What do you think?
Rate this book
Principles of Economics
In writing this textbook, Mankiw has tried to put himself in the position of someone seeing economics for the first time. The author's conversational writing style presents the politics and science of economic theories to tomorrow's decision-makers.
848 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1997
693 people are currently reading
6636 people want to read
About the author
N. Gregory Mankiw
386 books300 followersNicholas Gregory Mankiw is an American macroeconomist who is currently the Robert M. Beren Professor of Economics at Harvard University. Mankiw is best known in academia for his work on New Keynesian economics.
Mankiw has written widely on economics and economic policy. As of February 2020, the RePEc overall ranking based on academic publications, citations, and related metrics put him as the 45th most influential economist in the world, out of nearly 50,000 registered authors. He was the 11th most cited economist and the 9th most productive research economist as measured by the h-index. In addition, Mankiw is the author of several best-selling textbooks, writes a popular blog, and has since 2007 written approximately monthly for the Sunday business section of The New York Times. According to the Open Syllabus Project, Mankiw is the most frequently cited author on college syllabi for economics courses.
Mankiw is a conservative, and has been an economic adviser to several Republican politicians. From 2003 to 2005, Mankiw was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush. In 2006, he became an economic adviser to Mitt Romney, and worked with Romney during his presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012. In October 2019, he announced that he was no longer a Republican because of his discontent with President Donald Trump and the Republican Party
Mankiw has written widely on economics and economic policy. As of February 2020, the RePEc overall ranking based on academic publications, citations, and related metrics put him as the 45th most influential economist in the world, out of nearly 50,000 registered authors. He was the 11th most cited economist and the 9th most productive research economist as measured by the h-index. In addition, Mankiw is the author of several best-selling textbooks, writes a popular blog, and has since 2007 written approximately monthly for the Sunday business section of The New York Times. According to the Open Syllabus Project, Mankiw is the most frequently cited author on college syllabi for economics courses.
Mankiw is a conservative, and has been an economic adviser to several Republican politicians. From 2003 to 2005, Mankiw was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush. In 2006, he became an economic adviser to Mitt Romney, and worked with Romney during his presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012. In October 2019, he announced that he was no longer a Republican because of his discontent with President Donald Trump and the Republican Party
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 150 reviews
March 18, 2019
There are many academic books in the field of economics but this one is best. It holds everything that a student is looking for in an academic book. The language is pretty simple and consists of many things like eloquence, elegancy, good examples, understandable graphs and most important FYI(for your information).
Overall, the book is an impressive piece. If you are a student of economics or not and wants to understand the principles of it you should surely consider this book.
Overall, the book is an impressive piece. If you are a student of economics or not and wants to understand the principles of it you should surely consider this book.
February 7, 2022
The economics of economics? No, this has likely already been researched.
The economics of books? No, there has already been at least some analysis of modern book markets.
The economics of teaching economics, such as economics textbooks? Perhaps, though not interesting enough for me.
The economics of book reviews? Perhaps. There seems to be relatively little research on the economics of reviews, so this might be worthwhile.
The economics of learning economics? Yes, this one would be interesting, and would correlate to both my and others' experiences in learning economics.
Let us begin.
In general, to the degree economics describes universal phenomena within the confines of scarcity, the knowledge of economics improves an individual significantly. The knowledge of economics may permit one to allocate resources more optimally, resulting in one moving from within to towards their production possibilities frontier. Alternatively, such knowledge may also expand the total production possibilities frontier of an individual. These effects could, of course, be said to be the effects of learning much knowledge in general.
To possess an absolute advantage of knowledge may be said to be a few things. One could be the ability to apply knowledge better than others, despite having less total relevant knowledge. An example of this may be someone who can utilize or deduce from even the most elementary axioms of mathematics to solve a given problem compared to someone who needed to possess relatively more relevant knowledge such as latter steps or more condensed and tailored axioms to solve the same problem. Another example may be someone who, despite little overall knowledge or education, has the ability to understand and solve problems not directly in their purview. These examples have been solely in regards to solving problems and applying knowledge though. A better definition and set of examples may be in that of creating new knowledge. For example, despite some individuals having amassed great amounts of knowledge and having read widely, they nonetheless do not produce any novel insights or knowledge. Such individuals would have a very low absolute advantage of knowledge.
The opportunity cost of knowledge is most often time and energy, and inevitably money either directly or through second order opportunity costs. Interestingly, the opportunity cost of knowledge can vary depending on many factors. For example, the abilities of individuals to learn various types of knowledge creates disparities in their opportunity costs. Furthermore, the opportunity costs of knowledge may at times be dynamic, not just static.
Thus, a comparative advantage of knowledge is where some individuals are able to learn and apply knowledge at a lower opportunity cost than others.
Based upon this, individuals trade knowledge via communication. Individuals import and export knowledge. To read an economics textbook is to import knowledge because it was produced and packaged at a lower opportunity cost than what an individual would be able to do themselves.
The market for knowledge is large, however the market for knowledge about economics is relatively smaller.
In the information age, the market for most any knowledge may be said to be a competitive market.
The quantity demanded for knowledge of economics is very low as individuals, although very likely able to learn it, have little to no desire to do so.
The law of demand dictates that the demand for knowledge of economics rose when the opportunity cost of it decreased such as in the information age.
Knowledge of economics may best be analogized to be a normal good rather than an inferior good.
The closest substitute for knowledge of economics is likely knowledge of business.
The closest complement for knowledge of economics may be said to be forms in which it is packaged. For example, if the opportunity cost of books, courses, videos, and instructors increased, then so too the demand for knowledge of economics may decrease. However, to foreshadow, if the opportunity cost increases, and thus quantity supplied of individuals with knowledge of economics decreases, then the total value and and quantity demanded for individuals with knowledge of economics would increase. This would best be described as a shortage. A surplus would result from opposite pretexts. In sum, this demonstrates the law of supply and demand, along with the corresponding equilibriums.
Knowledge of economics likely has low elasticity.
Price ceilings for the knowledge of economics only explicitly exist in the form of the maximum cost for courses from public universities, and perhaps also for textbooks in general. Price ceilings may exist implicitly such as for basic utilities and resources for the acquisition of knowledge of economics such as internet, electricity, telecommunications, and libraries.
Price floors for the knowledge of economics perhaps do not exist.
The willingness to pay for knowledge of economics is likely very non linear, since the demand is already so low and there is low elasticity. Those who desire it will likely go to greater lengths to obtain it than those who do not desire it.
As such, the consumer surplus for knowledge of economics is very high. In this sense, knowledge of economics is an excellent allocation of resources for the well being of individuals.
The degree to which there is producer surplus for the knowledge of economics varies depending on the context. For example, if taking business as the application of economics, then it seems many sufficiently profit solely from selling watered down knowledge of such. There are many MBAs, business gurus, and entrepreneurs, however very few innovators.
Knowledge of economics has extremely high efficiency, however contingent and varying equality.
Because there are little interventions for the knowledge of economics, there is little existent deadweight loss.
The world price for the knowledge of economics is distinct from the world price for the credentialed education of economics. Knowledge related to economics has a very low world price, however credentials for knowledge related to economics has a very high world price. (Though, it does not seem the higher cost and perceived quality of education in the United States sets or significantly influences the world price.)
Tariffs for the knowledge of economics only exist in accordance to the format and medium in which the knowledge of economics is beheld. For example, imported books, foreign instructors and their income taxation, etc.
Knowledge of economics likely has positive externalities on average. To the degree economics may have negative externalities, this could be internalized using corrective taxes in the form of increasing the costs for the acquisition of knowledge of economics. This would, however, be an indirect form of censorship. (I am now curious whether there has ever been a state, perhaps socialist in nature, that has explicitly censored knowledge of economics. In a way, since economics is closely aligned with free markets for the purposes of demonstration and idealization, this in turn closely aligns with democracy. At a bare minimum it seems that for a socialist state to even partially censor knowledge of democracy would in turn censor knowledge of economics and thereby be a form of internalizing externalities.)
Knowledge of economics is not rival in consumption, however it is partially excludable depending on its format. As such, it may vary between being a club good and a public good. Free riders for the knowledge of economics are those who benefit in the form of consumer surplus from tertiary order effects from individuals who apply knowledge of economics, which may be said to be a positive externality.
This review is a rudimentary form of cost benefit analysis of the knowledge of economics.
Knowledge of economics, compared to all other knowledge, has very high potential for increasing total revenue (both abstractly, via the well being of the individual, and literally, via monetary benefits).
As mentioned before, the total cost for the acquisition of knowledge of economics can vary depending on the individual.
The profit for knowledge of economics, as a result of the relative potential revenue and likely cost, is extremely high compared to other types of knowledge.
The explicit costs are components or forms that have a monetary value such as this book. The implicit costs would be the other mentioned variables from opportunity costs. Regardless, both the economic profit and accounting profit for knowledge of economics is very high.
There are two means of proceeding for the knowledge of economics in regards to the costs of production. One, as alluded to when speaking of absolute advantages, it can be analyzed what the general and overall effects of applying such knowledge are. Two, various formats and products for the knowledge of economics can be analyzed. Since the former is more specific to the chosen topic, and more useful for myself, I shall do that.
Not all inputs are of similar value in regards to outputs. Because of this, the marginal product for any given knowledge of economics varies. I am further uncertain at what point diminishing marginal product sets in for the knowledge of economics. For example, glancing over the holy grail book that which is Microeconomic Theory by Max-Colell, I gauge such a level of depth and abstraction would have inconceivable diminishing marginal product.
Fixed costs may be said to be the sunk costs after the acquisition of the knowledge of economics. There would be little variable costs for the application of the knowledge of economics besides, again, and perhaps the specific type of knowledge being applied. This is because different concepts have different costs in order to be properly applied.
The marginal cost is negligible as the acquisition of knowledge of economics has already been completed and the application of such does not necessarily incur any additional costs.
The efficient scale for knowledge of economics would inherently simply be the maximization of applying the knowledge in the real world due to the sunk costs. Thus, this specific knowledge, and all knowledge in general, may be said to have economies of scale.
There are no monopolies for the knowledge of economics, especially in the information age. Though, depending on the form and medium, there may be localized monopolies. For example, required textbooks which were written by the very people who require it such as certain hypothetical professors, who then can price discriminate.
As with most other products, the knowledge of economics is more so a form of monopolistic competition. Interestingly, the economics textbook market may have a concentration ratio over 90%, making it an oligopoly, since Mankiw's economics textbook is widely adopted.
Knowledge of economics is most certainly a derived demand for its potential applications as very few learn it solely for the sake of it.
Knowledge of economics is a form of human capital and wage variable.
Knowledge of economics maximizes consumer choice by virtue of increasing both accuracy and precision of decisions. A result may be that individuals become better at understanding their preferences, substitutes, complements, and optimums.
Knowledge of economics can result in extreme information asymmetries.
I am uncertain whether the supply or demand of knowledge of economics would have lower elasticity. As a result, I am further uncertain on what side of the market the burden of the hypothetical tax incidence would fall on. I am uncertain in what ways the Coase Theorem and therefore transaction costs may be applied to knowledge of economics. I forgoed discussing the design of tax systems in regards to the knowledge of economics such as average tax rate, marginal tax rate, lump sum tax, benefits principle, ability to pay principle, vertical equity, horizontal equity, proportional tax, regressive tax, and progressive tax. Lastly, I do not think there are many ways in which macroeconomics can be analogized or applied to the knowledge of economics.
Ah, well, this was quite an amusing attempt to analogize and retrofit every important microeconomics concept from this textbook to the knowledge of economics. I wonder whether economists would be horrified or proud of this analysis?
The economics of books? No, there has already been at least some analysis of modern book markets.
The economics of teaching economics, such as economics textbooks? Perhaps, though not interesting enough for me.
The economics of book reviews? Perhaps. There seems to be relatively little research on the economics of reviews, so this might be worthwhile.
The economics of learning economics? Yes, this one would be interesting, and would correlate to both my and others' experiences in learning economics.
Let us begin.
In general, to the degree economics describes universal phenomena within the confines of scarcity, the knowledge of economics improves an individual significantly. The knowledge of economics may permit one to allocate resources more optimally, resulting in one moving from within to towards their production possibilities frontier. Alternatively, such knowledge may also expand the total production possibilities frontier of an individual. These effects could, of course, be said to be the effects of learning much knowledge in general.
To possess an absolute advantage of knowledge may be said to be a few things. One could be the ability to apply knowledge better than others, despite having less total relevant knowledge. An example of this may be someone who can utilize or deduce from even the most elementary axioms of mathematics to solve a given problem compared to someone who needed to possess relatively more relevant knowledge such as latter steps or more condensed and tailored axioms to solve the same problem. Another example may be someone who, despite little overall knowledge or education, has the ability to understand and solve problems not directly in their purview. These examples have been solely in regards to solving problems and applying knowledge though. A better definition and set of examples may be in that of creating new knowledge. For example, despite some individuals having amassed great amounts of knowledge and having read widely, they nonetheless do not produce any novel insights or knowledge. Such individuals would have a very low absolute advantage of knowledge.
The opportunity cost of knowledge is most often time and energy, and inevitably money either directly or through second order opportunity costs. Interestingly, the opportunity cost of knowledge can vary depending on many factors. For example, the abilities of individuals to learn various types of knowledge creates disparities in their opportunity costs. Furthermore, the opportunity costs of knowledge may at times be dynamic, not just static.
Thus, a comparative advantage of knowledge is where some individuals are able to learn and apply knowledge at a lower opportunity cost than others.
Based upon this, individuals trade knowledge via communication. Individuals import and export knowledge. To read an economics textbook is to import knowledge because it was produced and packaged at a lower opportunity cost than what an individual would be able to do themselves.
The market for knowledge is large, however the market for knowledge about economics is relatively smaller.
In the information age, the market for most any knowledge may be said to be a competitive market.
The quantity demanded for knowledge of economics is very low as individuals, although very likely able to learn it, have little to no desire to do so.
The law of demand dictates that the demand for knowledge of economics rose when the opportunity cost of it decreased such as in the information age.
Knowledge of economics may best be analogized to be a normal good rather than an inferior good.
The closest substitute for knowledge of economics is likely knowledge of business.
The closest complement for knowledge of economics may be said to be forms in which it is packaged. For example, if the opportunity cost of books, courses, videos, and instructors increased, then so too the demand for knowledge of economics may decrease. However, to foreshadow, if the opportunity cost increases, and thus quantity supplied of individuals with knowledge of economics decreases, then the total value and and quantity demanded for individuals with knowledge of economics would increase. This would best be described as a shortage. A surplus would result from opposite pretexts. In sum, this demonstrates the law of supply and demand, along with the corresponding equilibriums.
Knowledge of economics likely has low elasticity.
Price ceilings for the knowledge of economics only explicitly exist in the form of the maximum cost for courses from public universities, and perhaps also for textbooks in general. Price ceilings may exist implicitly such as for basic utilities and resources for the acquisition of knowledge of economics such as internet, electricity, telecommunications, and libraries.
Price floors for the knowledge of economics perhaps do not exist.
The willingness to pay for knowledge of economics is likely very non linear, since the demand is already so low and there is low elasticity. Those who desire it will likely go to greater lengths to obtain it than those who do not desire it.
As such, the consumer surplus for knowledge of economics is very high. In this sense, knowledge of economics is an excellent allocation of resources for the well being of individuals.
The degree to which there is producer surplus for the knowledge of economics varies depending on the context. For example, if taking business as the application of economics, then it seems many sufficiently profit solely from selling watered down knowledge of such. There are many MBAs, business gurus, and entrepreneurs, however very few innovators.
Knowledge of economics has extremely high efficiency, however contingent and varying equality.
Because there are little interventions for the knowledge of economics, there is little existent deadweight loss.
The world price for the knowledge of economics is distinct from the world price for the credentialed education of economics. Knowledge related to economics has a very low world price, however credentials for knowledge related to economics has a very high world price. (Though, it does not seem the higher cost and perceived quality of education in the United States sets or significantly influences the world price.)
Tariffs for the knowledge of economics only exist in accordance to the format and medium in which the knowledge of economics is beheld. For example, imported books, foreign instructors and their income taxation, etc.
Knowledge of economics likely has positive externalities on average. To the degree economics may have negative externalities, this could be internalized using corrective taxes in the form of increasing the costs for the acquisition of knowledge of economics. This would, however, be an indirect form of censorship. (I am now curious whether there has ever been a state, perhaps socialist in nature, that has explicitly censored knowledge of economics. In a way, since economics is closely aligned with free markets for the purposes of demonstration and idealization, this in turn closely aligns with democracy. At a bare minimum it seems that for a socialist state to even partially censor knowledge of democracy would in turn censor knowledge of economics and thereby be a form of internalizing externalities.)
Knowledge of economics is not rival in consumption, however it is partially excludable depending on its format. As such, it may vary between being a club good and a public good. Free riders for the knowledge of economics are those who benefit in the form of consumer surplus from tertiary order effects from individuals who apply knowledge of economics, which may be said to be a positive externality.
This review is a rudimentary form of cost benefit analysis of the knowledge of economics.
Knowledge of economics, compared to all other knowledge, has very high potential for increasing total revenue (both abstractly, via the well being of the individual, and literally, via monetary benefits).
As mentioned before, the total cost for the acquisition of knowledge of economics can vary depending on the individual.
The profit for knowledge of economics, as a result of the relative potential revenue and likely cost, is extremely high compared to other types of knowledge.
The explicit costs are components or forms that have a monetary value such as this book. The implicit costs would be the other mentioned variables from opportunity costs. Regardless, both the economic profit and accounting profit for knowledge of economics is very high.
There are two means of proceeding for the knowledge of economics in regards to the costs of production. One, as alluded to when speaking of absolute advantages, it can be analyzed what the general and overall effects of applying such knowledge are. Two, various formats and products for the knowledge of economics can be analyzed. Since the former is more specific to the chosen topic, and more useful for myself, I shall do that.
Not all inputs are of similar value in regards to outputs. Because of this, the marginal product for any given knowledge of economics varies. I am further uncertain at what point diminishing marginal product sets in for the knowledge of economics. For example, glancing over the holy grail book that which is Microeconomic Theory by Max-Colell, I gauge such a level of depth and abstraction would have inconceivable diminishing marginal product.
Fixed costs may be said to be the sunk costs after the acquisition of the knowledge of economics. There would be little variable costs for the application of the knowledge of economics besides, again, and perhaps the specific type of knowledge being applied. This is because different concepts have different costs in order to be properly applied.
The marginal cost is negligible as the acquisition of knowledge of economics has already been completed and the application of such does not necessarily incur any additional costs.
The efficient scale for knowledge of economics would inherently simply be the maximization of applying the knowledge in the real world due to the sunk costs. Thus, this specific knowledge, and all knowledge in general, may be said to have economies of scale.
There are no monopolies for the knowledge of economics, especially in the information age. Though, depending on the form and medium, there may be localized monopolies. For example, required textbooks which were written by the very people who require it such as certain hypothetical professors, who then can price discriminate.
As with most other products, the knowledge of economics is more so a form of monopolistic competition. Interestingly, the economics textbook market may have a concentration ratio over 90%, making it an oligopoly, since Mankiw's economics textbook is widely adopted.
Knowledge of economics is most certainly a derived demand for its potential applications as very few learn it solely for the sake of it.
Knowledge of economics is a form of human capital and wage variable.
Knowledge of economics maximizes consumer choice by virtue of increasing both accuracy and precision of decisions. A result may be that individuals become better at understanding their preferences, substitutes, complements, and optimums.
Knowledge of economics can result in extreme information asymmetries.
I am uncertain whether the supply or demand of knowledge of economics would have lower elasticity. As a result, I am further uncertain on what side of the market the burden of the hypothetical tax incidence would fall on. I am uncertain in what ways the Coase Theorem and therefore transaction costs may be applied to knowledge of economics. I forgoed discussing the design of tax systems in regards to the knowledge of economics such as average tax rate, marginal tax rate, lump sum tax, benefits principle, ability to pay principle, vertical equity, horizontal equity, proportional tax, regressive tax, and progressive tax. Lastly, I do not think there are many ways in which macroeconomics can be analogized or applied to the knowledge of economics.
Ah, well, this was quite an amusing attempt to analogize and retrofit every important microeconomics concept from this textbook to the knowledge of economics. I wonder whether economists would be horrified or proud of this analysis?
March 17, 2013
I didn't study economics in my school or university, but I've been an ardent fan of the subject ever since a very good friend (Raymond, you know who you are!) introduced me to The Economist in my first year of University.
Since then I've built up knowledge of the field organically through various sources, but always felt my understanding was lacking in some key areas (especially banking). A while ago I bought this book (which is a 100 level college textbook) to fill that gap.
The text and presentation is very strong - clear, engaging and satisfying without going too deep or floating above the surface. The delivery is sometimes pedestrian - I think I could have picked up some concepts quicker than Mankiw is ready to deliver them to me. But overall the book does a great job of surveying the field.
I was also impressed that despite Mankiw's relatively well-understood position on issues, the book presents most of the key debates in an even handed way without seeming to put his finger on the scales.
The book has lots of good diagrams. It lacks enough references to specific experimental evidence for my preference, but this is perhaps understandable at the 100 level. It is also full of newspaper quotations to bring the topic to life. I found these uninteresting and mostly a space filler, but perhaps they would appeal more to someone who has yet to get excited about the subject.
The one amazing thing about the book (which I bought 2nd hand) is the retail price, which seems to be ~250 dollars, seemingly some kind of exorbitant rip off aimed at students where it is a compulsory text. Analyzing the price in economic terms makes one suspect that some kind of market failure is taking place to support this price :)
Great foundational book.
Since then I've built up knowledge of the field organically through various sources, but always felt my understanding was lacking in some key areas (especially banking). A while ago I bought this book (which is a 100 level college textbook) to fill that gap.
The text and presentation is very strong - clear, engaging and satisfying without going too deep or floating above the surface. The delivery is sometimes pedestrian - I think I could have picked up some concepts quicker than Mankiw is ready to deliver them to me. But overall the book does a great job of surveying the field.
I was also impressed that despite Mankiw's relatively well-understood position on issues, the book presents most of the key debates in an even handed way without seeming to put his finger on the scales.
The book has lots of good diagrams. It lacks enough references to specific experimental evidence for my preference, but this is perhaps understandable at the 100 level. It is also full of newspaper quotations to bring the topic to life. I found these uninteresting and mostly a space filler, but perhaps they would appeal more to someone who has yet to get excited about the subject.
The one amazing thing about the book (which I bought 2nd hand) is the retail price, which seems to be ~250 dollars, seemingly some kind of exorbitant rip off aimed at students where it is a compulsory text. Analyzing the price in economic terms makes one suspect that some kind of market failure is taking place to support this price :)
Great foundational book.
March 20, 2016
This is one of few textbooks that didn’t make me fall asleep while reading for hours.
With understandable anylisis and detailed examples, it truly is a precious gift for an economics-idiot like me..
With understandable anylisis and detailed examples, it truly is a precious gift for an economics-idiot like me..
November 23, 2020
به دوستان فارسیزبان چند نکته رو برای مطالعهی این کتاب توضیح میدم، امیدوارم که مفید باشه:
۱- خیلی ها میگن این کتاب بهترین کتابیه که برای مبانی اقتصاد نوشته شده. من خودم نمیتونم اینو تأیید کنم، چون کتابهای رقیب رو نگاه نکردم. اما قطعا معروفترین کتابیه که برای مبانی اقتصاد نوشته شده. منکیو یکی از معروفترین اساتید اقتصاده و در دورهای کوتاه، مشاور اقتصادی اصلی بوش پسر بوده.
۲- اقتصاد در دو سطح خرد و کلان مطالعه میشه و پدیدههای اقتصادی، چه خرد و چه کلان، در بازههای کوتاهمدت و بلندمدت بررسی میشن. این کتاب با اقتصاد خرد شروع میشه و به اقتصاد کلان میرسه. گزارهها و گفتهها در اقتصاد در دو گروه تقسیم بندی میشن.
۳- کتاب رو به فارسی نخونید. کلاً اقتصاد رو به فارسی نخونید. اگه بازم کلی تر بخوام بگم، کلاً هیچ کتابی از علم، ریاضی و فلسفه رو به فارسی نخونید. بیشتر روشنفکرهای فارسیزبان آگاهانه یا ناآگاهانه سوگیری شدیدی به سوسیالیسم دارند. دنیای فکری فارسیزبانها محدوده. الان فارسی فقط به درد خوندن شاهنامه و دیوان حافظ میخوره. text این کتاب رو تهیه کنید. الان که دارم این متن رو مینویسم، ویرایش نهم جدیدترین ویرایشی هست که از این کتاب منتشر شده. واقعا گرونه اما متن روان و راحتی داره. نسخههای دیگهای هم وجود داره که زیرمجموعهی این کتاب حساب میشن و چند فصل کمتر دارن. نگران متن انگلیسی نباشید. به تدریج راه میفتید.
۴- بیشتر شما اینجوری text میخونید: کتاب رو باز میکنید، متن رو تا یه جایی میخونید و بعد کتاب رو میبندید تا دفعه بعد.
این روش مناسب نیست. این ویدیو رو توی یوتیوب نگاه کنید. روش خوبی رو برای خوندن textbook توضیح میده. به خصوص برای اونایی که یه آشنایی مقدماتی با اقتصاد دارند و مطالب پراکندهای از اقتصاد رو میدونند:
https://youtu.be/nqYmmZKY4sA
۵- هر چیزی برای اینکه به خاطر سپرده بشه باید به صورت منظم تکرار بشه. به قول فرنگیها تکرار مادر یادگیریه. بعد از خوندن هر فصل یه خلاصهی خیلی جمع و جور تهیه کنید. ترجیحاً به انگلیسی و در فضای ابری. میتونید از google keep استفاده کنید. خلاصه رو به روش Spaced repetition تکرار کنید. حالا اینکه Spaced repetition چی هست، از حوصلهی بحث خارجه. خودتون گوگل کنید. فقط اینو بگم که خلاصهی یک فصل، معادل یک عدد فلشکارد میشه.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space....
۶- توی این کتاب از فرمولهای جبری ساده و گراف استفاده شده. خوندن این کتاب نیاز به ریاضیات پیشرفتهتر نداره. ریاضی دبیرستان کافیه. شاید کمتر از پیشدانشگاهی هم کفاف بده. ولی اگه توی ریاضیات به خصوص حساب (calculus) قویتر باشید، راحتتر موضوع رو میفهمید. دونستن مفاهیم ابتدایی منطق هم میتونه در درک اقتصاد بهتون کمک کنه. با منطق، کمتر دچار برداشت اشتباه میشید. اگه احساس میکنید اینجا هم ریاضی دست از سرتون برنمیداره، تقصیر منکیو یا کتابش نیست. تازه به نظرم منکیو تو این کتاب مراعات کرده.
۷- اقتصاد رو تو دانشگاه نخوندم اما ظاهراً توی دانشگاهها هم از جمله دانشگاههای ایران برای مبانی اقتصاد همین کتاب منکیو رو معرفی میکنند.
۸- اگه برای خوندن اقتصاد برنامهی مفصل ندارید و حوصلهتون نمیکشه با ریاضیات و اصطلاحات تخصصی دست و پنجه نرم کنید، کتاب Basic Economics از Thomas Sowell براتون مناسبتره. اتفاقاً کتاب صوتی هم داره. ساده و خوشخوانه. این کتاب الان توی بعضی شاخهها پروفروشترین کتاب آمازونه:
https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economic...
۹- اگه کسی همون فصل اول کتاب منکیو رو بخونه، از شارلاتانها و بیسوادها کمتر فریب میخوره. البته وقتی خیلی جلوتر برید، به این نتیجه میرسید که امثال دکتر! راغفر و دکتر! فرشاد مومنی و دکتر! حجتالله عبدالملکی احتمالاً در حد همین فصل اول این کتاب هم اقتصاد بلد نیستند. از این چیزا توی همه جای دنیا هست اما تو ایران خیلی زیاده.
۱۰- اقتصاد یه درس مفهومیه. نیاز به تفکر داره. طوطیوار کتاب رو حفظ نکنید. با حفظ کردن، زود فراموش میکنید و درنهایت نمیتونید به صورت مستقل در مورد شرایط واقعی نظر بدید. طبق گفتهی منکیو، اساسیترین موضوع اقتصاد، نظریهی عرضه و تقاضا است. اگه اقتصاددان بودن به گفتن مکرر عرضه و تقاضا توی صحبت کردن باشه، یه طوطی هم میتونه اقتصاددان به نظر بیاد.
۱۱- بسیاری از گزارههای اجتماعی به خاطر تکرار زیاد توی رسانهها تو ذهن شما جا افتاده. اگه این اولین کتابیه که دربارهی اقتصاد میخونید، شاید به بسیاری از ارزش-داوری های شما در مورد امور اقتصادی، اجتماعی، فلسفی و سیاسی آسیب وارد بشه که اتفاقا خیلی هم خوبه! اگه بعد از خوندن اقتصاد، فهمیدید که حرفهای امثال سروش و ملکیان و به خصوص فردید و شریعتی و آلاحمد در مورد پیشرفت جامعه براتون حال بهم زنه، تعجب نکنید. معنیاش اینه که راه رو درست اومدید و اگه دیدید باز هم حرفهای اینا براتون قابل هضمه، معنیش اینه که چیزایی که تا الان از اقتصاد یاد گرفتید هنوز تاثیر خودش رو نذاشته.
۱۳- خیلیها معتقدند که از نظر فلسفهی علم، اقتصاد به طور کامل در تعریف یک علم تجربی مثل فیزیک، شیمی یا زیست نمیگنجه. بله اگه منصفانه قضاوت کنیم، ایراداتی رو میشه وارد دونست. تجربهی آزمایشگاهی در اقتصاد معمولاً عملی نیست. اما به نظرم عنوان علم برای اقتصاد خیلی برازنده تره تا برای شاخهای مثل جامعهشناسی. یکی از شباهتهای اقتصاد به علم تجربی اینه که این بیچاره خودش خیلی بیادعاست. اگه تعصبی هم هست بیشتر مربوط به اقصادخوانهاست. اقتصاد مثل بقیهی شاخههای علم محدودیتهایی داره و اگه جایی نتونه مجموعهای از پدیدههای تاریخی رو درست تفسیر یا پیشبینی کنه، دچار اصلاح و تکامل میشه یا سکوت میکنه. قبول دارم که اقتصاد به اندازهی فیزیک دقیق و ایستا نیست، ولی همچنین معتقدم که ارزشمند و کاربردیه.
۱۴- این نکتهی آخری که میخوام بگم به نظرم مهمترین حرفیه که توی این review میزنم: تاریخ اقتصاد مهمه. علوم تجربی مثل فیزیک، فقط یک جریان دارند ولی علوم اجتماعی، از جمله اقتصاد، جریانها و مکاتب متعدد دارند. توی اقتصاد خرد اختلافات و جدلها خیلی کمه اما توی اقتصاد کلان اینطور نیست. چون اقتصاد کلان با حکومت و سرنوشت انسانها گره خورده، انتخاب کردن یک مکتب با ارزشهای فلسفی شما ارتباط مستقیم داره. به طور کلی مکاتب مختلف رو میشه در یک طیف قرار داد. من سه تا گروه اصلی رو معرفی میکنم.
یک سر طیف رو سوسیالیسم میگیم که شامل مارکسیسم، مائوئیسم، لنینیسم، نازیسم و ... میشه. اینها جمعگرا هستند (در مقابل فردگرا) و مالکیت اشتراکی (در مقابل مالکیت خصوصی) رو دنبال میکنند. آزادیهای فردی برای این مکتب ارزشی نداره و عجیب نیست اگه ازشون بشنوید که حاضرند برای خیر جمعی، افرادی رو قربانی کنند (برای نمونه گولاکهای استالین و نسلکشیهای هیتلر رو به یاد بیارید). سوسیالیسم رو معمولاً با اتوکراتها به یاد میاریم ولی دموکراسی هم پتانسیل زیادی برای گرایش به سوسیالیسم داره. مخالفت با بازار آزاد از ویژگیهای بارز این مکتبه. سوسیالیستها باور دارند که تخصیص منابع رو باید دولت با برنامهریزی متمرکز انجام بده. اگه بگیم دولت رو معادل خدا میدونند بیراه نگفتیم.
اگه توی طیف جلوتر بریم به کینزیها میرسیم. اینها در مجموع مالکیت خصوصی و آزادیهایی مثل بازار رو پذیرفتن اما نگاه خوشبینانهای به این موارد ندارند. به همین دلیل مداخلهی دولت در اقتصاد رو تشویق میکنند. تفکرات این مکتب رو جان مینارد کینز در دهههای ۲۰ و ۳۰ قرن بیستیم (به خصوص بعد از دیدن رکود بزرگ آمریکا در دههی بیست) معرفی کرد. تفکرات کینز به دلیل تشویق دولت به مداخله گرایی، طرفدارانی بسیاری در بین دولتها پیدا کرد. آشفتگیهای اقتصادی دههی ۶۰ و ۷۰ به خصوص تو آمریکا، نشون داد که خیلی از حرفهای کینز شوخی بوده و مدلی مناسبی برای توصیف واقعیت نیست. در نتیجهی انتقاداتی که به کینزیها وارد شده، اصلاحاتی در این مکتب اتفاق افتاد و نیوکینزیها متولد شدند. نیوکینزیها فعلاً جریان اصلی اقتصاد هستند. منکیو و کروگمن از این مکتبند. اقتصاد کلانی که توی کتاب مبانی اقتصاد میخونید، اقتصاد نیوکینزی هست.
اگه توی طیف جلوتر بریم به لیبرالهای کلاسیک و لیبرتارینها میرسیم. اتریشیها (هایک، میزس، راتبارد) و شیکاگوئیها (فریدمن و ساول) جز این دسته هستند. اینها شدیداً بر مالکیت خصوصی و آزادیهای فردی تاکید دارند و بازار رو راهحل مشکلات میدونند. اینها برعکس دو طیف قبلی نسبت به دولت بدبین هستند و اون رو منشأ بسیاری از نابرابریها و تبعیضها میدونند. (شوروی سابق و ایران خودمون مثال واضح هستند. به سهمیهها و رانتها دقت کنید). شکست سوسیالیسم و فروپاشی شوروی رو پیشبینی کرده بودند. از نظر اونها تصمیمگیریها باید نامتمرکز باشه. توی این مکتب روی دولت حداقلی و حتی بیدولتی (راتبارد) تاکید شده. با دادن سهمیه براساس دین، نژاد، جنسیت، رنگ پوست، زبان، عقاید، و ... مخالفند. معتقدند آدمها برابر نیستند ولی قانون باید با اونها برابر رفتار کنه. معتقدند با تصمیماتی که آدمها در بازار آزاد میگیرند، نوعی نظم خودجوش ایجاد میشه که هر نوع برنامهریزی متمرکز برای جایگزینی این نظم خودجوش، شکست میخوره. دنیا اینطوریه و کاریش نمیشه کرد.
تکلیف سوسیالیستها که روشنه. اگه کسی اقتصاد بخونه و با ذات انسان و محدودیتهای دنیای واقعی آشنا بشه، قطعاً سوسیالیسم رو کنار میذاره. میمونه اون دوتای دیگه: کینزیها و اتریشیها. پیشنهاد من اینه که اقتصاد رو با کینزیها شروع کنید ولی با اتریشیها ادامه بدید. کینزیها فعلاً جریان اصلی هستند. بیشتر اقتصاددانهای فعلی با زبان کینزی با دولتمردها صحبت میکنند. پس شما هم باید این زبان رو بلد باشید. اما اگه با اتریشیها ادامه بدید، نقائض بسیار کینزیها رو متوجه میشید و آلترناتیو بهتری پیدا میکنید.
تاریخ اقتصاد و آشنایی با اون خیلی مهمه. اگه عقاید و ارزشهای فلسفی شما شبیه یک ساختمان باشه، گرایش به هرکدوم از این مکتبها ممکنه باعث فروریختن این ساختمان بشه. خوبی این اتفاق اینه که میتونید ساختمان بعدی رو با شناخت بهتری از واقعیت بنا کنید. اینکه به کدوم مکتب نزدیک میشید، تاثیر زیادی توی انتخابهای زندگی شما میذاره. روش فکر کردن و مسیر زندگی شما رو تغییر میده.
بهترین کتابهایی که میتونم برای ادامهی اقتصاد کلان بهتون ارائه بدم، این دو جلده:
قانون، قانونگذاری و آزادی از هایک برای تاریخ اقتصاد
کنش انسانی (Human action) از میزس برای انسانشناسی. شخصاً کمونیستهایی رو دیدم که با خوندن این کتاب لیبرتارین شدند. هر گونه شائبهای رو در مورد بازار آزاد (با توجه به ویژگیهای انسان) برطرف میکنه. این کتاب رایگانه. دو مدل کتاب صوتی هم داره. سرچ کنید، پیدا می کنید.
https://mises.org/library/human-action-0
۱۵- فهرست کتاب مبانی اقتصاد منکیو:
1 Ten Principles of Economics
2 Thinking Like an Economist
3 interdependence and the Gains from Trade
4 The Market Forces of Supply and demand
5 Elasticity and its application
6 Supply, demand, and Government Policies
7 Consumers, Producers, and the Efficiency of Markets
8 application: The Costs of Taxation
9 application: international Trade
10 Externalities
11 Public Goods and Common resources
12 The design of the Tax System
13 The Costs of Production
14 Firms in Competitive Markets
15 Monopoly
16 Monopolistic Competition
17 oligopoly
18 The Markets for the Factors of Production
19 Earnings and discrimination
20 income inequality and Poverty
21 The Theory of Consumer Choice
22 Frontiers of Microeconomics
23 Measuring a Nation’s income
24 Measuring the Cost of Living
25 Production and Growth
26 Saving, investment, and the Financial System
27 The basic Tools of Finance
28 Unemployment
29 The Monetary System
30 Money Growth and inflation
31 open-Economy Macroeconomics: basic Concepts
32 a Macroeconomic Theory of the open Economy
33 aggregate demand and aggregate Supply
34 The influence of Monetary and Fiscal Policy on aggregate demand
35 The Short-run Trade-off between inflation and Unemployment
36 Six debates over Macroeconomic Policy
۱- خیلی ها میگن این کتاب بهترین کتابیه که برای مبانی اقتصاد نوشته شده. من خودم نمیتونم اینو تأیید کنم، چون کتابهای رقیب رو نگاه نکردم. اما قطعا معروفترین کتابیه که برای مبانی اقتصاد نوشته شده. منکیو یکی از معروفترین اساتید اقتصاده و در دورهای کوتاه، مشاور اقتصادی اصلی بوش پسر بوده.
۲- اقتصاد در دو سطح خرد و کلان مطالعه میشه و پدیدههای اقتصادی، چه خرد و چه کلان، در بازههای کوتاهمدت و بلندمدت بررسی میشن. این کتاب با اقتصاد خرد شروع میشه و به اقتصاد کلان میرسه. گزارهها و گفتهها در اقتصاد در دو گروه تقسیم بندی میشن.
۳- کتاب رو به فارسی نخونید. کلاً اقتصاد رو به فارسی نخونید. اگه بازم کلی تر بخوام بگم، کلاً هیچ کتابی از علم، ریاضی و فلسفه رو به فارسی نخونید. بیشتر روشنفکرهای فارسیزبان آگاهانه یا ناآگاهانه سوگیری شدیدی به سوسیالیسم دارند. دنیای فکری فارسیزبانها محدوده. الان فارسی فقط به درد خوندن شاهنامه و دیوان حافظ میخوره. text این کتاب رو تهیه کنید. الان که دارم این متن رو مینویسم، ویرایش نهم جدیدترین ویرایشی هست که از این کتاب منتشر شده. واقعا گرونه اما متن روان و راحتی داره. نسخههای دیگهای هم وجود داره که زیرمجموعهی این کتاب حساب میشن و چند فصل کمتر دارن. نگران متن انگلیسی نباشید. به تدریج راه میفتید.
۴- بیشتر شما اینجوری text میخونید: کتاب رو باز میکنید، متن رو تا یه جایی میخونید و بعد کتاب رو میبندید تا دفعه بعد.
این روش مناسب نیست. این ویدیو رو توی یوتیوب نگاه کنید. روش خوبی رو برای خوندن textbook توضیح میده. به خصوص برای اونایی که یه آشنایی مقدماتی با اقتصاد دارند و مطالب پراکندهای از اقتصاد رو میدونند:
https://youtu.be/nqYmmZKY4sA
۵- هر چیزی برای اینکه به خاطر سپرده بشه باید به صورت منظم تکرار بشه. به قول فرنگیها تکرار مادر یادگیریه. بعد از خوندن هر فصل یه خلاصهی خیلی جمع و جور تهیه کنید. ترجیحاً به انگلیسی و در فضای ابری. میتونید از google keep استفاده کنید. خلاصه رو به روش Spaced repetition تکرار کنید. حالا اینکه Spaced repetition چی هست، از حوصلهی بحث خارجه. خودتون گوگل کنید. فقط اینو بگم که خلاصهی یک فصل، معادل یک عدد فلشکارد میشه.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space....
۶- توی این کتاب از فرمولهای جبری ساده و گراف استفاده شده. خوندن این کتاب نیاز به ریاضیات پیشرفتهتر نداره. ریاضی دبیرستان کافیه. شاید کمتر از پیشدانشگاهی هم کفاف بده. ولی اگه توی ریاضیات به خصوص حساب (calculus) قویتر باشید، راحتتر موضوع رو میفهمید. دونستن مفاهیم ابتدایی منطق هم میتونه در درک اقتصاد بهتون کمک کنه. با منطق، کمتر دچار برداشت اشتباه میشید. اگه احساس میکنید اینجا هم ریاضی دست از سرتون برنمیداره، تقصیر منکیو یا کتابش نیست. تازه به نظرم منکیو تو این کتاب مراعات کرده.
۷- اقتصاد رو تو دانشگاه نخوندم اما ظاهراً توی دانشگاهها هم از جمله دانشگاههای ایران برای مبانی اقتصاد همین کتاب منکیو رو معرفی میکنند.
۸- اگه برای خوندن اقتصاد برنامهی مفصل ندارید و حوصلهتون نمیکشه با ریاضیات و اصطلاحات تخصصی دست و پنجه نرم کنید، کتاب Basic Economics از Thomas Sowell براتون مناسبتره. اتفاقاً کتاب صوتی هم داره. ساده و خوشخوانه. این کتاب الان توی بعضی شاخهها پروفروشترین کتاب آمازونه:
https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economic...
۹- اگه کسی همون فصل اول کتاب منکیو رو بخونه، از شارلاتانها و بیسوادها کمتر فریب میخوره. البته وقتی خیلی جلوتر برید، به این نتیجه میرسید که امثال دکتر! راغفر و دکتر! فرشاد مومنی و دکتر! حجتالله عبدالملکی احتمالاً در حد همین فصل اول این کتاب هم اقتصاد بلد نیستند. از این چیزا توی همه جای دنیا هست اما تو ایران خیلی زیاده.
۱۰- اقتصاد یه درس مفهومیه. نیاز به تفکر داره. طوطیوار کتاب رو حفظ نکنید. با حفظ کردن، زود فراموش میکنید و درنهایت نمیتونید به صورت مستقل در مورد شرایط واقعی نظر بدید. طبق گفتهی منکیو، اساسیترین موضوع اقتصاد، نظریهی عرضه و تقاضا است. اگه اقتصاددان بودن به گفتن مکرر عرضه و تقاضا توی صحبت کردن باشه، یه طوطی هم میتونه اقتصاددان به نظر بیاد.
۱۱- بسیاری از گزارههای اجتماعی به خاطر تکرار زیاد توی رسانهها تو ذهن شما جا افتاده. اگه این اولین کتابیه که دربارهی اقتصاد میخونید، شاید به بسیاری از ارزش-داوری های شما در مورد امور اقتصادی، اجتماعی، فلسفی و سیاسی آسیب وارد بشه که اتفاقا خیلی هم خوبه! اگه بعد از خوندن اقتصاد، فهمیدید که حرفهای امثال سروش و ملکیان و به خصوص فردید و شریعتی و آلاحمد در مورد پیشرفت جامعه براتون حال بهم زنه، تعجب نکنید. معنیاش اینه که راه رو درست اومدید و اگه دیدید باز هم حرفهای اینا براتون قابل هضمه، معنیش اینه که چیزایی که تا الان از اقتصاد یاد گرفتید هنوز تاثیر خودش رو نذاشته.
۱۳- خیلیها معتقدند که از نظر فلسفهی علم، اقتصاد به طور کامل در تعریف یک علم تجربی مثل فیزیک، شیمی یا زیست نمیگنجه. بله اگه منصفانه قضاوت کنیم، ایراداتی رو میشه وارد دونست. تجربهی آزمایشگاهی در اقتصاد معمولاً عملی نیست. اما به نظرم عنوان علم برای اقتصاد خیلی برازنده تره تا برای شاخهای مثل جامعهشناسی. یکی از شباهتهای اقتصاد به علم تجربی اینه که این بیچاره خودش خیلی بیادعاست. اگه تعصبی هم هست بیشتر مربوط به اقصادخوانهاست. اقتصاد مثل بقیهی شاخههای علم محدودیتهایی داره و اگه جایی نتونه مجموعهای از پدیدههای تاریخی رو درست تفسیر یا پیشبینی کنه، دچار اصلاح و تکامل میشه یا سکوت میکنه. قبول دارم که اقتصاد به اندازهی فیزیک دقیق و ایستا نیست، ولی همچنین معتقدم که ارزشمند و کاربردیه.
۱۴- این نکتهی آخری که میخوام بگم به نظرم مهمترین حرفیه که توی این review میزنم: تاریخ اقتصاد مهمه. علوم تجربی مثل فیزیک، فقط یک جریان دارند ولی علوم اجتماعی، از جمله اقتصاد، جریانها و مکاتب متعدد دارند. توی اقتصاد خرد اختلافات و جدلها خیلی کمه اما توی اقتصاد کلان اینطور نیست. چون اقتصاد کلان با حکومت و سرنوشت انسانها گره خورده، انتخاب کردن یک مکتب با ارزشهای فلسفی شما ارتباط مستقیم داره. به طور کلی مکاتب مختلف رو میشه در یک طیف قرار داد. من سه تا گروه اصلی رو معرفی میکنم.
یک سر طیف رو سوسیالیسم میگیم که شامل مارکسیسم، مائوئیسم، لنینیسم، نازیسم و ... میشه. اینها جمعگرا هستند (در مقابل فردگرا) و مالکیت اشتراکی (در مقابل مالکیت خصوصی) رو دنبال میکنند. آزادیهای فردی برای این مکتب ارزشی نداره و عجیب نیست اگه ازشون بشنوید که حاضرند برای خیر جمعی، افرادی رو قربانی کنند (برای نمونه گولاکهای استالین و نسلکشیهای هیتلر رو به یاد بیارید). سوسیالیسم رو معمولاً با اتوکراتها به یاد میاریم ولی دموکراسی هم پتانسیل زیادی برای گرایش به سوسیالیسم داره. مخالفت با بازار آزاد از ویژگیهای بارز این مکتبه. سوسیالیستها باور دارند که تخصیص منابع رو باید دولت با برنامهریزی متمرکز انجام بده. اگه بگیم دولت رو معادل خدا میدونند بیراه نگفتیم.
اگه توی طیف جلوتر بریم به کینزیها میرسیم. اینها در مجموع مالکیت خصوصی و آزادیهایی مثل بازار رو پذیرفتن اما نگاه خوشبینانهای به این موارد ندارند. به همین دلیل مداخلهی دولت در اقتصاد رو تشویق میکنند. تفکرات این مکتب رو جان مینارد کینز در دهههای ۲۰ و ۳۰ قرن بیستیم (به خصوص بعد از دیدن رکود بزرگ آمریکا در دههی بیست) معرفی کرد. تفکرات کینز به دلیل تشویق دولت به مداخله گرایی، طرفدارانی بسیاری در بین دولتها پیدا کرد. آشفتگیهای اقتصادی دههی ۶۰ و ۷۰ به خصوص تو آمریکا، نشون داد که خیلی از حرفهای کینز شوخی بوده و مدلی مناسبی برای توصیف واقعیت نیست. در نتیجهی انتقاداتی که به کینزیها وارد شده، اصلاحاتی در این مکتب اتفاق افتاد و نیوکینزیها متولد شدند. نیوکینزیها فعلاً جریان اصلی اقتصاد هستند. منکیو و کروگمن از این مکتبند. اقتصاد کلانی که توی کتاب مبانی اقتصاد میخونید، اقتصاد نیوکینزی هست.
اگه توی طیف جلوتر بریم به لیبرالهای کلاسیک و لیبرتارینها میرسیم. اتریشیها (هایک، میزس، راتبارد) و شیکاگوئیها (فریدمن و ساول) جز این دسته هستند. اینها شدیداً بر مالکیت خصوصی و آزادیهای فردی تاکید دارند و بازار رو راهحل مشکلات میدونند. اینها برعکس دو طیف قبلی نسبت به دولت بدبین هستند و اون رو منشأ بسیاری از نابرابریها و تبعیضها میدونند. (شوروی سابق و ایران خودمون مثال واضح هستند. به سهمیهها و رانتها دقت کنید). شکست سوسیالیسم و فروپاشی شوروی رو پیشبینی کرده بودند. از نظر اونها تصمیمگیریها باید نامتمرکز باشه. توی این مکتب روی دولت حداقلی و حتی بیدولتی (راتبارد) تاکید شده. با دادن سهمیه براساس دین، نژاد، جنسیت، رنگ پوست، زبان، عقاید، و ... مخالفند. معتقدند آدمها برابر نیستند ولی قانون باید با اونها برابر رفتار کنه. معتقدند با تصمیماتی که آدمها در بازار آزاد میگیرند، نوعی نظم خودجوش ایجاد میشه که هر نوع برنامهریزی متمرکز برای جایگزینی این نظم خودجوش، شکست میخوره. دنیا اینطوریه و کاریش نمیشه کرد.
تکلیف سوسیالیستها که روشنه. اگه کسی اقتصاد بخونه و با ذات انسان و محدودیتهای دنیای واقعی آشنا بشه، قطعاً سوسیالیسم رو کنار میذاره. میمونه اون دوتای دیگه: کینزیها و اتریشیها. پیشنهاد من اینه که اقتصاد رو با کینزیها شروع کنید ولی با اتریشیها ادامه بدید. کینزیها فعلاً جریان اصلی هستند. بیشتر اقتصاددانهای فعلی با زبان کینزی با دولتمردها صحبت میکنند. پس شما هم باید این زبان رو بلد باشید. اما اگه با اتریشیها ادامه بدید، نقائض بسیار کینزیها رو متوجه میشید و آلترناتیو بهتری پیدا میکنید.
تاریخ اقتصاد و آشنایی با اون خیلی مهمه. اگه عقاید و ارزشهای فلسفی شما شبیه یک ساختمان باشه، گرایش به هرکدوم از این مکتبها ممکنه باعث فروریختن این ساختمان بشه. خوبی این اتفاق اینه که میتونید ساختمان بعدی رو با شناخت بهتری از واقعیت بنا کنید. اینکه به کدوم مکتب نزدیک میشید، تاثیر زیادی توی انتخابهای زندگی شما میذاره. روش فکر کردن و مسیر زندگی شما رو تغییر میده.
بهترین کتابهایی که میتونم برای ادامهی اقتصاد کلان بهتون ارائه بدم، این دو جلده:
قانون، قانونگذاری و آزادی از هایک برای تاریخ اقتصاد
کنش انسانی (Human action) از میزس برای انسانشناسی. شخصاً کمونیستهایی رو دیدم که با خوندن این کتاب لیبرتارین شدند. هر گونه شائبهای رو در مورد بازار آزاد (با توجه به ویژگیهای انسان) برطرف میکنه. این کتاب رایگانه. دو مدل کتاب صوتی هم داره. سرچ کنید، پیدا می کنید.
https://mises.org/library/human-action-0
۱۵- فهرست کتاب مبانی اقتصاد منکیو:
1 Ten Principles of Economics
2 Thinking Like an Economist
3 interdependence and the Gains from Trade
4 The Market Forces of Supply and demand
5 Elasticity and its application
6 Supply, demand, and Government Policies
7 Consumers, Producers, and the Efficiency of Markets
8 application: The Costs of Taxation
9 application: international Trade
10 Externalities
11 Public Goods and Common resources
12 The design of the Tax System
13 The Costs of Production
14 Firms in Competitive Markets
15 Monopoly
16 Monopolistic Competition
17 oligopoly
18 The Markets for the Factors of Production
19 Earnings and discrimination
20 income inequality and Poverty
21 The Theory of Consumer Choice
22 Frontiers of Microeconomics
23 Measuring a Nation’s income
24 Measuring the Cost of Living
25 Production and Growth
26 Saving, investment, and the Financial System
27 The basic Tools of Finance
28 Unemployment
29 The Monetary System
30 Money Growth and inflation
31 open-Economy Macroeconomics: basic Concepts
32 a Macroeconomic Theory of the open Economy
33 aggregate demand and aggregate Supply
34 The influence of Monetary and Fiscal Policy on aggregate demand
35 The Short-run Trade-off between inflation and Unemployment
36 Six debates over Macroeconomic Policy
February 15, 2021
I was delighted when I learnt that a group of Harvard students had staged a walk-out in protest against the narrow, discriminatory and biased introductory economic course of Gregory Mankiw. I agree with the dissenting students , this 'textbook' is every bit what the students say it is. The author barely even acknowledges that there are other schools of economic thought (For more on the different schools of economics See : Economics: The User's Guide) , and this paraphrasing Yanis Varoufakis definitely amounts to the worst form of indoctrination especially of young impressionable students who set out to study economics. The below image pretty much sums up what I think about this book and the world view that the author is trying to instill in students.
For those disillusioned with mainstream economics and wondering how on earth such absurd models came to dominate our lives Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist is a great place to start rethinking economics on lines that actually serve human needs and also doesn't destroy the planet in the process.
For those disillusioned with mainstream economics and wondering how on earth such absurd models came to dominate our lives Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist is a great place to start rethinking economics on lines that actually serve human needs and also doesn't destroy the planet in the process.
December 18, 2017
This is a mainstream economics textbook which means that it uses competitive market model (upward supply and downward demand curves) to explain almost everything. What bothers me about this model is that it doesn't apply to majority of markets in modern economy. There are barely any price takers, I can't think of a firm that hires labor or capital the way that neoclassic theory explains, ... . Not surprisingly this approach reduces large part of economics (especially microeconomics) to a study detached from real world.
Throughout the book author assures the reader that although theory may not portray the real world, but it is a useful simplification and its results are not far from observations. Is this claim true? Except competitive markets; monopoly, monopolistic competition and oligopoly are introduced in the book. I also found all these models quite simple so why for example monopolistic competitive model (which includes most markets in modern economy) is not used anywhere else is a mystery to me. But second part of his claim is more important, does it really work? Author gives some evidence here and there but they are far less than to be persuasive. Controversial claims such as 'minimum wage and unions cause unemployment', 'rent ceiling causes shortage in rental markets' are provided with no evidence. I understand Popperian falsification has serious limits in economics so I don't blame author for lack evidence but he is certainly to blame for failing to mention these subtleties.
Throughout the book author assures the reader that although theory may not portray the real world, but it is a useful simplification and its results are not far from observations. Is this claim true? Except competitive markets; monopoly, monopolistic competition and oligopoly are introduced in the book. I also found all these models quite simple so why for example monopolistic competitive model (which includes most markets in modern economy) is not used anywhere else is a mystery to me. But second part of his claim is more important, does it really work? Author gives some evidence here and there but they are far less than to be persuasive. Controversial claims such as 'minimum wage and unions cause unemployment', 'rent ceiling causes shortage in rental markets' are provided with no evidence. I understand Popperian falsification has serious limits in economics so I don't blame author for lack evidence but he is certainly to blame for failing to mention these subtleties.
May 17, 2020
I studied in the university time as a part of class, but every individual no matter occupation can understand and enjoy reading it
February 20, 2017
I knew what I was getting into, I think, when I started reading the first chapter and found numerous issues with how Mankiw inserts his opinions through the examples he chooses to give, and I'm like: wtf and then my teacher is no different, so I have a lot of supplementary reading to do after this class ends in a couple weeks to balance out—or rather, cleanse out—the material I had been given. I'm in it to gather basic terminology, etc. and interestingly, thru this Chicago lens. . .
On Valentine's Day, Bonnie sent me that one anti-capitalist love note that had been shared online, that said, "You are worth so much more than your productivity." Then, the following day in class, I had to take answer a question on our quiz that said that the only thing determining our value and wealth was our level of productivity. . .
On Valentine's Day, Bonnie sent me that one anti-capitalist love note that had been shared online, that said, "You are worth so much more than your productivity." Then, the following day in class, I had to take answer a question on our quiz that said that the only thing determining our value and wealth was our level of productivity. . .
July 27, 2024
I know Econ now
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 19, 2021
مخاطب
این کتاب یکی از مراجع اصلی برای دانشجویان رشته اقتصاد است و هر دو مبحث اقتصاد خرد و کلان را پوشش میدهد. با این حال، متن کتاب روان است و برای افراد عام هم قابل فهم است. رشته اصلی بنده مهندسی کامپیوتر/نرمافزار است اما از کتاب اصول اقتصاد (ویرایش نهم) بهره فراوانی بردهام.
محتوا
کتاب با تعریف اقتصاد آغاز میکند و ۱۰ اصل بنیادی را بیان میکند. یکی از این اصول ناظر بر این مفهوم است که همه انتخابها، همه تصمیمها، همه خرید و فروشها به نوعی مبادله است. به طور مثال اگر تصمیم بگیرید که امشب به سینما بروید به این معنا است که پول خرید سینما به علاوه چند ساعت زمانتان را هزینه کردید و در عوض لذت دیدن فیلم را دریافت کردید. حال سوال این است که بهتر نبود این زمان را صرف خواندن کتاب بکنید؟ یا آنکه به مهمانی بروید؟ به طور کلی چگونه باید تصمیم گرفت؟
پاسخ به سوالهای مذکور از طریق هزینه و فایده فرصت بیان میشود.
افراد منطقی به هزینه و فایده به صورت مارجینال (حاشیهای) فکر میکنند.
اگر اقتصاد را مانند یک کیک در نظر بگیریم. هر تصمیم اقتصادی یا بر بهرهوری تأثیر میگذارد یا بر برابر بودن. مثلا اگر مالیات افراد ثروتمند افزایش کند، اگرچه در کاهش اختلاف طبقاتی کمک میکند، اما سبب کاهش بهرهوری و در نتیجه کوچکشدن کیک اقتصادیمان میشود. به طور برعکس اگر مالیات گرفته نشود، کیک اقتصادی بزرگ میشود و هر فرد سهم بیشتری از کیک میتواند ببرد اما اختلاف بین سهمی که افراد از این کیک میبرند میتواند بسیار زیاد شود.
از این به بعد یادتان باشد تصمیمات سیاستمداران روی یکی از این دو مورد تأثیر میگذارد و بهبود یکی از این دو به معنای قربانی کردن دیگری است.
جمعبندی
در فصلهای دیگر کتاب نگارنده اصول ذکر شده در فصل اول را باز میکند و با بیان ریاضی (اما قابل فهم و ساده) آن را توضیح میدهد. این کتاب را به تمامی افرادی که میخواهند پاسخ سوالات زیر را بدانند توصیه میکنم.
- آیا افزایش حداقل دستمزد به نفع نیروی کار است یا به ضرر آن؟
- آیا گرفتن مالیات از کالاهای تجملی (مانند قایق تفریحی) به افراد ثروتمند بیشتر آسیب میزند یا افراد فقیر؟
- آیا تعیین سقف دریافت اجاره به نفع اجاره نشینهاست؟
بعد از خواندن کتاب دیدتان نه تنها به اقتصاد روزمره بلکه به تصمیمهایی که هر روز میگیرید عوض میشود.
July 27, 2009
Better than a text book. An excellent work that explains the basics of economics very well. Peppered with anecdotes and articles from the like of the Economist, the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal that emphasize or clarify the topics discussed in the chapters.
Loved it and will keep it as a reference forever.
Loved it and will keep it as a reference forever.
August 2, 2017
کتابی با زبان ساده، محتوای خوب و خوشخوان درباره اقتصاد
باید کتاب درسی همه شود
باید کتاب درسی همه شود
March 20, 2020
Un buen libro cuando tu profesor de economía no sabe explicar la economía a pesar de ser profesor de universidad. Ahora en serio, si necesitáis un libro para estudiar economía o simplemente como manual de referencia, este libro es más que útil.
June 1, 2019
(5th Edition) Clear, understandable, approachable, and, to the extent possible, comprehensive textbook about economics. As an independent learner like me, this book provided a good way to learn more about the basics of economics and many ways to "think economically" too. While the book is intended for a course on economics, it is easy to read and understand if you are studying on your own.
The initial chapter does a good job laying out 10 key principles of economics (like trade-offs, opportunity cost, marginal analysis, incentives, markets, etc), and after the author then uses these principles throughout the later chapters on specific topics and questions. I liked how the textbook provided a lot of charts to examine how supply and demand curves work in general and in various scenarios. This made it easy to think how certain relationships work in a market between a the suppliers and consumers and how you get price equilibrium. Understanding how supply and demand works is really the core economics and the book doesn't get away from reiterating it in nearly every possible case.
Obviously, this is not a short book. But once you get the core ideas, most of the later chapters could be read independent of one another. This allows you to look at topics as they interest you and what you want to learn. For example, my initial interest was marginal analysis (marginal utility and marginal cost) and macroeconomics (GDP and productivity), and it was easy to focus on this before going into other topics I wanted to explore later, like price control, taxes, economic inequality and monetary policy.
Most chapters can be read in 30-45 minutes or split in two or three sessions. Additionally, all of the key terms are explained and then put into context as well. Often times the breakout sections show how a concept works in a real-life newspaper analysis too. So it's pretty easy to jump around if that's how you want to learn.
Unlike some other economics books I've read, I found the book largely non-political in its analysis and explanations. It just gives you a way to understand the terms and core ideas of economics without forcing a kind of "political framing" of economics. Interesting, this becomes most obvious in the last chapter where you are provided 5 economic questions and how to debate the pro's and con's of both sides. Ultimately, this really shows how economics is not politically neutral. In fact, many of many societal debates (like a balanced budget, inflation, high or low taxes and even personal savings) are not answered by asking the economists. Instead, our economic policy involves trade-offs too.
Definitely a book I would return to for a refresher or reexploration of economics in the future too!
The initial chapter does a good job laying out 10 key principles of economics (like trade-offs, opportunity cost, marginal analysis, incentives, markets, etc), and after the author then uses these principles throughout the later chapters on specific topics and questions. I liked how the textbook provided a lot of charts to examine how supply and demand curves work in general and in various scenarios. This made it easy to think how certain relationships work in a market between a the suppliers and consumers and how you get price equilibrium. Understanding how supply and demand works is really the core economics and the book doesn't get away from reiterating it in nearly every possible case.
Obviously, this is not a short book. But once you get the core ideas, most of the later chapters could be read independent of one another. This allows you to look at topics as they interest you and what you want to learn. For example, my initial interest was marginal analysis (marginal utility and marginal cost) and macroeconomics (GDP and productivity), and it was easy to focus on this before going into other topics I wanted to explore later, like price control, taxes, economic inequality and monetary policy.
Most chapters can be read in 30-45 minutes or split in two or three sessions. Additionally, all of the key terms are explained and then put into context as well. Often times the breakout sections show how a concept works in a real-life newspaper analysis too. So it's pretty easy to jump around if that's how you want to learn.
Unlike some other economics books I've read, I found the book largely non-political in its analysis and explanations. It just gives you a way to understand the terms and core ideas of economics without forcing a kind of "political framing" of economics. Interesting, this becomes most obvious in the last chapter where you are provided 5 economic questions and how to debate the pro's and con's of both sides. Ultimately, this really shows how economics is not politically neutral. In fact, many of many societal debates (like a balanced budget, inflation, high or low taxes and even personal savings) are not answered by asking the economists. Instead, our economic policy involves trade-offs too.
Definitely a book I would return to for a refresher or reexploration of economics in the future too!
March 29, 2019
I am in a beginning level economics class as a freshman in college and this book has been really helpful for me. Many of the concepts in economics can be confusing because economics is introducing a new was of thinking as opposed to just memorization. Because of this, it is important to get a book that teaches the concepts in a way that are broken down to a very low level and highlights the fundamental concepts within the subject. The book does well and uses examples of very simplified markets in which the concepts can be clearly seen and identified. By establishing this base knowledge of how economics works at simple levels, it makes it easier to identify how things work on larger scale markets. This book also includes two different viewpoints of economics. In the microeconomics portion of the textbook, readers learn how actions in markets affect individual homes and small firms. In the macroeconomics section of the textbook, it discusses how markets and transactions affect the economy as a whole. Each section of the book is very informative and breaks down the information in a way that is understandable for beginners. I would highly recommend this book!
[WC 199]
[WC 199]
May 19, 2020
Mankiw aka. My month-long odyssey through the world of economics. And was it worth it? Absolutely. For those of you who have never heard of Makiw's Principles of Economics, let me tell you that book here is like a map that guides you through an abstract world that we think is losing its mind. It gives it rules on how the tide is going out. Like supply and demand. I had a good but sometimes chewy read and I'm sure I will come back to It in the the future whenever I feel I have a question to solve.
5*
5*
June 29, 2024
I delved into two additional books to deepen my understanding of economics. The author's explanation of each chapter is truly captivating. The use of examples and straightforward language makes the material highly accessible. Notably, the text avoids delving into overly complex topics or introducing challenging interpretations. Consequently, this clarity and approachability render the book highly commendable and recommendable
December 31, 2017
This book provided me with an excellent foundation for further economic study. For a textbook, the author writes in a very readable way and explains the concepts extremely well. The author does a fair job being neutral; however, one can sense his leanings.
March 8, 2016
For anyone who wants to know how Economics works this is a great book to start with.
May 31, 2021
Principles of macro and micro economics. Well written, easy to read, easy illustrations, interesting examples.
December 3, 2021
I HATE YOU
October 16, 2024
Pareciera que, al menos en la mayoría de las carreras, se dispone de un "texto base" que es revisado desde los primeros cursos con el fin de mostrar una visión panorámica de lo que serán las materias estudiadas más adelante en dicha rama. En el caso de la economía, el libro que hoy en día cumple esa función es el "Principios de Economía" de Gregory Mankiw, el cual puede verse algo intimidante dada su extensión y la cantidad de temas tratados. Sin embargo, creo que en realidad puede ser una lectura bastante amigable si se aborda con la suficiente paciencia, lo que le permitiría a gente de otras áreas poder iniciarse en esta disciplina.
ANÁLISIS DEL LIBRO
Esta obra dispone de un total de 34 capítulos distribuidos en 13 partes. Los tres primeros son de carácter introductorio y nos enseñan los "10 princpios de la economía", la forma de razonar de los economistas y un par de nociones generales sobre el comercio. Entre los capítulos 4 y 6 se explican la ley de la oferta y la demanda, la relación entre esta y el concepto de elasticidad y la forma en cómo es afectada por la política económica de un país. Luego, el capítulo 7 da una introducción a la eficiencia de los mercados, mientras que los capítulos 8 y 9 muestran cómo se relaciona con la tributación y el comercio internacional.
Los tres capítulos siguientes muestran la relación entre la economía y el sector público, siendo de particular interés el número 12, ya que aborda el sistema tributario. La siguiente parte (capítulos 12-17) está dedicada a las empresas y a los distintos tipos de mercados en los que estas se pueden encontrar -es decir, nos encontramos en el estudio de la microeconomía-, incluyendo: competencia perfecta, monopolios, oligopolios y competencia monopolística. Posteriormente, se estudia el mercado del trabajo, donde se exponen los factores producción, los ingresos y la desigualdad en las rentas. Para terminar con el estudio de microeconomía, el capítulo 21 entrega una teoría sobre las elecciones de los consumidores.
El resto del texto está orientado esencialmente hacia la macroeconomía e inicia con un capítulo sobre el producto interno bruto de un país y otro sobre el índice de precios del consumidor. Los siguientes capítulos utilizan dichos indicadores para explicar cómo funcionan el sistema financiero y el monetario; además de introducir otros conceptos como la producción, crecimiento, desempleo e inflación. Asimismo se hace mención a las diferencias entre una economía a largo y corto plazo. Para terminar, el último capítulo nos muestra 5 debates relacionados a la macroeconomía, dándonos a entender que cada economista tiene su propia visión sobre cómo deben abordarse dichas discusiones.
RESEÑA
Resulta curioso para quienes consultamos este libro en la universidad el hecho de que Mankiw fue capaz de explicar diversos conceptos económicos sin recurrir a materias avanzadas de las matemáticas. Ideas como el coste marginal o el beneficio marginal de una empresa son entendidas completamente cuando recurrimos al cálculo diferencial, no obstante el texto permite que aquellas personas sin formación en dicha disciplina sean capaces de comprenderlas con relativa facilidad, lo que lo convierte en una interesante alternativa para iniciarse en la economía. A modo de ejemplo, tal vez el cálculo más "complicado" que podemos encontrar es el del PIB, el cual es simplemente la suma entre cuatro parámetros (consumo, inversión, gasto público y exportaciones netas).
Por otra parte, si bien cada persona tiene su propia visión sobre cómo sería una buena política económica -lo cual es razonable, dado que el pensamiento económico es tan diverso como cualquier otra disciplina de las ciencias sociales-, es recomendable el estudio de este texto para comprender cuáles son los principales debates en economía y cuáles son las instituciones involucradas (banco central, bolsa de valores, etc.). Este libro permite comprender a qué se refieren los noticieros cuando indican que hubo un crecimiento en el PIB o en la inflación; también nos enseña cómo es que los bancos generan ganancias (los intereses de sus préstamos son mayores a las de nuestras cuentas de ahorro), cuáles son los riesgos de tener más dinero en circulación, por qué es importante el comercio con otros países, etc.
A pesar de lo anterior, hay una advertencia que debo hacerle a los posibles lectores y es que Mankiw escribe su obra "como un economista", es decir, alguien que hace un análisis coste-beneficio al momento de tomar una decisión. Pongo como ejemplo un caso expuesto en el capítulo 11: se nos pone en la disyuntiva de colocar un semáforo en un cruce. Es evidente que el beneficio de este consiste en todas las vidas que se salvarían con él. Sin embargo, Mankiw nos avisa que, en principio, no podemos determinar si son mayores los beneficios o los costes por no tratarse de "las mismas unidades". Para esto propone como solución tratar de darle un valor monetario a la vida humana (no es broma...) y, a partir de ahí, hacer la comparación con el coste del semáforo. Obviamente el autor se cuidó de darle un valor lo suficiente alto para evitar meterse en un dilema moral.
ANÁLISIS DEL LIBRO
Esta obra dispone de un total de 34 capítulos distribuidos en 13 partes. Los tres primeros son de carácter introductorio y nos enseñan los "10 princpios de la economía", la forma de razonar de los economistas y un par de nociones generales sobre el comercio. Entre los capítulos 4 y 6 se explican la ley de la oferta y la demanda, la relación entre esta y el concepto de elasticidad y la forma en cómo es afectada por la política económica de un país. Luego, el capítulo 7 da una introducción a la eficiencia de los mercados, mientras que los capítulos 8 y 9 muestran cómo se relaciona con la tributación y el comercio internacional.
Los tres capítulos siguientes muestran la relación entre la economía y el sector público, siendo de particular interés el número 12, ya que aborda el sistema tributario. La siguiente parte (capítulos 12-17) está dedicada a las empresas y a los distintos tipos de mercados en los que estas se pueden encontrar -es decir, nos encontramos en el estudio de la microeconomía-, incluyendo: competencia perfecta, monopolios, oligopolios y competencia monopolística. Posteriormente, se estudia el mercado del trabajo, donde se exponen los factores producción, los ingresos y la desigualdad en las rentas. Para terminar con el estudio de microeconomía, el capítulo 21 entrega una teoría sobre las elecciones de los consumidores.
El resto del texto está orientado esencialmente hacia la macroeconomía e inicia con un capítulo sobre el producto interno bruto de un país y otro sobre el índice de precios del consumidor. Los siguientes capítulos utilizan dichos indicadores para explicar cómo funcionan el sistema financiero y el monetario; además de introducir otros conceptos como la producción, crecimiento, desempleo e inflación. Asimismo se hace mención a las diferencias entre una economía a largo y corto plazo. Para terminar, el último capítulo nos muestra 5 debates relacionados a la macroeconomía, dándonos a entender que cada economista tiene su propia visión sobre cómo deben abordarse dichas discusiones.
RESEÑA
Resulta curioso para quienes consultamos este libro en la universidad el hecho de que Mankiw fue capaz de explicar diversos conceptos económicos sin recurrir a materias avanzadas de las matemáticas. Ideas como el coste marginal o el beneficio marginal de una empresa son entendidas completamente cuando recurrimos al cálculo diferencial, no obstante el texto permite que aquellas personas sin formación en dicha disciplina sean capaces de comprenderlas con relativa facilidad, lo que lo convierte en una interesante alternativa para iniciarse en la economía. A modo de ejemplo, tal vez el cálculo más "complicado" que podemos encontrar es el del PIB, el cual es simplemente la suma entre cuatro parámetros (consumo, inversión, gasto público y exportaciones netas).
Por otra parte, si bien cada persona tiene su propia visión sobre cómo sería una buena política económica -lo cual es razonable, dado que el pensamiento económico es tan diverso como cualquier otra disciplina de las ciencias sociales-, es recomendable el estudio de este texto para comprender cuáles son los principales debates en economía y cuáles son las instituciones involucradas (banco central, bolsa de valores, etc.). Este libro permite comprender a qué se refieren los noticieros cuando indican que hubo un crecimiento en el PIB o en la inflación; también nos enseña cómo es que los bancos generan ganancias (los intereses de sus préstamos son mayores a las de nuestras cuentas de ahorro), cuáles son los riesgos de tener más dinero en circulación, por qué es importante el comercio con otros países, etc.
A pesar de lo anterior, hay una advertencia que debo hacerle a los posibles lectores y es que Mankiw escribe su obra "como un economista", es decir, alguien que hace un análisis coste-beneficio al momento de tomar una decisión. Pongo como ejemplo un caso expuesto en el capítulo 11: se nos pone en la disyuntiva de colocar un semáforo en un cruce. Es evidente que el beneficio de este consiste en todas las vidas que se salvarían con él. Sin embargo, Mankiw nos avisa que, en principio, no podemos determinar si son mayores los beneficios o los costes por no tratarse de "las mismas unidades". Para esto propone como solución tratar de darle un valor monetario a la vida humana (no es broma...) y, a partir de ahí, hacer la comparación con el coste del semáforo. Obviamente el autor se cuidó de darle un valor lo suficiente alto para evitar meterse en un dilema moral.
Currently reading
January 30, 2024(Still Reading)
Chapter 1 Summary
• The fundamental lessons about individual decision making are that people face trade-offs among alternative goals, that the cost of any action is measured in terms of forgone opportunities, that rational people make decisions by comparing marginal costs and marginal benefits, and that people change their behavior in response to the incentives they face.
• The fundamental lessons about interactions among people are that trade and interdependence can be mutually beneficial, that markets are usually a good way of coordinating economic activity among people, and that the government can potentially improve market outcomes by remedying a market failure or by promoting greater economic equality.
• The fundamental lessons about the economy as a whole are that productivity is the ultimate
source of living standards, that growth in the quantity of money is the ultimate source of inflation, and that society faces a short-run trade-off between inflation and unemployment.
Chapter 2 Summary
• Economists try to address their subject with a scientist’s objectivity. Like all scientists, they make appropriate assumptions and build simplified models to understand the world around them. Two simple economic models are the circular-flow diagram and the production possibilities frontier.
• The field of economics is divided into two subfields: microeconomics and macroeconomics. Microeconomists study decision making by households and firms and the interaction among households and firms in the marketplace. Macroeconomists study the forces and trends that affect the economy as a whole.
• A positive statement is an assertion about how the world is. A normative statement is an assertion about how the world ought to be. When economists make normative statements, they are acting more as policy advisers than scientists.
• Economists who advise policymakers offer conflicting advice either because of differences in scientific judgments or because of differences in values. At other times, economists are united in the advice they offer, but policymakers may choose to ignore it.
"When you see a graph used to support an argument about cause and effect, it is important to ask whether the movements of an omitted variable could explain the results you see."
"Just keeping in mind that cigarette lighters don’t cause cancer (omitted variable) and minivans don’t cause larger families (reverse causality) will keep you from falling for many faulty economic arguments."
Chapter 3 Summary
•
Chapter 1 Summary
• The fundamental lessons about individual decision making are that people face trade-offs among alternative goals, that the cost of any action is measured in terms of forgone opportunities, that rational people make decisions by comparing marginal costs and marginal benefits, and that people change their behavior in response to the incentives they face.
• The fundamental lessons about interactions among people are that trade and interdependence can be mutually beneficial, that markets are usually a good way of coordinating economic activity among people, and that the government can potentially improve market outcomes by remedying a market failure or by promoting greater economic equality.
• The fundamental lessons about the economy as a whole are that productivity is the ultimate
source of living standards, that growth in the quantity of money is the ultimate source of inflation, and that society faces a short-run trade-off between inflation and unemployment.
Chapter 2 Summary
• Economists try to address their subject with a scientist’s objectivity. Like all scientists, they make appropriate assumptions and build simplified models to understand the world around them. Two simple economic models are the circular-flow diagram and the production possibilities frontier.
• The field of economics is divided into two subfields: microeconomics and macroeconomics. Microeconomists study decision making by households and firms and the interaction among households and firms in the marketplace. Macroeconomists study the forces and trends that affect the economy as a whole.
• A positive statement is an assertion about how the world is. A normative statement is an assertion about how the world ought to be. When economists make normative statements, they are acting more as policy advisers than scientists.
• Economists who advise policymakers offer conflicting advice either because of differences in scientific judgments or because of differences in values. At other times, economists are united in the advice they offer, but policymakers may choose to ignore it.
"When you see a graph used to support an argument about cause and effect, it is important to ask whether the movements of an omitted variable could explain the results you see."
"Just keeping in mind that cigarette lighters don’t cause cancer (omitted variable) and minivans don’t cause larger families (reverse causality) will keep you from falling for many faulty economic arguments."
Chapter 3 Summary
•
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 13, 2025
Traumatising.
Read
May 30, 2022neukaljanost mišlju
January 31, 2025
Chapter 1 at least is nothing but eye rolls. What a friggin neoliberal shill. So many fallacies of logic, and dishonest representation of market factors.
I’ll keep reading it (it’s for a class) and update my rating if warranted, but we’re off to a rough start. Right out of the gate, he’s simping for Friedman hard.
Our opening line is: “Scarcity means society has limited resources and therefore cannot produce all the goods and services people want.” I’m not going to sit here and pretend like resource scarcity isn’t *among* the defining concerns of economics, but as an opener, setting the stage for the entire field, it feels misleading. The #1 problem with distribution of resources is arguably not scarcity, it’s hoarding & monopolies. Some things *are* finite, like time, but many things just appear finite because of hegemonic control mechanisms. But I accept that maybe we got off on the wrong foot and even though he phrased it like that, maybe he’ll expand on the topic with nuance later that wasn’t even remotely alluded to here…
“Laws that require firms to be reduce pollution may raise the cost of producing some goods and services.” True. Then he goes on to say, “Because of higher costs, firms are likely to earn smaller profits, pay lower wages, charge higher prices or do some combination of those 3 things.” Funny! Salaries are never mentioned but wages are. This ignores the opportunity to reduce typically bloated upper management *salaries* rather than passing the cost burden onto the consumer or cutting “wages” for low/mid level workers (non-salaried employees). Okay, maybe he *meant* salaries, and figured we could *assume* that there were various ways to manage trade offs that need not raise every consumer’s grocery bill, right? He’s just speaking broadly about the full scope of possibilities.
Referring broadly to social welfare programs and personal income tax, “these policies increase equality but may decrease efficiency. When the government redistributes wealth from the rich to the poor, it reduces the reward for hard work for people at all income levels. As a result, people may work less and produce fewer goods and services.” Oh brother. Extensive studies have widely discredited this claim time and time again, so I really do have to interject and take issue here: either he’s too ignorant to be writing an economics textbook or he’s concern trolling.
I know he said “may” - he’s really hedging his bets with all this passive aggressive Thatcherism - but why bother when the data shows overwhelmingly that it does *not* under most circumstances? Let’s look at the facts this statement ignores.
1. Marginal Tax Rates and Labor Supply: Numerous studies show that moderate increases in taxation on high earners do not significantly reduce work effort. The elasticity of labor supply—how much people reduce work when taxes rise—is generally low, particularly for high-income earners whose jobs often involve prestige, status, and long-term career investments. https://academic.oup.com/wbro/article...?
• For low-income earners, tax credits and social benefits often increase work participation rather than decrease it (e.g., the Earned Income Tax Credit in the U.S.).
https://www.nber.org/digest/nov01/eff...
2. Economic Growth and Redistribution:
• OECD data suggests that economies with higher redistribution (like Sweden or Denmark) still have high productivity and GDP per capita.
• IMF and World Bank studies show that inequality can actually hurt long-term economic growth because low-income individuals spend a higher share of their income, undermining demand.
• Progressive taxation and welfare spending can improve human capital (e.g., better education and healthcare), leading to higher productivity.
3. The “Efficiency vs. Equality” Trade-off is Often Overstated: Countries with high social spending and progressive taxation (e.g., Nordic nations) do not have significantly lower labor productivity or GDP growth.
• Inequality itself creates inefficiencies, such as reduced social mobility, increased crime, and lower public health outcomes, which ultimately drag down productivity.
Then our boy sets up Adam Smith as the patron saint of economists, makes a few throwaway jabs at Soviet planned economies as the only alternative and then gives Keynes a miss altogether. It’s black and white free market “Invisible Hand magic” as he puts it, or you’re a goddamn commie.
And yes, I’m reviewing the 10th edition, not the 1980s edition. Wild that anyone is still making these arguments in the 2020s.
He says diamonds are worth more than water because they’re more scarce.
No, dear sir, that isn’t quite true, though, is it? Speaking of market failures—
After remarking that taxis were overregulated for safety and Adam Smith would have loved Uber and economists all agreed it was the best thing for all involved except the butt hurt taxi drivers—he wins us back with the necessary begrudging caveat, eventually, that sometimes there are market failures and governments might need to wade in. But then he trails off with the underhanded implication that they’re probably bad at it & unqualified in the first place.
…and then chucks out two more harebrained claims:
1) Workers’ rising wages over the past century weren’t due to labor unions or employer generosity, but rising productivity.
2) The U.S. wage stagnation since the 1970s wasn’t due to globalization but to weak productivity growth.
Let’s examine that, shall we?
From 1948 to 1973, wages & productivity grew together.
From 1973 onward, productivity kept rising, but wages stagnated.
Real median wages barely budged even though productivity doubled.
Corporate profits & executive pay skyrocketed instead.
Labor unions declined, offshoring increased, and policy shifted against workers.
If productivity alone determined wages, workers would have seen massive wage increases since the '70s. But they didn’t.
What changed wasn’t productivity. It was who captured the gains.
His second assertion completely ignores deindustrialization, trade policy, and corporate profit motives. If the minimum wage had kept pace with productivity, it would be ~$26/hour today (instead of ~$7.25 federally).
Oh but surely only teenagers get paid min wage as a “starter job”? After all… “In the United States, incomes have historically grown about 2 percent per year (after adjusting for changes in the cost of living). At this rate, the average income doubles every 35 years. Over the past century, the average U.S. income has risen about eightfold.” Is that mean or median or mode, bud? Where are you coming up with these numbers?
Wherever they come from, I’m sure it’s a reliable source because, after all, national specialization = good. Full stop, no caveats. Definitely not risky at all, ever. Gains all day long, forever & ever. Homeboy published this edition after COVID, too. No notes.
“But you’re a damn commie socialist Bernie bro!” you guffaw, taking a big bite of fois gras & pissing on an endangered species of baby bird. “Don’t hate the player, hate the game, baby! Joe Rogan says Elon is the future & Mankiw, too! God bless America!”
Well, I regret to inform you, even if I am mistaken, and the extensive data that contradicts Mankiw’s misleading generalizations was all aggregated by a bunch of “woke-ass SJWs” trying to kill the American dream and make us all ashamed to be men, then Mankiw would *still* unfortunately be bad at writing textbooks.
Because, structurally & logically, it’s divorced dad track suit slobby. For instance, in the beginning he cites Economic Principles 1 & 2. 1) People Face Trade-Offs and 2) The Cost of Something Is What You Give Up to Get It. This seems like the same thing, from an economics PoV in which everything ostensibly breaks down into commodities/resources - why make a distinction between these ideas.
I asked around. It seems like the distinction subtly implied (but never stated outright) is that 1 deals with “trade-offs” - an umbrella which includes both quantifiable and the elusively subjective/qualitative factors. Principle 2 hypothetically deals with those we can quantify algorithmically, and are thus referred to as “opportunity costs”. I’m honestly not sure whether or not these definitions are industry standard at the moment, but I was under the impression that an opportunity cost is still the opportunity you lost, whether or not we can definitively quantify it. Quantification of the ambiguous seems like one of the key challenges of economists, but an increasingly gratifying challenge in the era of Big Data. Even still, the efforts to quantify the ambiguous aspects of choice are hardly new - we just have better tools now to do so by analyzing consumer behaviour data at scales never before seen. The supposedly implied distinction between “trade offs” and “opportunity costs” (which is never states outright) is starting to feel unambitious at best, anachronistic at worst. But either way, somewhat arbitrarily defined here - or arguably not distinguished from one another at all.
Tragically, this is our textbook for the term. What a waste. Just glad I didn’t spend any money on it, thanks to those socialist libraries. No wonder he’s bitter.
I’ll keep reading it (it’s for a class) and update my rating if warranted, but we’re off to a rough start. Right out of the gate, he’s simping for Friedman hard.
Our opening line is: “Scarcity means society has limited resources and therefore cannot produce all the goods and services people want.” I’m not going to sit here and pretend like resource scarcity isn’t *among* the defining concerns of economics, but as an opener, setting the stage for the entire field, it feels misleading. The #1 problem with distribution of resources is arguably not scarcity, it’s hoarding & monopolies. Some things *are* finite, like time, but many things just appear finite because of hegemonic control mechanisms. But I accept that maybe we got off on the wrong foot and even though he phrased it like that, maybe he’ll expand on the topic with nuance later that wasn’t even remotely alluded to here…
“Laws that require firms to be reduce pollution may raise the cost of producing some goods and services.” True. Then he goes on to say, “Because of higher costs, firms are likely to earn smaller profits, pay lower wages, charge higher prices or do some combination of those 3 things.” Funny! Salaries are never mentioned but wages are. This ignores the opportunity to reduce typically bloated upper management *salaries* rather than passing the cost burden onto the consumer or cutting “wages” for low/mid level workers (non-salaried employees). Okay, maybe he *meant* salaries, and figured we could *assume* that there were various ways to manage trade offs that need not raise every consumer’s grocery bill, right? He’s just speaking broadly about the full scope of possibilities.
Referring broadly to social welfare programs and personal income tax, “these policies increase equality but may decrease efficiency. When the government redistributes wealth from the rich to the poor, it reduces the reward for hard work for people at all income levels. As a result, people may work less and produce fewer goods and services.” Oh brother. Extensive studies have widely discredited this claim time and time again, so I really do have to interject and take issue here: either he’s too ignorant to be writing an economics textbook or he’s concern trolling.
I know he said “may” - he’s really hedging his bets with all this passive aggressive Thatcherism - but why bother when the data shows overwhelmingly that it does *not* under most circumstances? Let’s look at the facts this statement ignores.
1. Marginal Tax Rates and Labor Supply: Numerous studies show that moderate increases in taxation on high earners do not significantly reduce work effort. The elasticity of labor supply—how much people reduce work when taxes rise—is generally low, particularly for high-income earners whose jobs often involve prestige, status, and long-term career investments. https://academic.oup.com/wbro/article...?
• For low-income earners, tax credits and social benefits often increase work participation rather than decrease it (e.g., the Earned Income Tax Credit in the U.S.).
https://www.nber.org/digest/nov01/eff...
2. Economic Growth and Redistribution:
• OECD data suggests that economies with higher redistribution (like Sweden or Denmark) still have high productivity and GDP per capita.
• IMF and World Bank studies show that inequality can actually hurt long-term economic growth because low-income individuals spend a higher share of their income, undermining demand.
• Progressive taxation and welfare spending can improve human capital (e.g., better education and healthcare), leading to higher productivity.
3. The “Efficiency vs. Equality” Trade-off is Often Overstated: Countries with high social spending and progressive taxation (e.g., Nordic nations) do not have significantly lower labor productivity or GDP growth.
• Inequality itself creates inefficiencies, such as reduced social mobility, increased crime, and lower public health outcomes, which ultimately drag down productivity.
Then our boy sets up Adam Smith as the patron saint of economists, makes a few throwaway jabs at Soviet planned economies as the only alternative and then gives Keynes a miss altogether. It’s black and white free market “Invisible Hand magic” as he puts it, or you’re a goddamn commie.
And yes, I’m reviewing the 10th edition, not the 1980s edition. Wild that anyone is still making these arguments in the 2020s.
He says diamonds are worth more than water because they’re more scarce.
No, dear sir, that isn’t quite true, though, is it? Speaking of market failures—
After remarking that taxis were overregulated for safety and Adam Smith would have loved Uber and economists all agreed it was the best thing for all involved except the butt hurt taxi drivers—he wins us back with the necessary begrudging caveat, eventually, that sometimes there are market failures and governments might need to wade in. But then he trails off with the underhanded implication that they’re probably bad at it & unqualified in the first place.
…and then chucks out two more harebrained claims:
1) Workers’ rising wages over the past century weren’t due to labor unions or employer generosity, but rising productivity.
2) The U.S. wage stagnation since the 1970s wasn’t due to globalization but to weak productivity growth.
Let’s examine that, shall we?
From 1948 to 1973, wages & productivity grew together.
From 1973 onward, productivity kept rising, but wages stagnated.
Real median wages barely budged even though productivity doubled.
Corporate profits & executive pay skyrocketed instead.
Labor unions declined, offshoring increased, and policy shifted against workers.
If productivity alone determined wages, workers would have seen massive wage increases since the '70s. But they didn’t.
What changed wasn’t productivity. It was who captured the gains.
His second assertion completely ignores deindustrialization, trade policy, and corporate profit motives. If the minimum wage had kept pace with productivity, it would be ~$26/hour today (instead of ~$7.25 federally).
Oh but surely only teenagers get paid min wage as a “starter job”? After all… “In the United States, incomes have historically grown about 2 percent per year (after adjusting for changes in the cost of living). At this rate, the average income doubles every 35 years. Over the past century, the average U.S. income has risen about eightfold.” Is that mean or median or mode, bud? Where are you coming up with these numbers?
Wherever they come from, I’m sure it’s a reliable source because, after all, national specialization = good. Full stop, no caveats. Definitely not risky at all, ever. Gains all day long, forever & ever. Homeboy published this edition after COVID, too. No notes.
“But you’re a damn commie socialist Bernie bro!” you guffaw, taking a big bite of fois gras & pissing on an endangered species of baby bird. “Don’t hate the player, hate the game, baby! Joe Rogan says Elon is the future & Mankiw, too! God bless America!”
Well, I regret to inform you, even if I am mistaken, and the extensive data that contradicts Mankiw’s misleading generalizations was all aggregated by a bunch of “woke-ass SJWs” trying to kill the American dream and make us all ashamed to be men, then Mankiw would *still* unfortunately be bad at writing textbooks.
Because, structurally & logically, it’s divorced dad track suit slobby. For instance, in the beginning he cites Economic Principles 1 & 2. 1) People Face Trade-Offs and 2) The Cost of Something Is What You Give Up to Get It. This seems like the same thing, from an economics PoV in which everything ostensibly breaks down into commodities/resources - why make a distinction between these ideas.
I asked around. It seems like the distinction subtly implied (but never stated outright) is that 1 deals with “trade-offs” - an umbrella which includes both quantifiable and the elusively subjective/qualitative factors. Principle 2 hypothetically deals with those we can quantify algorithmically, and are thus referred to as “opportunity costs”. I’m honestly not sure whether or not these definitions are industry standard at the moment, but I was under the impression that an opportunity cost is still the opportunity you lost, whether or not we can definitively quantify it. Quantification of the ambiguous seems like one of the key challenges of economists, but an increasingly gratifying challenge in the era of Big Data. Even still, the efforts to quantify the ambiguous aspects of choice are hardly new - we just have better tools now to do so by analyzing consumer behaviour data at scales never before seen. The supposedly implied distinction between “trade offs” and “opportunity costs” (which is never states outright) is starting to feel unambitious at best, anachronistic at worst. But either way, somewhat arbitrarily defined here - or arguably not distinguished from one another at all.
Tragically, this is our textbook for the term. What a waste. Just glad I didn’t spend any money on it, thanks to those socialist libraries. No wonder he’s bitter.
December 4, 2022
Primer Parcial Economía aprobado.
Los conceptos están bien explicados y se hace más amena la comprensión de los conceptos.
Lectura obligatoria para Principios de Economía en Abogacìa, Siglo 21
Primer Parcial 3/11: 5
Segundo Parcial 2/12: 8
Los conceptos están bien explicados y se hace más amena la comprensión de los conceptos.
Lectura obligatoria para Principios de Economía en Abogacìa, Siglo 21
Primer Parcial 3/11: 5
Segundo Parcial 2/12: 8
October 26, 2018
Principles of Economics with Dr. Gregory Mankiw was a delight and a treat. Dr. Mankiw is a professor at Harvard in economics. I took macroeconomics my sophomore year of college and this book was very insightful and helped me achieve success. Not only did it aid in school but the material in this textbook stuck with me post class. I still find my self using the concepts of economics from this textbook. Dr. Mankiw made the text easy to read and applied to real business and life situations which makes it more understandable. If you are looking to learn about economics this is the book to read.
September 28, 2019
Conocido cariñosamente como "el Mankiw", por su autor. Bien, pues no exagero si os digo que es imposible aprobar la asignatura de Principios de Economía de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Por suerte, a mí me encantaba la economía y con la pequeña-gran ayuda de mi amigo Mankiw, no supuso una dificultad ;) No olvidéis que es un tocho de libro de 900 páginas en tamaño DIN A 4. Ahí lo dejo.
Reseña en el blog La Contraportada: https://lacontraportadablog.blogspot....
Reseña en el blog La Contraportada: https://lacontraportadablog.blogspot....
Displaying 1 - 30 of 150 reviews