In the 21st century, Adam Smith's "invisible hand" model has gained the upper hand, and capitalism has ultimately won the ideological battle over socialism and interventionism. But even in the era of globalization and privatization, Keynesian and Marxist ideas continue to play a significant role in economic policy in the public and private sectors.
©2007 Mark Skousen; (P)2007 Blackstone Audio Inc.
"Thoughtful, highly readable account that brings economics to life." (R. Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School)
"I love Mark Skousen's book about the history of economists - it is so interesting and well written, and helps us visualize the big picture." (Jeremy J. Siegel, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania)
"A curious, enlightening and creative account of the world's three most influential economists, and why their theories have had such a huge impact on the economic history of the modern world." (Robert J. Shiller, Yale University)
This title includes short biographies of each of the three economists Smith, Marx and Keynes, together with a discussion of the main points of their work and critique of their ideas. It also goes into useful detail about their successors and their historical impact.
Serves as a reasonable introduction to the history of economics for the general reader. There is bias introduced by the author's particular perspective. For example, he devotes a surprising amount of space to a discussion of whether or not Adam Smith was a practicing Christian. The description of Karl Marx is splendidly bitchy: a man described more than once as 'demonic'. He is villified, for example, because his children died in poverty. However, much of the discussion of Marx' work is reasonably unbiased and can be useful. It is obviously a matter of great dismay to the author that John Maynard Keynes described himself as an 'immoralist' and was openly homosexual for part of his life.
A reasonably good read, less impartial than I would have liked, but presents the main economic ideas in an accessible manner.
Not impressed with this title at all - overly simplistic, historically inaccurate and written in small chunks - pretty much like a students' set of notes from lectures. Not for anyone interested in Economics or the economists in question. I would highly recommend Thomas Sowell's basic economics as it covers the essential points in a far more intelligent & lucid way
I was terribly disappointed by this book. I had in mind an objective and analytical account of each economists contribution to the field; this is not the case. The author favours Adam Smith above all and is sure to push his opinion at every opportunity.
"Cut and paste"
This book is ok. Unfortunately it is pretty much a "cut and paste" book assembeled from his earlier works. Instead of this one, buy "The history of modern economics" by the same author.
"Two for One"
If you listened to Skousen's Making of Modern Economics then there really is no reason to pick up this volume. There are whole passages lifted from the prior text and this volume offeres really no new insight. This is more of an abridged version of his earlier volume. There is a lot of really good theory in this book and perhaps a little more focused that the purposely broader volume published earlier. I recommend it for someone who just wants the major thinkers instead of the progression of economic though.
"Quality economic intro, but not without bias"
This was my first book about pure economics (vs. economic history) and I learned a tremendous amount. Skousen takes a circumspect approach to each school of thought, briefly addressing the biography of each character and then describing his ideas and their ramifications.
It's worth pointing out that book is really about the big 3 schools of thought, rather than just the central personalities of the "Big Three". Skousen addresses the primary evangelists of each school who followed the three greats as well. Overall, his coverage of the topic felt thorough as he deftly switches between history, the nuts of bolts of each theory, and the effects of each.
One word of caution, however. I expected this book to be more "Just the facts, Ma'am" as it discussed each school of thought, leaving true evaluation of the theories up to the reader. However Skousen's neo-classical bent comes through almost immediately. His opinion is well-reasoned and I found myself agreeing with it almost unanimously, but the title left me expecting something slightly different than what the book delivered, which made it a 4-star overall.
The reading didn't detract from the text. Hey, we're talking economic theory, right? How much do you expect with regards to dramatic reading?
"A great introduction into the history of economics"
I fairly don't understand people who complain this book is biased. So what? The bias is easily distinguishable and it doesn't compromise the facts presented in the book. You don't need to convert yourself in to a free market economist to learn a bit of the history. At worst, you would know one biased point and it'd give you an even better perspective while reading a different point of view on the same economists or events.
As the author noted, it is important to try to avoid discrediting all of the person's work just because his or her major theory was proven or considered false (he was talking about Marx, btw). Thus if you disagree with the author on some major grounds, I think it's always a good exercise to try to find things that you agree with and can make use of.
Good book, great narration. Giving four stars because the story may have been a bit monotonous at times.
"What you really need to know"
That is what is in this book and I loved it. You can't go wrong if you buy this book.
"A bit dry"
The text was a bit dry. Good topical information.
"Another Ayn Rand disciple?"
This would have been much better if it had been a more balanced book. It is definitely in the free market + religion + tea party ballpark. If that's your inclination then you'll like it. But if you want an objective and balanced view of economics ... definitely pick another book than this.
"I don't agree with but appreciated this book"
I am definitely not a Marx fan, but I felt that this author is a bit too conservative for my taste. Yet, I actually appreciated the way he explained, summarized, and contrasted these three men's ideas. The reality is that, I think, these three men's ideas were shaped by the political and social environment of the times each experienced as well as by their social backgrounds. I recently read (listened to) both Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations and Joseph Stiglitz's The Price of Inequality and was amazed by how the world has changed between 1776 and 2012. I would not be surprised if Smith were alive now as an economist, he would have agreed with Stiglitz's viewpoint (though I am positive that the author of this book would not agree with me!). Anyway, I enjoyed listening to this book.
"Why did I buy this dumb book?"
The problem was my memory. I bought the same book years ago when it was first published. In my mind, it was a Okay book that presented three heavy weight economists. That's the reason I purchased the Audible version so that I would listen the story again while I am hiking. LOL! I forgot that Mr. Skousen was disciple of Milton Friedman who treated Karl Marx as sub-text.Money wasted !
"The big 3"
This is a good book for starters. “The Big Three in Economics” is a book for those of you who would like to know more about economics and which types for you.
The Book starts with Adam Smith who wrote the “The Wealth of Nations.” Adam Smith is considerted the founder of what is know today a Classical Economics. The author take you though the life of Adam Smith and some of his well know followers. All of which helped to expound on the ideas in “The Wealth of Nations.” To think that “The Wealth of Nations” was written in 1776 with many principles the the United States was founded on.
Next Mark Skousen take us to Karl Marx and his writings that led to Communism. I have tired to read the “The Communist Manifesto” but some of the term are used, are not very American. So I had to stop and think who he is referring to, it just annoyed me. If you look into there lives you can understand why they had certain preferences. One of his other books “Das Kapital” was also refereed to.
Then the final ideology in Economics Keynesian. American embraced Keynesian from the second Roosevelt to Carter. Where the economy started to falter with stagflation which then we turned to Classical Economics till the the Second Bush and back to Keynesian which we are following now.
These are all Marco-Economics types each does have it merits. Some work better then other just depends on your point of view. Each has it own ideas of how to use and manipulate the money supply. (Increase in the money supply increases inflation) Check the inflation rate Click here.
I do have my preference and that is Classical. Once governments gets to large it spends mine and yours money with a lot of waste.
Please check out my review at http://passiveinvestor.com/recommended-books/the-big-three/
Report Inappropriate Content
If you find this review inappropriate and think it should be removed from our site, let us know. This report will be reviewed by Audible and we will take appropriate action.