Rating: 
Summary: Misleading title
Review: The title of this book is very misleading. It is called "Economics In One Lesson" but a better title would have been "Randomly Selected Economic Myths and Economist Pet Peeves". Although this book is very interesting and makes many good points, it is not a good introduction to economics. It is basically an economist whining about government interference in the economy and common economic myths. This is fine stuff, but it is not "Economics In One Lesson" as the title implies. For an introduction to economics you would be better off getting a good college economics textbook or How the Economy Works by Edmund Mennis.
Rating:
Summary: Fast, simple and dated, with one massive error.
Review: A lot of opinion with few backup examples. Luckily most of the opinions are correct, but some are dated and there is one massive error.
How can economic theory be dated?! Well, this book makes it possible. Written just after WW II and apparently not much revised since, it offers substantial criticism of government efforts such as domestic price controls and make-work programs which are little used today, but which were an enormous part of Roosevelt's "New Deal". If you know something about the New Deal, you will understand Hazlitt's justified backlash fervor.
What's the massive error? It's the claim that foreign trade between nations must quickly balance out because the nations building trade deficits will soon lack the foreign currency to continue importing from the nations with surpluses. While this could theoretically be true in a model in which all the trading nations adhere to a gold standard (and has been true at times), Nixon's 1971 closing of the US gold window, and the advent of pure fiat money almost worldwide, has rendered this theory obsolete. The absolute proof is in the steadily growing US trade and current account deficit over the past couple of decades. Oh sure, eventually the US may equalize imports and exports with China. But how many more DECADES will it take? And, will the US economy still be recognizable? And will the US dollar have any international value? Or domestic value? Will we all be happy when our standard of living is the same as that in China?
Even the great Milton Friedman theorized that trade imbalances are self correcting, without presenting the now obvious fact that the time element in such an equalization could be sufficient to sink a nation.
Rating: 
Summary: Good But Some Holes
Review: Henry Hazlitt's book starts with a single lesson-that economics means looking beyond the immediate effects of any act or policy to the consequences of it for everyone. The rest of the book is a series of short chapters giving examples of the application of this lesson.
Hazlitt's lesson in itself is great. I wish it were better known. His examples vary in quality. Some are a bit dated; natural for a book which mostly dates to 1946. The chapter on rent control is as relevant today as ever. The discussion of the cost of war and other types of destructive activities punctures a misconception that is still common. In his discussion of unemployment, however, he fails to mention immigration and population growth as part of the cause.
The section on tariffs is good as far as it goes. The problem with his analysis is that transportation today is in effect heavily subsidized. Oil companies and the like don't have to pay for the air pollution and climate change caused by their products, or for roads, or for the armies protecting the oil flow. Subsidized transportation costs make nonsense of the idea that local and imported goods are really on the same footing. Free trade with countries having non-existent environmental laws simply sets up a race to the bottom, with responsible companies heading for bankruptcy and irresponsible companies destroying the economic foundations of their own countries.
Hazlitt swallows whole the idea that growth in GNP is always good and can continue indefinitely. Given that GNP doesn't include the costs of pollution, resource depletion, the effects of population growth, or quality of life, this is very questionable. Hazlitt needs to apply his own "one lesson" here.
Hazlitt states in his first sentence that economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known to man. I tend to agree. Hazlitt points out some of them and does it in a very readable way. Hazlitt fails with some of the other fallacies. Read the book, but read it with a grain of salt.
Rating: 
Summary: Great economics starter!
Review: Having poor public schooling on economics, I decided to pick this book up. This is the perfect starter book for anyone wanting to learn about economics. Relatively short book, just goes through major topics each chapter. Short and to the point. After this book, I would recommend "Naked Economics" by Charles Wheelan. I started off reading Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell, and in comparison, this is a much easier read. I think I might have started backwards. =). A must read for beginners.
Rating:
Summary: A Political pamphlet all the way
Review: This book seems to be a political pamphlet, all the way. I like the narrative approach though. Too much anger at the government I guess. Analysis please. Reader will draw their own conclusions.
|
