The best
Theory of Economics books:
Reddit reviews
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The best of Theory of Economics books by number of unique Reddit comments:
Top Reddit reviews mentioning Theory of Economics books:
I recently read Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty - In the book Piketty suggests that the return on capital is now so much higher than the return on labor that traditional income taxes would not be very effective for increasing the tax contributions of the extremely wealthy. Let me know if I'm off-base here, but wouldn't a 90% top income tax bracket just hit a small number of very high earning professionals like doctors, lawyers, etc.?
Correct. Read Piketty's book Capital in the 21st century.
The market if left to its own devices, will over time, bring us all back to feudalism. As ever larger shares of wealth travel in ever fewer amount of hands. Someone eventually wins the Monopoly game.
I don't disagree that Piketey has probably got it right, that if we don't make it our business as regular people to transition into interest bearing stuff, by way of the market, we have trouble.
The real concern is that Boomers, most definitely did "break" America by way of acceding to the notion that they could have "everything" without having to work for it, the notion of "pay it later" or "leave it for the kids" is EXACTLY what became respectable during the 1980's.
It turned the United States from an aspirant republic capable or generating wealth by way of fostering upward mobility, and through decades of disinvestment in schools, healthcare and infrastructure, to say nothing of militarizing the civic services, we ended up in short order, in an Ayn Rand inspired dystopia, where the engineers and "smart people" all were told to work 80 hours a week and do well, the "moochers" did FAR worse, and at the end of the day the "best and brightest" got the shaft, at some raw outsourcing deal.
So while there are winners in our society, the Mark Z's, and Eric Princes of our society, they were going to do just fine whether fortune smiled heavily or lightly upon them, that they just make it clear, that in fact we've become a casino / winner take all type economy.
It's a massive regression, so instead of public services and intentionally socializing major industrial/economic benefit projects, we wait on the hopeful benevolent patronage of some hyperwealthy person who can personally fund moon-launches, mars colonies. One wonders if they don't name the first colony Galt's Gulch.
What's screwed up is to see the boomers vigorously fuck over their own children and grandchildren so they don't have to think too much about any sort of responsibility or cost to themselves.
The 'me' generation all the way.
Actually don't need to be tech-savvy, just economic-savvy(and if you're in this sub without knowing basic economics, you get McNuked :3).
Bitcoin mining can use various types of hardware to mine(including Graphic Processing Units/GPUs, such as the GTX 1080s in the OP).
Thus, demand for GPUs has increased. What happens to prices when demand increases?
That is why OP is butthurt about Bitcoin.
^(or the shortages in case there wasn't a price increase)
I think you will be surprised to learn that what you have come to understand about neoliberalism and the positions supported by this sub are not always in alignment.
Make sure to read <em>Why Nations Fail</em>. Your first book report is due in two weeks.
Both Economics in One Lesson and Basic Economics are golden, though for very different reasons.
Economics is One Lesson starts with a truth that is obvious and simple once you hear it explained. You think to yourself, "Well, yeah. Who could possibly think otherwise?" And then you hop onto Reddit and see that a substantial preponderance of Reddit are afflicted with a mindset and beliefs that fly in the face of this simple truth. It then spends time expanding on this truth and applying it to tons of different things that you wouldn't intuitively see it applying to.
Basic Economics is better though. Both are well worth reading, but Sowell's work is incredibly comprehensive. When I read it, it didn't come across as someone trying to prove any world view, as tends to be the case from so many economists. It is him simply seeking to explain economics to someone who is new to the field. To his credit, he uses terminology that is accessible to anyone and doesn't spend a single moment trying to prove to how smart he is. (Though his brilliance is immediately evident.) Its most important quality is that it doesn't ask you to partake in a string of thought experiments to reach some grand conclusions. Every assertion he makes is supported by multiple studies and historical examples. This happens time and time again. And the bolder the claim, the more evidence he provides. It's remarkable.
While it does weigh in at 700-ish pages, Basic Economics is almost certainly the perfect book for getting your feet wet when in economics.
> The crisis in VZ is a product of lack of diversification and an over reliance on the oil economy to fund social programs.
This is simply nonsense. The crisis in VZ is a product of:
- Price and currency controls
- Corruption and mismanagement in nationalized industries
> how does participation [this] make VZ an example of socialism?
It makes it a perfect example of everything Hayek predicted would result from central/collectivist economies. That the whole thing devolves into starvation and oppression is no head-scratcher. It's right on script.
Do you honestly believe that if a billionaire makes a dollar, that it somehow prevents you from making a dollar as well? Do you think that there is legitimately a finite amount of money in this world? Do you think that billionaires actually have a scrooge mcduck vault full of all their billions? Cause if you've answered yes to any of this I recommend you read this book :
https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Common-Sense-Economy/dp/0465022529
It does look like to the majority of the left, but that's not the case. If you have an example, I can do my best to explain the stance (whether or not I agree with it). But, I will say that a lot of regulation that intends to protect the poor from the rich actually ends up being counter-productive. The goals of a regulation are often very different from the incentives it creates. The best example of that, I think, is rent control. The goals of rent control are very noble, but the perverse incentives it creates actually end up greatly reducing the amount and quality of available low-income housing. Thomas Sowell goes into in the book I'm reading, which I think you can read on the Amazon page w/o needing Prime or to buy a copy. If you click the "Look Inside" button above the image of the cover, you should be able to get to the section on Price Controls. The first in-depth section is on rent control. Ya know, if you're interested. It's a dry subject, but I think Sowell does a great job of making it understandable to those of that aren't economists.
Also, and I'm not saying you're definitely making this mistake, but a mistake a ton of people make is that they think the economy and wealth are zero-sum. The far-left subs (r/LateStageCapitalism etc) routinely misunderstand how net worth is calculated and what it actually means.
It was definitely Freakanomics. Discussed the (I believe Indian?) PhD student who immersed himself in a prominent Chicago gang and you're exactly right. He found out the structure and function of criminal organizations are practically identical to regular orgs.
Super interesting stuff and I highly recommend the book to anyone. It's a very easy read and pretty captivating.
Probably a good time to read The Road to Serfdom, or at least to flick through the brief illustrated version.
There’s been some fascinating research about how most “popular” revolutions are attempts by the indebted to tear down the system and reset their finances. This book has some great stories.
There was also a big article in the Washington Post about how many of the insurrectionists had tax problems and bad debts. Babbitt was just one of many, but since she’s the one who took a bullet to the neck her family is going to use that to try to make some coin.
You only need the part after "dp". Check this out:
Will take you to the same page as:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0307719227/
Good URL hygiene is important!
Dear Reddit:
I am so sick of this type of ignorant statement being up-voted. Please read 'Basic Economics' by Thomas Sowell.
It is only 635 pages, and then we can get back to talking about these types of topics like rational actors.
I don't get your fixation on the raw number of shares someone holds it should be on the amount of money the have in it. If you have 100k worth of a company A with 10 shares and 100k worth of company B with 5 shares and they both pay a dividend of 10% you'll still get paid 10k from both companies regardless of the amount of shares you have.
I will agree though as I have numerous times throughout this thread that wealth inequality is a problem and I would 100% not want money being concentrated in the higher parts of society.
Yes I agree 10000% that the fed's lowered interest rates which have allowed for the growth of capital/assets to be higher than the growth in the economy leads to worsening wealth inequality, which Thomas Piketty extremely thoroughly discusses in his book Capital.
What I've been trying to get at (although badly, sorry slow day) is that given the circumstances that we've been dealt, and with the knowledge that the Fed's actions do help the economy recover and lessen the effects from a recession, and "as long as we don’t see inflation on the consumer side" during the Fed's efforts I dont see a problem with the lowered rates.
The main problem is how long it took the economy to recover and the length at which the fed kept it's policies in place, which I why I stated that I hope we start to see a continuation of the precovid labor market as well as large gains with wages so that the Fed can start to ease off its easy credit policies fast and asset prices can drop/stabilize.
I recommend <em>Capital in the 21st Century</em>. It's an extensive study of income, economy growth, capital, and how it all relates to the rising rates of inequality in the world. It finishes with tentative policy recommendations for governments to look into to counteract the inevitable market trends.
It's written by an economist, so it is kind of number heavy, but I think it's worth getting through.
It's the immigration law that creates that grey market. I pointed this out in my first post. You are effectively arguing against the restrictions on immigration.
I've read Basic Economics. Have you?
Not to make this political. But everyone should care. Global inequality is at all time highs.
We can feed and clothe the poor many times over and we choose not to. We destroy the environment and pollute our bodies in the name of economic growth. It ultimately leads to civil unrest, which we are experiencing now, because people can’t get by working full time jobs. They can’t afford health care. They can’t provide for their families. The middle class is disappearing and being replaced by what amounts to modern day slaves.
Capital in the Twenty First Century is on my reading list and covers some of these topics.
Bezos doesn't have enough liquid assets to buy even 1% of coastline.
Let's assume that someone 1000x more rich than Bezos wants to go with your plan.
For arguments sake lets say the cost of the coast *today* is 500 trillion. The exact values don't matter much as you'll see.
Over the course of a year Super Bezos buys up 99% of the coast and spends almost 500 trillion.
The last 1% of coast at the end of the year will be worth 500 trillion.
Again don't get too caught up on the numbers. We don't know how much exactly the entire coast costs or how much the last 1% of coast will appreciate due to the other 99% being taken off the market. What we *do* know is that the cost of the remaining coast is going to trend upwards in a nonlinear fashion.
It's the same thing as buying the last remaining diamond for sale on Earth in the year 2350. That diamond is going to cost a hell of a lot more than the same diamond today when they are plentiful.
Make sense?
I highly recommend this book.
https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Thomas-Sowell/dp/0465060730
Money is just an instrument of exchange and to store value. Without a currency people would need to barter. Check Basic Economics: A Common Sense Guide to the Economy.
>If you were about facts over feelings you wouldn't be for supply side economics. Give a rich person money and they hoard it. Give a poor person money and they spend it.
Wealth isnt zero sum, unless you think wealthy people stuff all their cash in their mattress. Please stop talking about how you have facts if you don't understand this, its like economics 101.
>do even a little research and you'll find out tax cuts to the poor have a correlation with increased economic activity whereas tax cuts to the rich do not.
This is provably false considering that close to half of America consume more in government services than they pay in federal income taxes.
>Less spending? Take a look at Clinton vs Bush or Obama vs Trump. The deficit and national debt have increased more under Republican presidents than under Democrats.
False obamas deficit was close to 7 trillion, which is double Trumps deficit.
I'm going to stop here because its kind of embarrassing how fundamentally misinformed you are. Instead of lecturing people on reddit about shit you don't know, go read a book.
Preferably this one....
Regulations, taxes, and central banking are exactly what creations monopolies. They are the only thing that does.
Please learn the basics of markets, try some econ 101
i already read the Communist Manifesto if you're wondering;
The only difference between me and you is that i also read this book
https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Common-Sense-Economy/dp/0465060730
Sure, here is a source to get you started
Once you have finished that one, we can move on to more advanced sources and history.
Counter to the popular linear theory of currency progression, barter is a system that exists when there is little trust between the engaging parties. When there is trust, credit systems appear, even in primitive societies.
So in a complete societal breakdown, you and some guy you meet on the road might barter some food for medicine while holding shotguns on each other for fear of theft. You probably won't be holding a gun on your father-in-law if he wants to buy some of that medicine from you, and if he currently has nothing you want in trade you will still give him the medicine he needs because he's part of your communal support system and it's understood that he will owe you something in return, specified or unspecified, at a later date.
> Mild inflation encourages investment, which grows the economy. Deflation encourages the exact opposite.
Mild inflation, being theft, encourages malinvestment to avoid being robbed. People blindly investing in bloated beasts they barely understand doesnt nothing positive economically.
> Deflation encourages the exact opposite.
Deflation encourages economizing, thrift, durability, and only making smart investments instead of reckless malinvestments. Delfation is the natural state of a growing society.
> Economics 101.
I highly suggest you learn it Its clear you have taken nothing but arts level emotional econishmish
> And yes, the FDIC has made thousands upon thousands of people whole.
Good luck getting the FDIC make your dollars gain back their lost value. If you want to believe that then you probably also believe in santa claus.
>Government wasn’t as big, and we weren’t giving that much handouts back than then
That doesn't address his point about how the wealthiest are taxed. Did you know that they used to pay at least 70% of their income in tax and now generally pay less than 15%, sometimes zero? If you want sources, let me know, but first let me know that you're not one of those types that only accepts right-wing sources.
​
>I agree that the trickle down affect of the tax break affects the bottom employee/worker the least. If there was a better way to motivate/improve on Capitalism then I’m all ears.
If you're really all ears, read Capital in the Twenty-First Century. At least read some of the Amazon reviews for it. We're very far from needing to speculate on how capitalism can be reformed, and the answer is one we used for the 30-40 most prosperous years in the history of humanity, progressive taxation.
> Yeah I’ve learned basic economics and this ain’t it man.
Ask for a refund, because this is in fact it. Supply and demand, savings and trade.
> But have a nice day.
You as well. I humbly recommend this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Thomas-Sowell/dp/0465060730
It's infuriating that Conservatives still haul out Klein's "you don't buy groceries with your savings" line as if it explains the economy. If every politician read Stephanie Kelton's The Deficit Myth, our world might actually start moving forward.