Is there a /lit/ approved economics reading chart?
>>7967745
Wealth of Nations
Capital
The Joyless Economy
Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy
Ecomomic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money
The Affluent Society
Road to Serfdom
Small is Beautiful
The Gift
The Great Transformation
Philosophy of Money
make a chart of this; i can't think of any other deserving ones. maybe "debt" if you want to extend the chart to new stuff in this vein
/lit/ is absolutely retarded when it comes to economics and money, considering the boardis mostly NEETs and undergrads. why would you want a /lit/ approved chart
>>7967783
This is a pretty excellent list honestly, but I think The Fissured Workplace and something Austrian might complete it.
>>7967806
have only read Road to Serfdom
I think that's enough to show good faith
>>7967783
Also I don't think capital is necessary at all, reading a forty page summary of the ideas is essentially all you really need. Marx is an absolutely horrible writer, the three hundred pages of Capital I read were fucking painful.
>>7967822
I mean if your tacking on capital I see no reason not to include Human Action
>>7967806
something austrian? care to elaborate?
>>7967783
Throw in the Worldly Philosophers for some history of economics, good to know
>>7967783
Naked economics
>>7967783
I would include Essays on Positive Economics on that list.
>>7967876
I read about the first 300 pages, he begins to repeat himself afterawhile. I think it's seminal enough to include, especially for the more philosophical angle.
>>7967856
From the Austrian School of Economics. Basically a bunch of anarchocapitakist kooks but really a fun and convincing to read bunch.
>>7970164
Totally understand no Rothbard lol. What flavor of leftist are you?
Master Calculus (just say 'no' to Economics if you can't get past this point) --> Undergrad Economics textbook --> Grad school material
Ignore your Smiths and Marxs; you can read them as you come to know more and more about contemporary economic theory.
BUT PLEASE NAIL YOUR MATH FIRST
>>7971484
He asked for a reading chart, not how to be an economist
>>7967745
There has been no decent economic literature since Marx
YOU CALLED?
>>7971639
Go to bed, Tom.
/pol/ needs you up bright and early tomorrow.
>>7971711
Dude get the fuck over yourself you don't need strong math background to develop informed economic opinions and economic intuition.
Did you really not read any of the fun shit like Hoppe or Marx until you took actual courses?
Background: Economics and Math double major
>>7971484
sorry, you can't seem to tell the difference between finance and economics...economics has simple algebraic math at most...
>>7971484
Most "contemporary economic theory" is just pure obscurantism (like most other social sciences) hiding behind complex formulas. Classical political economy in many ways still explains reality better (even with no calculus!) than most contemporary "experts" and is easy to grasp even for a high school student.
>>7967745
Jump around for an overview of a lot of different schools of thought:
http://www.newschool.edu/nssr/het/thought.htm
I think Thorstein Veblen's "The Theory of Business Enterprise" is still the best realist way of understanding how corporate America really functions. Credit, mergers, inflation and ownership strategies for accumulation under the given 'limits of the market' is central to understanding finance capitalism. The Machiavellian ways insiders engineer the system to get something for noting is what's key to understanding how people really get ahead.
>The problem for the absentee owners, according to Veblen, was that the industrial machine was too productive and threatened to collapse prices (and thus profit), if left unchecked. As we have discussed, the modern corporation is itself an incorporation of credit, and was formed to strategically control the production process of ‘industry’. In other words, credit fell into use because the industrial system was too productive and needed to be curtailed. But how does credit play this role? Well, through incorporation, that is through ownership, a corporation comes to dominate a given fraction of the industrial process and can control this fraction within limits for profitable ends. A greater extension of credit however, allows the incorporation of absentee owners greater strategic leverage in their mission to accumulate profits through a vigilant curtailment of productive efficiency.
>First, it can use this credit offered by the Investment Banker to merge or acquire other companies with which it is competing. This allows the corporation to collect or take-over the income stream of an existing corporation while at the same time, creating no new capacity with the credit it has been extended by our friend the Investment Banker. It also gives the corporation greater strategic control over a given fraction of the industrial system. With greater control, the corporation is freer to undertake acts of sabotage by curtailing production and jacking the price of its wares.
>Second, the extension of credit can serve to inflate prices. What is crucial for Veblen here is that an extension of credit does not mean that it is linked to any ‘tangible asset’ (though it could be), and is therefore capable of extending, ad infinitum until something checks this inflation in a period of crisis. However, until this check arrives, prices are free to soar and the ‘proverbial’ bottom line of numerical units will be fattened.
>>7967783
Road to Serfdom is not Economics.
>>7971768
goddamn you need to go to school
>>7971786
Holy shit thank you so much I'm halfway through it right now and I'm like "where does the economics start"
>>7967783
Capitalism and Freedom sempai
>>7971810
Never, if it's your first introduction to econ, drop it immediately.
If it isn't, read one of Hayek's articles on competition instead, they're much better than his more ideological work, which is just proto-neoliberal drivel.
>>7971484
Fuck your gay little math formulas.
>>7971817
Road to Serfdom is a masterpiece you shitlord
>>7971844
Road to Serfdom is the worse piece of trash I've ever read in my life. Taken solely as a critique of National Socialism and Fascism, it's a fine historical document, but the idea that people would read it today as a means to critiquing modern socialism is abhorrent. It should be universally disregarded as corrosive ideological garbage along with Hayek's attacks on social justice.
i would say that this is offtopic but pseudoscience (freud, lacan, et al) seems to be welcome on this board so post away
mankiw has 2 intro micro & macro textbooks. why you'd bother with reading historical texts is beyond me.
sage anyways.
>>7971862
Found the delusional Marxist
Road to Serfdom is more relevant today than ever, as is his essay on the ills of social justice. You are another rubbish byproduct of university brainwashing. Socialism and social justice are two of the worst blights in modern times.
>>7971884
Found the ill-educated "libertarian"
I hope your country privatises their healthcare system and that you get gangrene on your dick that could only be treated if you only just had the money to pay for it. I also hope that your country's government decides to cancel welfare so that when you eventually end up jobless like I expect anyone with your level of intelligence might, you are unable to buy toilet paper and have to wipe you ass with — you guessed it — the Road to Serfdom. At that point, the book will have at least found one pro-social use for its pages.
>>7971904
Right m8, I'm sure you studied economics under Milton Friedman like my father did.
I'm hope your pisshole country nationalizes its healthcare system so you can wait in line for months and months while your testicular cancer metastatizes instead of being treated, which it could be if you were actually allowed to pay for better insurance. I hope you end up having to fly to another country to get a prescription because the government insurance review board decides you don't need it. I also hope your country expands welfare to attract more migrants and refugees so you'll eventually wind up working 50 hours a week to pay the salary of the African bull who's fucking your wife. At that point you will have finally achieved 'social justice'.
>>7971927
>Milton Friedman
OH MY GOD hahahahahahaha. Wew lad, wew lad.
>>7971935
>dissing the most highly respected, most highly relevant economist of the 20th and 21st century
Do you even consumption function m9?
>>7971661
/lit/ is the new home for Sowell posters
>>7971927
>
lol my father studied under a guy know things
>>7967783
>Marx
>Keynes
>No Mises
>No Menger
>No Land
Legit kill yourself, plebeian retard.
>>7972679
Go back to /pol/, you pathetic dumbfuck.
>>7972244
If you use the term neoliberal there's a 99% chance you don't know what you're talking about
>>7971484
>mathematical economics
>>7971935
Kill yourself.
>>7972244
Such as...
>>7972683
>Still believing in Socialism/Communism
Yeah, he's the pathetic dumbfuck.
OP here, I'm actually going into my final year of undergraduate studies and want to read the essential texts because I feel like I don't know as much as I should.
Contemporary Anglo-American economics is an utter spook-fest. Just say no to mind-killing propaganda.
>>7971776
This.
I was a math major, but standard academic economics in the US is a pseudo-science that hides an oppressive ideology under the mask of specious mathematics.
Read this: https://aeon.co/essays/how-economists-rode-maths-to-become-our-era-s-astrologers
>>7967827
That's a shame, was the style in the communist manifesto all engels? I thought that was pretty well written.
>>7972683
>Keynesian/Marxian/progressive
>calling others "dumbfuck"
Top lel.
>>7967783
I'm not exactly an expert in the field, but even I can tell this list is flawed.
Besides what others have said, two more I would contend need to be included are Henry George and Immanuel Wallerstein.
Mises & Rothbard.
>>7967745
Read Yanis Varoufakis if you want to understand what is *actually* going on.
>>7974030
yeah then follow it up with Chomsky lmao
>>7967827
Are you dumb? Marx's 1844 manuscripts are beautifully written. I haven't read Capital yet, but to claim Marx is a bad writer is incorrect. Maybe you read a shit translation or something. His essay "Estranged Labour" is clear, concise, and evocative.
>>7971812
>>7972685
This.
They say it as if it's a bad thing
>>7974239
Capital is a lot, but its so worth the read.
>>7971927
What crack are you smoking? America is damn near the only industrialized nation with privatized health care and it has some of the worst in the world!
>>7971884
Yeah cuz fuck valuing people as human beings. people are things that are to be rented out for profit.
>>7968354
That is a great book.
>>7971484
>Master Calculus
You don't need calculus really if you master your matrices and linear algebra and all that
>>7971862
>Taken solely as a critique of National Socialism and Fascism
Its purview is considerably wider than that, tho it's nowhere near being a nail in the coffin of socialism, and its portrayal of capitalist markets should be viewed super critically.
>>7967827
If you do this then you may as well just read the Communist Manifesto. It's only a few pages as well.
>>7971639
he didn't fly
>>7971484
this. econ phd at top 25 here. all i do is proofs.
I recommend:
Microeconomic Theory by Mas-Colell
Recursive Methods in Economic Dynamics by Stokey and Lucas, Prescott
start there. the exercises are also a part of the book, so do them. avoid non-mainstream economics, they're all plagued with bullshit ideology.
reminder that economics is not ideology-driven.
>>7974840
also let me explain why the guy above said "say no to economics if you cant get past calculus". economics deals with phenomena at the MARGIN. it means if i add a very tiny amount to a system, how does it change? most economic objects need to satisfy first differentiability to be analyzed.
>>7974239
I'll leave the possibilty of a shit translation in the question to be honest, but besides the manifesto, which I believe he had a lot of outside help on, his writing comes off a super dry and often downright boring especially for such an important subject matter.
>>7972679
>complaining about the inclusion of two of the most influential theorists in economic theory.
Like I understand you ancaps lack attention because you're all babies, but I'm sorry to tell you but these guys are irrelevant.
How is this bitch?
>>7971484
>>7974840
this is definitely true if you want to read academic economic literature and become an economist
but you can read some 'popular' economics books and pick up a lot of understanding and general useful ideas of economics, which is better than nothing for someone who doesn't have the will to learn about integrals. someone reading some books by deaton, thaler, acemoglu, even some krugman(not including his political nytimes blog) will do no harm
it is almost impossible to be free of ideology no matter how objective or academic someone is trying to be, economics does do a pretty good job and it is right to pretty much stick to mainstream consensus thought with it unless you are very well read in it and are pinning your career on that one small trick that you think everyone else has missed
>>7975808
fine, there are some disputes over some of the methodology and general findings but it's not heteredox
there are many more disputes on the actual solutions piketty proposes, but this will always be more difficult
>>7975808
not quite sound
>math
>econ
Holy shit stop posting this meme, econ is a social science
People are people, not ducking numbers. Applying a model to people is dumb as fuck.
>>7977565
>math
>engineering
materials are materials, not ducking numbers. applying a model to materials is dumb as fuck.
fuck off, idiot
>>7974840
>economics is not ideology-driven
Hahaha
>>7971786
From what I know it's a significant philosophical text that's often applied to theories of neoliberal free market economics. But I haven't read it so I wouldn't know.
>>7967783
Isn't Capital in the 21st Century significant as well? I get the feeling that it won't fade with time.
>>7971632
That seems impossible just on the virtue that people who have read Marx since Marx could at least apply his theories to the modern context. I mean Marx didn't foresee developments of capitalism that occurred in his lifetime. He assumed that capitalism's ever-worsening exploitation would necessitate a world revolution, that it could be relied upon like laws of physics. But then the welfare state developed that cut out rights and minimum wages for workers, workers comp and pensions. From a Marxist interpretation this created a much more sophisticated method of capitalist tyranny, one that the exploited proletariat felt reliant upon.
>>7974840
0/10.
100 Best Economic Books: http://www.listmuse.com/100-best-economics-books-time.php
>>7977575
You fell for the brainwashing.
https://aeon.co/essays/how-economists-rode-maths-to-become-our-era-s-astrologers
>>7971776
>seeing veblen mentioned on 4chan
you made my day
agreed on the points about classical political economy, econ is a meme degree
also veblen's theory of the leisure class is a must read
>>7978182
lists like these are nearly always terrible but this is one of the least terrible i've seen
would remove chang, harvey and keen though...
>>7972244
Hooray for baseless assumptions.
>>7978565
fucking burger
>>7978188
keep linking that shitpile of an article. Every single part of his argument is factually incorrect.
>>7980344
In your dreams, moron. He called you out for your bullshit, and you're humiliated.
>>7974301
>filename
>>7976846
Perfect. Fits right in with all the other hacks.
>>7980384
Piketty is in no way a hack like varoufakis...
>>7980352
All the article does is show they aren't good at math, don't understand how economics uses the word rational and all the mathematical models that take account of people doing dumb shit, and then just rambles abouts astrology and the Chinese. Top hack.
>>7980398
Varoufakis is not a "hack". He has actually interacted with the real world of economic power, unlike 99.9999% of academic "economists".
>>7967827
Capital is very well written, the first three chapters are dense and inaccessible by necessity according to his own words. Absolutely horrible writer my ass. 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon is very beautifully written.
>>7980405
Your cute little "proofs" have zero relevance to the real world, son. You are a tool of powerful people and you don't even know it.
>>7980417
Yeah and he did so well at that
His books aren't rigorous and aren't worth reading aside from wanting to know what it was actually like trying to negotiate with Merkel et al. He's now just cashing in on the minimal fame he has attained.
Keep with the jibes at actually rigorous academic economists though you sure showed them
From /biz/
>>7980434
That's why they're implemented in many industries successfully I suppose. Because they're so useless. I'm sorry you don't understand integrals anon but they're not that difficult, all you're doing is displaying ignorance.
>>7980436
Translation: "Nu-uh"
>>7980451
I have a degree in mathematics, asshat. I have done more original proofs than you have read. That's why it disturbs me to witness the misuse and abuse of mathematics. Applied mathematics is all well and good, but the models you construct should be empirically adequate and possess predictive power. Economists notoriously have a shit track record when it comes to predicting the future - let alone with any kind of mathematical precision. To compare economics to a physical science is utterly delusional. It'd be a harmless amusement if it weren't so dangerous.
>>7980436
Wow, you are really brainwashed to the point of complete autism.
Varoufakis has a MSc in mathematical statistics and a PhD in economics - he's one of you guys! He has published many "rigorous" works of standard economics while being a faculty member at the greatest universities around the world. What he has realized is that the little abstract games people play in economics departments have zero relevance to the world we actually live in, where inconvenient things like space, time, and corporations exist. The reason he "didn't do so well" is because, in the real world, the powers that be don't give a fuck about what the "rational" thing to do is.
>>7980487
Nobody claims economics to be a physical science, hard science whatever. It also does far more than simply trying to predict economic growth. Macro is notoriously difficult to predict or analyse in general, though it has improved a lot after implementing many more micro principals and yes becoming more mathematically rigorous. Micro is much easier to have mathematical models for and has been used, with things like game theory, very effectively and with a good level of prediction by government, business etc.
I'll take you as being truthful about having a math degree, but you don't seem to understand what economics does or claims to be.
>>7980515
Yes he was an academic economist. This doesn't mean his recent books aren't garbage.
Him having been used by a Greek government pretty much doomed to fail from the start doesn't change any of this.
>>7980546
So your problem is with his rigour? Where is it lacking?
is intelligent investor and security analysis by Benjamin graham anygood?
>>7980555
This started as a comparison to piketty who utilised reams of data to support his thesis in capital. Varoufakis isn't doing this or anything close to this from what I've read in recentish books he's done. My main point was really pointing out that piketty is not a hack and is respected academically.
Garbage is a bit strong for yannis but he's not doing comparable work to piketty. He's OK if you have a soft spot for Marxists on want a run down of whatever issues his book is covering. He's better than Robert reich or ha joon Chang probably...as examples of people doing books pitched at a similar level.
>>7980546
His recent books concern the actual *real* world that we all live in. Look, it would certainly be a great intellectual achievement to produce an elegant, mathematically rigorous, reductionist picture of the world that operates at all levels of description. The reality is, we are not there yet with human behavior. Not even close. The reality is, the economic policies we live under are largely in the hands of unelected, irrational, and often actively misanthropic bureaucrats. Rather than screwing around with toy models that lack an iota of predictive power, maybe we should be addressing the world as it actually presents itself to us.
>>7980523
>Nobody claims economics to be a physical science, hard science whatever.
Someone upthread did >>7977575 . I guess it wasn't you.
>It also does far more than simply trying to predict economic growth.
I never said anything about growth. Regardless, if economics purports to be an empirical theory, then it must make predictions, and if the model's predictions are no better than chance, it's time to rethink the whole enterprise.
>Macro is notoriously difficult to predict or analyse in general,
That's putting it mildly.
>though it has improved a lot after implementing many more micro principals and yes becoming more mathematically rigorous.
No, it has not. The fact that 2008 was a complete surprise is all the proof you need that additional mathematization has only added obscurity and not enhanced empirical adequacy.
>Micro is much easier to have mathematical models for and has been used, with things like game theory,
Sure, it's more mathematically tractable - that's because its applicability to the real economy is so remote
>very effectively and with a good level of prediction by government, business etc.
What specifically are you talking about? What's an example of an economic theory with a well-confirmed track record of precise predictions?
>>7980580
I agree, I don't think economics describes everything about the world or should be the only thing considered by politicians when making policy. It is very good at describing and providing models for producing and consuming goods and the general conditions for it, look at the success of Western economies controlling inflation over the past 30 years for instance.
>>7980597
Maths has done a lot in the recent past anon. It has allowed for things to be proven as opposed to bullshit masquerading as economics to hold any sway. It has added rigour. At times it is gatekeeping but economics is in a much better place utilising math than without. Otherwise you run the risk of Austrian economics not being a joke.
People always bring up 2008 as some perceived slam dunk on economists, where most economists don't study anything related to sub prime loans and bank leverages, so to say it shows the how field to have problems is utter nonsense and shows the person up who claims it to not know what they're on about.
Funnily enough the recent crash and the response to it shows the benefit of mathematical rigour and what we have learned and have sound evidence for. Central banks rightfully, notably the fed, slashed interest rates for looser money to aid growth and inflation thankfully ignoring the mistakes of the great depression that we have learned from.
Speaking from the micro pov as that's what I am more interested in then the utilisation of game theory for auctions such as selling phone licenses, math is useful for econ. You have difficulty proving much with any rigour otherwise and in academia this becomes a problem.
>>7980604
>look at the success of Western economies controlling inflation over the past 30 years for instance
That has more to do with rising inequality and globalization than any inflation-targeting model.
>>7980580
>The reality is, we are not there yet with human behavior.
In my experience a lot of economists at all levels, from top academics to people in think tanks to people with more real world applicable jobs to undergrads etc etc they're very much stick in the muds. I remember lots of "you don't understand"s and "such and such is very well defined"s and other kinds of weasely statements when bringing up fairly simple criticisms of of things like rational actor theory.
>>7980632
>It has added rigour.
Has it? People often confuse real rigour with a kind of authoritative rhetoric, I mean some people are doing something in the same ball park as Lacan's mathemes
This is actually a good book on Marx, don't let the comic part fool you.
>>7980632
>Maths has done a lot in the recent past anon. It has allowed for things to be proven
You can't "prove" things about the empirical world - that's the whole point. Proof can only generate knowledge in the a priori realms of logic and pure mathematics. You can't use a mathematical proof to establish anything about human behavior (or electron behavior for that matter).
>as opposed to bullshit masquerading as economics to hold any sway. It has added rigour.
Mathematical rigor is only a virtue if your theory generates precise predictions that are confirmed by observation. Otherwise you are just masturbating with models.
>People always bring up 2008 as some perceived slam dunk on economists, where most economists don't study anything related to sub prime loans and bank leverages,
The implications are broader than that. The underlying policy decisions were not suggested or enacted by experts in subprime loans. Securitization, bank mergers, bank deregulation, leveraging - these things all happened as a *consequence* of decisions made at the highest level. And the elite agenda of free trade and privatization was enacted with the intellectual cooperation of Quislings in economics departments who said "our models say it's good policy, go ahead". Sure, some remained silent and worked on their toy models, but that's not any better.
>Speaking from the micro pov as that's what I am more interested in then the utilisation of game theory for auctions such as selling phone licenses, math is useful for econ
You are talking about how economic models are *used to do things* in government, business, etc. No argument there. Astrology has been used too. That doesn't mean those models are "right" in any sense. The empirical adequacy is questionable, and so is the practical and moral value.
Antoine Destutt de Tracy - A Treatise on Political Economy
Carl Menger - On the Origins of Money
Carl Menger - Principles of Economics
David Gordon - An Introduction to Economic Reasoning
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk - Capital and Interest
Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk - The Positive Theory of Capital
Frank Fetter - Economic Principles
Friedrich von Wieser - Social Economics
Hans-Hermann Hoppe - A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism
Hans-Hermann Hoppe - The Economics and Ethics of Private Property
Jean-Baptiste Say - A Treatise on Political Economy
Jesús Huerta de Soto - Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles
Jörg Guido Hülsmann - Theory of Money and Fiduciary Media
Jörg Guido Hülsmann and Stephan Kinsella - Property, Freedom, and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Joseph Salerno - Money: Sound and Unsound
Ludwig von Mises - Human Action
Ludwig von Mises - The Theory of Money and Credit
Murray Rothbard - America's Great Depression
Murray Rothbard - Man, Economy, and State, With Power and Market
Oskar Morgenstern - The Limits of Economics
Richard Cantillon - An Essay on Economic Theory
Robert Higgs - The Transformation of the American Economy, 1865-1914
Robert Murphy - Chaos Theory
William Stanley Jevons - The Theory of Political Economy
Reminder that the freshwater schools predicted that nordic model "socialism" would eventually attract too many unskilled migrants which would crash the system, and this is currently happening right now.
>>7980725
Broken clock is right twice a day m8.
>>7980725
Except the system is not crashing. If you had to live as an average person in any society, the Scandinavian counties are by far the best choice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se55CCdfaOA
>>7980696
It was
>>7980487
>the models you construct should be empirically adequate and possess predictive power
They do. This has been shown time and time again.
Not that I'm surprised someone with a degree with no real application doesn't understand confirmation bias, survivorship bias, or statistics.
>>7980448
not /lit/
