<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Too bad Galbraith isn't much of an economist.
Review: Galbraith is a very clear writer. He rarely uses technical jargon or mathematics. But unlike some other popular writers, it isn't because he is able to explain complex phenomena without them. He doesn't appear to understand them. This book reads like a fairy tale or child's letter to Santa Claus. Mr. Galbraith doesn't seem to understand economics well enough to pass economics 101. But he does have an excellent command of the English language.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting ideas poorly communicated
Review: Galbraith's insight on society unfortunately gets lost in a maze of double negatives and confusing sentence structure. His ideas are sound, though he has a very off-putting pompous delivery. In fact, his verbosity and poor structure is so bad, that it turns what should be a slim read into a fairly mind-numbing experience. The book really needs to go back to an editor.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting ideas poorly communicated
Review: Galbraith's insight on society unfortunately gets lost in a maze of double negatives and confusing sentence structure. His ideas are sound, though he has a very off-putting pompous delivery. In fact, his verbosity and poor structure is so bad, that it turns what should be a slim read into a fairly mind-numbing experience. The book really needs to go back to an editor.
Rating: 
Summary: A practical advocate for a more humane economy
Review: Galbraith's main point has less to do with any specific policy than with his belief that rigid ideologues advocate for flawed and potentially dangerous political and economic systems. He argues that capitalism is by far the most responsive and effective economic system given our nature and needs, but that pure market capitalism comes up short in many significant respects. He does exhibit his own bias in some chapters when he ignores matters of degree in favor of more dramatic claims, but his proposals are not controversial by most standards-we need a safety net, environmental regulation is necessary, etc. I couldn't relate to most of the negative reviews/remarks here. Among them: Galbraith, onetime speechwriter for presidents, editor of Fortune magazine, and prolific author, is inarticulate to the point of incoherence; Galbraith, a onetime Harvard economics professor and head of the American Economic Association, lacks any understanding of economics; Galbraith's ideas are silly; etc. This is a book arguing that capitalism must be tempered if it is to serve society well. Someone who believes that environmental regulations, zoning laws, a progressive income tax, and organizations like the SEC are unnecessary impediments to economic growth will have a hard time with Galbraith. Others will likely recognize that the criticisms of capitalism he levels here are, to some debatable extent, legitimate.
Rating: 
Summary: It' s useful for his enemy
Review: I have two reasons for putting a high value of this book, First, I truly appreciate Mr. Galbraith's style. Its sentence is compact, logic is clear, and expression is eloquent...in short, his style is incredibly excellent. Second, it's useful. Reading this compact book,you can understand 'liberal's good society.'I believe nobody can misunderstand Mr. Galbraith's opinion. If you are a 'liberal', to read this book must be a pleasure. And, if you belong to 'conservative', missing opportunity to know your enemy is not clever.
Rating:
Summary: A book that will make you laugh and frighten you
Review: Mr. Galbraith is smart, accomplished, and learned man who knows what is best for all us. His view of a good society differs from past visions of societal utopia. Rather than a completely coercive state directing the actions of its citizens to some hirer calling, Mr. Galbraith aims to be `practical' and just further defines the third way. Nonetheless, his proposal of what makes a good society is not the classical liberal view and it is more attuned to the European model of society. Many of his proposals are so silly you won't take them seriously. But sadly, he is quite serious. For example, Mr. Galbraith states that in a good society everyone should have a rewarding life. Of course, he never defines the standard by which society should judge whether or not a life is rewarding. Neither does he address what one should do if their life is un-rewarding and what the obligation is of society to fulfill that vision of a rewarding life. And, of course, who is the `rewarding life judge' and does this judge have the authority of the state to take something from someone (who has a life that is deemed too rewarding) for someone who has life that is too un-rewarding. Mr. Galbraith fails to convince the reader of the practicality of his proposals and ends up straddling a line between socialism and capitalism, and saying nothing new.
Rating:
Summary: A Treatise for Economic Justice
Review: This book is on my short shelf of most important books of this era, in that Galbraith takes the work of his earlier economic analyses over many books, and gives an all-humanity based outline to consider for the 21st century.Those who dismiss this book as non-economic I fear are stuck within narrow definitions, as opposed to the more human-based origins of the word economics (from oikonomia, home management). It is this narrow definition that is prone to the boom-bust cycles Galbraith discusses in earlier historical works on the history of modern economics, and is part ofthe current recessional problem. This book is a cry for human-based economics, and would be a good book study or resource for businesses, community organizations, or churches around North America.
<< 1 >>
|
