Scan barcode
chelton's review against another edition
5.0
It’s not that everything was perfect before American politicians began paying attention to economists, but things sure were different. Between 1969 and 2008, author Binyamin Appelbaum argues that economists rose from the deepest depths of academia to rest in positions like secretary of the treasury and chairs of the Federal Reserve and, more broadly, as policymakers. From deregulation to antitrust to conscription, economists have spent fifty years with their fingerprints on everything. So how did it happen and, better yet, what’s been the result of this economist-driven revolution?
Appelbaum has crafted one of the most readable economic histories imaginable. While detailing the major players behind the current free-market economy and its gradual evolution could easily be dry, he avoids this by exploring its practical application to everyday life across the decades. For example, Milton Friedman and his University of Chicago gang share a bulk of Appelbaum’s focus, and Friedman’s theories led to him pushing for an end to the military draft in the U.S.—a major plus. Yet this same worldview led to the deregulation of financial institutions, eventually resulting in the subprime mortgage crises—a major yikes. Similar anecdotes, both positive and negative, are peppered throughout the book and break up some of the more detail-dense topics.
Since Appelbaum’s focus on the historical aspects at the beginning of the book shows off the breadth of his research, there’s an added sense of authority when he reaches his later criticisms. He takes issue with the idea that free-market-focused economists manufacture riches to anyone beyond the ruling class, instead pointing to their deficiencies as the catalyst for the Great Recession. In this instance, it’s a measured, focused rebuttal to this way of governing, but Appelbaum’s delivery can veer from patient to sharp and, frankly, funny depending on how absurd he finds each proposal.
With carefully researched analysis and an easy style, The Economists’ Hour provides something Appelbaum might argue many economists don’t: accessibility.
Note: I received a free ARC of this book through NetGalley.
Review also posted at https://pluckedfromthestacks.wordpress.com/
Appelbaum has crafted one of the most readable economic histories imaginable. While detailing the major players behind the current free-market economy and its gradual evolution could easily be dry, he avoids this by exploring its practical application to everyday life across the decades. For example, Milton Friedman and his University of Chicago gang share a bulk of Appelbaum’s focus, and Friedman’s theories led to him pushing for an end to the military draft in the U.S.—a major plus. Yet this same worldview led to the deregulation of financial institutions, eventually resulting in the subprime mortgage crises—a major yikes. Similar anecdotes, both positive and negative, are peppered throughout the book and break up some of the more detail-dense topics.
Since Appelbaum’s focus on the historical aspects at the beginning of the book shows off the breadth of his research, there’s an added sense of authority when he reaches his later criticisms. He takes issue with the idea that free-market-focused economists manufacture riches to anyone beyond the ruling class, instead pointing to their deficiencies as the catalyst for the Great Recession. In this instance, it’s a measured, focused rebuttal to this way of governing, but Appelbaum’s delivery can veer from patient to sharp and, frankly, funny depending on how absurd he finds each proposal.
With carefully researched analysis and an easy style, The Economists’ Hour provides something Appelbaum might argue many economists don’t: accessibility.
Note: I received a free ARC of this book through NetGalley.
Review also posted at https://pluckedfromthestacks.wordpress.com/
maybehannahsmith's review against another edition
4.0
This book definitely took a few of my few spare brain cells to understand (give me something about biology or chemistry any day over economics). I'm positive a lot of it went over my head, but not to the fault of the author. The language was accessible, but I just don't have the background to jump right into a book like this without taking notes (which of course I didn't because I'm lazy, and it's economics). BUT I still think it's a good primer for understanding our current economic problems historically and is something I'll try to keep at the back of my mind in the future.
Granted, I'll probably have to reference the book again or do some outside research to have a coherent conversation about the economy, but that's not new.
Granted, I'll probably have to reference the book again or do some outside research to have a coherent conversation about the economy, but that's not new.
skitch41's review
5.0
Supply-side economics, Reaganomics, voodoo economics, trickle-down economics, call it what you will, but the neoclassical theories of Milton Friedman and his acolytes have oriented economic policy making in America, Britain, and much of the rest of the world for the last few decades. In this detailed, yet approachable, work of economic history, Mr. Appelbaum traces its roots, its disciples, its benefits and its costs.
On the periphery of economic thinking in the immediate post-WWII American boom, Mr. Appelbaum shows how Milton Friedman and other neoclassical economists had sharpened their knives in the background until 1970s stagflation and the rise of conservative politics embodied in Ronald Reagan gave them the chance to finally put their theories into practice by cutting taxes, deregulating large sections of the economy, and floating currency exchange rates birthed the market economy that we have today. This is a book that could’ve easily fallen into a hell of minute details, but Mr. Appelbaum admirably makes this book accessible even for someone who has never learned a thing about economics. There are still the occasionally head spinning data points, but they are used sparingly.
Another great aspect of this book is how even handed the analysis feels. Mr. Appelbaum does make his criticisms of the neoclassical economists quite plain throughout, particularly shining a light on how uneven the economic gains of the last few decades have been. However, he also does a good job of showing the failures of Keynesian economists to arrest stagflation in the 1970s and how the neoclassical economists of the period, such as Paul Volker, aggressively implemented new thinking that helped rescue the economy. But for every economic action there is an equal and opposite economic reaction, as Mr. Appelbaum ably points out on every page. This book could’ve easily been a polemical railing against Friedman and other neoclassical economists, and occasionally it is. But I felt the judgements to fair and balanced on the whole.
The great takeaway from this book, and one that will plague policy makers and voters for the several years, is that markets are made by people, not impersonal forces. Neoclassical theories may lead to more efficient economic outcomes, but not always fair or just outcomes. So striking that balance between efficient and fair is our present challenge. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about how we got to the present economic moment and want to try to imagine how it might be different.
On the periphery of economic thinking in the immediate post-WWII American boom, Mr. Appelbaum shows how Milton Friedman and other neoclassical economists had sharpened their knives in the background until 1970s stagflation and the rise of conservative politics embodied in Ronald Reagan gave them the chance to finally put their theories into practice by cutting taxes, deregulating large sections of the economy, and floating currency exchange rates birthed the market economy that we have today. This is a book that could’ve easily fallen into a hell of minute details, but Mr. Appelbaum admirably makes this book accessible even for someone who has never learned a thing about economics. There are still the occasionally head spinning data points, but they are used sparingly.
Another great aspect of this book is how even handed the analysis feels. Mr. Appelbaum does make his criticisms of the neoclassical economists quite plain throughout, particularly shining a light on how uneven the economic gains of the last few decades have been. However, he also does a good job of showing the failures of Keynesian economists to arrest stagflation in the 1970s and how the neoclassical economists of the period, such as Paul Volker, aggressively implemented new thinking that helped rescue the economy. But for every economic action there is an equal and opposite economic reaction, as Mr. Appelbaum ably points out on every page. This book could’ve easily been a polemical railing against Friedman and other neoclassical economists, and occasionally it is. But I felt the judgements to fair and balanced on the whole.
The great takeaway from this book, and one that will plague policy makers and voters for the several years, is that markets are made by people, not impersonal forces. Neoclassical theories may lead to more efficient economic outcomes, but not always fair or just outcomes. So striking that balance between efficient and fair is our present challenge. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in learning more about how we got to the present economic moment and want to try to imagine how it might be different.
tmntfan's review against another edition
5.0
felt like a learned a ton on mostly macroeconomics, the inflaton, employment, monetary vs fiscal policy, cost-benefit analysis, taxes and tax cuts, stimulus, and regulations along with anti-trust. how theoretical economics don't always hold up in the real world. this is mostly about the US and so it spends most of the time on the '70-'80s and skips over how globalization is taking money out of a country's economy which seems like a big deal but I'm not an economist. the bits on deregulation leading to wealth disparity are hard to read case its what I've believed but to see the mistakes from deregulating the money exchange and have it crash and then see them play more with derivatives and how that crashed in 2008 it is like we learned nothing.
cameroncl's review against another edition
3.0
Informative, but too focused on the U.S. (almost no discussion of France or Germany, both of which have just as important intellectual histories) and missing meta-analysis of the big picture and its implications for democracy.
ineffablebob's review against another edition
4.0
The Economists' Hour lays out a history of changes in monetary and economic policy around the world for the last half century. It focuses not just on the shifts in academic thinking and policy-making, but also the people behind those changes.
Most of the story focuses on the United States due to its size and impact over that time period, but there are portions where other countries take the lead. Most notable are Great Britain, where policy under Margaret Thatcher was much like that under Ronald Reagan in the US; and Chile, where an authoritarian approach allowed the implementation of an "efficient" (and painful) approach to economic reform that was politically impossible for democratically elected governments.
I took away a couple of major themes from this book. The first is the rise of economics as a respected field of study, taken seriously in the implementation of public policy. Appelbaum describes economists prior to the early 20th century as a group given little respect by policy-makers, when they weren't ignored outright. That slowly began to change, until a few decades later economists were occupying some of the highest positions of policy power.
The second theme is the rigidity of thinking exhibited by those powerful economists and their disciples. The popular perception of economics is of a science, driven by data and backed up by rigorous mathematics. But it's clear from the story told here that the scientific method was only being followed half-way. A theory was proposed, experiments were designed and implemented in the world's economies, but the results weren't being taken seriously and fed back to adjust the theory. Ideas like deregulation, lower tax burdens, and minimal government spending took root and continued to be applied, regardless of what the data showed the results to be. If there were any bad effects, it must have been because those ideas weren't applied vigorously enough, not because the ideas themselves were flawed.
We don't know the end of this story yet. Plenty of the same laissez faire ideas are still being used to implement economic policy today. Throwing them out entirely isn't a good idea, either. There's a balance to be struck, and we haven't found it yet. Perhaps we can't, and it will be a never-ending battle to figure out the right economic policy for changing conditions. But fighting that battle means keeping a marketplace of ideas open and evolving, without letting one school of thought dominate policy. I think that's the lesson to be taken from The Economists' Hour: be flexible in your thinking, look critically at the results of your own ideas, and be willing to adapt to reality. Good advice for anyone in any area, but particularly for those setting public policy and us voters who put them into power.
Most of the story focuses on the United States due to its size and impact over that time period, but there are portions where other countries take the lead. Most notable are Great Britain, where policy under Margaret Thatcher was much like that under Ronald Reagan in the US; and Chile, where an authoritarian approach allowed the implementation of an "efficient" (and painful) approach to economic reform that was politically impossible for democratically elected governments.
I took away a couple of major themes from this book. The first is the rise of economics as a respected field of study, taken seriously in the implementation of public policy. Appelbaum describes economists prior to the early 20th century as a group given little respect by policy-makers, when they weren't ignored outright. That slowly began to change, until a few decades later economists were occupying some of the highest positions of policy power.
The second theme is the rigidity of thinking exhibited by those powerful economists and their disciples. The popular perception of economics is of a science, driven by data and backed up by rigorous mathematics. But it's clear from the story told here that the scientific method was only being followed half-way. A theory was proposed, experiments were designed and implemented in the world's economies, but the results weren't being taken seriously and fed back to adjust the theory. Ideas like deregulation, lower tax burdens, and minimal government spending took root and continued to be applied, regardless of what the data showed the results to be. If there were any bad effects, it must have been because those ideas weren't applied vigorously enough, not because the ideas themselves were flawed.
We don't know the end of this story yet. Plenty of the same laissez faire ideas are still being used to implement economic policy today. Throwing them out entirely isn't a good idea, either. There's a balance to be struck, and we haven't found it yet. Perhaps we can't, and it will be a never-ending battle to figure out the right economic policy for changing conditions. But fighting that battle means keeping a marketplace of ideas open and evolving, without letting one school of thought dominate policy. I think that's the lesson to be taken from The Economists' Hour: be flexible in your thinking, look critically at the results of your own ideas, and be willing to adapt to reality. Good advice for anyone in any area, but particularly for those setting public policy and us voters who put them into power.
chandlersanchez's review against another edition
4.0
4.2/5
Why isn’t every American forced to learn some of these concepts instead of geometry or calc?
Why isn’t every American forced to learn some of these concepts instead of geometry or calc?
tonstantweader's review against another edition
4.0
The Economists' Hour is a history of how economists have gained primacy in policy-making in all three branches of government. From big business paying judges $1000 to go on a one-week Florida junket where they were taught regulations are bad and anti-trust laws are bad to the takeover of administrative positions, economic ideology has replaced political ideology. Of course, economists insist they are dealing in facts which is laughable when we learn such lovely things such as Milton Friedman announcing the results of his research before he began collecting data.
Since World War Two, economists associated with the University of Chicago, most notably Milton Friedman, have waged war on Keynes advocacy of government intervention. They have encouraged the business consolidation and the elimination of regulations, insisting the market will fix everything but stupidity. When their ideas result in disasters like the should-be-criminal predation that led to the crash in 2008, they say it’s stupidity, but now everyone has learned better and it won’t happen again, so regulation is not necessary. Yeah, right.
I learned a lot from this history. We all know the conventional narrative of how America lost manufacturing jobs to other countries. Big business loves to blame labor unions demands for wages and benefits, though they never note the growth in productivity of American workers outpaced their wages. Sometimes we are told that automation destroyed the jobs, however, in this book, we learn how anti-trust, monetary policy, and currency trading played significant roles as well
The Economists’ Hour is an excellent history. It has enough of the gossipy kind of details and snarky quotes from people who knew the people he is writing about to be fun while doing a great job of explaining and presenting economic history. I struggled at first because it seemed like such a huge book. I read and read and read and was only 10% of the way through. Finally, I checked and discovered about 40% of the book is footnotes. Then it seemed less daunting. I was making progress.
This is the most holistic and credible history of how we got here from there in terms of growing inequality. It is nonpartisan and I get the impression that Appelbaum is not a pure advocate for either Friedman or Keynesian theories of economic policy. Instead, he seems to believe that what we really need is pragmatists, not ideologues, who can shift strategies depending on the current situation and reality. He notes the times that Friedman has been right and when the absolutists have been wrong.
If you don’t like where we are, it is smart to learn how we got here so we make the right choices in trying to change it. The Economists’ Hour will be invaluable in that pursuit.
I received an e-galley of The Economists’ Hour from the publisher through NetGalley.
The Economists’ Hour at Little, Brown and Company
Binyamin Appelbaum author site
Since World War Two, economists associated with the University of Chicago, most notably Milton Friedman, have waged war on Keynes advocacy of government intervention. They have encouraged the business consolidation and the elimination of regulations, insisting the market will fix everything but stupidity. When their ideas result in disasters like the should-be-criminal predation that led to the crash in 2008, they say it’s stupidity, but now everyone has learned better and it won’t happen again, so regulation is not necessary. Yeah, right.
I learned a lot from this history. We all know the conventional narrative of how America lost manufacturing jobs to other countries. Big business loves to blame labor unions demands for wages and benefits, though they never note the growth in productivity of American workers outpaced their wages. Sometimes we are told that automation destroyed the jobs, however, in this book, we learn how anti-trust, monetary policy, and currency trading played significant roles as well
The Economists’ Hour is an excellent history. It has enough of the gossipy kind of details and snarky quotes from people who knew the people he is writing about to be fun while doing a great job of explaining and presenting economic history. I struggled at first because it seemed like such a huge book. I read and read and read and was only 10% of the way through. Finally, I checked and discovered about 40% of the book is footnotes. Then it seemed less daunting. I was making progress.
This is the most holistic and credible history of how we got here from there in terms of growing inequality. It is nonpartisan and I get the impression that Appelbaum is not a pure advocate for either Friedman or Keynesian theories of economic policy. Instead, he seems to believe that what we really need is pragmatists, not ideologues, who can shift strategies depending on the current situation and reality. He notes the times that Friedman has been right and when the absolutists have been wrong.
If you don’t like where we are, it is smart to learn how we got here so we make the right choices in trying to change it. The Economists’ Hour will be invaluable in that pursuit.
I received an e-galley of The Economists’ Hour from the publisher through NetGalley.
The Economists’ Hour at Little, Brown and Company
Binyamin Appelbaum author site
matt99stevens's review against another edition
5.0
Best book I read this year. Applebaum makes a great case the Monetarists and Supply-Siders drank their own coolaid and refused to base their arguments on factual basis. The misdiagnosis of the economy and the solutions is still haunting us today.
In his conclusion, he hedges slightly, saying the forces of globalization (my word, not his) would have overwhelmed many other policy choices. He spends most of the book talking about the policy choices that entrenched the power of the wealthy, hurt the poor and middle class, and destroyed the industrial base of america. But then kind of says "there may not have been much we could have done different" and he's not wrong that it was a world wide phenonon that took away the industrial base of the much of the developed world. And yet, their are nations and regions with the US that still have strong industrial basis. Those are where we can learn how to rebuild our own.
I am also having to work my way through the consumer vs. the producer self identification. I want to be a fan of nader, and that we need to empower the consumer. And I understand that sometimes, monopoly drive down costs, and empower the consumer, at the expense of smaller or less cheap producers. In the end, that may not be actually better for the consumer or the broader economy.
In his conclusion, he hedges slightly, saying the forces of globalization (my word, not his) would have overwhelmed many other policy choices. He spends most of the book talking about the policy choices that entrenched the power of the wealthy, hurt the poor and middle class, and destroyed the industrial base of america. But then kind of says "there may not have been much we could have done different" and he's not wrong that it was a world wide phenonon that took away the industrial base of the much of the developed world. And yet, their are nations and regions with the US that still have strong industrial basis. Those are where we can learn how to rebuild our own.
I am also having to work my way through the consumer vs. the producer self identification. I want to be a fan of nader, and that we need to empower the consumer. And I understand that sometimes, monopoly drive down costs, and empower the consumer, at the expense of smaller or less cheap producers. In the end, that may not be actually better for the consumer or the broader economy.