What do you think?
Rate this book
Everlasting Light Bulbs
Can economics be fun? Is it relevant to everyday life? John Kay believes passionately that the answer to both questions is yes and in this collection of essays, based on his widely acclaimed "Financial Times" columns, he sets out to prove it. In this book, you will learn why modern advertisements frequently convey no information, understand that tailgating drivers and hedge fund managers are victims of the same illusions, appreciate the inefficiency of Christmas giving, and benefit from the economic lessons of a romantic evening at the Elizabeth restaurant thirty years ago. You will find here acerbic commentary on the boom and bust in financial markets, a wide ranging guide to the latest economic ideas, and a demonstration that complex analysis can be made accessible through lucid exposition and dry humour.
- GenresEconomicsNonfiction
184 pages, Paperback
First published September 20, 2004
2 people are currently reading
78 people want to read
About the author
John Kay
67 books182 followersI was born in Edinburgh, Scotland in 1948, and completed my schooling and undergraduate education in that city: I am fortunate to have lived most of my life in beautiful places. I went to the University of Edinburgh to study mathematics. But, after taking a subsidiary course in economics, I decided that I wanted to be an economist. The notion that one might understand society better through the application of rigorous and logical analysis excited me – and it still does. After graduating from Edinburgh, I went to Nuffield College, Oxford. I worked there under James Mirrlees, who was in due course to win the Nobel Prize for his contributions to economic theory.
On Mirrlees’s advice, I applied for and to my astonishment got a permanent teaching post in the University of Oxford at the embarrassingly early age of 21. Oxford is a collegiate university – members of the faculty generally have both University and College appointments. This post carried with it a fellowship at St John’s College, an association which I have maintained and enjoyed ever since. Through the 1970s I developed a conventional academic career, publishing in academic journals, and writing my first book Concentration in Modern Industry (with Leslie Hannah, an economic historian colleague). My particular interests were in public finance and industrial organisation.
But my rationale for studying economics had, from the beginning, been concerned for application. My career began to change direction when I was asked to join a group to review the structure of the British tax system. This group was established under the auspices of a newly established think tank, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, and was headed by James Meade, another economist who had achieved the ultimate distinction of a Nobel prize. Meade’s rigour was as demanding as that of Mirrlees, (both delivered it with extraordinary personal charm). But the most important effect of my experience with the Meade Committee was that I began to develop a taste for the popular exposition of economic concepts.
In this vein, I wrote (with Mervyn King, now Governor of the Bank of England) a more personal account of issues in taxation, The British Tax System which ran through five editions.
Pursuing these interests, I moved from Oxford and joined the Institute for Fiscal Studies as its first research director. Soon after I became Director of the Institute. IFS developed into (and remains) one of Britain’s leading think tanks, respected and feared by policymakers and journalists for its fiercely independent analysis of fiscal issues.
After seven years, I decided it was time to move on. The success of IFS had been built on serious economics accompanied by a commitment to popularisation and application. If this could be done for public policy issues, could the same be done in the area of business policy? This was the thinking that led me to accept a chair at the London Business School in 1986 and, at the same time, to establish a consulting company, London Economics.
Over the next few years, the application of economics to business issues became my intellectual focus. During this period, London Economics grew rapidly, largely on the back of the wave of privatisation and regulatory change in Britain in the 1980s. By 1991, managing the company had become a major responsibility. I revised my arrangements with London Business School. My new contract was as Visiting Professor but my job as executive chairman of London Economics took the larger part of my time. London Economics grew until, by its tenth anniversary, its annual turnover exceeded £10m with offices in three continents and assignments in over sixty countries.
London Economics gave me insights into the business world. These came both through consultancy work with major corporations and first hand observation of the growth and development of a small business. Other activities have enriched my more scholarly work by broadening the experi
On Mirrlees’s advice, I applied for and to my astonishment got a permanent teaching post in the University of Oxford at the embarrassingly early age of 21. Oxford is a collegiate university – members of the faculty generally have both University and College appointments. This post carried with it a fellowship at St John’s College, an association which I have maintained and enjoyed ever since. Through the 1970s I developed a conventional academic career, publishing in academic journals, and writing my first book Concentration in Modern Industry (with Leslie Hannah, an economic historian colleague). My particular interests were in public finance and industrial organisation.
But my rationale for studying economics had, from the beginning, been concerned for application. My career began to change direction when I was asked to join a group to review the structure of the British tax system. This group was established under the auspices of a newly established think tank, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, and was headed by James Meade, another economist who had achieved the ultimate distinction of a Nobel prize. Meade’s rigour was as demanding as that of Mirrlees, (both delivered it with extraordinary personal charm). But the most important effect of my experience with the Meade Committee was that I began to develop a taste for the popular exposition of economic concepts.
In this vein, I wrote (with Mervyn King, now Governor of the Bank of England) a more personal account of issues in taxation, The British Tax System which ran through five editions.
Pursuing these interests, I moved from Oxford and joined the Institute for Fiscal Studies as its first research director. Soon after I became Director of the Institute. IFS developed into (and remains) one of Britain’s leading think tanks, respected and feared by policymakers and journalists for its fiercely independent analysis of fiscal issues.
After seven years, I decided it was time to move on. The success of IFS had been built on serious economics accompanied by a commitment to popularisation and application. If this could be done for public policy issues, could the same be done in the area of business policy? This was the thinking that led me to accept a chair at the London Business School in 1986 and, at the same time, to establish a consulting company, London Economics.
Over the next few years, the application of economics to business issues became my intellectual focus. During this period, London Economics grew rapidly, largely on the back of the wave of privatisation and regulatory change in Britain in the 1980s. By 1991, managing the company had become a major responsibility. I revised my arrangements with London Business School. My new contract was as Visiting Professor but my job as executive chairman of London Economics took the larger part of my time. London Economics grew until, by its tenth anniversary, its annual turnover exceeded £10m with offices in three continents and assignments in over sixty countries.
London Economics gave me insights into the business world. These came both through consultancy work with major corporations and first hand observation of the growth and development of a small business. Other activities have enriched my more scholarly work by broadening the experi
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
December 13, 2020
Good collections of small articles, pity he didn't go into it in more detail for the book.
September 12, 2023
Collection of small articles (columns I presume) from the late 90s, early 2000s, about various economic topics. Has lost quite a bit of its insight and humour in the intervening years.
October 11, 2009
Being a student of economics books with the aim of explaining the subject to people with a non economics background usually do little for me. Everlasting Light Bulbs was different. The theories were explained with an unusual amount of depth, without sacrificing clarity and accessibility and so obtaining a wide readership potential.
Perhaps the books greatest asset is the application of economic theory to the modern world. Textbooks generally explain that few economic rules apply to 100% of cases but with the exception of the "major" theories provide little reasoning as to why not. John Key analyses these ideas showing how in some cases the rules are little more than weak guides as to what might happen.
The book is a collection of articles he has written in his career and come in a variety of forms ranging from letters to friends to simple analysis. Sometimes these formats distract from the content of the piece and I found myself skipping one or two out of annoyance, but on the whole it works rather well. Another negative is that in some cases Kay moves away from the initial question, the final answer is still of interest but that is no excuse.
On a minor note: this book had a special appeal to me because many people have through my life explained in conspiracy theory like manner how cigarettes that do not cause cancer or another bad effects (including addiction) are in existence, they taste no different from the regular kind and so are of great appeal to everybody. The trouble is that firms are unwilling to sell them because it would lead to a loss of revenue as the addicts could safely distance themselves from the product. The title of the book and the corresponding article inside expose the many flaws in this line of reasoning.
In short this is an excellent economics title which I enjoyed reading, the flaws while annoying do little to dim its appeal.
Perhaps the books greatest asset is the application of economic theory to the modern world. Textbooks generally explain that few economic rules apply to 100% of cases but with the exception of the "major" theories provide little reasoning as to why not. John Key analyses these ideas showing how in some cases the rules are little more than weak guides as to what might happen.
The book is a collection of articles he has written in his career and come in a variety of forms ranging from letters to friends to simple analysis. Sometimes these formats distract from the content of the piece and I found myself skipping one or two out of annoyance, but on the whole it works rather well. Another negative is that in some cases Kay moves away from the initial question, the final answer is still of interest but that is no excuse.
On a minor note: this book had a special appeal to me because many people have through my life explained in conspiracy theory like manner how cigarettes that do not cause cancer or another bad effects (including addiction) are in existence, they taste no different from the regular kind and so are of great appeal to everybody. The trouble is that firms are unwilling to sell them because it would lead to a loss of revenue as the addicts could safely distance themselves from the product. The title of the book and the corresponding article inside expose the many flaws in this line of reasoning.
In short this is an excellent economics title which I enjoyed reading, the flaws while annoying do little to dim its appeal.
September 4, 2011
This is the first economics (or "pop econ") book I've ever read, and I found it very interesting. It was recommended to me by a couple of friends, one of whom has recently retrained (as most friends my age seem to be doing lately) as an economist. He was right when he said, of the list of 8 books he recommended, that this would be a good one to start with.
It's essentially a collection of essays and columns written over a 7 year period. Aside from a couple of standalone essays, the book is organised into 6 broad categories or topics that provide good coverage of aspects of economics that I was unaware affected aspects of society, our history and my everyday life.
It lends weight to Ben Goldacre's assertion that any throwaway explanation for something is "probably a bit more complicated than that", which dovetails nicely into Tim Harford's TED talk in July 2011. I don't mean the difficulty of understanding economics (though that exists), but rather that the cause of any given problem cannot be explained away with a simple "well it's because of X". Nothing's that simple. And this book illustrates that very well.
It's essentially a collection of essays and columns written over a 7 year period. Aside from a couple of standalone essays, the book is organised into 6 broad categories or topics that provide good coverage of aspects of economics that I was unaware affected aspects of society, our history and my everyday life.
It lends weight to Ben Goldacre's assertion that any throwaway explanation for something is "probably a bit more complicated than that", which dovetails nicely into Tim Harford's TED talk in July 2011. I don't mean the difficulty of understanding economics (though that exists), but rather that the cause of any given problem cannot be explained away with a simple "well it's because of X". Nothing's that simple. And this book illustrates that very well.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews