Are there any good books about neoclassical economics for laypeople? I want to learn more about other schools of thought besides the Austrian school so I've been looking around for some good info, but I can't find anything good. I was thinking about getting Milton Friedman on Economics: Selected Papers and Monetary History of the United States: 1867-1960 by Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz. I thought that maybe these two books will help me learn a little about neoclassical and monetarist economics, any other suggestions?

I can't recommend anything on mainstream economics, but I would recommend Studies in Mutualist Political Economy by Kevin Carson if you're interested in other schools of thought.

wombatron:

I can't recommend anything on mainstream economics, but I would recommend Studies in Mutualist Political Economy by Kevin Carson if you're interested in other schools of thought.

It's worth reading, if only to understand what's wrong with mutualism contra the Austrian school.  Carson also makes a few interesting contributions, but these are generally outdone by a structure of thought largely built on what I (and the Austrian school in general) consider to be fallacious premises.

 

Well I'm mainly looking for books from an orthodox POV, but thanks guys. :)

I've been looking around since I've posted and now I'm thinking about Macroeconomics: A Neoclassical Introduction by MH Miller and CW Upton, Milton Friedman on Economics: Selected Papers, and The Economic Approach to Human Behavior by Gary Becker.

R.J. Moore II:

It's worth reading, if only to understand what's wrong with mutualism contra the Austrian school.  Carson also makes a few interesting contributions, but these are generally outdone by a structure of thought largely built on what I (and the Austrian school in general) consider to be fallacious premises.

Agreed, but he does have several very good points, especially about "vulgar libertarianism" and alternative methods of economic organization.  Too bad he's so attached to the LTV.

Plus, he is quite a good writer.  Reminds me of Rothbard, in his clarity and subtle humor.  Its much easier to read about economics when it is enjoyable

As far as neoclassical/mainstream goes, Economics by Samuelson and Nordhaus and Value and Capital by J.R. Hicks are supposed to be good introductions, although they are both textbooks, maybe not what you want to go for. 

Ekelund's Private Markets and Public Choice is great, and it's even written from an Austrian perspective.

-Jon

Thanks for all the suggestions. Who here knows of any good books about neoclassical microeconomics?

I think I'm going to start off with a neoclassical micro and macro book and then move on to other, more all-encompasing, works.

The book I mentioned covers both IIRC.

-Jon

What level of complexity are you looking for? Judging from the list of books you listed previously, it sounds like you're wanting to jump into the deep end right away. I did the same thing when I first started learning mainstream economics and I think it only discouraged me (i didn't have the basic background required to really understand or enjoy more complex works).

If you are a total beginner to micro and don't want to deal with any equations or graphs, I would recommend Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell or David Friedman's Hidden Order is also a pretty good introduction.

If you've passed the introductory stage and want to get into some more intermediate stuff (graphs and simple equations) I would recommend David Friedman's price theory textbook. It's freely available online. 

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_ToC.html

It's actually essentially the same as Hidden Order, but Friedman uses some graphs and equations to help pump your intuition. Varian also has a good intermediate textbook (not to be confused with his graduate text: Microeconomic Analysis) that you may consider looking into.

In terms of mathematical intermediate micro, you will probably see the same general structure in most textbooks. First, learning how to model the decisions of the individual (utility maximization), next modeling the decisions of the firm (profit maximization or cost minimization), and finally you will be shown how to model the interaction of these decisions in a single market. Then you will probably spend time seeing how your results change in different types of markets (perfectly competitive, monopoly, maybe oligopoly). Sometimes you'll go into general equilibrium stuff, but I think most intermediate books avoid it.

For a more advanced textbook (ussually used at the grad school level or advanced micro courses), I really liked Nicholson's Microeconomic Theory textbook. But I wouldn't go this far until you have firmly established your intuition and until you have some experience with multivariate calculus. It's actually all pretty simple, but it would be very difficult to jump right in to this level of difficulty.

If you're still in school, I def. suggest taking a course in micro. THis is not easy stuff to learn on your own. And being graded and tested on the material forces you to dredge through the really hard parts. 

Hope this helps!

Hah, it just hit me that I forgot both Friedman and Sowell. Good suggestions. The Varian book is good too for understanding neoclassical econ, I used it on my econ courses, but it's not easy material. Neither is Ekelund's book come to think of it, though it's great for understanding the important stuff.

-Jon

krazy kaju:

Are there any good books about neoclassical economics for laypeople? I want to learn more about other schools of thought besides the Austrian school so I've been looking around for some good info, but I can't find anything good. I was thinking about getting Milton Friedman on Economics: Selected Papers and Monetary History of the United States: 1867-1960 by Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz. I thought that maybe these two books will help me learn a little about neoclassical and monetarist economics, any other suggestions?

What level of economics are you looking at?


I consider myself a member of the "neoclassical" school - though like the "Austrian" school, I really don't think that either exist - good economics is good economics, bad economics is bad economics and that's it.

 

In any case, I suggest the following as introductions if you haven't already been introduced to the college atmosphere of economics.

For Game Theory,

Game Theory: A Critical Introduction by Shaun P. Hargreaves-Heap and Yanis Varoufakis

For Macroeconomics as a textbook - yes, you can actually read textbooks,

 

Principles of Economics (7th Edition) (Addison-Wesley Series in Economics) by Roy J. Ruffin and Paul R. Gregory

 

For Microeconomics as a textbook,

Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Extensions (Hardcover)

by Walter Nicholson

 

For international economics, definitely check out Paul Krugman's,

Pop Internationalism.

 

I cannot stress how important that book really is to your development as an economist in the modern age.

krazy kaju:

Are there any good books about neoclassical economics for laypeople? I want to learn more about other schools of thought besides the Austrian school so I've been looking around for some good info, but I can't find anything good. I was thinking about getting Milton Friedman on Economics: Selected Papers and Monetary History of the United States: 1867-1960 by Milton Friedman and Anna J. Schwartz. I thought that maybe these two books will help me learn a little about neoclassical and monetarist economics, any other suggestions?

For a good foundation in microeconomics I would recommend the follwing:

1. Basic Economics - Thomas Sowell

2. Price Theory - David Friedman

3. Microeconomic Theory - Walter Nicholson

(If you are weak on Calculus you might think about working your way through "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Calculus" by W. Michael Kelley, but calculus is not needed for the first text, and is optional for the second. You need to know calculus to understand the third one).

For a good foundation in macroeconomics I would recommend:

1. Concise Guide to Macroeconomics - David Moss

2. Macroeconomics - Gregory Mankiw

*Please note that you will need to know more than this to be an economist, but if you really study these and understand them you will know more economics than the average undergraduate econ student.

 

 

Wow, thanks everyone for the great help. This thread turned out better than I thought. Don't worry, I'm not asking about economics book to become a crack "economist." I'm a firm believer in "don't call yourself an economist unless you have a PhD."

Anyways, the book suggestions are great and I'll look them over in more detail tonight. But aren't Greg Mankiw and Paul Krugman both new Keynesians? I was thinking about buying Mankiw's book anyways, but wouldn't their POV on some issues and economic models be rather different from the views of neoclassical economists?

krazy kaju:

Wow, thanks everyone for the great help. This thread turned out better than I thought. Don't worry, I'm not asking about economics book to become a crack "economist." I'm a firm believer in "don't call yourself an economist unless you have a PhD."

Anyways, the book suggestions are great and I'll look them over in more detail tonight. But aren't Greg Mankiw and Paul Krugman both new Keynesians? I was thinking about buying Mankiw's book anyways, but wouldn't their POV on some issues and economic models be rather different from the views of neoclassical economists?

Again, it depends upon what you mean by "neoclassical."

Most would say that all economists that aren't Marxians belong to the neoclassical school and it doesn't matter what college you go to, most will take an eclectic perspective from the Chicago school, Keynesian school, and perhaps even unwittingly from the "Austrian" school.

 

Also, are you going to college for economics?

Well, there are essentially two popular macroeconomic camps in mainstream universities: new keynesian macro and real business cycle macro. Both of them could be legitamatley be considered "neoclassical" in nature because theorists in each of these schools of thought build their models based on assumptions of utiliy maximing individuals and profit maximizing firms. The schools differ in how much weight they place on frictions that may divert the economy as a whole from a certain growth path (or "from full employment" to put in old fashioned terms). But there isn't a "neoclassical" school of macro though per se.

At least that is if you're strictly interested in business cycle theory. In terms of economic development, theorests following Solow's research program tend to be classified as "neoclassical" (in contrast to folks like Romer or Lucas who developed "endogenous" growth theories).

I would recommend starting off with microeconomics before you move onto macro. Once you get the basics down there, you will be able to better understand macro models in all the mainstream schools.

If you just can't wait, I would recommend Krugman's "Return to Depression Economics" for a very basic (but very insightful) introduction or Robert Barro's Macroeconomics textbook for a more intermediate approach.

If you don't want to spend money, Mike McElroy's Macroeconomics textbook is free and online. It's very good.

http://legacy.ncsu.edu/classes/ec348001/TextLinks.htm

 

Also, I think it is most important that you start reading up on DSGE. Without an understanding of it, it's possible that macroeconomics will simply pass you by and the macro you're reading now will be completely out of tune with the macro everyone else is talking about (my main problem with the "Austrians").

 

Then again, I'm not an economics major, I'm a Business student who has taken economic courses as requirements (and as a hobby).

I'm a senior right now, but yeah, I'll be going to college for economics for sure. I plan on taking the AP micro and macro exams also. Again, thanks for all the suggestions guys.

Now I somehow have to narrow it down to which ones I'll get...

Just make sure to keep up with the Austrian works too. Especially the more difficult stuff as your understanding advances.

-Jon

LOL I will Jon. I'm still in the process of reading Mises's Human Action and Socialism. I just want to learn more about the neoclassical school because I have a feeling that both the Austrian and the neoclassical schools could benefit from exchanging ideas... kind of a "neomarginalist school" if you will. Then again, it's only an intuition so I want to learn a bit more the neoclassical school to see if I agree with any of their views or not.

They do exchange ideas as it is. I think, though, an understanding of neoclassical econ will benefit you, and allow you to be better able to make sense of Austrian attitudes towards it, so good luck with it.

-Jon

I'm going to reiterate.

 

Good economics is good economics; bad economics is bad economics.

Yeah, I agree... still, I stand by what I said.

-Jon

Niccolò:

For Game Theory,
   

Game Theory: A Critical Introduction by Shaun P. Hargreaves-Heap and Yanis Varoufakis

I'm almost through Solid Choke's reading list -- btw thx for the fine compilation -- and thought about giving this one a try.

Glancing the book, I paid especially attention to its chapter on evolutionary processes, made me wonder if this really is a book you'd be assigned in college, and whether it is worthy of scarce time. It seems like its games contain fundamental flaws: eg the example for spontaneously provided public goods is health care. The reason why it works? Because only if you participate, you'll get it when you need it. But if it was excludable all along, how can it be considered an example of a public good?

I appreciate the philosophical content, and I don't hold against the authors the statist stance, but a lot of language seems downright undecipherable. And I mean sociology book undecipherable. For a critical text, I find it funny how they poke Dawkins' Selfish Gene for talking as if genes are conscious actors with intentions, when Dawkins makes it very clear, from the 1st chapter and many times on, that it is only meant as a metaphorical device -- but on the other hand they uncritically describe how some Schumpeter's disciple argued that the tendency to monopoly in capitalism is the cause of the economic hoes. Or how it finishes the evolution chapter with Marxist thoughts like how the capitalist allocation process requires war to adjust, and how we need a newborn Spartacus to show us our condition of slavery and the path to rebellion. I guess the point of the authors is to show how people's blind endorsement of present day institutions can distort the outcome of their interactions, and there are underlying lessons to all the other summaries, but I'd hope the examples would enjoy more economic literacy, and substance from psychological experiments.

If you guys could hint me to another book, I'd appreaciate it. I'm no stranger to math; in fact, I'm looking for neo-classical works as is the topic of this thread. I understand behavioral economics has gained important inroads into neoclassical territory, and for good reason, if you read some of their fascinating lab and field work, butright now I especially want to delve into pure rationality.

Also, what is a good primer in econometrics?

For neo-classical economics I would recommend "Economics" by Samuelson and Nordhaus, excellent textbook.

krazy kaju:

...any other suggestions?

Vedder & Gallaway's Out of Work.  They talk about Austrian school of thought, but they have a Neoclassical perspective generally.  They just share Austrian views on labor, and their opinion on econometrics.

BlackSheep:

Also, what is a good primer in econometrics?

Jeff Woolridge's Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach is brilliantly. Personally I'm a big fan of econometrics.