What do you think?
Rate this book
Selected Essays on Political Economy
From Chapter I: "In the economic sphere an act, a habit, an institution, a law produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen; we are fortunate if we foresee them. There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen. Yet this difference is tremendous; for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the later consequences are disastrous, and vice versa. Whence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good that will be followed by a great evil to come, while the good economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil. The same thing, of course, is true of health and morals. Often, the sweeter the first fruit of a habit, the more bitter are its later fruits: for example, debauchery, sloth, prodigality. When a man is impressed by the effect that is seen and has not yet learned to discern the effects that are not seen, he indulges in deplorable habits, not only through natural inclination, but deliberately.This explains man's necessarily painful evolution. Ignorance surrounds him at his cradle; therefore, he regulates his acts according to their first consequences, the only ones that, in his infancy, he can see. It is only after a long time that he learns to take account of the others.Two very different masters teach him this lesson: experience and foresight. Experience teaches efficaciously but brutally. It instructs us in all the effects of an act by making us feel them, and we cannot fail to learn eventually, from having been burned ourselves, that fire burns."
Kindle Edition
First published June 1, 1968
98 people are currently reading
814 people want to read
About the author
Frédéric Bastiat
594 books545 followersClaude Frédéric Bastiat (29 June 1801 – 24 December 1850) was a French classical liberal theorist, political economist, and member of the French assembly.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
March 8, 2011
Frederic Bastiat is an economic genius. His work is timeless because he excoriates a government that steals from one group to give to another under the rubric of welfare, or helping the downtrodden. By definition it is stealing from one group to enrich another. The government, be it 19th century France, or 21st century America (strange how he praises mid 1800's America except for slavery because of their economic freedoms, which we've since given up) will laud the "impulse" they have exerted on the economy only reporting those "jobs" they have created, not acknowledging the utility that would have been gained elsewhere in the economy had they not taken it from the taxpayer. Not to mention the value that is syphoned off by the work necessary to levy and collect the taxes which is paid for but does not increase overall productivity in the country. Therefore although there is benefit seen from the money redirected by government, there is nothing said of the benefit foregone because of the money taken from the taxpayer, nor nothing spoken of the inefficiencies in that transfer and the money and time wasted in collecting and redistributing the money, which all hurts overall productivity in the country and more importantly erodes our freedoms.
Please understand that this does not mean there are not roles for the government, but the redistribution of monies under the false guise of spurring the economy is a lie, and should be regarded as such. While I'm sure it's well-intentioned, the fact remains that it is done to curry political favor and done like in the case of the 19th century socialists, because politicians don't trust the public and will not leave them to their own devices. They believe they know better than the public, and that without their intervention, we would ruin ourselves.
It's good to know that many members of both parties (but especially the party in power in the highest office in the land, has done little to update his understanding of the economy since the mid 1800's.
Please understand that this does not mean there are not roles for the government, but the redistribution of monies under the false guise of spurring the economy is a lie, and should be regarded as such. While I'm sure it's well-intentioned, the fact remains that it is done to curry political favor and done like in the case of the 19th century socialists, because politicians don't trust the public and will not leave them to their own devices. They believe they know better than the public, and that without their intervention, we would ruin ourselves.
It's good to know that many members of both parties (but especially the party in power in the highest office in the land, has done little to update his understanding of the economy since the mid 1800's.
March 9, 2015
Bastiat, in his usual entertaining, simple style outlines what seem to be complicated questions of economics and not only makes them accessible, but makes clear the costs and benefits of each proposed path and its opposite. Some may question whether there is any benefit to reading a Frenchman writing in the first half of the 19th century; yet the questions he faced are the same that plague us today, and we would do well to consider how the "solutions" we have been bringing to bear for decades are actually the root of many of our problems.
Bastiat begins by defending interest on capital, using everyday examples to lay plain the justice of interest and the benefit of it. He then moves on to the famous "broken window" example, by which he explodes the Keynesian theory (then not even yet formed!) that war and other destruction somehow increases our wealth. His method for analyzing this is viewing "what is seen" and "that which is not seen," or in other words, the many real (and not just apparent) consequences of actions. He concludes that the best way to benefit all, especially the workers, is not "insurrection, hatred and error" but "peace, liberty, and security." (location 500-501) Henry Hazlitt further focuses on this type of analysis in his brilliant and accessible Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics. Bastiat lays down the marker for economists to come, with his observation, "the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil." (location 507-508) Keynesianism vs Liberalism, anyone?
Bastiat develops this reasoning to show the fallacy that government spending of any kind (militaries, infrastructure, etc.) "creates" jobs; rather, it merely displaces them from where and how they would have been otherwise employed had the money spent on them not been taken away by taxes in the first place, and in a way more natural and organic to people's actual situations, wants, and needs. He notes that such expenditures must be defended on their actual merits (the need for defense, roads, dams, etc.) and their benefits as such, not in "job creation" which is actually just job dislocation (and Bastiat is sure to note the process loss in government taking with one hand and giving, but not as much, with the other...). He also attacks the false notion that for a person to oppose government spending on a subject (i.e., the arts) is to oppose the subject itself, whereas if there is a need or want for a thing, it would receive much more natural support from a people left free to invest in it on their own directly.
He shows the illusion of eliminating middlemen by showing how they are typically replaced with some sort of government functionary, therefore the consumer is left paying the one, or the taxpayer paying the other, and the latter functioning far less efficiently and competently, without such intermediaries actually being removed.
Bastiat distinguishes between labor, money, and wealth, showing that labor is for the purpose of some good thing (not an end to itself), and money is for convenience of exchange (but one can't eat it!), but true wealth are the good things labor produces and money buys. Therefore, any restriction (on imports, on mechanization, on labor, etc.) tend to make everyone poorer by reducing the abundance of the good things all seek, even if they might produce more "work" or put more money in a person's pocket, which in the end, buys fewer desirable goods and services. He explodes the idea (still prevalent today) of importing being bad and exporting being good (most people, in their own exchanges, seek to receive more while parting with less...), again by focusing on the purpose of exchange, that is, the goods and services sought. In the meantime, he shows up the enormous expense consumed in creating and enforcing such restrictions that in the end make everyone less well provided for. His discourse on money is very entertaining as well as enlightening and well worth reading!
Bastiat attacks the idea that true wealth can be created by borrowing, either private or public, showing that whether there is a lot or little money chasing the desired goods and services, it is not the money that creates them. Therefore, the actual capital and (productive) labor that drives
availability, not cash. He attacks the mercantilist system and the idea of colonialism generally; while colonialism may seem like a bad word nowadays, the underpinning economic fallacies Bastiat exposes remain in current use today, unfortunately.
He explores people's misconceptions about the role, not to mention the capabilities, of government, not to mention their common desire to have it all and not have to pay for it. He explores the unrealistic ideas of what government "ought" to provide from the common calls: "a beneficent and inexhaustible being, calling itself the Government, which has bread for al mouths, work for all hands, capital for all enterprises, credit for all projects, oil for all wounds, balm for all sufferings, advice for all perplexities, solutions for all doubts, truths for all intellects, diversions for all who want them, milk for infancy, and wine for old age--which can provide for all our wants, satisfy all our curiosity, correct all our errors, repair all our faults, and exempt us henceforth from the necessity for foresight, prudence, judgment, sagacity, experience, order, economy, temperance and activity (location 1203-1208) He can't help but to observe, "since up to this time everything presenting itself under the name of the Government is immediately overturned by the people, precisely because it does not fulfill the rather contradictory conditions of the programme." (location 1212-1213) He sums it up so: "Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavours to live at the expense of everybody else." (location 1234-1235)
While it is popular to disparage those in favor of free markets as being uncaring and their system leading to the victimization of the poor, Bastiat quite shows the opposite is true. For instance, at the end of his money discourse, he explains both the theoretical and practical cause and effect of inflation, especially in how the rich tend to benefit (or at least not be hurt as much) while the poor end up on the short end of the stick: "When once false money (under whatever form it may take) is put into circulation, depreciation will ensue, and manifest itself by the universal rise of every thing which is capable of being sold. But this rise in prices is not instantaneous and equal for all things. Sharp men, brokers, and men of business, will not suffer by it; for it is their trade to watch the fluctuations of prices, to observe the cause, and even to speculate upon it. But little tradesmen, countrymen, and workmen, will bear the whole weight of it. The rich man is not any the richer for it, but the poor man becomes poorer by it. Therefore, expedients of this kind have the effect of increasing the distance which separates wealth from poverty." (location 1662-1666)
In short, this work should be requires reading for anyone before receiving a high school diploma, not only for how it simplifies the many and complicated issues facing us all everyday, but for the way it can even sharpen a person's ability to think critically and examine more carefully consequences, intended and unintended, immediate and long term. Better yet, concerned parents ought to read it for themselves and ensure their children read it, as Bastiat himself notes about education, "The most urgent necessity is, not that the State should teach, but that it should allow education. All monopolies are detestable, but the worst of all is the monopoly of education." (location 1707-1709) After all, how is it we have gotten ourselves into the dreadful situation of the state curbing our liberties more each day, and seizing more of our property through taxes, all in the name of fixing the very problems it created, other than by "educating" us through its schools to assume that which is not true, is true, and that which is true, is somehow harmful to us...?
Bastiat begins by defending interest on capital, using everyday examples to lay plain the justice of interest and the benefit of it. He then moves on to the famous "broken window" example, by which he explodes the Keynesian theory (then not even yet formed!) that war and other destruction somehow increases our wealth. His method for analyzing this is viewing "what is seen" and "that which is not seen," or in other words, the many real (and not just apparent) consequences of actions. He concludes that the best way to benefit all, especially the workers, is not "insurrection, hatred and error" but "peace, liberty, and security." (location 500-501) Henry Hazlitt further focuses on this type of analysis in his brilliant and accessible Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics. Bastiat lays down the marker for economists to come, with his observation, "the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil." (location 507-508) Keynesianism vs Liberalism, anyone?
Bastiat develops this reasoning to show the fallacy that government spending of any kind (militaries, infrastructure, etc.) "creates" jobs; rather, it merely displaces them from where and how they would have been otherwise employed had the money spent on them not been taken away by taxes in the first place, and in a way more natural and organic to people's actual situations, wants, and needs. He notes that such expenditures must be defended on their actual merits (the need for defense, roads, dams, etc.) and their benefits as such, not in "job creation" which is actually just job dislocation (and Bastiat is sure to note the process loss in government taking with one hand and giving, but not as much, with the other...). He also attacks the false notion that for a person to oppose government spending on a subject (i.e., the arts) is to oppose the subject itself, whereas if there is a need or want for a thing, it would receive much more natural support from a people left free to invest in it on their own directly.
He shows the illusion of eliminating middlemen by showing how they are typically replaced with some sort of government functionary, therefore the consumer is left paying the one, or the taxpayer paying the other, and the latter functioning far less efficiently and competently, without such intermediaries actually being removed.
Bastiat distinguishes between labor, money, and wealth, showing that labor is for the purpose of some good thing (not an end to itself), and money is for convenience of exchange (but one can't eat it!), but true wealth are the good things labor produces and money buys. Therefore, any restriction (on imports, on mechanization, on labor, etc.) tend to make everyone poorer by reducing the abundance of the good things all seek, even if they might produce more "work" or put more money in a person's pocket, which in the end, buys fewer desirable goods and services. He explodes the idea (still prevalent today) of importing being bad and exporting being good (most people, in their own exchanges, seek to receive more while parting with less...), again by focusing on the purpose of exchange, that is, the goods and services sought. In the meantime, he shows up the enormous expense consumed in creating and enforcing such restrictions that in the end make everyone less well provided for. His discourse on money is very entertaining as well as enlightening and well worth reading!
Bastiat attacks the idea that true wealth can be created by borrowing, either private or public, showing that whether there is a lot or little money chasing the desired goods and services, it is not the money that creates them. Therefore, the actual capital and (productive) labor that drives
availability, not cash. He attacks the mercantilist system and the idea of colonialism generally; while colonialism may seem like a bad word nowadays, the underpinning economic fallacies Bastiat exposes remain in current use today, unfortunately.
He explores people's misconceptions about the role, not to mention the capabilities, of government, not to mention their common desire to have it all and not have to pay for it. He explores the unrealistic ideas of what government "ought" to provide from the common calls: "a beneficent and inexhaustible being, calling itself the Government, which has bread for al mouths, work for all hands, capital for all enterprises, credit for all projects, oil for all wounds, balm for all sufferings, advice for all perplexities, solutions for all doubts, truths for all intellects, diversions for all who want them, milk for infancy, and wine for old age--which can provide for all our wants, satisfy all our curiosity, correct all our errors, repair all our faults, and exempt us henceforth from the necessity for foresight, prudence, judgment, sagacity, experience, order, economy, temperance and activity (location 1203-1208) He can't help but to observe, "since up to this time everything presenting itself under the name of the Government is immediately overturned by the people, precisely because it does not fulfill the rather contradictory conditions of the programme." (location 1212-1213) He sums it up so: "Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavours to live at the expense of everybody else." (location 1234-1235)
While it is popular to disparage those in favor of free markets as being uncaring and their system leading to the victimization of the poor, Bastiat quite shows the opposite is true. For instance, at the end of his money discourse, he explains both the theoretical and practical cause and effect of inflation, especially in how the rich tend to benefit (or at least not be hurt as much) while the poor end up on the short end of the stick: "When once false money (under whatever form it may take) is put into circulation, depreciation will ensue, and manifest itself by the universal rise of every thing which is capable of being sold. But this rise in prices is not instantaneous and equal for all things. Sharp men, brokers, and men of business, will not suffer by it; for it is their trade to watch the fluctuations of prices, to observe the cause, and even to speculate upon it. But little tradesmen, countrymen, and workmen, will bear the whole weight of it. The rich man is not any the richer for it, but the poor man becomes poorer by it. Therefore, expedients of this kind have the effect of increasing the distance which separates wealth from poverty." (location 1662-1666)
In short, this work should be requires reading for anyone before receiving a high school diploma, not only for how it simplifies the many and complicated issues facing us all everyday, but for the way it can even sharpen a person's ability to think critically and examine more carefully consequences, intended and unintended, immediate and long term. Better yet, concerned parents ought to read it for themselves and ensure their children read it, as Bastiat himself notes about education, "The most urgent necessity is, not that the State should teach, but that it should allow education. All monopolies are detestable, but the worst of all is the monopoly of education." (location 1707-1709) After all, how is it we have gotten ourselves into the dreadful situation of the state curbing our liberties more each day, and seizing more of our property through taxes, all in the name of fixing the very problems it created, other than by "educating" us through its schools to assume that which is not true, is true, and that which is true, is somehow harmful to us...?
October 12, 2023
Frederic Bastiat is a French classical liberal theorist, and political economist (1801-1850). His essays on Political Economy are a primer on capitalism and free market economics. In this work, Bastiat systematically argues for free markets, which can only be realised when a natural right to life, liberty and property are protected. He elaborates his arguments under various chapters such as Capital & interest, That Which is seen and that which is not seen, Government, What is Money? and The Law. This work is in some ways a response to Proudhon’s socialist economics. Though contextually it relates to the issues of early nineteenth-century France, conceptually his theoretical arguments are very similar to those forwarded by the present-day free market economists.
Under capital and interest, he states that any creation of value makes it the property of the creator and he has the right to transfer that value either as a gift, exchange or as a loan. He develops the logic of voluntary exchange where the lender and the borrower, governed by their own needs, are willing to exchange capital for interest. Thus, interest is nothing, but the service rendered by the borrower to the lender, in exchange for the capital he has received as a loan. By not entering into this voluntary transaction, they have nothing to lose as they remain in the condition prior to the exchange. He contends that the possibility of a lender charging exorbitant interest can be countered by facilitating many lenders to operate in the economy. Thus, having many lenders or in other words having many sources of capital is in the interest of the borrower.
In “That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen”, Bastiat asserts that a good economist is one who can foresee the unseen effect of an act, an institution, or a law. This becomes more desirable when the unseen effects are pernicious. He manages to bring out profound economic insights from ordinary everyday events. A broken windowpane is one such incident through which he analyses the seen effects and tries to foresee the unseen effects such as the lost opportunity for an investment. He concludes that destruction cannot be seen as an economic opportunity to rebuild.
Similarly Taxing the citizen is justified only when it gets the value for the tax paid in terms of public goods. Initiating an unproductive public works with the intention to create employment may have labour employment in the short term but will be detrimental to taxpayers’ money which he would have intended the govt to spend on a more productive use.
Trade is the activity of buying and selling of goods and services. It involves sourcing and procuring material and delivering the same at most competitive price to the customer. This is a service which needs to be compensated either by the state or a private individual. Bastiat claims that competitive markets would compete to optimise their activities to deliver the goods at the minimum possible price to the end user. If the State takes upon the trading activity, being a sole trader has no incentive to be efficient and with limited accountability, tends to be less optimal ending up with a higher price for the customer.
Trade/tariff barriers to help the local industry and local employment is another fallacy Bastiat tries to bust. Tariff barriers may appear to be beneficial to the local industry as the price of the product increases in the domestic market. It is said that will also help in expanding employment. However, as a result, the citizens must pay a higher price for the same product. If only citizen was to get the product at the most competitive price, the money saved in the bargain would go into the economy to benefit some other industry and enhance employment.
Bastiat argues against the misconception about the notion that technology and innovation would hurt labour by way of retrenchment. He says that the capital saved due to invention would be looking for labour thus moving into different fields of investment. Further, the price of the product falls due to the lower cost of production which will leave the consumer with surplus cash which aggregates into saved wages to compensate for the loss of wages. In the short term, the owner and the inventor stand to gain but in the long term, innovation is a gain for all.
Bastiat affirms that the government should not intervene in the dissemination of credit. Further, if the government as a policy stands to guarantee for a borrower whose credentials are doubtful, it will result in the deprivation of credit to a genuine borrower and by implication taxpayer in effect stands a guarantee for a borrower he has nothing to do with. He declares that behind every public expense by the government, there lies a hidden cost difficult to discern. The idea is to see both the seen and unseen cost and be informed.
Bastiat is very sceptical about the role of the government in organising the economy. He is sure that the government is a faceless entity through which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. The personification of government as an omnipotent entity with the power to satisfy all the demands/wants and with the power to claim anything human from the people is really the source of friction. As such polity in general expects two things from the government, maximum free benefits, and no taxes. As the Government cannot generate resources on its own without taxation, the expectation for free benefits is bound to fail.
A few thoughts come to mind on reflection; Even a free market economy, assuming it to be a panacea for evils of a socialist economy, requires a government to ensure perfect competition in the markets, to disseminate price information instantly, to ensure that markets do not degenerate into monopolies, to prevent price cartelization and to establish a judiciary which ensures honouring of the contractual obligations. Thus, a state in some form is required to create a competitive environment for voluntary exchanges to happen without coercion. One can concede that there shall be checks and balances to limit the role of the state to a neutral umpire. Considering the inevitability of the state for any society, Bastiat’s revulsion for any government is rather surprising.
That many economic theories with compelling arguments have emerged to counter free-market economics is a testimony to human genius and its passion for looking for an acceptable solution for the material well-being of populations at large. Further, free market capitalism doesn’t work in the real world as per Bastiat’s blueprint. To be fair Bastiat never supports the ugly side of the capitalist economy. It is true that no argument or a theory however well intended cannot escape the cunning and shrewdness of human intellect to reshape and reinterpret it to suit their own selfish ends. Ideas, in a way, evolve relentlessly, analysing the old and synthesising the new, in an ongoing endless cycle. Bastiat is one such important stage in such evolution.
Being a translation into Old English of a French work of the early nineteenth century, the book is not particularly an easy read. It is rewarding if you persist and complete it, though.
Under capital and interest, he states that any creation of value makes it the property of the creator and he has the right to transfer that value either as a gift, exchange or as a loan. He develops the logic of voluntary exchange where the lender and the borrower, governed by their own needs, are willing to exchange capital for interest. Thus, interest is nothing, but the service rendered by the borrower to the lender, in exchange for the capital he has received as a loan. By not entering into this voluntary transaction, they have nothing to lose as they remain in the condition prior to the exchange. He contends that the possibility of a lender charging exorbitant interest can be countered by facilitating many lenders to operate in the economy. Thus, having many lenders or in other words having many sources of capital is in the interest of the borrower.
In “That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen”, Bastiat asserts that a good economist is one who can foresee the unseen effect of an act, an institution, or a law. This becomes more desirable when the unseen effects are pernicious. He manages to bring out profound economic insights from ordinary everyday events. A broken windowpane is one such incident through which he analyses the seen effects and tries to foresee the unseen effects such as the lost opportunity for an investment. He concludes that destruction cannot be seen as an economic opportunity to rebuild.
Similarly Taxing the citizen is justified only when it gets the value for the tax paid in terms of public goods. Initiating an unproductive public works with the intention to create employment may have labour employment in the short term but will be detrimental to taxpayers’ money which he would have intended the govt to spend on a more productive use.
Trade is the activity of buying and selling of goods and services. It involves sourcing and procuring material and delivering the same at most competitive price to the customer. This is a service which needs to be compensated either by the state or a private individual. Bastiat claims that competitive markets would compete to optimise their activities to deliver the goods at the minimum possible price to the end user. If the State takes upon the trading activity, being a sole trader has no incentive to be efficient and with limited accountability, tends to be less optimal ending up with a higher price for the customer.
Trade/tariff barriers to help the local industry and local employment is another fallacy Bastiat tries to bust. Tariff barriers may appear to be beneficial to the local industry as the price of the product increases in the domestic market. It is said that will also help in expanding employment. However, as a result, the citizens must pay a higher price for the same product. If only citizen was to get the product at the most competitive price, the money saved in the bargain would go into the economy to benefit some other industry and enhance employment.
Bastiat argues against the misconception about the notion that technology and innovation would hurt labour by way of retrenchment. He says that the capital saved due to invention would be looking for labour thus moving into different fields of investment. Further, the price of the product falls due to the lower cost of production which will leave the consumer with surplus cash which aggregates into saved wages to compensate for the loss of wages. In the short term, the owner and the inventor stand to gain but in the long term, innovation is a gain for all.
Bastiat affirms that the government should not intervene in the dissemination of credit. Further, if the government as a policy stands to guarantee for a borrower whose credentials are doubtful, it will result in the deprivation of credit to a genuine borrower and by implication taxpayer in effect stands a guarantee for a borrower he has nothing to do with. He declares that behind every public expense by the government, there lies a hidden cost difficult to discern. The idea is to see both the seen and unseen cost and be informed.
Bastiat is very sceptical about the role of the government in organising the economy. He is sure that the government is a faceless entity through which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else. The personification of government as an omnipotent entity with the power to satisfy all the demands/wants and with the power to claim anything human from the people is really the source of friction. As such polity in general expects two things from the government, maximum free benefits, and no taxes. As the Government cannot generate resources on its own without taxation, the expectation for free benefits is bound to fail.
A few thoughts come to mind on reflection; Even a free market economy, assuming it to be a panacea for evils of a socialist economy, requires a government to ensure perfect competition in the markets, to disseminate price information instantly, to ensure that markets do not degenerate into monopolies, to prevent price cartelization and to establish a judiciary which ensures honouring of the contractual obligations. Thus, a state in some form is required to create a competitive environment for voluntary exchanges to happen without coercion. One can concede that there shall be checks and balances to limit the role of the state to a neutral umpire. Considering the inevitability of the state for any society, Bastiat’s revulsion for any government is rather surprising.
That many economic theories with compelling arguments have emerged to counter free-market economics is a testimony to human genius and its passion for looking for an acceptable solution for the material well-being of populations at large. Further, free market capitalism doesn’t work in the real world as per Bastiat’s blueprint. To be fair Bastiat never supports the ugly side of the capitalist economy. It is true that no argument or a theory however well intended cannot escape the cunning and shrewdness of human intellect to reshape and reinterpret it to suit their own selfish ends. Ideas, in a way, evolve relentlessly, analysing the old and synthesising the new, in an ongoing endless cycle. Bastiat is one such important stage in such evolution.
Being a translation into Old English of a French work of the early nineteenth century, the book is not particularly an easy read. It is rewarding if you persist and complete it, though.
December 7, 2013
This is a good and easy-to-read collection of Bastiat's polemical, witty and sharp essays.
It includes the ever-green "The Law", which is a fantastic piece of polemical writing in the right-libertarian tradition. I have reviewed it elsewhere; it remains fantastic.
"That Which is Seen" is a rhetorical masterpiece. It contains the famous "broken window fallacy" but it treats a whole plethora of subjects under the sun (that which is seen), and in the shadows (that which is not seen). The rhetorical exposition of a few basic tenets, and applying it real world problems, proves a fertile and fruitful task, since it enables a wide-ranging criticism of government shortsightedness and of petty-minded group-interest, self-interest, politics.
"Capital and Interest" is a somewhat drier but pedantically useful exposition of the value of capital accumulation and interest collection. It dispels many myths of the evils of money by explaining the economic rational of capital economy. It argues passionately that it is in the interest of not only the landowning and property-owning classes, but also the labouring classes, to support the spreading of capital accumulation to the whole population.
There is a case to be made that Bastiat's political economy is markedly 19th Century in its failure to accommodate rising working class interests at heart. There is a further case to be made that some of the economic arguments need to be supplemented, in order to be valid, by late 19th and 20th century advances in economic theory, e.g. marginalism and behavioural economics.
But the surprising thing about these texsts is not that they need revision in light of new data; the surprising thing is how LITTLE of Bastiat's basic analysis needs such revision. He provides a lively critique of the plundering policies of an ever-expanding welfare state. Such an analysis, although one-sided, is relevant even today - perhaps more than ever.
It includes the ever-green "The Law", which is a fantastic piece of polemical writing in the right-libertarian tradition. I have reviewed it elsewhere; it remains fantastic.
"That Which is Seen" is a rhetorical masterpiece. It contains the famous "broken window fallacy" but it treats a whole plethora of subjects under the sun (that which is seen), and in the shadows (that which is not seen). The rhetorical exposition of a few basic tenets, and applying it real world problems, proves a fertile and fruitful task, since it enables a wide-ranging criticism of government shortsightedness and of petty-minded group-interest, self-interest, politics.
"Capital and Interest" is a somewhat drier but pedantically useful exposition of the value of capital accumulation and interest collection. It dispels many myths of the evils of money by explaining the economic rational of capital economy. It argues passionately that it is in the interest of not only the landowning and property-owning classes, but also the labouring classes, to support the spreading of capital accumulation to the whole population.
There is a case to be made that Bastiat's political economy is markedly 19th Century in its failure to accommodate rising working class interests at heart. There is a further case to be made that some of the economic arguments need to be supplemented, in order to be valid, by late 19th and 20th century advances in economic theory, e.g. marginalism and behavioural economics.
But the surprising thing about these texsts is not that they need revision in light of new data; the surprising thing is how LITTLE of Bastiat's basic analysis needs such revision. He provides a lively critique of the plundering policies of an ever-expanding welfare state. Such an analysis, although one-sided, is relevant even today - perhaps more than ever.
August 7, 2020
Bastiat was certainly a man ahead of his time when it came to espousing political-economic theory, and his ideas are at the heart of classical liberalism and free-market economics. The insights gained during such a short life can be attributed to the times in which he lived, serving in public office after the Revolution of 1830 and in the French national assembly following the revolution of 1848, against the background of the French socialist movement. It's this historical backdrop that makes Bastiat difficult to read for a modern American audience, because one must have this historical context to understand many of his references. Bastiat was likely the first to popularize the broken window fallacy and many tenets of free-market thought. For an English-speaking reader seeking to understand free-market economics, Henry Hazlitt is much more accessible in both his prose and the context in which he writes. For somebody looking to understand free-market economics and classical liberalism between Adam Smith and the Austrian School, Bastiat is essential.
May 9, 2021
Common Sense
Phenomenal common sense spoken into an increasingly insane France 160 years ago, which would speak to us today if we had the good sense to listen.
Phenomenal common sense spoken into an increasingly insane France 160 years ago, which would speak to us today if we had the good sense to listen.
May 17, 2018
This collection of essays contains five of the essays of this well-known and sadly all too shortly-lived French economist who explores the various ways that someone who is essentially proper and conservative can appeal to a large group of readers in speaking economic truths that are sometimes difficult to understand for many people. Two of the essays in this book I have already read and commented on at length elsewhere in my writings about this economist [1], namely "The Law," which is the fifth essay here, and "That Which Is Seen, And That Which Is Unseen," which is the second essay. The remaining three essays, though, are short but powerful examples of Bastiat's winning graciousness and perspicacity as a writer. Namely, those essays are "Capital And Interest," where the author provides a legitimization of interest and the productive capacity of capital, "Government," where the author talks about the tensions governments are involved in with the simultaneous and contrary desires for low taxes and high amounts of government service, and "What Is Money?" which is a short dialogue concerning monetary policy and the difficulties of defining terms in economics.
This is the sort of book that would be deeply loved by those who are already fond of Bastiat as a writer. Some readers, when they encounter this book, may have read some of the essays here before, but even so this is a powerful collection of writings that demonstrates Bastiat's interest in explaining economics to a mass audience and in educating ordinary French citizens (and those who read him in translation) on the fundamental aspects of political economics. He is gracious and tireless in pointing out that to be hostile to government doing something because it tends to do things poorly and because the true costs of public goods are not often revealed by those who endorse them is not to be hostile to the things that government likes to do. His essay on money, for example, ends up in an eloquent plea for freedom of education, which is not going to happen well if government is in charge, something that we can see all too well in the United States, for example. Likewise, his essays in general are full of references to areas of widespread interest and he manages to avoid being tediously repetitive about the points that he has to make, leavening his comments with humor and a fair dose of irony.
Although I happen to be a fan of Bastiat's winsome approach, especially when it is compared to many others of the same political and economic mindset but a great deal less charm, I wonder often if Basitat's arguments are likely to be as successful as one would hope. To be sure, Bastiat combines logic with a great deal of humanity, and no one giving these essays a fair read would assume that Bastiat was lacking in the warmth of human kindness, as can be said about many of the economics of the Austrian school. Is it the truths that authors like Bastiat proclaim that is unpopular themselves, or is the approach more fundamental than the content in determining the hearing that more contemporary writers would receive in writing this sort of material? It is hard to determine this fact for sure, and the result is that we are left with a small body of excellent writing by Bastiat but no way of knowing if his approach would have been more successful than the generally unsuccessful approach of writers who had the same opinions and beliefs as he did about political economy but were less interested in persuading and more interested in ridiculing and skinning them with the painful truth painfully said.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
http://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018/...
This is the sort of book that would be deeply loved by those who are already fond of Bastiat as a writer. Some readers, when they encounter this book, may have read some of the essays here before, but even so this is a powerful collection of writings that demonstrates Bastiat's interest in explaining economics to a mass audience and in educating ordinary French citizens (and those who read him in translation) on the fundamental aspects of political economics. He is gracious and tireless in pointing out that to be hostile to government doing something because it tends to do things poorly and because the true costs of public goods are not often revealed by those who endorse them is not to be hostile to the things that government likes to do. His essay on money, for example, ends up in an eloquent plea for freedom of education, which is not going to happen well if government is in charge, something that we can see all too well in the United States, for example. Likewise, his essays in general are full of references to areas of widespread interest and he manages to avoid being tediously repetitive about the points that he has to make, leavening his comments with humor and a fair dose of irony.
Although I happen to be a fan of Bastiat's winsome approach, especially when it is compared to many others of the same political and economic mindset but a great deal less charm, I wonder often if Basitat's arguments are likely to be as successful as one would hope. To be sure, Bastiat combines logic with a great deal of humanity, and no one giving these essays a fair read would assume that Bastiat was lacking in the warmth of human kindness, as can be said about many of the economics of the Austrian school. Is it the truths that authors like Bastiat proclaim that is unpopular themselves, or is the approach more fundamental than the content in determining the hearing that more contemporary writers would receive in writing this sort of material? It is hard to determine this fact for sure, and the result is that we are left with a small body of excellent writing by Bastiat but no way of knowing if his approach would have been more successful than the generally unsuccessful approach of writers who had the same opinions and beliefs as he did about political economy but were less interested in persuading and more interested in ridiculing and skinning them with the painful truth painfully said.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
http://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018/...
May 6, 2017
Ugh. I enjoy reading Bastiat because his prose is well-worded, but the content is the exact same drivel I hear from intelligent libertarians today.
He tosses out a lot of explanations that were great then but which have since been amended and debunked. It's got holes in it, just like those modern libertarian arguments. And that is honestly exhausting. To me, it has always seemed that libertarian economics should be called "Econ for people who only ever took intro-economics."
F - "Taking from one man to give to another isn't producing any more economic activity"
yes it is if you're taking from the wealthy - whose marginal propensity to spend is lower than the impoverished - to give to the poor - who will spend every penny and create demand in the economy.
F - "You can't just print money out of thin air - it doesn't add wealth to the economy"
yes you can. and yes it can. If you can print that money essentially for free (as we've been able to for almost a decade now) and pumping it into the lower rungs of society will boost spending, this will boost hiring across the economy to provide goods and services being demanded. Inflation yadayada yeah we've all got answers for these things - that's what floating currencies and the inflation rate is for.
Like I get that Bastiat is wrong a lot of the time. His writing is hundreds of years old. But when people start running with these ideas and ignore the empirical evidence we've used to update economic theory, that's when you look foolish.
Read him for context. Learn about all of his arguments, then learn about which have been answered.
He tosses out a lot of explanations that were great then but which have since been amended and debunked. It's got holes in it, just like those modern libertarian arguments. And that is honestly exhausting. To me, it has always seemed that libertarian economics should be called "Econ for people who only ever took intro-economics."
F - "Taking from one man to give to another isn't producing any more economic activity"
yes it is if you're taking from the wealthy - whose marginal propensity to spend is lower than the impoverished - to give to the poor - who will spend every penny and create demand in the economy.
F - "You can't just print money out of thin air - it doesn't add wealth to the economy"
yes you can. and yes it can. If you can print that money essentially for free (as we've been able to for almost a decade now) and pumping it into the lower rungs of society will boost spending, this will boost hiring across the economy to provide goods and services being demanded. Inflation yadayada yeah we've all got answers for these things - that's what floating currencies and the inflation rate is for.
Like I get that Bastiat is wrong a lot of the time. His writing is hundreds of years old. But when people start running with these ideas and ignore the empirical evidence we've used to update economic theory, that's when you look foolish.
Read him for context. Learn about all of his arguments, then learn about which have been answered.
April 4, 2020
Loved the book! It was a relief to finally have a book by someone who wants to bring economics to the people (rather than making people run away screaming "this is so boring!"). If someone wanted to learn what in the world economics was, I would direct them to this book right away. Bastiat makes basic economic ideas easy to understand through the "seen and unseen" concept. I will say it got a little repetitive, but I can see how it's useful to really drive the point home in someone new to the subject.
April 22, 2025
Few thinkers have ever made economics feel as alive — or as morally urgent — as Frédéric Bastiat. Essays on Political Economy is not just a collection of essays. It is a revelation in plain language. Bastiat combines sharp logic, biting wit, and moral clarity in a way that exposes the illusions behind economic fallacies that still dominate our world today.
What makes Bastiat exceptional is not only his defense of liberty and free exchange, but his ability to reveal the unseen — the ripple effects of policies that most people never stop to question. He anticipated with striking precision many of the pathologies we see in modern political economies, from rent-seeking to the weaponization of public spending.
As someone involved in investment, policy, and the architecture of emerging technologies, I find his work more relevant than ever. Whether one is building decentralized systems or rethinking the role of the state in a post-industrial era, Bastiat provides the intellectual lens to cut through the noise and return to what actually creates value.
This is required reading for anyone serious about understanding how economies flourish and how societies decay. Bastiat does not offer ideology. He offers truth — delivered with elegance and precision.
Read it, reread it, and recommend it to anyone still under the illusion that the state creates wealth.
What makes Bastiat exceptional is not only his defense of liberty and free exchange, but his ability to reveal the unseen — the ripple effects of policies that most people never stop to question. He anticipated with striking precision many of the pathologies we see in modern political economies, from rent-seeking to the weaponization of public spending.
As someone involved in investment, policy, and the architecture of emerging technologies, I find his work more relevant than ever. Whether one is building decentralized systems or rethinking the role of the state in a post-industrial era, Bastiat provides the intellectual lens to cut through the noise and return to what actually creates value.
This is required reading for anyone serious about understanding how economies flourish and how societies decay. Bastiat does not offer ideology. He offers truth — delivered with elegance and precision.
Read it, reread it, and recommend it to anyone still under the illusion that the state creates wealth.
July 29, 2025
Good introduction to economy
August 16, 2021
An informative piece, jam packed with interesting tidbits. However not really my cup of tea as Bastiat argues against taxation. Of course within a more modern day context where we require taxation for roads and public goods his argument would not really fit.
October 8, 2015
“Essays on Political Economy” is the first work I have ever read by Bastiat beyond quotes and excerpts. I come away very impressed with his lines of reasoning and his simple examples to depict more complicated economic interactions and concepts. Bastiat is a precursor to the Austrian school of economics; he believes that government intervention in the economy does more harm than good and that paper money is extremely dangerous. He believes that government should exist only to protect private property, which Bastiat writes is the epitome of justice. Any intervention by the government in private transactions and private property establishes a precedent that eventually leads to ruin.
As an Austrian school supporter, I found myself nodding along throughout Bastiat’s work. What stood out most to me was his revelation that government can go down one of three paths: the few plunder the many, everybody plunders everybody, or nobody plunders anybody. There is no middle ground in between the distinctions. Once the government decides to infringe on private property rights, which it does with its redistributive taxes today, it establishes a dangerous precedent. If the few are in power, these usurpations benefit the ruling class at the expense of the masses. In a universal suffrage democracy with a plundering government, different factions take from each other and everybody plunders everybody. In the third option, nobody plunders anybody and the free market is allowed to work its magic through voluntary association and mutually beneficial transactions.
It is also extremely important to take seriously his writings on “what is seen and what is not seen”. This is as relevant as ever in an age of economic illiteracy like today. When we simply look at the immediate effects of an action, we see that protectionist policies benefit one class of workers and business owners in whatever industry is being protected. These people will have more money to spend and circulate throughout the economy. However, the amount and quality of the useful goods within a country are the true indicator of its worth. Also, each time someone buys a good or pays for a service, he or she has simply traded the previous good or service sold for money for this new good or service. Nothing is gained in that string of transactions. When people are forced to pay extra money for a domestic good rather than purchase the good abroad cheaper, they are worse off. If they were allowed to buy the good abroad, they would have booth the good (the true judge of wealth) and the extra money in savings to spend and circulate on another good or service.
I look forward to reading more Bastiat, but I thought that this was a fantastic primer. It is available for free on Kindle, so there’s no reason to avoid this one. Bastiat should be mentioned among the brilliant minds of the 19th century; he is a champion of liberty and small government, which probably explains why most have not heard of him. It certainly does not feel as if this was written nearly 200 years ago, which goes to show that many of the problems we face today have historical precedents from which we can learn.
As an Austrian school supporter, I found myself nodding along throughout Bastiat’s work. What stood out most to me was his revelation that government can go down one of three paths: the few plunder the many, everybody plunders everybody, or nobody plunders anybody. There is no middle ground in between the distinctions. Once the government decides to infringe on private property rights, which it does with its redistributive taxes today, it establishes a dangerous precedent. If the few are in power, these usurpations benefit the ruling class at the expense of the masses. In a universal suffrage democracy with a plundering government, different factions take from each other and everybody plunders everybody. In the third option, nobody plunders anybody and the free market is allowed to work its magic through voluntary association and mutually beneficial transactions.
It is also extremely important to take seriously his writings on “what is seen and what is not seen”. This is as relevant as ever in an age of economic illiteracy like today. When we simply look at the immediate effects of an action, we see that protectionist policies benefit one class of workers and business owners in whatever industry is being protected. These people will have more money to spend and circulate throughout the economy. However, the amount and quality of the useful goods within a country are the true indicator of its worth. Also, each time someone buys a good or pays for a service, he or she has simply traded the previous good or service sold for money for this new good or service. Nothing is gained in that string of transactions. When people are forced to pay extra money for a domestic good rather than purchase the good abroad cheaper, they are worse off. If they were allowed to buy the good abroad, they would have booth the good (the true judge of wealth) and the extra money in savings to spend and circulate on another good or service.
I look forward to reading more Bastiat, but I thought that this was a fantastic primer. It is available for free on Kindle, so there’s no reason to avoid this one. Bastiat should be mentioned among the brilliant minds of the 19th century; he is a champion of liberty and small government, which probably explains why most have not heard of him. It certainly does not feel as if this was written nearly 200 years ago, which goes to show that many of the problems we face today have historical precedents from which we can learn.
March 11, 2015
Where the purpose of the book 'The Law' by Mr.Bastiat ends, the necessity of his 'Essays on Political Economy' begins.
Originally published as a pamphlet, 'The Law' was written to appeal the public at large. It flows with brilliant eloquence, with sentences constructed in active voice, instructing, revealing and lambasting the over-reach of the government in formation of law to use it as a tool of plunder, instead of employing the same to protect the liberty and property of man. He had further explained how the tariffs, subsidies, free public education, taxation etc, provided in the name of poor, is actually being utilized to plunder one group for promoting the interests of the other. However, 'The Law' does not provide any theoretical explanations for Bastiat's pronouncements.
Herein begins the purpose of economical substantiations provided through his essays.
'Essays on Political Economy'of Bastiat(and his other ones), provides the "science of economy which is necessary for the harmony of the free society". The essays "That which is seen and That which is not seen " explicates the detrimental effects of the social policies formulated without considering the effects of "That which is not seen", which is nothing but the 'Opportunity cost' widely applied today by every economist, accountant, business consultant in calculating the return on investment, public or private. What makes Bastiat a genius is not only that he propounds the concept of 'Opportunity cost' in the most accessible manner(for which we are forever indebted to him) but that he also applies the same to every possible governmental policy formulated in the name of the general goodness - be it taxation, public services, credit backed by state, war, and explains the undue consequences of the same which are apt and accurate to this every day.
Personally, I am more impressed by the essays under 'Capital and Interest' where he logically argues on the link between capital and social progress. I wonder how marxism, communism and socialism spread its shadow over this world even after economists like Bastiat proved brilliantly the undeniable role of capital or money for the very progress and harmony of the society.
It should be noted that Bastiat never denies the role of government, as noted by another reviewer in this space. He makes it clear that as long the government spending or policies meets its utility, its role is perfectly justified. But when there is a pilferage, plunder, extravagance or over-reach; when promises exceeds results, he warns of the consequences of higher opportunity cost lost.
As long as the world has the State and citizens; the rulers and the ruled; the government and the governed, Bastiat and his thoughts would stay alive, in rigour.
A must read.
Originally published as a pamphlet, 'The Law' was written to appeal the public at large. It flows with brilliant eloquence, with sentences constructed in active voice, instructing, revealing and lambasting the over-reach of the government in formation of law to use it as a tool of plunder, instead of employing the same to protect the liberty and property of man. He had further explained how the tariffs, subsidies, free public education, taxation etc, provided in the name of poor, is actually being utilized to plunder one group for promoting the interests of the other. However, 'The Law' does not provide any theoretical explanations for Bastiat's pronouncements.
Herein begins the purpose of economical substantiations provided through his essays.
'Essays on Political Economy'of Bastiat(and his other ones), provides the "science of economy which is necessary for the harmony of the free society". The essays "That which is seen and That which is not seen " explicates the detrimental effects of the social policies formulated without considering the effects of "That which is not seen", which is nothing but the 'Opportunity cost' widely applied today by every economist, accountant, business consultant in calculating the return on investment, public or private. What makes Bastiat a genius is not only that he propounds the concept of 'Opportunity cost' in the most accessible manner(for which we are forever indebted to him) but that he also applies the same to every possible governmental policy formulated in the name of the general goodness - be it taxation, public services, credit backed by state, war, and explains the undue consequences of the same which are apt and accurate to this every day.
Personally, I am more impressed by the essays under 'Capital and Interest' where he logically argues on the link between capital and social progress. I wonder how marxism, communism and socialism spread its shadow over this world even after economists like Bastiat proved brilliantly the undeniable role of capital or money for the very progress and harmony of the society.
It should be noted that Bastiat never denies the role of government, as noted by another reviewer in this space. He makes it clear that as long the government spending or policies meets its utility, its role is perfectly justified. But when there is a pilferage, plunder, extravagance or over-reach; when promises exceeds results, he warns of the consequences of higher opportunity cost lost.
As long as the world has the State and citizens; the rulers and the ruled; the government and the governed, Bastiat and his thoughts would stay alive, in rigour.
A must read.
April 9, 2009
Everyone should require themselves to read this book. Though written in the middle of the 19th century in France, it addresses the important policy questions facing the citizens of the United States (and indeed other nations as well) in a manner so timely one is reminded of the line in Ecclesiastes, "[w:]hat has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun."
It's translation is in the public domain and available for free at gutenberg.org. Stylistically certain portions seem a bit archaic (one essay in particular is composed as a dialogue between the author and another thinker in a manner uncommon these days), but it is utterly comprehensible to a 21st century reader without reference notes (i.e. there is no obsolete diction). The only unfortunate aspect of this book is the realization that the French did not take heed in the 19th century just as it seems unlikely that we will take heed in the present.
It's translation is in the public domain and available for free at gutenberg.org. Stylistically certain portions seem a bit archaic (one essay in particular is composed as a dialogue between the author and another thinker in a manner uncommon these days), but it is utterly comprehensible to a 21st century reader without reference notes (i.e. there is no obsolete diction). The only unfortunate aspect of this book is the realization that the French did not take heed in the 19th century just as it seems unlikely that we will take heed in the present.
November 21, 2015
"it all comes to the same thing: political economy, justice, good sense, are all the same thing"
while this book is not flawless, its central message is of the utmost importance for Humanity and Civilization. Liberty brings the development and prosperity of Mankind and Economics is the science that shows how this is true. All those econometrics of nowadays are just mist that is shrouding common sense and the efforts of fellow human beings to aspire to a better life.
This book was released in 1874, the Marginalist Revolution hadn't even happened, and this man produced a collection of essays that shows that all one has to do in order to understand economics is to accept human nature, human interests and start theorising from the simplest situations, adding a little complexity and understanding how it all comes down to the same thing: savings, prudence and cooperation.
while this book is not flawless, its central message is of the utmost importance for Humanity and Civilization. Liberty brings the development and prosperity of Mankind and Economics is the science that shows how this is true. All those econometrics of nowadays are just mist that is shrouding common sense and the efforts of fellow human beings to aspire to a better life.
This book was released in 1874, the Marginalist Revolution hadn't even happened, and this man produced a collection of essays that shows that all one has to do in order to understand economics is to accept human nature, human interests and start theorising from the simplest situations, adding a little complexity and understanding how it all comes down to the same thing: savings, prudence and cooperation.
September 5, 2009
“That which is Seen …” is probably one of the best political economic essays in existence. If only this was required reading in high school, Bryan Caplans Myth of the Rational Voter may not have been necessary.
April 14, 2013
Not as concise a treatise as "The Law," but it deserves four stars simply for containing the "broken window fallacy." So eloquent and so simple, but apparently beyond the comprehension of Paul Krugman.
March 5, 2008
Economy is generally boring, but Bastiat can be a snoot sometimes, and that's always fun.
November 27, 2008
How did this guy get so dang smart? How can he see things so clearly that people love to confuse? Amazing!
July 14, 2016
Eloquent and brilliant.
July 16, 2011
Excellent stuff. I've said it before, I'll say it again. I love the clarity of thought and the relevance.
Read
February 4, 2012Everyone's reading Hayek's The Road to Serfdom lately--this guy's worth the time invested in making economic reality comprehensible.
September 5, 2012
A series of essays by Bastiat focusing on the duties of government in relation to the liberties of individuals...
Read
November 15, 2015Fantástico, de leitura fácil e clara.
Um livro que todo mundo que se interessa por economia deve ler. A leitura é fácil, sem termos técnicos, e os exemplos continuam atuais.
Um livro que todo mundo que se interessa por economia deve ler. A leitura é fácil, sem termos técnicos, e os exemplos continuam atuais.
July 22, 2015
This is where you start. Bastiat accurately analyzes, dissects and destroys one fallacy and false view after another. He covers economics, government, consequences and the law. This is a must read.
January 22, 2016
Historically relevant, incredibly repetitive.
June 2, 2016
Excellent book, provides great and accessible insights on free market political economy
January 18, 2016
...pay attention to the unseen....
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews