Rating: 
Summary: Interesting thoughts; shame about the attitude
Review: This is the first book that has moved me sufficiently to write a review on Amazon.I found it an entertaining read, with some though-provoking ideas often wittily written up. It is such a shame, though (and I read a review here from someone else with similar views) that the text is threaded so liberally with the author's private conceits. What a very smug and self-satisfied man. Again agreeing with a previous review here, in the end the sheer arrogance becomes offensive and begins to overshadow the arguments being put forward. I'm glad I read the book. I'm also glad, however, that I shall likely never meet Steven E Landsburg.
Rating: 
Summary: the armchair narcissist, perhaps
Review: This may not be the worst book on economics ever written, but it surely ranks among the most narcissitic and self-indulgent. Landsburg explores through 24 short chapters a number of myths, problems and paradoxes that confront the contemporary economist. The problems in the book fall into two general categories. First, Landsburg seems far more interested in proving his own cleverness and superiority than presenting useful discourse. Take this example: "In my experience economists are extraordinary in their openness to alternative preferences, life-styles, and opinions." One senses that Landsburg could go on at length about the intellectual and characterological virtues of economists. Mercifully, one can fit only so much self-praise in such a brief volume. There are other examples, but let one more suffice: "There is an appalling population of otherwise literate adults who prefer the poetry of Rod McKuen to that of William Butler Yeats." He follows this observation with a contrived scenario in which McKuen-lovers buy volumes of Yeats for public display so as to conceal their real preference. Now mass culture is certainly fair game for criticism, but Landsburg's contempt for anyone not a member of the allegedly superior economist class is so pervasive and mean-spritited that it finally is just offensive. He outdoes even himself in one chapter that is nothing more than a puerile diatribe against environmentalism. This arrogance might be tolerable if the text were otherwise virtuous. But failures of substance are legion. Many of the "problems" that he addresses are trite or have trivial solutions. There are numerous examples of inconsistency between chapters and, in at least one case, a hypothetical with analysis that disregards its own assumptions. Finally, some of his commentary is simply jejune, as for example his discussion of air pollution in which obvious externalities are somehow ignored. On the positive side, the book may have some use as a thought-starter; some of the problems posed are thought-provoking. And a pervasive theme -- that obvious solutions to economic problems may well be wrong -- is certainly correct. The failings here are unfortunate. Economics is a poorly understood science; and that poor understanding has led to misguided social and economic policies. Landsburg had an opportunity to produce a really useful volume here but was diverted by his own attempts at cleverness and self-congratulation. Too bad.
Rating:
Summary: the armchair narcissist, perhaps
Review: This may not be the worst book on economics ever written, but it surely ranks among the most narcissitic and self-indulgent. Landsburg explores through 24 short chapters a number of myths, problems and paradoxes that confront the contemporary economist. The problems in the book fall into two general categories. First, Landsburg seems far more interested in proving his own cleverness and superiority than presenting useful discourse. Take this example: "In my experience economists are extraordinary in their openness to alternative preferences, life-styles, and opinions." One senses that Landsburg could go on at length about the intellectual and characterological virtues of economists. Mercifully, one can fit only so much self-praise in such a brief volume. There are other examples, but let one more suffice: "There is an appalling population of otherwise literate adults who prefer the poetry of Rod McKuen to that of William Butler Yeats." He follows this observation with a contrived scenario in which McKuen-lovers buy volumes of Yeats for public display so as to conceal their real preference. Now mass culture is certainly fair game for criticism, but Landsburg's contempt for anyone not a member of the allegedly superior economist class is so pervasive and mean-spritited that it finally is just offensive. He outdoes even himself in one chapter that is nothing more than a puerile diatribe against environmentalism. This arrogance might be tolerable if the text were otherwise virtuous. But failures of substance are legion. Many of the "problems" that he addresses are trite or have trivial solutions. There are numerous examples of inconsistency between chapters and, in at least one case, a hypothetical with analysis that disregards its own assumptions. Finally, some of his commentary is simply jejune, as for example his discussion of air pollution in which obvious externalities are somehow ignored. On the positive side, the book may have some use as a thought-starter; some of the problems posed are thought-provoking. And a pervasive theme -- that obvious solutions to economic problems may well be wrong -- is certainly correct. The failings here are unfortunate. Economics is a poorly understood science; and that poor understanding has led to misguided social and economic policies. Landsburg had an opportunity to produce a really useful volume here but was diverted by his own attempts at cleverness and self-congratulation. Too bad.
Rating:
Summary: A word from an economics student
Review: To be fair, this book has moments that are very funny, some of the funniest I've ever read in economics, and Lansburg provides some economic insights into social problems that are truly enlightening, such as his comments on competition among the sexes for mates, competition among political parties for voter-consumers, and his lucid explanation of what the "random walk" of stock prices really means. However, I could not finish the book for the style in which the ideas are presented. First, the prose is not fluid. Lansburg often wanders in his argumentation, leaving the reader behind to anticipate where he intends to go with his analogies. The result is a lack of transition that makes you want to read the chapters over again to absorb what he is saying. Second, he contrives some overly simple hypotheticals to drive home his points, and these don't even survive a moment's critical reflection. Granted, his economic arguments, however outlandish someone else may think them to be, are correct, but his models are so abstract as to have little relevance in the real world. Most importantly, Lansburg is guilty of making straw men out of his opponents' arguments. More than once Lansburg makes his opponents' arguments into weak, brittle little straw men and then proceeds to hack them apart. Lansburg's arguments are correct and proven in the literature, but he is an argumentative bully. As a final criticism, I would say that a few of the chapters are downright awful.(I wonder if other readers will understand any of it.). On the flipside, Lansburg is very funny, and you won't find any falsehoods in the book. So, my advice is to skip the book, or read discerningly, skimming the poorly written chapters. Economists were never known for their writing ability, but you can probably enjoy a book buy Paul Krugman (Age of Dim., Peddling Prosperity, etc.) a lot more. (Krugman is also more current.) --Lewis Gainor, Mizzou Econ
| 
