What do you think?
Rate this book
Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: A Brief History of Capitalism
Random House presents the audiobook edition of Talking to My Daughter About the A Brief History of Capitalism by Yanis Varoufakis.
Why is there so much inequality?
In this short book, world famous economist Yanis Varoufakis sets out to answer his 11-year-old daughter Xenia's deceptively simple question. Using personal stories and famous myths - from Oedipus and Faust to Frankenstein and The Matrix - he explains what the economy is and why it has the power to shape our lives.
Intimate yet universally accessible, Talking to My Daughter About the Economy introduces listeners to the most important drama of our times, helping to make sense of a troubling world while inspiring us to make it a better one.
Why is there so much inequality?
In this short book, world famous economist Yanis Varoufakis sets out to answer his 11-year-old daughter Xenia's deceptively simple question. Using personal stories and famous myths - from Oedipus and Faust to Frankenstein and The Matrix - he explains what the economy is and why it has the power to shape our lives.
Intimate yet universally accessible, Talking to My Daughter About the Economy introduces listeners to the most important drama of our times, helping to make sense of a troubling world while inspiring us to make it a better one.
- GenresNonfiction
Audible Audio
Published October 19, 2017
20 people are currently reading
75 people want to read
About the author
Yanis Varoufakis
60 books2,516 followersIoannis "Yanis" Varoufakis is a Greek-Australian economist and politician. A former academic, he has been Secretary-General of MeRA25, a left-wing political party, since he founded it in 2018. A former member of Syriza, he served as Minister of Finance from January to July 2015 under Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
December 26, 2025
An excellent primer for the uninitiated.
December 17, 2025
I do not have a daughter, nor do I have particularly sound understanding of economics. Upon reading this book I continue to not have a daughter, nor a particular sound understanding of economics. However, I am more deeply imbued with a sense that this is deliberately curated (the economic illiteracy, not the daughter) by those who prioritise wealth accumulation over the world we live in.
***BOOMER ALARM, I’VE REALISED THIS IS THE AUDIOBOOK BUT DON’T KNOW HOW TO CHANGE IT***
***BOOMER ALARM, I’VE REALISED THIS IS THE AUDIOBOOK BUT DON’T KNOW HOW TO CHANGE IT***
January 25, 2026
This has to be one of the dumbest, most error-ridden, ridiculous excuse for a book I have ever had the displeasure to read.
Background: my daughter was assigned this book to read as part of her college career, so I thought I would read it with her and whew! what a pile of nonsense. In fact, the author tells you at the beginning of the book that he researched nothing he said, and provided not a single reference for any of the crazy stuff he says. What kind of professor assigns you a book that doesn't have any references and so many glaring inaccuracies?
Also, in the prologue, he starts by saying that if you want to build a bridge or need surgery, you talk to the experts, but the economy is too important to leave to the economists because "the self-appointed experts on the economy, the economists, are almost always wrong" so we shouldn't listen to economists. Guess what Yanis Varoufakis is. Yep, an economist. So that means we shouldn't listen to him and honestly, that's about the only truthful thing he says in the whole book.
He uses the genetic logical fallacy when talking about the origins of religion.
Claims that the Parthenon, the pyramids, and Inca temples were built by slaves, but they were all built by paid laborers.
He makes it seem like economists aren't like scientists because scientists use math. Uh, scientists using science is what makes them scientists. He neglects the fact that economics can be tested just like the harder sciences, for instance the hypothesis of socialism has been tried and tried and the hypothesis fails every time.
The story about the guy going in debt by purchasing government resources assumes that Mr Nabok can’t have a better crop next year.
His point about countries where blood donors are paid get less blood than free ones is not true. Paid donation increases the quantity of blood available greatly.
Claims that economists don’t value experiences, only market value, which confuses subjective, personal value with objective, market value.
Points out that people in the past worked harder than we do today, but neglects to credit that to capitalism.
Like all socialists, he assumes that if you are a laborer today, then you are a laborer for generations, but that is only true on socialism. In a free market, laborers can become millionaires, or at least go work for another employer, and CEOs can become poor all in a single lifetime, and all based on the changing market. Inescapable generational poverty only is a reality in socialism.
Lists out a bunch of terrible scenarios, pregnant women giving birth unassisted in bad conditions and slavery for instance and claims that these were new events due to the industrial revolution. Uh, no. They aren’t. The slave trade, for instance, existed for millennia before the Industrial Revolution.
Says banks create money out of thin air for loans. I kid you not. The economist thinks that the banks just make up the money they give you for loans. Banks don’t create money, if anyone does, it’s the federal reserve. Banks get their money from their customers, borrowing money from other banks, etc. banks don’t make money. If this were true, then rampant inflation would be immediate.
His proposed solution to all this? Theft. Confiscate machines, purchased by the sweat, risk taking, and toil of the entrepreneurs who bought them and give a portion of the profit made by the machine to “the people”. I remind you that taking the profit of “the machine” is also theft from the company who bought the machine. Who does he propose will pay for the machines upkeep, I wonder?
He discusses a free-market economy that worked great in a POW camp without any regulatory oversight, and then talks about the dangers of having governmental manipulation causing inflation in ancient Rome and it never even occurs to him that the nightmare scenario he discussed is exactly the "solution" he is proposing.
Dude can’t even quote someone accurately and his laughable attempt at quoting Archimedes towards the end of the book shows he also doesn’t understand how a freaking lever works.
There is so much more that 'ole dude gets wrong that I stopped taking notes and started just marking up my copy and writing in the margins. It's essentially like reading a 124 page long train wreck, dumpster fire, conspiracy theory rant by that weird friend that’s always talking about chemtrails or a flat earth. You can tell by listening to them that they really don’t understand how anything works but they think they are so much smarter than everyone else.
Background: my daughter was assigned this book to read as part of her college career, so I thought I would read it with her and whew! what a pile of nonsense. In fact, the author tells you at the beginning of the book that he researched nothing he said, and provided not a single reference for any of the crazy stuff he says. What kind of professor assigns you a book that doesn't have any references and so many glaring inaccuracies?
Also, in the prologue, he starts by saying that if you want to build a bridge or need surgery, you talk to the experts, but the economy is too important to leave to the economists because "the self-appointed experts on the economy, the economists, are almost always wrong" so we shouldn't listen to economists. Guess what Yanis Varoufakis is. Yep, an economist. So that means we shouldn't listen to him and honestly, that's about the only truthful thing he says in the whole book.
He uses the genetic logical fallacy when talking about the origins of religion.
Claims that the Parthenon, the pyramids, and Inca temples were built by slaves, but they were all built by paid laborers.
He makes it seem like economists aren't like scientists because scientists use math. Uh, scientists using science is what makes them scientists. He neglects the fact that economics can be tested just like the harder sciences, for instance the hypothesis of socialism has been tried and tried and the hypothesis fails every time.
The story about the guy going in debt by purchasing government resources assumes that Mr Nabok can’t have a better crop next year.
His point about countries where blood donors are paid get less blood than free ones is not true. Paid donation increases the quantity of blood available greatly.
Claims that economists don’t value experiences, only market value, which confuses subjective, personal value with objective, market value.
Points out that people in the past worked harder than we do today, but neglects to credit that to capitalism.
Like all socialists, he assumes that if you are a laborer today, then you are a laborer for generations, but that is only true on socialism. In a free market, laborers can become millionaires, or at least go work for another employer, and CEOs can become poor all in a single lifetime, and all based on the changing market. Inescapable generational poverty only is a reality in socialism.
Lists out a bunch of terrible scenarios, pregnant women giving birth unassisted in bad conditions and slavery for instance and claims that these were new events due to the industrial revolution. Uh, no. They aren’t. The slave trade, for instance, existed for millennia before the Industrial Revolution.
Says banks create money out of thin air for loans. I kid you not. The economist thinks that the banks just make up the money they give you for loans. Banks don’t create money, if anyone does, it’s the federal reserve. Banks get their money from their customers, borrowing money from other banks, etc. banks don’t make money. If this were true, then rampant inflation would be immediate.
His proposed solution to all this? Theft. Confiscate machines, purchased by the sweat, risk taking, and toil of the entrepreneurs who bought them and give a portion of the profit made by the machine to “the people”. I remind you that taking the profit of “the machine” is also theft from the company who bought the machine. Who does he propose will pay for the machines upkeep, I wonder?
He discusses a free-market economy that worked great in a POW camp without any regulatory oversight, and then talks about the dangers of having governmental manipulation causing inflation in ancient Rome and it never even occurs to him that the nightmare scenario he discussed is exactly the "solution" he is proposing.
Dude can’t even quote someone accurately and his laughable attempt at quoting Archimedes towards the end of the book shows he also doesn’t understand how a freaking lever works.
There is so much more that 'ole dude gets wrong that I stopped taking notes and started just marking up my copy and writing in the margins. It's essentially like reading a 124 page long train wreck, dumpster fire, conspiracy theory rant by that weird friend that’s always talking about chemtrails or a flat earth. You can tell by listening to them that they really don’t understand how anything works but they think they are so much smarter than everyone else.
July 11, 2025
it's pretty good for beginners, the theme of him explaining economy to his daughter makes some concepts easier to understand. contains some interesting anecdotes like why the Europeans advanced in tech before the aboriginal Australians and the Africans
a lot of the concepts he talks about are useful but this is a VERY beginner book and I guess it's my fault for choosing to read this when I'm not a beginner.
he also tended, or at least this was my feeling, that he repeated himself a lot which got kind of annoying as the book progressed
a lot of the concepts he talks about are useful but this is a VERY beginner book and I guess it's my fault for choosing to read this when I'm not a beginner.
he also tended, or at least this was my feeling, that he repeated himself a lot which got kind of annoying as the book progressed
May 31, 2025
I didn't love this book... particularly the recurring references to 'The Matrix' as a means of explaining concepts. But, I can appreciate the intention with which this book was written. I think it's helpful to understand, criticise, and analyse the things we accept as the status quo... and this we need more of!
September 7, 2025
I Rate 3, simply because I don't fully engaged throughout the book.
Hoever, I do really love epilogue. it emphasized the reader (or her daughter) on why economy is important to be understood by all of us, in an interesting and philosophical way.
Hoever, I do really love epilogue. it emphasized the reader (or her daughter) on why economy is important to be understood by all of us, in an interesting and philosophical way.
August 17, 2025
Think I’m dumber than his daughter x
September 22, 2025
Excelente introdução à economia, para ler e questionar tudo e que foi lido ; )
Read
December 28, 2025U ovoliko strana nije moglo detaljnije. Bilo bi sjajno kad bi se bar ovoliko učilo u (osnovnim/srednjim) školama
January 12, 2026
A good introduction to western style economies, good for a stem grad who knows sweet fuck all about economics.
May 26, 2025
An excellent work that elucidates many complex economic topics with an underrepresented left wing pov via the accessible logic traditionally only employed by right wing economists.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews