Economics: The User's Guide

Pelican Books #1

by Ha-Joon Chang

From the internationally bestselling author and prizewinning economist--a highly original guide to the global economy.

In his bestselling 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism , Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang brilliantly debunked many of the predominant myths of neoclassical economics. Now, in an entertaining and accessible primer, he explains how the global economy actually works--in real-world terms. Writing with irreverent wit, a deep knowledge of history, and a disregard for conventional economic pieties, Chang offers insights that will never be found in the textbooks.

Unlike many economists, who present only one view of their discipline, Chang introduces a wide range of economic theories, from classical to Keynesian, revealing how each has its strengths and weaknesses, and why there is no one way to explain economic behavior. Instead, by ignoring the received wisdom and exposing the myriad forces that shape our financial world, Chang gives us the tools we need to understand our increasingly global and interconnected world often driven by economics. From the future of the Euro, inequality in China, or the condition of the American manufacturing industry here in the United States-- The User’s Guide is a concise and expertly crafted guide to economic fundamentals that offers a clear and accurate picture of the global economy and how and why it affects our daily lives.

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

384 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 2014

About the author

Ha-Joon Chang is a South Korean institutional economist, specializing in development economics. Currently he is a reader in the Political Economy of Development at the University of Cambridge.

Reviews

[The Conspiracy is Capitalism · Rating 4 out of 5]

ECON 101 for the real world…

Preamble:
--I first read this book in 2017 and have re-read it routinely since as an accessible refresher to engage with/critique.
--My arduous path of learning “economics” has literally spanned the entire spectrum:
i) Austrian school (Right-Libertarianism, i.e. “free market” fundamentalism): I started here, thanks to Ron Paul (The Revolution: A Manifesto)
ii) Neoclassical school (“mainstream economics”): I then shifted to those allowing some crumbs of welfare, starting with American “Liberals” like Krugman (The Conscience of a Liberal)
iii) heterodox economics: I finally escaped the narrow lenses of capitalist apologists with Chang, who introduces 9 schools of economic thought and focuses on testing them with the real world (history/current events) rather than abstract modeling/ivory tower naval-gazing.
iv) I expanded beyond Chang’s 9 schools: geo-political (global south, world-systems), environmental (ecological, biophysical), feminist, etc.

Highlights:
--Chang’s “user’s guide” provides foundational tools for how to think (more so than what to think) about real-world “economics”. Here’s how Chang organizes this:

1) Scope of “economics”:
--Unlike flashy marketing (ex. the best-seller Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything), Chang focuses on…the economy.
--More importantly, “economics” cannot be a hard science, as the issues it addresses are political (see: “What is Politics?”), immersed in social values and power relations. So, when faced with conflicting subjective perspectives, it is prudent to consider cui bono? (to whom does it benefit?)

2) History of capitalism (1776 to 2014):

2.1) Origins of capitalism:
--Chang’s 384-page book still cannot compete with Varoufakis’ eloquent 224-page Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works—and How It Fails. Also see Capitalism: A Very Short Introduction for a useful synthesis on this topic.

2.2) Colonialism:
--This is what first brought me to Chang; his “Developmentalist” lens shines with his kicking away the ladder framing of how Western imperialism:
i) climbed the ladder of industrialization (higher productivity) through economic planning/protection to nurture domestic higher-productivity industries and prevent these still-developing industries from being wiped out by more-advanced foreign competitors on the global market (i.e. “infant industry argument”, from Britain’s Henry VII/Robert Walpole to US’s Alexander Hamilton)
ii) once these domestic industries caught up/surpassed foreign competition (of course, another factor here was directly destroying foreign competition, i.e. military imperialism), Western imperialism flipped to “kicking away the ladder” and pushing “free trade”/“free market” (via “unequal treaties”, i.e. economic imperialism) on the rest of the world to prevent foreign countries from economic planning/protection for economic development (infant industry argument).

2.3) Great Depression/World Wars/postwar Golden Age:
--Unfortunately, Chang’s “kicking away the ladder” brilliance is followed by his biggest bias (growing up in South Korea): his framing of enlightened US imperialism; from his prior book:

Through the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), also set up in 1947, the US and other rich countries allowed developing countries to protect and subsidize their producers more actively than the rich countries. This was a huge contrast to the days of colonialism and unequal treaties, when developing countries were forced into free trade. This was partly due to the sense of colonial guilt in countries like Britain and France, but it was mostly because of the more enlightened attitude of the then new hegemon of the global economy, the US, towards the economic development of poorer nations.

The result of this enlightened strategy was spectacular. The rich countries experienced the so-called ‘Golden Age of Capitalism’ (1950–73).

--We need to add historical context, as this "more enlightened attitude" didn’t appear in a vacuum. Every country/large group of people (even us as individuals) have competing tendencies:
a) cynicism: expecting the worst in others, thus acting/reacting in a coercive manner (“hard power”).
b) “enlightened”: seeking diplomacy/win-win mutual dependence/cultural influence (“soft power”)
c) “radical”/“revolutionary”: targeting contradictions from the structural roots, to shift the paradigm; ex. recognizing there are bigger conflicts within countries (class conflict) than between countries (where elites from both countries wipe up nationalism to focus attention on “foreigners” rather than domestic class conflicts). Thus, the need for class solidarity between countries.
--So, when we describe a country pursing one or the other tendency, the real question is why the bargaining power shifted to favour one tendency over the other. In this case, was it really just US enlightened liberal elites suppressing US cynics? Chang's rosy framing here neglects:
i) Capitalism’s crisis (Great Depression) and recovery (Military Keynesianism):
--Chang's much-praised post-WWII "Golden Age of Capitalism" was economically built on the recycling (Keynesian redistribution) of US surpluses (production/finance) to rebuild Western Europe, Japan, and satellites in decolonial Global South.
--This US surplus came from WWII, the most destructive war in human history. WWII's creative destruction rescued global capitalism from its systemic crisis, the Great Depression; the US’s enlightened domestic New Deals (welfare Keynesianism) were insufficient (as capitalist cynics restrained them), thus ultimately requiring WWII’s boom/US Military Industrial Complex (military Keynesianism).
--In fact, Chang's personal context (South Korea’s rapid industrialization) had a crucial geo-political economy context: it relied on US military contracts for the US's genocidal war on Vietnam/Cambodia/Laos; similarly, Japan’s postwar re-industrialization benefited from US military contracts for the Korean War. See: Drums of War, Drums of Development: The Formation of a Pacific Ruling Class and Industrial Transformation in East and Southeast Asia, 1945-1980. When Chang considers South Korea industrialization in other books, he focuses on its domestic protectionism and neglects this geo-political economy context of US Military Keynesianism.
ii) Cold War competition:
--Besides from the blood money aid of Military Keynesianism, defenders of US enlightened imperialism/soft power can also point to US support for progressive land reform in South Korea/Japan/Taiwan, etc. (See: Seeds of Stability: Land Reform and US Foreign Policy).
--Once again, context matters. When countries not under US military control try to pursue land reform, the US screams COMMUNISM and drops democracy-bombs.
-The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World
-Washington Bullets: A History of the CIA, Coups, and Assassinations
-Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II
--US enlightenment’s redistribution was not merely top-down handouts from liberal elites like FDR/JFK. It required bottom-up pressure (from communists/socialists/labour unions/feminists/civil rights/decolonial) taking advantage of increased bargaining power within WWI/WWII’s reconfiguration of labour (working class organized in the military; women/minorities/colonies in factory jobs and military) and leading the fight against fascism (whereas liberal elites often tried to use fascism for their class conflict against leftists).
-Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism
-The Capital Order: How Economists Invented Austerity and Paved the Way to Fascism
--The irony of Cold War competition:
a) USSR civilized US capitalism: forcing the US to adopt redistribution to compete both in the eyes of domestic workers and foreign decolonizing masses:
-The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World
-Red Star Over the Third World
b) US imperialism perpetuated USSR’s war economy (built to survive Nazi invasion):
-“siege socialism”
-The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner

2.4) Neoliberalism:
--Chang’s neglect for detailing the contradictions behind the post-WWII Golden Age/American hegemony is further exposed in his vague analysis of why the Golden Age ended.
--Once again, we must turn to Talking to My Daughter About the Economy: or, How Capitalism Works—and How It Fails to introduce capitalism’s key contradictions, starting with finance. Credit/debt is central since the origins of capitalism (the “Great Reversal”: feudalism’s economic sequence of production --> distribution --> finance became reversed under capitalism: finance --> distribution --> production). There are so many more contradictions detailed by Varoufakis, from expectations for labour/money to capitalist production’s profit squeeze…
--Once again, there’s also the geo-political economy layer, where the post-WWII global recycling of US surpluses relied on, well, US surpluses. For the fascinating story of the contradictions and their consequences (the end of Bretton Woods and the unleashing of Wall Street) see:
-Varoufakis’ The Global Minotaur: America, the True Origins of the Financial Crisis and the Future of the World Economy
-Hudson’s Super Imperialism: The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. World Dominance
--Thus, Chang's reformist solution of better financial regulation misses the tidal waves of contradictions in capitalism’s finance/production/geo-political economy. Similarly limited is Chang’s analysis of existential climate/ecological crises and alternatives to capitalism:
-Another Now: Dispatches from an Alternative Present
-Facing the Anthropocene: Fossil Capitalism and the Crisis of the Earth System
-Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World
-Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist
-The New Economics: A Manifesto

…see comments below (message #37) for rest of the review: How to use “economics”, Economic actors, Output/Income/Happiness, Production, Finance, Inequality/Poverty, Work/Unemployment, State, International…

[Trevor · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really good book. A couple of years ago I decided it would be a good idea to get a better idea about what all the excitement was with this economics stuff. So, I set about reading some books. I also decided that I ought to read some books I was likely to disagree with, to get a better idea of the full spectrum of thought around this topic. Some of the threads under the reviews of the books I read that supported free market economics still occasionally flare up. I’m much more likely to be called an idiot under those reviews than just about any other I have written. Generally that is all the people do say, though – “McCandless, you’re an idiot”. Which is fine, and pretty close to the level of ‘debate’ I would expect.

But I also read books with titles like Economics for people that don’t like Capitalism or Filthy Lucre – you know, books I sort of thought might give me a more ‘left wing’ perspective on economics. But generally these books were written by people who fully accepted that the only way to understand the economy was from the perspective of neoliberal economics and that if your view differed in any way from this perspective then you were simply wrong. They quietly asserted that economics is a science and that that science is completely settled. The problem I had with this was that neoliberal policies have dominated the world economy for decades and, well, in a word (number?) 2008. You know, we ended up being fried in the GFC and from the outside that did look a bit like being the fault of neoliberal policies. I’d have thought that anyone who even pretended to be even a wee bit objective might think that the GFC could, perhaps, offer a bit of a challenge to the neoliberal orthodoxy. I know, I can be incredibly naïve.

This is the book that I wish I’d read close to first. It really is a lovely introduction to economics. Firstly, it tells you that the GFC really does present a challenge to the major economic orthodox theory of today – neoliberalism. It also says that there are other economic theories and that these have been far too often completely ignored by authors who have been far too partisan in their views. It then goes on to outline the major economic theories and to highlight their main assumptions and concerns. For the summary he provides of these on the pages following 165 in an appendix to the chapter on the subject really the book is a must have.

But this is so much more than merely an attack on neoliberal economic theories – in fact, it could be argued that it isn’t even really that. The author sees economic theories as essentially a series of tools that can be used to help understand economic phenomena. As such, each theory provides a different way to understand these phenomena and each theory is therefore somewhat limited in its scope and applicability. The problem arises when people are ideologically committed to only one theory – he quotes that saying about to the guy with a hammer everything looks like a nail – and so that is where problems arise. As someone who likes the idea that the world is complicated and difficult to understand and that having as many candles available to help light the world from different perspectives as one can is about our only hope to understand the world at all – this is all pretty well someone singing my favourite song. But it won’t be all that well liked by the kinds of people who tell me how much they hate me under those reviews I mentioned before of neoliberal economics texts I’ve read.

One of the things I really liked about this book is that chapters end with ‘real world numbers’ and this is such an important thing. He talks about things we all know to be true – we live in a globalised world, we are deindustrialising, education makes us more productive – and then he provides the numbers and muddies these waters in ways they really should be muddied.

He ends this book by saying that economics is too important to be left to the professional economists and that it isn’t all that hard to learn the basics and therefore to have a better chance of knowing when you are being taken for a ride. This really is a worthwhile book to read, highly recommended.

[Mark Lawry · Rating 2 out of 5]

We all have our conversational biases. Mine is a belief in limited government, free trade, and market economies. Chang’s is a belief in a larger state, regulation, and a lack of faith in markets. That’s fine, we can all continually read and learn from each other. However, Chang tries to walk a fine line between being governed by his own biases while yet being continually wrong. There are just too many examples of this in this work. I will name just a couple. He claims “Only Chile did well out of Neo-Liberal policies (think Reagan and Thatcher) of the 1980s and the 1990s.” I’m not going to write a book about how foolish a statement this is. Then on page 166 he claims that several rich countries of Europe had maintained less than 1% unemployment during the Golden Age (post WWII until Reagan era of deregulation.) It was the disastrous unemployment and inflation that ushered in Reagan.
There is one place where Chang and I probably agree. He says that one should read as extensively as possible opinions from as many as possible. For this reason I will probably read a couple other books of his. The problem with this book is it is nothing more than an encyclopedia of economic terms with his opinion mixed in. I’m willing to read his evidence or argument that expands on what he claims in this book.
Perhaps a useful book to add to an undergrad Econ 101 reading list.

[Simon Wood · Rating 5 out of 5]

TOO IMPORTANT TO BE LEFT TO ECONOMISTS

Ha-joon Changs "Economics: The User's Guide" is the first title in the newly resurrected Pelican imprint. Chang himself is best described as a heterodox economist, firmly outside the mainstream where neoclassical economics (not to mention neoliberalism) is the reigning creed. But given the multiple failings of orthodox economics the heterodox Chang with his cheerful style, wide learning and a clear and concise authorial voice make him the ideal candidate for writing an introductory book on economics. He doesn't dissapoint.

The book itself is divided into twelve chapters exploring a range of economic issues including asking what exactly economics is, exploring the role of the state, inequality and poverty, work and unemployment, finance and production. Sixty odd pages are devoted a brief history of capitalism, giving the reader a pretty good understanding of two and a half centuries of capitalisms global progress.

It's a brilliant introduction for those who have encountered the economy watching the news, through history or political books, and want to find out what this vitaly important aspect of our lives is about. The further reading guides at the end of each chapter are a valuable resource for those whose interests have been aroused. More seasoned students of economics should find the scope of the book (both intellectually and geographically), and it's easy and succinct style ample reward for the effort spent reading. One quibble I have: important terms (privitisation, capital controls, etc) are printed in bold in the text at the point where they are explained, but the index of the defined terms allowing easy reference is absent.

This is a book which along with his "23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism" and "Bad Samaritans" I'd strongly recommend reading, not least because (as Chang himself notes) a widespread knowledge of economics is essential to understanding our societies and democraticising our political life.

[Prerna · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is divided into two parts - the first part provides a very accessible introduction to the various schools of economics and a brief history of capitalism. I particularly liked the chapter on Keynesian economics. However, I got increasingly bored with the second part which focused on learning to use economics. Ha-Joon Chang has a tendency to oversimplify important concepts and to use humour where it's absolutely unnecessary.

And for all its emphasis on the importance of international trade, I found that there was next to nothing on trade embargos and its effects on developing countries and the global economy. Also, there are barely any mentions of climate change, the military industrial complex, international wars, the refugee crisis, US and European imperialism which are all very pertinent to the current economic scenario.

I also got very annoyed with all the pop-culture references, perhaps more so because I read this book twice, consecutively. However, it's a really accessible primer on economics and Ha-Joon Chang offers various ways of reading it. You don't even have to read it in its entirety. I'm sure I'll revisit this whenever I need to refresh my knowledge on certain aspects of economics.

[Piyush Bhatia · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent source to get useful insights into Economics.

[Elizabeth · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really wanted to like this, but I felt like looking at economics this way was more disjointed than helpful. Instead of presenting a textbook approach to economics, Ha-Joon Chang tackles it more conversationally. After digging into the history of economic thought he explores a variety of current events and shows their ties to economics. Readers may take away a greater appreciation for what economics can tell us, but they probably won't get an understanding of how to "do" economics.

[Katia N · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5

Ha-Joon Chang is the economist from Cambridge. He broadly specialises in the field of development economics, but famous for his books “23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism.”  (I have not read that book).

I picked up “the Manual” with the idea of refreshing my knowledge of basic economics. For this purpose, I think, the book is not the best source, but I found a few very interesting and useful parts and ideas in the book nevertheless.

He splits the book in two parts. It is the second part, “Doing economics” i've had problems with. Mainly, because it did not add too much to what i already knew. He would not go farther than the knowledge of a layperson with good grasp of the current affairs. And very often his point of view is a bit too obvious. In this part, he discusses the following Macroeconomic areas: Measurement of Growth, Production, Work and Unemployment, the Role of the Government, Globalisation. It would be useful, if one does not know anything about how modern economy function. But if you do, you can skip this bit or read just headings.

However, I enjoyed the first part of the book and his views on the subject of the economics per se. He defines the economics as a study of economy (money, work, technology, trade, taxes and other things which we have to do to distribute the incomes generated in the process and consume what it produced.) As opposed to study of rational decision making within the constraints of scarcity.

And as a second step, he postulates that the economy could not be separated from the politics, or at least that the boundary is very blur. “Because the boundary of the market and economy is determined by politics. Not by the economics theory of whatever variety.” He argues that the politicians (and sometimes the society) decide what is subject to market and what is not. For example, the human beings are used to be subjects of the market transactions during the slavery. And current emission limits trading is something which was never defined as the market before. Further he argues that “a political argument often presented as a science.” by all involved.

Also he argues that the markets might be detrimental to democracy:

“Markets run according to the one-dollar-one-vote rule while democratic politics run on the principle of one person one vote. Thus the proposal for greater depoliticisation of the economy in the democracy is in the end an antidemocratic project that wants to give more power in the running of the society to those with more money.”

It is a very interesting point worth considering. I personally can see where he is coming from, but do not entirely agree with the view “one dollar one vote” automatically benefits the rich - mass consumption fuelled by the debt is only thing which “trickled down” successfully. So the economy is relying on the masses to buy stuff. If they would stop for whatever reason, their economic vote would be very tangible. But this discussion is very interesting and relevant and should be continued.

The book also includes the brief history of capitalism which summarises the economic development up to current time. It is by definition sketchy, and i found it too selective to be helpful. But another chapter is devoted to the history of economic thought. He identifies 9 different schools of economic theories (from Adam Smith to Austrians, Keynesian, institutionalises etc.) and presents their main ideas, strengths and weaknesses. I found this analysis invaluable, the most interesting and unbiased part of the book. The chapter I would come back to reread. As a conclusion, he claims if the economist says to you “there is no alternative”, he cannot be right and not to be trusted.

PS:

The interview with him about this book and other stuff:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...

[Maru Kun · Rating 5 out of 5]

...when faced with an economic argument, you must ask the age-old question 'Cui bono?' - Who benefits?...

Or in other words, "follow the money".

So says Ha-Joon Chang in the epilogue to this excellent introduction to economics which shows how economic questions cannot be separated from political questions and which helps explain how politicians hide behind smokescreens of economic theory and economic jargon to advance policies that favour particular interest groups - more often than not the rich - instead of policies that reflect the democratic will of their electors.

This is important as recent years have seen many professional economists turn into little more than paid shills preaching "trickle down economics" and the "supremacy of the market" for the benefit of rich patrons. This book will help you put your finger on exactly where and how the work of these shills is based on faith or fantasy rather than on objective evidence about how economies actually work.

If only Queen Elizabeth had had a copy of this book at hand when she asked why no economists foresaw the financial crisis of 2008. She would have learnt that the "neo-classical" economics that dominates economic discussion in the media is based on a series of assumptions - hyper-rationality, perfect knowledge and efficient markets - that are almost farcically different from conditions that actually apply in the world. She would also have learnt that there are many other schools of economic thought that provide much better frameworks for analysing economics and a better job of answering her question as well as learning about a range of economic issues - production, inequality, the reality of globalization, immigration - that are swept under the carpet by economists who, whether they admit it or not, have a political agenda.

...economics is far more accessible than many economists would have you believe...

Ha-Joon Chang's book is a reminder that the future of our democracy is in doubt if we don't educate ourselves to tell the difference between the economic propaganda spouted by vested interests and the economic and political truth we can observe in the world around is if we spend the time to try and understand it. This book is a great step towards such an understanding.

[عبدالرحمن عقاب · Rating 4 out of 5]

كتب تشانج ماتعة مفيدة. وأسلوبه فيها واضح مباشر، يستخدم الأمثلة الحياتية، ويختصر فقراته في عناوين كاشفة، ويجيد طرح أفكار الاقتصاد المتعددة والمعقّدة في سلاسة مدهشة.
في هذا الكتاب يطرح الأفكار الكبرى في الاقتصاد؛ مجالاً ومذاهب وأسساً ثمّ ينتقل إلى نقاش جوانب محدّدة مما يناقشه الاقتصاديون؛ مثل الناتج القومي والدّين والبنوك والعمل والبطالة...الخ.
والكتاب مترجم باحترافية مشكورة. وما زالت دار "مدارات" تتألق باختياراتها فيما تنشر من أعمالٍ عربية أصيلة ومترجمة.

[Tanvika · Rating 4 out of 5]

Irresistable, likeable introductory book to Economics. I can say that as being a economics student,have struggled quite a bit with the lame,dry, scientific, imaginary diagram prone idealistic neoclassical way of learning. The subject was also taught very very mechanically as a means to maximize our grades and careers.

The first thing the writer does is to break the ' hoax of being a science to be known only by specialist'. You don't need to be a genius to know what people do, why the price keeps on jumping around, the net output made, the income disparities and the high level of unemployment in the world. The layman when aware can also keep a check on the experts,the government before another 2008 crisis knocks at our door.

Again, the writer doesn't directly cut short history,society,pschyology as is general in a standard eco textbook. History of capitalism is elaborated (economic history is much neglected these days).
There is a respect for various schools of thought like keynesian,Marxian,austrian, institutional, schumpeterian etc. These various schools contains some diverse views to look at our economy. There is just no one explanation.let hundred flowers bloom,hundered schools contend. Let's cross fertilize and understand the reality more better.

There are then various chapters beautifully laying the basics ; the economic actors,the output, percapita income, happiness index, unemployment, inequality reasons and trends, poverty, development,finance,trade etc. There is a multiple vantage point view followed. The themes have witty titles like ' Boris goat should drop dead' ,'dramatis persona'. there is a practical way of presenting data and it's interpretation. Cross country comparisons are also very well explained. It is also pointed out clearly,that data isn't that perfect and supreme. For instance, gross domestic product excludes house work,care for elders, informal enterprises etc. Data collecting is itself a very challenging task in developing economies.

As a introductory text,i wish this book had been referred to me way earlier. It does do a fairly good job to demystify and connect economics to the ground. But, I was disappointed, by the passing mention to environmental damages caused in the name of economic growth.

[howl of minerva · Rating 4 out of 5]

The second of these Pelican Introductions that I've read. They seem to nicely split the difference between Oxford UP's Very Short Introductions (great but obviously only toe-dipping) and heftier academic texts.

Chang provides a broad overview of different schools of economic thought and argues sensibly that economics should not be considered an empirical science but a social and political one. This should be obvious but it's not. Dominant ideologies love to appropriate the mantle of science. That's as true for 'scientific socialism' as for the TINA-ism of the neoliberal age. God said, "Let Hayek Be!" and all was light.

If you're familiar with Chang's work, his own positions here will come as no surprise: 'free-market' economics means de-development for the global south; some regulation is a good thing etc. He situates these views in the field of competing opinions.

His plea at the end for a more engaged public that is willing to doubt experts is problematic. Chang writes from Britain. Should the public there ignore experts in favour of their gut feelings? That's probably contributed to the current woes. But if we do need experts, which ones are trustworthy? It surely takes expertise to know. The average member of public has to pick one and/or try to become one and/or be swept up by demagoguery. My preference for economists like Chang, Stiglitz and Piketty realistically has more to do with my overall political sympathies than my knowledge of economics. Bernays examines this dilemma in detail in Propaganda and I think there's no simple solution. (Education, you say? Who will do the educating?). Perhaps Piketty's forthcoming monster opus on Capital and Ideology will provide clues.

[Ed · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a brilliant book that dismantles the current fetishism that tries to turn economics--a study of human behavior and its consequences with all the uncertainty and rough edges that any investigation of people and the way they act must contain--into a materialistic science like physics or chemistry with the same rigor and exactitude. The basic assumptions of classical, neo-classical, neo-liberal and most economic thought are based on some core principles which, when looked at apart from the ideology in which they are embedded, become risible. Unless, of course, one takes seriously that individuals are perfectly selfish, always act perfectly rational and are able to create perfect markets by acting in her own interests.

This isn't a Jeremiad against the profession. Chang is much too entertaining and too good a writer for that. He is interested in the spirit of political economy, a concept so fitting that one wonders how it could have fallen so far out of fashion. Instead of a faux-hard science with page-long equations that generally describe nothing, he is interested in getting (back) to the real thing, the study of political management of the economy.

There is a lot to recommend in all of Chang's work and "Economics: The User's Guide" is as good a place to start as any. My only quibble is with its page design and layout--there are so many terms in bold type (often several per page) and so many italic summaries that it become distracting. Other than those typographical complaints though, this book is a masterpiece worth reading by anyone interested in how the profession of economics works.

[Phil · Rating 4 out of 5]

There are lots of books about economics and the economy, but Chang's books is quite unique. I would not consider this an introduction to the discipline of economics, although it could serve as such, but rather a bird's eye view of the discipline and how it has evolved over time. The first section (part I and II) provides an excellent history of economic thought and economic history in a very condensed, accessible fashion. Yes, Chang omits a lot of nuance, but he discusses several schools of economic thought an just how they make sense of the economy and its relationship to the state. Further, this is largely a critique of the neoclassical/neoliberal stance of TINA-- e.g., there is no alternative to our current status quo.

All that stated, the last part, (section III), is not quite as strong. After Chang elucidates several schools of thought and how they focus on different aspects of the economy (individual actors, classes, etc.), he then considers several 'hot' topics, like international trade, poverty, and income inequality and considers how we can make sense of them from an economist's view, or rather, several different schools of thought. Yet, he is not very explicit about which school would say what. Classical and neoclassical economists have very little to say about income inequality, for example, but he does not make that explicit. What he does do a good job of here, however, is to show the various ways these issues/topics can be considered. Is income inequality a problem? We, it depends on who you ask, and even if they consider it a problem, it may be for different reasons.

Overall, a badly needed book that provides a decent critique of the 'orthodox' neoclassicals and the neoliberal political position, but it is rather shallow as it tries to do a lot in very little space. Well written and at times quite funny, hopefully it may spur some interest in the various hot topics he discusses and let people approach them in a more critical way. A big take away is that there are many voices in economics and they do not all agree.

Finally, I should note that I am an economist and am very familiar with the various schools of thought discussed here, but I am an outlier in the profession (like Chang himself). For many other 'orthodox' economists, they may be an eyeopener. I would consider this a mid-level undergraduate text and certainly one with a largely successful attempt to make the topics/ideas accessible to a broader public. Kudos Chang!! 4 stars.

[Francisco · Rating 2 out of 5]

I started reading this book thinking that it provided an unconventional view on how the economy works. The book doesn't do that. The author portends that he's about to give you an introduction to economics, or to teach you how to think critically about economics. He doesn't do either, or at least not well. This book is a push-back against the neo-liberal, free-market, "right-wing" ideology that dominates the economics establishment, thinly disguised as a guide to the macroeconomy. I don't mind the ideology, but it's not the type of book I thought I was going to read.

The book fails as an introduction to economics because it doesn't teach you to "think like an economist." For that, you need microeconomics. It's not a crash course in macroeconomics, either (although the structure of the book is closer to that of a macro textbook than of a micro textbook).

After a prolonged first act (motivation, definition of economics, history of capitalism, history of economic thought, and introduction to the economic actors), the author sets out to explain different areas of macroeconomics. In each chapter he ensures you question the received wisdom (unfailingly free-market, neo-liberal) and invites you to give a chance to alternative views. For example, in the chapter about the "international dimension" (Ch. 12) he questions the notion that free trade is always good.

I do appreciate that he takes the time to go through several prominent schools of economic thought (Ch. 4), and tries to instill in the reader the sense that there's no such thing as "the right" economic school. All of them get something right, and none gets everything right. An eclectic, open-minded attitude is beneficial to students of economics at all levels.

I also must say that the book is written with wit and humor.

With those caveats in mind, do read the book if (1) Your education in economics is at the college level or below, (2) You are already extremely interested in economics, (3) You already have read a conventional introduction to macroeconomics, and (4) You don't mind the ideological push-back.

[Makmild · Rating 5 out of 5]

นี่เป็นหนังสือที่เราตามหามานานค่ะ (แต่มีอยู่บนเชลฟ์นานแล้วแค่ยังดองไม่ได้ที่แค่นั้นเอง ฮือๆ เลยเพิ่งได้หยิบมาอ่านช่วงปลายปีที่แล้ว/จบปีนี้) มีคำถามตลอดเลยว่า เศรษฐศาสตร์คืออะไรกันแน่ ทั้งๆ ที่อ่านหนังสือเศรษฐศาตร์เยอะมาก แต่ไม่รู้ตัวเลยว่าที่ว่าอ่านเยอะมากน่ะ มันก็แค่เศษเสี้ยวเดียวเท่านั้น เพราะเศรษฐศาสตร์มีอยู่หลายสาขามาก (ปกติอ่านแต่ behavior ซึ่ง เศรษฐศาสตร์พฤติกรรมเป็นอีกหนึ่งแนวคิดที่เพิ่งเกิดมา) ไม่ว่าจะเป็น คลาสสิก, นีโอคลาสสิก, มาร์กซิสต์, พัฒนานิยม, ออสเตรีย, ชุมเพเทอร์, เคนส์, สถาบันนิยม และ พฤติกรรมนิยม ซึ่งแต่ละสาขาก็มีวิธีการมองโลก, ตลาดไม่เหมือนกัน จุดอ่อนจุดแข็งไม่เหมือนกัน Economics: The User's Guide พาเราไปรู้จักแต่ละสาขาอย่างละนิดละหน่อยเหมือนชิมค็อกเทลแล้วในช่วงที่สอง ฮาจุงชานก็จะเขย่ามินิค็อกเทลพวกนี้ผสมกันพาเราไปใช้ในชีวิตจริง และมองโลกอย่างที่นักเศรษฐศาสตร์แต่ละสถาบันมอง
.
ฮาจุนชางพาเราไปตอบคำถามยากๆ อย่างเรื่องความเหลื่อมล้ำ, ความยากจน, ดุลการค้า, ปัญหาการว่างงาน, วิกฤตการเงินเมื่อปี 2008 (และปี 1999 - ต้มยำกุ้ง - สำหรับประเทศไทย) ว่าง่ายๆ ก็คือ คำถามหรือคำยากๆ อย่าง GDP (ยากแล้วสำหรับดิฉันที่เรียนเศรษฐศาสตร์มาตอนมอปลายเท่านั้น), NDP, GNP, FDI คำพวกนี้แต่ก่อนเป็นยาขมสำหรับเราเลยค่ะ แต่ตอนนี้คือ อ้อ (ถ้าไม่ลืม) และเวลาฟังนโยบายเศรษฐกิจหรือฟังพวกวิเคราะห์แนวโน้มเศรษฐกิจก็เข้าใจขึ้นเยอะ เห็นความเชื่อมโยงของภาพใหญ่ว่าเรื่องพวกนี้มาเกี่ยวข้องยังไงกับชีวิตเรา มันสำคัญต่อชีวิตเราจริงๆ เพราะเศรษฐศาสตร์กับการเมืองเป็นสิ่งที่แยกออกจากกันไม่ขาด ทั้งคู่เกี่ยวเนื่องกัน และการเมืองก็เกี่ยวข้องกับชีวิตเรา เพราะงั้นการที่เราจะเข้าใจการเมืองในอีกทางหนึ่งก็ต้องเข้าใจเศรษฐศาสตร์ด้วยเหมือนกันค่ะ
.
เล่มนี้ทำให้เราเห็นเศรษฐศาสตร์มหภาคแบบเข้าใจง่ายมากจริงๆ จากใจคนอ่านเศรษฐศาสตร์มหภาคแล้วงงมาตลอด (เช่นงานของ tyler หรือ tim อ่านแล้วยังมึนๆ เพราะไม่มีแกนจากเล่มนี้ พออ่านเล่มนี้แล้วเข้าใจงานของ tyler cowen หรือ tim harford มากขึ้นมากๆ) แนะนำมากๆ สำหรับคนที่อยากเข้าใจเรื่องเศรษฐศาสตร์ค่ะ

[Ed Erwin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty darn good. Dry in places, but that is probably inevitable.

I suppose the main take-away is "Economics is a political argument. It is not – and can never be – a science; there are no objective truths in economics that can be established independently of political, and frequently moral, judgements."

Whenever some politician says "There is no alternative," they are wrong. Looking at the world from one framework there may be only one right option. But there are multiple frameworks, and none of them is proven, nor applies in every situation.

[Tirdad · Rating 5 out of 5]

اقتصاد، یک استدلال سیاسی است

دیده‌اید برخی اقتصاددان‌های وطنی راه «حل» مسائل اقتصادی موجود را رجوع به «علم اقتصاد» می‌دانند؟ اگر قرار است همهٔ مسائل مربوطه با کاربست یک موجودیت واحد به نام «علم اقتصاد» حل شود، پس چرا در دنیا این‌همه مشکل اقتصادی وجود دارد و همه با هم سر آن دعوا می‌کنند؟ اصلاً مگر ماهیت اقتصاد چیزی مثل ریاضیات است که هر پرسشی پاسخی یگانه داشته باشد؟ حتا در بنیادی‌ترین شاخه‌های علم طبیعی مانند فیزیک ذرات بنیادی هم چارچوب‌های مختلف نگریک وجود دارد و کسی مدعی نگره‌ای واحد نیست. پس چرا دوستان این‌قدر با اعتماد به نفس از علمی واحد سخن می‌گویند؟ پاسخ ساده است: بی‌سوادی!

اقتصاد در نهایت علمی است انسانی و کمی‌شدن آن هم صرفاً برای ساده‌سازی پدیده‌هایی به‌شدت پیچیده و فهم‌پذیر ساختن ‌آن‌ها است. اگر اقتصاددانی این پیچیدگی‌ها را درک نکرده باشد، با اقتصاد مانند مهندسی رفتار می‌کند. از پیچیدگی‌های توصیفی که بگذریم، اقتصاد وجه‌ای هنجاری هم دارد؛ یعنی پس از شناخت پدیدارها انتظار آن می‌رود که به ما بگوید «باید» چه کار کرد. پای هنجارها که به میان می‌آید، رجوع به سیاست و اخلاق گریزناپذیر می‌شود. درون علم اقتصاد هیچ‌چیزی وجود ندارد که به ما بگوید چه‌چیز خوب است و چه‌چیزی بد، چرا که همواره می‌توان پرسید «برای چه کسی خوب؟» و ریشه‌ای‌تر از آن «چرا این خوب است و نه آن؟». حیرت‌انگیز است که کسی خودش را اقتصاددان بنامد و هیچ درکی از این مبانی پیشاعلمی نداشته باشد. چانگ ۹ مکتب/گفتمان اقتصادی را برمی‌شمرد که هم پاسخ‌های مختلفی به «چه باید کرد؟»ها می‌دهند و هم مسیر رسیدن‌شان به آن پاسخ از هم متمایز است.

هدف چانگ در کتاب این است که اقتصاد را از دریچه‌ای گشوده‌تر معرفی کند. روایتی که چانگ ارائه می‌کند با این که روایت جریان اصلی اقتصاد نیست، اما روایت درست‌تری است. درست به این معنا که نقایص رویکردهای پرطرفدار را بیان کرده و با عدد و رقم و ارجاعات تاریخی می‌کوشد نادرستی‌شان را نشان دهد. بینش عمیق و فرا-اقتصادی چانگ دگم‌های رایج اقتصادی را برنمی‌تابد و هر کلیشه‌ای را به باد انتقاد می‌گیرد. غالب چپ‌های وطنی در نقد رویکرد نئوکلاسیک به اقتصاد واکنشی جز تمسخر، تحقیر و فحاشی نداشته‌اند. اگر به دنبال نقدی مستدل و علمی از رویکرد نئوکلاسیک می‌گردید، خواندن این کتاب خالی از لطف نخواهد بود.

[Maria · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ура, я добралась до конца этой книги!

Ожиданий не оправдалось. Возможно проблема была в ожиданиях - я думала. это такая экономика на пальцах для чайников. Оказалось, что нихрена - это вполне себе учебник по экономической теории, написанный языком учебника по экономической теории. Термины разъясняются плохо и сложно, примеров и аналогий совсем мало, ну и язык тоже из учебника - канцелярский, многоэтажный, когда к концу предложения уже не помнишь, с чего все начиналось. Но возможно это проблема переводчика, а не автора - переводчик-то явно гнал по привычке, как будто учебник переводил.

Обогатила ли меня эта книга? Очень мало. Какие-то термины, которые я давно знала, разъяснились, пара историй запомнилась. Но читать ради них всю книгу явно не стоило.

Не знаю, кому ее можно посоветовать. Разве что реально студентам, которые изучают экономику и им нужно что-то вроде сборника "всего обо всем"

[Dr. Tobias Christian Fischer · Rating 4 out of 5]

A classic to read to understand economics by hard. It’s not that simple written but it’s a book that should be used in courses.

[Tam · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book serves well as an introduction to Economics and its different schools of thought. This is a welcoming effort since underlying assumptions are not so often spelled out clearly and examined. Admittedly, this is only an introduction and thus the examination is brief (to my taste), yet it would be a very useful one for people not in the field, baffled by the seemingly too complex economic issues, yet who wish to know more.

This is somewhat similar to Chang's other books in the author's criticism of neo-liberalism. The bonus is his overall deconstruction of the view that Economics is a "science" in the sense of natural sciences are with, well, 'universal laws' and free of value judgments/politics. Some natural scientists would have something to comment on the latest developments in their fields about the existence of universal laws" and complete objectivity, which I wouldn't discuss. Nevertheless, surely I agree with this message.

Chang presents some major schools of thoughts in Economics, about which I was very excited. Again his presentation is cursory and I'm not totally satisfied. But more than that, my expectation was of something larger, about the overall methodologies in the field: the 'overus'e of maths, stats, (I think) etc. and thus the failure to employ other tools. It fell short of my expectation, therefore 3 stars.

[รพีพัฒน์ อิงคสิทธิ์ · Rating 4 out of 5]

รวบรวม concept ทั่วไปเกี่ยวกับเศรษฐศาสตร์ แต่ก็ยังมี jargon เต็มไปหมด ผมเห็นความพยายามของผู้เขียนในการทำแนวคิดที่ยุ่งยากซับซ้อนให้ง่าย ซึ่งผู้เขียนประสบความสำเร็จในระดับหนึ่ง

สิ่งที่ชอบที่สุดของหนังสือคือบทสุดท้ายที่ย้ำชัดว่าเศรษฐศาสตร์เป็นกึ่ง Social Science ที่ไม่มีใครทราบว่าวิธีการหรือแนวคิดไหนดีที่สุดและถูกต้องที่สุด หัวใจของ Social Science คือการถกเถียงด้วยเหตุผลจนตกผลึก มากกว่าการที่บอกว่าใครมีประสบการณ์มากกว่า หรือเรียนจบมาสูงกว่าต้องถูกต้องเสมอ

ชวนอ่านไว้มาเถียงกันครับ :)

[Kanin Nitiwong · Rating 5 out of 5]

เขียนสนุก น่าติดตาม และมองโลกในแง่ดี เหมาะเป็นหนังสือสำหรับคนที่อยากเริ่มศึกษาเศรษฐศาสตร์อย่างแท้จริง

[Will Ansbacher · Rating 4 out of 5]

OK, I will never again refer to economics as “the dismal science”. Ha-Joon Chang shows that it’s nothing like a science, however much it wants to be. (He says it suffers from “physics envy.”)

He wrote this guide in the aftermath of the 2008 financial meltdown, wanting to show that the current neoliberal (ie, free-market neoclassical) orthodoxy is just one of a number of incompatibly different theories of how an economy “actually” works.

Some models go so far as to maintain (apparently, and in defiance of all that is scientific) that it doesn’t matter if the underlying assumptions are faulty or deficient if the results are accurate. But here’s the thing - beyond some very narrow limits, the models often fail to predict anything reliably. Nor can they even agree on the causes of past economic events: I think that’s what I find so dispiriting about it all.

The guide begins with a worldwide history of economics, which I found very useful, and is followed by an extensive discussion on nine different schools of thought, which I thought was less successful – the problem being that they did not seem distinct, so much as existing on a continuum between neoliberalism and Marxism.

Anyway, to his critique of the dominant orthodoxy: it maintains that the free market (operating among consumers who make rational but selfish choices) works best when it is minimally regulated. But, he points out, the market is anything but free - it is dominated today by corporations who can radically manipulate it - and it fails spectacularly without regulation. The 2008 meltdown being a case in point, but by no means the only one. He also quotes multiple examples to show that economic growth (however that is defined) hasn’t even been the highest under the current regime; it was bettered in the post-WW2 Keynesian era when there were many more controls in place.

Beyond that, Chang asks some relevant questions about how should an economy be organized? (Is increasing inequality desirable? Who does international free trade really benefit? Why is higher unemployment considered a minor problem but higher inflation is a national disaster? And so on).
In many ways, this turns out to be a restatement of all the points in his 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism, which I read immediately after.

But there’s actually nothing really radical in all this, if you have ever given the state of the world some serious thought. The contradictions he raises - like the need for unbounded incomes to induce rich capitalists to work harder, while the threat of lower wages and unemployment is needed to make everyone else work harder - are ones that have been worked over many times, though not so much in Economics books perhaps. But I guess that just reinforces his point – that there really is too much orthodoxy among economists and you don’t need to be one to understand what is wrong.

So 3.5, maybe 4 stars.
On the other hand, what’s not to love about an economics book with a chapter called “One Fucking Thing after Another”?

[Otto Lehto · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent overview of the subject of economics, written by the "maverick" Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang, whose books have challenged the status quo in a witty way. This book, however, is a bit flimsier. It doesn't really know what it wants to be: an introduction to the layman, or a critical commentary on the present state of the science? Therefore, it ends up being a bit of both.

It is full of good advice: "the willingness to challenge professonal economists and other experts should be the foundation of democracy."

I was particulary impressed by Chang's advice that we should all acquiant ourselves with the different schools of economics - from the Neoclassical to the Behaviouralist via the Keynesian - and use them freely, like a Swiss knife, depending on the needs of the circumstances. This is very encouraging of pluralism, and all good advice.

Unfortunately, there are some boring sections that are written in a pedantic and teacher-like manner. This contrasts sharply with some of the more energetic bits of writing, full of wit and fun.

Overall, a mixed bag, but probably worth reading if you have any questions about economists. And you should. If you think you don't have any questions, you probably need to read this book all the more! Economics is a tough subject full of easy misconceptions and hidden political agendas. An overview of the general facts and theories becomes a weapon with which to shatter sacred cows.

[Luke McCarthy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very readable and very accessible run-down of some basic ECON 101 concepts, from popular schools of thought to the function of banks, stocks and trade. Chang's writing is concise, and his ability to articulate economics in relation to the 'real-world' is greatly appreciated (I even enjoyed the lame but endearing pop-culture references sprinkled throughout).
The faith here in a kind of regulated, 'tamed' capitalism makes some of the solutions he poses less radical than I'd like, and the discussions surrounding the supposed 'golden age of capitalism' seem somewhat naive. A golden age for whom? Chang seems very cogent of capitalism's inability to deal with externalities in the negative sense, yet never suggests that the post-war 'boom' was itself an anomaly born from the externalities of WW2 (ie, something that was bound to eventually crash).
Shines most whenever Chang explores the many myths surrounding 'free trade', systematically unpacking every assumption argued for and perpetuated by liberals and neo-liberals alike. A market - like all economics - is inherently political, and similar to liberalism generally, 'free trade' supposes that people, countries and companies are independent actors making decisions completely separate from the power structures in which they inhabit. His dissection of transfer pricing was similarly illuminating and well-articulated. Had a great time with this.

[Jaka Haris Mustafa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Buku bagus banget. Harusnya jadi buku wajib anak sekolah di Indonesia.

Jadi ingat komentar orang (di Facebook) yang bilang Jokowi plin-plan, gara-gara...:
dulu waktu di Jakarta, serapan anggaran rendah dibela dan argumennya "daripada korupsi". Tetapi begitu 2015 kemarin, serapan anggaran rendah dan pemerintah malah disuruh splurge.

Sebenarnya argumen (pembantunya) Jokowi itu bagus: mereka pakai paham Keynesian. Ketika pasar tidak dapat berfungsi dengan baik a.k.a pertumbuhan melemah, itulah saatnya pemerintah ambil kendali dg belanja sebanyak2nya. Tujuannya supaya ekonomi tetap bergairah.

Sementara waktu masih di Jkt, argumen "drpd korupsi" ya sah-sah saja. Lha wong waktu itu ekonomi masih oke, ngapain splurge?

Ya itu salah satu contoh lah. Masih banyak lagi yang menarik.

Oh iya, buku ini enggak cuma membahas tentang "uang", karena ekonomi sendiri pada hakikatnya bukan sekedar tentang uang. Tetapi social science yang mencoba memahami perilaku orang banyak terhadap sesuatu.

Buku bagus, wajib baca supaya bisa memahami orang perseorangan maupun lembaga dengan lebih baik dan lebih jelas.

P.S. Harusnya diterjemahkan di dalam bahasa Indonesia.

[postmodern putin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably the most accessible and comprehensive overview of modern economics I've read to date. Though formally trained as a developmental economist, Chang takes a refreshingly pluralist approach by analyzing each major school of economic thought on its own terms, then drawing selectively from across theories to address the messy realities of an increasingly globalized world. Rather than championing a single ideology, he treats the various schools more as a toolkit, letting readers evaluate competing ideas for themselves. Great for anyone looking to better understand the essential components of the modern global economy.

[Franz · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have found a new favorite author. Chang, an economist at Cambridge University, has written a reader-friendly guide that is sensible and fairly comprehensive. He is convinced that anyone who makes some effort can understand the basic principles of economics, and such knowledge is required for anyone who hopes to have some impact on decisions regarding our local, national, and global societies. In other words, all of us. He immediately admits that, contrary to the claims of many orthodox economists, economics is not a science; there are no objective economic facts or laws waiting to be discovered. Outcomes resulting from various economic policies are produced as the consequence of the values—moral, political, and social—expressed in those policies and outcomes by their authors. Values ultimately have greater impact on policy decisions than facts and data since even these are interpreted in the light of the values the interpreters hold.

Another strength of the book is that Chang does something I have never seen done in an economics book written for the general reader. In a long chapter he describes nine different schools of economics and explains the advantages and disadvantages of each. Among these are the classical, neo-classical, Keynesian, Marxist, and Austrian schools. He encourages taking a pragmatic approach and adopting what works in each of these schools and discarding what doesn’t. He is highly critical of any purely ideological approach for the reason that such an approach will lead to certain disaster, as has recently occurred. Although he recognizes its good elements, Chang reserves his greatest criticisms for neo-classical economics because that school has been dominant as orthodox economics for the last forty years, and its unfettered dogma of free markets and hyper-individualism led to the recent Great Recession, current unconscionable levels of income and wealth inequalities, and the crisis in the Eurozone. He argues that had other points of view been in play then perhaps better policies could have been enacted that could have avoided the current mess.

Whether discussing financial markets, economic inequalities, international trade, or the economic development of what used to be known as Third World nations, Chang takes an equally pragmatic and even handed line. He generally avoids jargon and manages to explain some fairly complicated concepts in plain English. To illustrate various points he draws on popular culture, and he is rarely boring and often witty. Although I must admit that by the last chapter on international trade my concentration began to lag.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

After overdosing on Poulantzas it was very good to reconnect with a book that is actually about something. Very useful intro on the different schools of economic thought and the general parameters of a national economy. Chang is not a marxist himself, but one wonderful specific contribution is his debunking of the international free market as 1) a playing field that tends towards equilibrium or 2) an engine a country can simply hook itself up to to get rich. Not everything is fleshed out equally (would have liked a layman's explanation of the economic crisis of 2008) but it does what it promises.