I want to begin studying economics, but I don't really know where to start. With most things it's pretty clear, but I really have no idea here? What is the "start with the Greeks" of economics?
>>7418246
Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell, and Economics In One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt (Hazlet? I'm not sure)
Once you get a little more familiar you should read some stuff by Ludwig Von Mises and Freidrich Hayek and Milton Friedman
They'll all dissuade you from all modern Leftist economics beliefs and theories being pushed in our modern age
>>7418369
Not OP but also interested on economics, thanks
Immanuel Wallerstein
>>>/biz/
Also, Communist Manifesto
>>7418492
Calling Coomunism economics is an oxymoron, it's not an active or organic economy, there's no money and it's everyone attempting to share all property communally, that's not an economy
>>7418554
Das Kapital
Read Joseph Schumpeter's "History of Economic Analysis", which is absolutely crucial for really understanding economics. If you google it you will find the PDF
Also give this a look: http://bnarchives.yorku.ca/259/
>>7418369
Don't listen to this guy, Sowell is a meme. Also Neoclassical and Austrian economics are radically at odds.
How is The Wealth of Nations? Will I actually get something out of it or is it purely historical at this point?
>>7418645
Instead of flinging insults why not critique the economists beliefs themselves
>>7418246
Also Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, idk how I forgot that
>>7418669
Das Kapital is more than just "coomunism"
>>7418677
I haven't read it so I apologize for just trying to presume it was but still considering that Marx never participated in the private sector and purely from his thoughts and not from experiences I would take extreme caution and skepticism when trying to read his work to get an understanding of the market/private sector
>>7418664
Sowell has contributed noting of significance to economics, he's just a run of the mill Chicago school mouth breather that has a completely unrealistic vision of how markets function. There really isn't that much different between the likes of Marx and Milton Friedman, they're both committed to autistic useless equilibrium analysis.
>>7418685
That's the stupidest critic ever. The grand majority of all note worthy economists have no real world business experience.
"Participating in the private sector" just ends up distorting how you interpret economics and make you take on more of a false perspective deriving purely from pure microeconomics.
Also Engels ran factories and gave Marx empirical information of how REAL WORLD books, balance sheets and recording keeping was being conducted. Something which most so called "economists" today have no idea about since they're more concerned about pure maths.
>>7418713
Yeah... the difference is that Marx was a bit mental. He wandered around museums while four of his kids starved to death IIRC.
He's a bit like the Jesus or Muhammad of his time. That crazy guy whose ideas were taken up by a bunch of other crazies until some influential people took it up to and fucked up the world with it.
>>7418723
Not only are you uninformed about Marx, you are also uninformed about Jesus and Muhammad. You seem to have no historical background.
>>7418246
OP please don't be fooled by the 18 year old kid who thinks he understands economics because he's read a few articles by Austrian economists.
>>7419019
This. You have to understand that there are different schools of economics based on completely different worldviews. If you're going to study the neoclassical school, you might as well study some of the Keynesians and the Marxists, just to get some perspective.
>>7419383
Obviously Das Kapital is the start for the Marxist school, but where do I start with the Keynesians? Also, I (OP) am >>7418974, is that an ok starting set? I researched all the books recommended and I chose Sowell for being recommended by Friedman and other neoclassical economists (which is my main interest), The Wealth of Nations because historical context and general interest, and Schumpeter because it's also highly recommended and seems to offer a different viewpoint to Sowell, though I don't really understand what that different viewpoint is.
>>7419399
"John Maynard Keynes" by Hyman Minsky is where to start for Keynes, it's better than Keynes himself:
http://digamo.free.fr/minsky75.pdf
Also "Contending Economic Theories: Neoclassical, Keynesian, and Marxian" is good to:
http://digamo.free.fr/wolffresnick12.pdf
And "The Age of Uncertainty Episode" is on youtube, it's hosted by John Kenneth Galbraith and gives a Keynesian overview of economic history:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGSID_Uyw7w
The question is why do you want to study economics? If the answer is 'to get rich' then you should just read an entrepreneaur book or some shit.
>>7420250
I just think it's interesting, wanna fill some knowledge gaps. Comprises a huge role in everyday life but I know nothing about it.
>>7418615
We can debate how shitty Communism is in real life, but any scholar of economics recognizes that Marx's economic writings are genius. Das Kapital is required reading for any student of economic thought.
>>7420250
Few economists get rich. They are mostly academics and government workers. It's MBAs that end up on Wall Street making bank.
Economics is a noble field. It studies not just the flow of money and goods but also human behavior that forms the very underpinnings of society. Historically, many major philosopher has devoted some portion of their writings to economics, including Aristotle, Mill, Bentham, Hume. You really can't say you have a decent understanding of Western civilization without a basic working comprehension of economics.
To OP: pic related will give you a very good introduction to economics. It's colorfully and clearly written, often funny, and concerned with the men behind the ideas as well as the ideas themselves. It will give you a clear understanding of the fundamental principles of modern economics, and certainly more of a grasp on the field than your average cocktail-party-self-proclaimed-economic-expert.
>>7419399
Don't bother with Keynes. You can learn his thought by watching basic youtube videos on economics.
I'd stick to the Austrian, Chicago and Marxist traditions. Also while you're reading, be prepared for being flung into a whole net of philosophical thought too, as inevitably your pursuit of Marxism and the Austrian school of economics will lead you down the path to earlier philosophers of liberalism/socialism. You can get away without reading the earlier works if you simply want a rudimentary understanding of modern economic thought, but nevertheless, you should still watch a few youtube videos to reinforce your understanding and the ground works behind particular schools.
I personally recommend Hans-Hermann Hoppe. I think his 'A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism' will work wonders as an introductory level economics textbook and if his thinking is particularly captivating, then you might consider looking at 'Democracy: The God That Failed', which is essentially a refutation of the idea that democracy is the 'best system ever devised by man'.
>>7418723
Spotted the highschooler
>tfw reading about corn rent in wealth of nations
one of the best things i could recommend as well are some of the TTC courses that are uploaded online to download for economics. There's a general economics course with 36 lessons 30 minutes each, then behavioral economics and one other. Books can't be beat but for those who prefer the audio side of things
>>7421440
PDF links.
HHH, 'Democracy the God That Failed'
http://www.riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf
HHH, 'A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism'
https://mises.org/sites/default/files/Theory%20of%20Socialism%20and%20Capitalism,%20A_4.pdf
I've found nothing enlightening from Adam Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations', but I can't say it's a bad book. But read it with the understanding that a lot of its thought is outdated.
>>7418723
>Christianity
>Fucked up the world.
I beg your pardon?
