A Guide to What's Wrong with Economics available in Paperback
- Pub. Date:
- Anthem Press
During a time of accelerating momentum for radical change in the study of economics, 'A Guide to What's Wrong with Economics' comprehensively re-examines the shortcomings of neoclassical economics and considers a number of alternative formulations.
About the Author
Edward Fullbrook is a Visiting Research Fellow at the School of Economics, University of the West of England. He is the founder and editor of the 'Post-Autistic Economics Review'. Among other books, he has edited 'The Crisis in Economics' (Routledge, 2003) and 'Intersubjectivity in Economics' (Routledge, 2002). He has also recently published 'Real World Economics: A Post-Autistic Economics Reader' (Anthem Press, 2007).
Table of Contents
Introduction: Broadband versus Narrowband Economics - Edward Fullbrook; Part I. Basic Problems; Part II. Micro Nonsense; Part III. Macro Nonsense; Part IV. Ethical Voids and Social Pathologies; Part V. Misuse of Mathematics and Statistics; Part VI. Category Mistakes Regarding Wealth and Illth; Part VII. Globalist Distortions; Notes ; Name Index
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
Fullbrook's collection of critical papers titled "What's Wrong With Economics", with contributions from twenty-six different authors on seven core subjects, is a reasonable introduction to heterodox economics for the layman with an interest in the 'technical' aspects of economics. Practically all the essays in this book are written from a radical neoclassical perspective criticizing the mainstream, although the writers vary much in the degree of their radicalism. Some authors just call for more attention to local circumstances or the environment, others, such as Steve Keen, Geoffrey Hodgson and Bernard Guerrien seek to demolish certain fundaments of the neoclassical mainstream. None of the papers, perhaps with the exception of Keen's, are very difficult to read, and most are short and to the point, which is very pleasant. The quality is varying, with some papers making rather weak points that could be avoided with just minor surface changes of mainstream practice or that attack precisely things that are not the issue of neoclassical economics, such as with Anne Mayhew's contribution. Generally though the essays are reasonably interesting and informative, and because of the excellent scope of this book, a balance between width and depth is achieved that allows any intelligent reader to get a primer on what is, indeed, wrong with economics. The only major flaw is that it contains no criticisms other than radical neoclassical (or mainstraim neoclassical); there's no neo-Ricardian or Marxist in sight.