Services has one of the largest and most successful Meals on Wheels programs in the area staffed by hundreds of volunteers. The local Food Bank has created a training program for chefs and restaurant personnel providing jobs for the unemployed – they will be the caterers at my daughter’s wedding this summer. Many of my clients are non-profits, including the United Way. Winston Salem has been in the highest per capita giving cities for the United Way for many years, the first to start an Arts Council in the United States. Sam talks about the rolls of charitable organizations in his story. I was surprised when he said, “What changed with the Great Depression was an enormous increase in the involvement of the federal government giving away dramatically larger sums of money. Just like Acme Charity, the government drove the private charities out of business. Private charities in the 1930’s couldn’t raise any money. They effectively went out of business.”7
Giving statistics compiled by the American Association of Fundraising Counsel for 20108
• Americans gave more than $290.89 billion to their favorite causes despite the economic conditions. Total giving, when adjusted for inflation, was up 3.8 percent in 2010. This slight increase is reflective of recovering economic confidence.
• The greatest portion of charitable giving, $211.77 billion, was given by individuals or household donors. Gifts from individuals represented 73 percent of all contributed dollars, a slight increase from 2009 figures.
• Charitable bequests, which are made by individuals, totaled $22.83 billion or 8 percent of total giving. Charitable bequests rose an estimated 18.8 percent. The sum of gifts by individuals and charitable bequests is $234.6 billion or 81 percent of total giving.
• Foundations gave $41 billion, accounting for 13 percent of all philanthropy in the USA.
• Individual, bequest and estimated family foundation giving combined were approximately $254.10 billion or 87 percent of total giving.
• Corporate giving, which is tied to corporate profits, rose an estimated 10.6 percent to $15.29 billion. This reflects an increase in corporate in-kind donations. Corporate giving accounted for 5 percent of all charitable giving. (Corporations do invest additional advertising dollars in cause-related marketing as a business expense.)
However, these numbers show that Americans are investing in many charitable endeavors since the Government tried to drive them out of business after the Great Depression. Civic-minded individuals’ invisible hearts beating at its core to transforms people’s lives will make the difference in improving the social, educational, cultural and religious capital of America, many times in spite of the efforts of government to get in the way. I typically donate half my time to the charities I work with creating donor management systems and data mining and fundraising management software as a means of social capital creation. Besides the United Way, I have worked with The Boys Scouts of America, Ronald McDonald House, Koman Race for the Cure, and the Children’s Center for Exceptional Children. Because of my applications, these charities are able to raise greater amounts of money and do more good for the community. Having the freedom and resources to volunteer, give, and make a difference offers a different kind of utility, but I consider the consumer-producer “surplus” to be immeasurable. I share Sam’s optimism when he says, “I love America. It’s still the place of possibility, the best place to dream of what might be. And that’s because of a deeply held conviction many Americans have in the power of being left to one’s devices. The power of liberty to unleash the human spirit and let it soar….It is what the American Dream is all about. Not the dream of riches, but the dream of the pursuit of happiness as the individual perceives it.”9
1 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 170
2 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 169
3 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 171
4 Coming Apart, The State of White America 1960 - 2010 by Charles Murray
5 Obama Wrong on D.C. School Vouchers and Hypocritical, Just Like Congress by Peter Roff, US News and World Report 4/22/2009 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/p...
6 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 166
7 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 166-67
8 http://www.nps.gov/partnerships/fundr...
9 The Invisible Heart by Russell Roberts, p 229-230
10 Splintered by William McKenzie (Dallas Morning News) Arkansas Democrat Gazette 3/4/2012
November 1, 2018
This is pretty ambitious, and while it didn’t completely succeed, that it was attempted at all competently makes it a good book. Basically, it is a “nicer” or “better” form of an Ayn Rand book — a romance novel (so, aimed at young women?) with a free market/libertarian economics message at core. There are some areas where it was a bit heavy handed (Rand-esque) with extended monologues about economics, and some bad guys who were caricatures. However, it is still interesting.
September 8, 2016
This book is targeted to youth, probably senior high schoolers and as such must be reviewed. In terms of language, its short sentences and narrative forms probably puts it in a 9 or 10th grade difficulty, while the topic it aims to explain are for an older audience. It thus tries by this effect, to make simpler what is more complex and possibly qualifies as a propagandist kind of a literature. Perhaps the word is too strong, but I wish to caution the reader that "too simple" sometimes leads one to loose the ability to critical reading, because the simplicity that cloaks the complexity, also cloaks the mind. What this book really needs is an alternate storyline, perhaps an alternate universe (which for this author's imagination might be too much a tour de force) which can explain the other point of view that Laura tries to express, but use instead an economist to express it. This is a missed opportunity to educate our youth and truly develop critical reading skills. Unfortunately the author fails at this, and the crude romance only serve to sweeten the feelings and associate them with the free-market view of the world that the protagonist (and biased author) advocates. It tricks the reader therefore by deceiving him with the simplicity of the feeling and of the language and fails at exploring the complexities of the world (or at least an attempt of it for the targeted audience). I give it 2 stars for possibly succeeding at this trickery as can be seen by the number of good reviews the book got.
October 17, 2022
A thoroughly modern capitalist apologetic, using Sam Gordon, a High School economics professor as mouthpiece. He's attracted to Laura, a young teacher who is a typical, reflexive statist. They spar with words but their attraction continues to build, despite such conflicting views. Two mysteries are introduced; one concerning the villainous CEO of a pharmaceutical company, and a second concerning Sam himself. While the book attempts to deal with big ideas—freedom, liberty, responsibility—it fails to present capitalism as anything more than the best way to help the most people. Sam routinely gets mired in the "What about the poor?" argument, never attacking the evils of sacrificial altruism, or defending the morality of individualism on principle. Sam is a virtuous man caught within a mediocre story and given misguided speeches.
August 5, 2011
I have to agree with all the reviews. The Invisible Heart fails as a work of fiction. I do believe it works as an economics/philosophy book. Thinly veiled by a budding romance formed by an unlikely couple, the work is really a series of dialogues about free market economics and the values that it promotes. The discussions shows the multitude of perspectives around complex economic arguments, but convincingly demonstrates why a free market system is superior to the interventionist approaches that seem to be favored by the masses. This book should be mandatory reading for everyone. I only rate it 4 stars because it is not great work of fiction.
November 30, 2012
An economic lesson in capitalism using a "novel" approach. I had to begin reading this book twice, but the second time I actually paid attention and understood the two main characters. There is a side story that surprised me - pleasantly. This book puts forth arguments in interesting ways. You can grow to like and dislike the characters and agree and disagree with their positions, but in the end the story is about an actual romance. It's an academic story with a personal twist. I would recommend this book to those who want to read about and understand the philosophies of either side of the political and economic aisle.
February 22, 2014
I have really enjoyed Russ Roberts' podcast "EconTalk" and so am familiar with the concepts in this book but it is still an excellent summary of the economic way of thinking and quite possibly the best introduction to it.
Russ isn't going to win any awards for a compelling romance but he does make good use of the story to convey the concepts he wants to teach. It was engaging and entertaining and I'd highly recommend it. I think anyone will take at least something away from it and I think most would benefit just from a different perspective on the world and how things work and what incentives do.
Russ isn't going to win any awards for a compelling romance but he does make good use of the story to convey the concepts he wants to teach. It was engaging and entertaining and I'd highly recommend it. I think anyone will take at least something away from it and I think most would benefit just from a different perspective on the world and how things work and what incentives do.
October 14, 2015
I think every VEPR students should read this book because somehow it summarizes all the basic ideas in the course. It clears my thinking on this unfettered economic system too. Everyone is trying to oppose it. Sometimes I feel shaken, but classical liberalism is really a most natural system of thought which supports regulating a self-governed system. The market is realistic, and we have to accept it if we want to make a better world.
May 18, 2016
Note: I had to read for school.
I would have probably enjoyed this romance more if ALL of the conversations they had weren't bogged down with economics. This book did the trick with economics though. I disliked how they ended Erica & Charles story. They didn't give us any closure.
Laura and Sam were really one dimensional for me. They didn't work.
This book as a work of fiction 1 star; as work of economics 3 stars. Hence the 2 star rating.
I would have probably enjoyed this romance more if ALL of the conversations they had weren't bogged down with economics. This book did the trick with economics though. I disliked how they ended Erica & Charles story. They didn't give us any closure.
Laura and Sam were really one dimensional for me. They didn't work.
This book as a work of fiction 1 star; as work of economics 3 stars. Hence the 2 star rating.
April 4, 2025
Üniversitede hocamız ödev olarak okutmuştu, epey akıcı ve öğretici.
April 16, 2025
Had to read it for an economics class… And that is the ONLY reason I’d ever touch this book… So unbelievably awful lol
August 29, 2016
The Invisible Heart is an oddly sweet argument introduction to the thinking behind classically liberal economics, taking the form of a dialogue between one Sam Gordon, an economics professor, and Laura Silver, an idealistic English instructor who has just begun working at the same private school as Sam. The two hit it off immediately, even though Laura thinks economists are soulless cretins obsessed with money at the expense of the noble expressions of the human spirit, like art and safety regulations. Sam is a lonely, embattled man, and he wants desperately to be understood by Laura, who -- despite not sharing Sam's views -- finds his earnest passion fascinating. And so as a year transpires, the two chance to meet time and again; first accidentally, and then as their friendship develops, deliberately. Their relationship is fed by argument, for the book is an extensive argument for libertarianism.
Laura is, by virtually everyone's meter, a liberal: she's very much concerned about the poor and oppressed. She believes firmly in safety regulations, minimum-wage laws, environmental protections -- the state exists to right the wrongs created by capitalism, to curb the abuses of the free market. Sam, in contrast, is a "classical" liberal who believes the freer the market, the freer the people. He takes Adam Smith's notion of an invisible hand at work in the marketplace for granted: let the market work, and things will sort themselves out. Companies that produce bad products will go out of business; businesses that don't pay well enough won't be able to find workers.
Although Sam's view is partially pragmatic --letting things flow naturally is considerably easier than trying to engineer everything -- he's also driven by principle. People shouldn't meddle with the lives of others, and they certainly shouldn't try to justify their interference by using the state to do the meddling. Sure, seatbelts are a great idea -- but making it illegal not to wear a seatbelt is an abominable one. What right does the government have to tell people how they may or may not use their own property? Sam also points out that meddling always has unintended consequences: when the Baptist ban drinking on Sundays, the moralists may cheer -- but so do the bootleggers, because now they can charge a premium for hooch that day. By the same token, when the state mandates the use of scrubbers to clean factory emissions, the manufacturers of those scrubbers give a cheer.* Why not simply fine companies that emit noxious fumes and let that be an incentive for them to find their own best way of eliminating emissions, rather than forcing them to buy a particular product, and thus enrich only a few? Spread the wealth around -- embrace competition. Environmental protection, incidentally, is the one area where Gordon isn't so much a free marketeer, but still manifestly libertarian. He believes firmly in personal responsibility, which is why he wears seat belts but hates the idea of making other people wear theirs. But whereas a driver choosing comfort over safety only endangers his own life, a company dumping waste into a river or into the air hurts everyone. They should take care of their own messes -- but care should be taken in making them do it, as with the scrubbers example.
It's hard not to like Sam, even if you disagree with him, as Laura does. He's a nice guy; like Laura, he wants a better world, but unlike he thinks he should be brought about in an organic way -- that it should emerge from the bottom-up, from the marketplace, rather than being forcibly constructed by states, from the top down. His arguments sometimes seem counter-intuitive; he defies expectations. Although an economist primarily concerned with self-interest, Sam isn't himself particularly focused on wealth. One of his arguments with Laura is over the question: are teachers unpaid? Sam thinks not. Yes, their salary is considerably less than most others, but they're compensated in different ways. They have the summers off, for instance, the work becomes easier with time, and they have the chronic joy of seeing "lightbulbs come on in students' heads". If they were truly underpaid, the school would be unable to find people to fill the positions. Besides, he says; it's so much easier to be content with what you have. Epicurean simplicity isn't what I would expect from an advocate of capitalism, the ethos of which seems to be MORE!
Although I, like Laura, don't quite agree with all of Sam's arguments, it's difficult not to find his earnestness compelling. His principles are outstanding, but it's easy to argue for the free market when you are protected from the fray. The Invisible Heart's author, Russ Roberts, is essentially Sam Gordon: a genuinely nice and fantastically interesting fellow who teaches economics, though at the university level. How can a university economist, safely ensconced in an 'ivory tower', feel comfortable telling people struggling to get by on a minimum wage that said minimum is a bad idea, as it prices those willing to work less out of the market? And it's easy to say that a factory that didn't pay enough won't find workers, but that's preposterous: when unemployment is high and people are desperate for food, they will accept despicable conditions because they have no other options. There isn't competition for employment in a one-factory town.
And yet despite these reservations, The Invisible Heart stirs me. I wish I'd purchased it instead of borrowing it through the interlibrary loan system, because it's one I'm going to want to revisit. If you want your assumptions questioned, if you want your mind to be provoked into thought by someone who disagrees with you but who is so nice about it that you feel more invigorated by the challenge than insulted, this is a book to read. Although about economics, the 'dismal science', Invisible Heart is anything but dismal, freely using poetry, literature, and philosophy to explore the meaning of life.
* For a more real-world example: I couldn't help but think of reading about a politician who advocated mandatory drug testing who turned out to be bankrolled by the manufacturers of the testing supplies. Baptists and bootleggers...
Laura is, by virtually everyone's meter, a liberal: she's very much concerned about the poor and oppressed. She believes firmly in safety regulations, minimum-wage laws, environmental protections -- the state exists to right the wrongs created by capitalism, to curb the abuses of the free market. Sam, in contrast, is a "classical" liberal who believes the freer the market, the freer the people. He takes Adam Smith's notion of an invisible hand at work in the marketplace for granted: let the market work, and things will sort themselves out. Companies that produce bad products will go out of business; businesses that don't pay well enough won't be able to find workers.
Although Sam's view is partially pragmatic --letting things flow naturally is considerably easier than trying to engineer everything -- he's also driven by principle. People shouldn't meddle with the lives of others, and they certainly shouldn't try to justify their interference by using the state to do the meddling. Sure, seatbelts are a great idea -- but making it illegal not to wear a seatbelt is an abominable one. What right does the government have to tell people how they may or may not use their own property? Sam also points out that meddling always has unintended consequences: when the Baptist ban drinking on Sundays, the moralists may cheer -- but so do the bootleggers, because now they can charge a premium for hooch that day. By the same token, when the state mandates the use of scrubbers to clean factory emissions, the manufacturers of those scrubbers give a cheer.* Why not simply fine companies that emit noxious fumes and let that be an incentive for them to find their own best way of eliminating emissions, rather than forcing them to buy a particular product, and thus enrich only a few? Spread the wealth around -- embrace competition. Environmental protection, incidentally, is the one area where Gordon isn't so much a free marketeer, but still manifestly libertarian. He believes firmly in personal responsibility, which is why he wears seat belts but hates the idea of making other people wear theirs. But whereas a driver choosing comfort over safety only endangers his own life, a company dumping waste into a river or into the air hurts everyone. They should take care of their own messes -- but care should be taken in making them do it, as with the scrubbers example.
It's hard not to like Sam, even if you disagree with him, as Laura does. He's a nice guy; like Laura, he wants a better world, but unlike he thinks he should be brought about in an organic way -- that it should emerge from the bottom-up, from the marketplace, rather than being forcibly constructed by states, from the top down. His arguments sometimes seem counter-intuitive; he defies expectations. Although an economist primarily concerned with self-interest, Sam isn't himself particularly focused on wealth. One of his arguments with Laura is over the question: are teachers unpaid? Sam thinks not. Yes, their salary is considerably less than most others, but they're compensated in different ways. They have the summers off, for instance, the work becomes easier with time, and they have the chronic joy of seeing "lightbulbs come on in students' heads". If they were truly underpaid, the school would be unable to find people to fill the positions. Besides, he says; it's so much easier to be content with what you have. Epicurean simplicity isn't what I would expect from an advocate of capitalism, the ethos of which seems to be MORE!
Although I, like Laura, don't quite agree with all of Sam's arguments, it's difficult not to find his earnestness compelling. His principles are outstanding, but it's easy to argue for the free market when you are protected from the fray. The Invisible Heart's author, Russ Roberts, is essentially Sam Gordon: a genuinely nice and fantastically interesting fellow who teaches economics, though at the university level. How can a university economist, safely ensconced in an 'ivory tower', feel comfortable telling people struggling to get by on a minimum wage that said minimum is a bad idea, as it prices those willing to work less out of the market? And it's easy to say that a factory that didn't pay enough won't find workers, but that's preposterous: when unemployment is high and people are desperate for food, they will accept despicable conditions because they have no other options. There isn't competition for employment in a one-factory town.
And yet despite these reservations, The Invisible Heart stirs me. I wish I'd purchased it instead of borrowing it through the interlibrary loan system, because it's one I'm going to want to revisit. If you want your assumptions questioned, if you want your mind to be provoked into thought by someone who disagrees with you but who is so nice about it that you feel more invigorated by the challenge than insulted, this is a book to read. Although about economics, the 'dismal science', Invisible Heart is anything but dismal, freely using poetry, literature, and philosophy to explore the meaning of life.
* For a more real-world example: I couldn't help but think of reading about a politician who advocated mandatory drug testing who turned out to be bankrolled by the manufacturers of the testing supplies. Baptists and bootleggers...
September 14, 2022
An interesting look at the role of markets and why, in the author's opinion, they meet people's needs best. Roberts does a good job of defending his position, but of course, uses simplistic examples. He discusses why it is better for everything from social welfare to labour to be run by individual choices rather than government regulation, but of course he cherry picks his examples.
I could get behind the idea that seatbelts and airbags could be left to individual choice (even if this is not a popular opinion), but he ignores the gigantic asymmetry of information between most consumers and the companies they deal with, made more complex with intellectual property restrictions.
Even Adam Smith acknowledged that markets work really well, but they work best when there is a balance in power between the supplier and the customer. If one gets too large, they can abuse the other, and there is a need for some intermediation to make sure "moral sentiments" are maintained. We generally see this as the role of government (even as we debate how it should do that best).
I could get behind the idea that seatbelts and airbags could be left to individual choice (even if this is not a popular opinion), but he ignores the gigantic asymmetry of information between most consumers and the companies they deal with, made more complex with intellectual property restrictions.
Even Adam Smith acknowledged that markets work really well, but they work best when there is a balance in power between the supplier and the customer. If one gets too large, they can abuse the other, and there is a need for some intermediation to make sure "moral sentiments" are maintained. We generally see this as the role of government (even as we debate how it should do that best).
July 27, 2019
I picked this up after learning that the host of the popular EconTalk podcast has also written novels, with an economics bent (along with rap videos.. although that's a different story!).
For any long-time listeners of EconTalk, none of the book's economics lessons will strike as new. In fact there is an opportunity to play the EconTalk bingo with this book, although Adam Smith's “Man naturally desires, not only to be loved, but to be lovely" does not, surprisingly, make an appearance! The knock against television and its caricatures is also well made, with a twist that I did not see coming! Romance novels are not my cup of tea - so I was glad that there wasn't much emphasis on that aspect, although it did feel like the emphasis on economics was a bit much. I would hope the characters found something else to talk about as well! This is a simple, short book and a decent read.
P.S. It was impossible not to read Sam Gordon's lines in EconTalker's voice!
For any long-time listeners of EconTalk, none of the book's economics lessons will strike as new. In fact there is an opportunity to play the EconTalk bingo with this book, although Adam Smith's “Man naturally desires, not only to be loved, but to be lovely" does not, surprisingly, make an appearance! The knock against television and its caricatures is also well made, with a twist that I did not see coming! Romance novels are not my cup of tea - so I was glad that there wasn't much emphasis on that aspect, although it did feel like the emphasis on economics was a bit much. I would hope the characters found something else to talk about as well! This is a simple, short book and a decent read.
P.S. It was impossible not to read Sam Gordon's lines in EconTalker's voice!
October 4, 2020
The book's concept is unique - a treatise on why unfettered capitalism is the superior market approach, wrapped in a fiction "romance" novel and topped off with a plot twist. Does it entirely succeed on all fronts? Well not really. I don't think anyone who truly enjoys a good fiction or good romance novel will jump to have this book at the top of their Goodreads To Read list! And the plot twist, while interesting, is no "The Sixth Sense" as one reviewer suggests. But there's no question that the economic arguments are the heart of the book. That's really not surprising to me having been a former MBA student of Russ Roberts and having read his first book The Choice. I could clearly hear Russ' voice as Sam saying the words "there's no such thing as a free lunch". Whether you agree with Sam's (aka Russ') positions or Laura's or perhaps a mix of both, this book is a more entertaining approach to present these ideas than what you'd usually see with economic journalism.
May 16, 2020
I believe this book is not just about economics more than a way to show us how to see life from an economical view of point, i love the book and im so sad that it finished. One more thing the book taught me lessons in a novel way which is very nice and difficult to do, and the best way to teach got to be this way. People learn from stories. I love how he should that the best way to live life is by making your own choices and being responsible for them, also how forcing people with legislations is not always the solution, and how when you have a controversial idea you dont have to point it a out just be the tide fish, also how we have to teach people how to fish rather than giving them a free fish.
Read
June 16, 2025The Invisible Heart takes a bold approach: it frames economic theory not as an abstract academic exercise, but as something deeply human... Shaping relationships, values, and the way people navigate power. Through a simple but effective narrative, Roberts contrasts the ideological allure of free markets with the emotional weight of responsibility, fairness, and risk. What stood out to me wasn’t the romance itself, but the way ideas were made personal. The characters feel like people you’ve debated with. It’s not about proving one system right, but showing how beliefs get tested when they meet real world consequences. A clear and thought provoking read that doesn’t try to be overly clever. It just asks the right questions and lets them echo.
April 23, 2020
This book was surprisingly enjoyable! In some ways it’s hardly a novel, most of it is the characters having discussions on economics. But despite that it is not at all boring: it does have a story that kept moving and it helps put economic ideas into a memorable context. The topics the characters think about are very practical and give good examples of larger ideas.
Also, the “romance” part of it was not overly romantic. It showed two people gradually getting to know each other through their discussions of the world and their views of it, and balancing that with each being able to see how the other actually lives his/her life.
Also, the “romance” part of it was not overly romantic. It showed two people gradually getting to know each other through their discussions of the world and their views of it, and balancing that with each being able to see how the other actually lives his/her life.
March 6, 2017
For what this book is--a narrative vehicle for articulating free market economics and a liberty-loving worldview--it is simply fantastic. It's not Austen or Homer, but it does succeed at presenting a believable romance and lots of very readable conversations about government, money, regulation, prices, and the unintended and often unforeseen consequences of state meddling. Really enjoyable, and very helpful in defending against some of the more difficult (mis)characterizations of a liberty worldview.
September 12, 2023
This is basically a book about a capitalist and a socialist falling in love and arguing about economic policy. It's good, if you're reading it for economics class. It's not good, if you're reading it for fun.
Also, the chapters about Erica Baldwin and Charles Krauss felt so disconnected from the Sam and Laura plot. I know they probably linked later on in the story, but I'm gonna be honest I skimmed most of those chapters because I got bored.
If you like capitalism and/or devil's advocate debates, you'll probably enjoy the dialogue. Not for me though.
Also, the chapters about Erica Baldwin and Charles Krauss felt so disconnected from the Sam and Laura plot. I know they probably linked later on in the story, but I'm gonna be honest I skimmed most of those chapters because I got bored.
If you like capitalism and/or devil's advocate debates, you'll probably enjoy the dialogue. Not for me though.
January 19, 2022
I read this book for an extra credit assignment. Honestly, I did not expect to like this book as much as I did. The characters were dynamic and learned and grew from interactions with one another, and the sub-plot surrounding them was engaging. I took a star off because the economic jargon was sometimes hard to understand and a little boring to read, but it did teach me a lot about how capitalism and incentives and all of that wonderful economic stuff works.
April 5, 2018
A brilliantly accessible exploration of the upsides of capitalism, in an age where it is widely disregarded and misunderstood. Simple in its writing and incredibly thought-provoking, this book opened my eyes in my view of the world as well as in developing an appreciation of the much-needed intersection of Philosophy, Politics and Economics.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 20, 2022
As soon as I got done reading the book, I kid you not, I was excited about reading some scathing reviews because the book honestly infuriated me at many points. Come here to see many of the reviews applauding the book. Did I miss something? Idk, maybe. Still dislike the book and the ideas its peddling tho 🙄
January 25, 2019
Very well written, unique book. While, obviously, it was a persuasive piece, it did help me to identify many of the economic issues facing Western nations. Roberts is a clever writer and persuader and, while I don't agree with everything in this book, he does make some great points.
November 2, 2019
Great book for people to get a richer understanding of free-market economics and libertarian economic theory and general economic principles. I learned a lot from the exposition of concepts from this book and the classic "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt.
June 20, 2020
I went back and forth between loving and hating the main character Sam. sometimes I agreed with him, sometimes I vehemently disagreed with him.
the book is well-written though, and definitely worth the read, and I feel like I got a mini CliffsNotes version of economics 101 in a way.
the book is well-written though, and definitely worth the read, and I feel like I got a mini CliffsNotes version of economics 101 in a way.
July 20, 2021
Easy to read, clean. Not overly romantic at all, so the boys shouldn't be put off by the title. Interesting points on economics are brought up that would probably be fun to discuss in a classroom setting.
September 25, 2022
The main romance was just them arguing about economics (and Laura making dumb arguments so Sam could prove the virtues of neoliberalism). The side story was mediocre until its resolution, when it became eye-roll inducing.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 131 reviews