/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16437647]

Book recommendations for learning about economics.

[Anonymous No.16437898]

>>16437647
but if you ever had a dream, what would it be? i am interested. i want to dream so badly. i have been awake for what now feels like the eons of wiping away a mountain with a calico cloth.

[Anonymous No.16437939]

>>16437898
based schizo poster

[Anonymous No.16437961]

>peak of Rome & Greece ~1000AD

[Anonymous No.16437969]

>>16437647
Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell

[Anonymous No.16437971]

>>16437647
god, is there a way to keep society between the second agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution? I think that is pean.

[Anonymous No.16437980]

>>16437961
peak of greece around 800ad is even more glaring

[Anonymous No.16437982]

Unironically Capital vol I and II. There isn't an economist on the planet that disagrees with Marxist analysis, they just cry over the implications. Alternatively you can read this >>16437969 and cope forever.

[Anonymous No.16437987]

>>16437647

>The entirety of mathematics and writing are both single points alongside things like railroads and “mobile”

Cursed image

[Anonymous No.16438000]

>>16437647
Das Kapital.

[Anonymous No.16439146]

>>16437647
Sowell is the best, the guy has advised presidents and is a genius, this is the only book you need for the basics

[Anonymous No.16439154]

>>16437647
Wealth of Nations, Kapital, and General Theory of Employment

[Anonymous No.16439164]

>>16437647
A textbook and potentially a course. Ignore anyone telling you to read meme books from the 19th century.

[Anonymous No.16439173]

>>16437982
>There isn't an economist on the planet that disagrees with Marxist analysis
oh boy are you in for a rude awakening. People should read Marx, yes, he made valid observations, but he's not infallibale kek

[Anonymous No.16439185]

Balaja Abdurrahmanov

[Anonymous No.16439205]

>>16437982
>There isn't an economist on the planet that disagrees with Marxist analysis
How many economists do you associate with? Even the vast majority of Marxist economists have moved onto something a little more contemporary than Capital.

[Anonymous No.16439512]

>>16437647

[Anonymous No.16439531]

>>16439512
Based

[Anonymous No.16439691]

>>16437647
https://mises.org/library/virtual-mises-university-suggested-reading
This reading list will cover a lot, it's an excellent way to cover much of economics quickly
>>16437969 , >>16439146
Sowell is also a very good option

[Anonymous No.16439713]

>>16437647
karl marx capital
david graeber debt 5000 years

[Anonymous No.16439718]

>>16439512
bro let's just sell children as slaves bro that's the real freedom bro

[Anonymous No.16439743]

>>16437647
economics is not /lit/
>>>/sci/

[Anonymous No.16439754]

>>16439743
>economics
>science
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.16439763]

>>16439743
Economics is definitely, definitely not a science. It doesn't fit perfectly onto any board, but the man wants books, so here he is.
Hell, even if it was a science, a thread asking for actual book recommendations is a welcome change from Twitter threads.

[Anonymous No.16439765]

>>16439718
You seem to be getting Rothbard's libertarian political theory mixed up with Austrian economic science. It's okay, read pic relate as an introduction.

>>16439691
Good to see a fellow Austrian here.

[Anonymous No.16439778]

>>16439718
W-what?
I think you might have missed something, like the entire book or Rothbard's basic theses.

[Anonymous No.16439780]

>>16437647
pic related

[Anonymous No.16439787]

>>16439765
I am familiar with rothband. he wants to destroy the state and turn the world into a collection of privately owned cities where those with property rule over everyone else as slaves and can do whatever they want.
that's what libertarian "freedom" means. the freedom to dominate everyone who is lower than you. delightful stuff

[Anonymous No.16439790]

>>16439765
I'm from the UK, so it's not often I get to talk to other Austrian economists, most people here really don't get it

[Anonymous No.16439794]

>>16439778

[Anonymous No.16439802]

>>16439787
Once again, Rothbard's libertarian political theory has no bearing on whether his economic reasoning is sound. They are different subjects.

There are Austrians who aren't ancap. You know this right?

>>16439780
Lame, /lit/ is a praxeological board

[Anonymous No.16439805]

>>16439790
Even in america it's pretty rare. I've never met an austrian in the wild.

What Austrian books are you reading currently? Any specific area of study.

[Anonymous No.16439809]

>>16439802
don't throw that garbage at me. it's a big project to justify a new global slavery, hilariously using the language of "freedom" to justify it.

[Anonymous No.16439812]

>>16439805
oh, don't worry our rulers subscribe to those economics. you don't meet them often because you're a dirty peasant whom they despise

[Anonymous No.16439819]

>>16439794
So literally the opposite of what you said then?

[Anonymous No.16439833]

>>16439809
>>16439812

The elites follow the neoliberal Keynesian empiricist economics. What are you talking about?

What is your problem with Austrianism specifically? Do you think their price theory is unsound? Do you think their structuring of capital is inferior to seeing it as homogeneous?

[Anonymous No.16439836]

>>16439805
I read through Chaos Theory recently, which certainly made some interesting propositions about private courts and militaries, though private defense naturally lends itself to lots of small communities and tends to make more independent homesteads less viable. It also makes extradition, as it were, really hard between two cities with different sets of values.

[Anonymous No.16439838]

Reminder that communists are subhuman niggers. Read pic related for actual introduction to economics

[Anonymous No.16439840]

>>16437987
>and writing
no.
writing is the dominant means of culture, from recorded history to literature to instruction manuals to recipes to personal expression to law, etc.
both railroad (trade and transportation improvement) and mobile (communications improvement, and much of it, from business to law to entertainment, is "writing") are merely modifications of what came before.
though they are VERY important they are not absolute world-changers on the same scale as "writing". Not even close.

[Anonymous No.16439843]

>>16439836
I don't have much interest in Austro-libertarianism, but I do want to read Murphy's "Choice" which is a simplified version of Mises "Human Action."

His study guides for MES and HA are great as well.

[Anonymous No.16439852]

>>16437647
>Mathematics
>0 BC
This has to be bait...

[Anonymous No.16439864]

>>16439843
I'm more interested in the economics too, though I thought I should give the libertarian side a look. I've been meaning to read some of Max Hirsch's work, he was around before Mises but managed to preempt some of his ideas in a context of land value taxation.

[Anonymous No.16439865]

>>16437987
>>16437961

the graph is in relation to population, the Y axis clearly shows "population", so it is population in relationship with technology

the term "rome and greece" seems strange but technology and population did peak in this period of time around 1000AD.
here the term "rome and greece" is not antiguity but its refering to the Holy roman empire and Byzantium even tho byzantium was considered the roman empire by their own inhabitants:
>Βασιλεία τῶν Ῥωμαίων, romanized: Basileía tōn Rhōmaíōn, lit. 'empire of the Romans'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantium
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire

is important to know how to read graph and what they are showing...and to know some history too...that's why that pic may seem strange for some people

[Anonymous No.16439884]

>>16439864
>Hirsch
A georgist? You're scaring me, anon.

>preempt some ideas in land value taxation
Any specific insights you've gained?

[Anonymous No.16439914]

>>16439884
I've read Henry George, he's too socialist about things but he has a point, in that the land value tax is the least worst tax. He's completely, completely wrong about how interest accrues though, which is where Hirsch preempts Mises and fixes up his theories.

[Anonymous No.16439920]

>>16439914
taxes are bullshit in general, they don't happen naturally so I see them as part of political theory more than anything.

[Anonymous No.16439926]

>>16439920
taxes are the interest on the debt you owe to society

[Anonymous No.16439933]

>>16439926
No. Where does this debt supposedly come from?
Taxes are mostly extortion applied randomly to spend on things individuals would never spend on themselves.

[Anonymous No.16439940]

>>16439933
a society gives you life, raises you, clothes you, feeds you. it's an infinite debt that can only be repaid with your very life. taxes are just interest on it

[Anonymous No.16439946]

>>16439920
True, but if you consider the maker's right to be the basis of property rights, then the land can't be considered anyone's in particular. If you say it belongs to everyone, then you have to buy or rent your land from society in general, which takes the shape of a tax. Of course, this only works if the cash raised is then spent purely on positive externalities, which are loosely classified at best. It's not perfect, but compared to income tax it's far more fair a system.
>>16439926 , >>16439940
Do you plan on charging your children interest on the debt they owe you for raising them?

[Anonymous No.16439956]

>>16439940
The idea that "society" (which does not exist) equally owns shares in my wellbeing and thus has rights to tax my property as interest on this debt is ridiculous to me.

I already pay for the food and clothes that they have supposedly given to me. So it hasn't been given at all.

[Anonymous No.16439964]

>>16439956
you disgust me

[Anonymous No.16439968]

>>16439946
>True, but if you consider the maker's right to be the basis of property rights, then the land can't be considered anyone's in particular. If you say it belongs to everyone, then you have to buy or rent your land from society in general, which takes the shape of a tax. Of course, this only works if the cash raised is then spent purely on positive externalities, which are loosely classified at best. It's not perfect, but compared to income tax it's far more fair a system.

I generally don't get into this kind of theorizing too much, because it's like complaining about the weather. True ownership actually comes from power to violence and nothing else, thus we don't actually own property except in our ability to have dominion over it through force, or proxy-force such as through the US goverment.

Thus, all american property is in a state of potential fiat-property (if you don't pay taxes you lose it), or the tenuous state of if they took our property we might revolt.

Ultimately the rothbardian idea of mixing labor with natural resources creates ownership is the most sound to me. It makes no sense that everyone in society owns the who universe equally just through being born.

[Anonymous No.16439987]

>>16439964
likewise, I would guess.

However, I apparently have an ownership in your life somehow, so I hope you pay it back soon.

[Anonymous No.16439992]

>>16439968
I definitely get where you're coming from. I guess the difference in opinion comes in part from the fact natural resources, including land, are more scarce in the UK, so such theorising at least makes a bit more sense. After all, we do like complaining about the weather here.

[Anonymous No.16440004]

>>16439956
america truly is the great satan, for only a vile entity such as that could originate such ideas

[Anonymous No.16440013]

>>16439992
>I guess the difference in opinion comes in part from the fact natural resources, including land, are more scarce in the UK.

That is an interesting idea, the environment changing how we might look at taxes.

Ultimately I would say, the government is providing a service (infrastructure, military, courts, etc.) and the individuals in society should be paying dues based on the use of these services.

Taxes should be the dues on these services. The amount of money I make has no bearing on the amount of services I use. The amount of land I own doesn't have any bearing on the amount of services I use.

I haven't thought much about this stuff though, it's not why I'm into economics. It's kind of like political philosophy (no one in power cares what I think about what should and shouldn't be taxed).

[Anonymous No.16440023]

>>16440004
You should own no property then, all property should be owned by all people equally. If a new person is born, your ownership is that much less.

Are you a communist then?

This should go for personal property as well. Your toothbrush is owned by all. Even someone on the other side of the planet owns your property (unless it's only your friendly society, then if I hate my neighbor is his ownership diminished?).

[Anonymous No.16440114]

Just start with this

[Anonymous No.16440343]

>>16440004
>Austrian economics comes from America
kek

[Anonymous No.16440375]

economics is a meme
>look at me halfass everything
>my brain boy my brain
lmao
literal retards

[Anonymous No.16440985]

>>16437898
Nice

[Anonymous No.16440993]

Stock & Watson

Intro to STATA

Incerto series

[Anonymous No.16441243]

is there a introduction thats not one particular theory but a compilation of all of them?
i dont want to read propaganda. i dont want to come out of it thinking i know anything for certain but know some frameworks

[Anonymous No.16441270]

>>16441243

[Anonymous No.16441276]

>>16441270
>i dont want to read propaganda

[Anonymous No.16441348]

>>16441243
Doesnt really exist, big name textbooks like Mankiw's and Krugman's are New Keynesian. I don't know McConell, Brue, Flynn's bias, but I assume it's the consensus mix of New Classical and New Keynesian.

People go to Austrian as a way to get away from the modern consensus of New Keynesian/New Classical/Monetarism. All major textbooks are going to be the modern consensus for obvious reasons. People are going to tell you all others are biased and that is the real scientific economics.

Other than that you have marxist and georgist.

Some people like to go to Chicago school writers for a NeoLiberal NeoClassical take. They were really big in the 80's and 90's.

[Anonymous No.16441371]

>>16441243
you can read few textbooks that approach the subject from different angles

[Anonymous No.16441439]

>>16441276
Everything but this book is propoganda

[Anonymous No.16441450]

>>16441348
>>16441371
so lets say theres none that are wide in scope, which schools of thought are the most important for me to learn in relief to marxist thought, since i will definitely read a marxist one, i want to know the arguments contrary or just separate ways of seeing the problems.

[Anonymous No.16441530]

>>16441450
Pic related might interest you. Marxist wrote it as a comparing Marxist, Keynesian, and NeoClassical.

Most would recommend you get a major textbook my Mankiw or McConnel, thatll give you an intro to the New Keynesian or New Classical outlook.

Austrians talk shit on marx all day, so if you want a further critique of marx, they are another option.

[Anonymous No.16441564]

>>16441530
that looks about perfect for what i want. thanks :*

[Anonymous No.16441691]

>>16437961

In terms of population. but still, weird to call it rome and greece.

[Anonymous No.16441826]

>>16441530
They talk shit about Keynesians too, Robert Murphy has a weekly podcast entirely dedicated to complaining about Krugman

[Anonymous No.16441868]

>>16441826
Absolutely, they do.

[Anonymous No.16441879]

>>16441564
If you want to look into Austrians, there's loads of resources at the Mises institute website, they're often free and some are very short. Hayek is seldom mentioned there, but he is worth pursuing too, he has some slightly different ideas about how involved the state should get.
The Chicago school is pretty similar to the Austrian school but they focus more on the role of government in dealing with currency, they generally believe in fiat money but a fixed rate of printing rather than a commodity backed currency. Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell are both Chicago school, and there are YouTube videos of both discussing the core of their theories if you just want a glance at them.
Georgism has been mentioned a few times in this thread, the central text for them is Progress and Poverty. This is freely available in abridged and unedited forms in a lot of places, it's a niche school but it's very interesting as an alternative view.

[Anonymous No.16441998]

>>16440343
the great satan is the country that finances and spreads them

[Anonymous No.16442143]

>>16437647
Free Trade Doesn't Work by Ian Fletcher

[Anonymous No.16442218]

>>16439987
>lolbert can't understand the concept of the collective and must think societal things are individual stake


Many such cases

[Anonymous No.16442676]

>>16442218
This is just ignorance. Austrian econ is separate from Austolibertarianism.

Those in my community may have some transcendental ownership in my wellbeing, but I have no respect for theories of my responsibility to all people legally due to the fact they were born.

[Anonymous No.16442797]

The Invisible Hook by Peter Leeson is a pretty good one if you’re juuuust starting, it’ll get you through most of the foundational ideas with examples that make everything click and it is very funny and the sort of book that makes me smile when I remember it exists

[Anonymous No.16443580]

>>16439205
To what did they move on? Genuine question. Sraffa?

[Anonymous No.16444033]

Anyone familiar with this one?

[Anonymous No.16444496]

>>16439512
Dude, Rothbard didn't even understand Mises, let alone the fact that everybody ignores him today.

[Anonymous No.16444575]

>>16444496
I don't think that's true. Mises loved MES and mentored Rothbard, and MES has become the basis of for modern Austrian macro theory.

[Anonymous No.16444676]

>>16444575
That might be so but Rothbard's ABCT in MES is a far cry from Mises's.

[Anonymous No.16444763]

>>16444676
Sure but the view of the federal reserve fucking the interest rate as a prime cause of crashes is used in modern Austrian theory, and so still considered valid, and isn't that far from Mises seeing it as caused by fractional reserve banking. Both seem to be operating on the same principle of causing malinvestment through inflation. Besides Rothbard was against fraction reserve as well.

Am I missing something important here?

[Anonymous No.16444884]

>>16439865
All of the labels are about major historical events. Referring the HRE and Byzantium as the peak of Rome or Greece is retarded.

[Anonymous No.16445006]

>all these retards reccing austrian school/marxist lit/sowell garbage as introductory material

Start with textbooks about micro/macro economics, continue with political economy 101 lectures/books, and ONLY THEN consider even touching the meme books.

[Anonymous No.16445044]

>>16445006
Just read New Kensianism bro, all the schools teach it. It must be true.

[Anonymous No.16445056]

Quinn Slobodian and Robert Brenner

[Anonymous No.16445357]

>>16437647
Everything you need to know anon

[Anonymous No.16445893]

Is this a good place to start with hayek?

[Anonymous No.16446449]

Seriously no one is gonna recommend Heilbroner's The Worldly Philosophers? Like, if you want a history of the discipline and the underlying philosophy, def start there. If ya want the graphs read Mankiw or Krugman pre-2000

[Anonymous No.16446467]

>>16437898
I would sex

[Anonymous No.16447445]

>>16446449
I own it, you recommend it?
I doesn't mention the Austrians so I was dissapointed.

[Anonymous No.16447658]

Any good books on behavioral economics?

[Anonymous No.16448174]

First Mankiw, then Varian for micro, Romer or Williamson for macro and Stock-Watson for econometrics. For intermediate/grad stuff, Acemoglu or Wickens for macro, Jehle-Reny for micro and Hayashi for econometrics.

[Anonymous No.16449508]

best pro "protectionist" books?

[Anonymous No.16449566]

>>16439146
So he has made the world a worse place.