/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17867798]

What would you say are the 5 most essential books on economics?
Also I’d appreciate it if any anons with an econ degree shared their experiences and prospects etc, as I’m in my first year and kinda wishing I had instead chosen political science.

[Anonymous No.17867951]

1) the wealth of nation's
2) principles of political economy by David Ricardo
3) Das Kapital
4)The general theory of employment, interest, and money
5) a monetary history of the United States by Milton Friedman
6) Capital by Thomas Piketty

There, that's all the major books that all disagree with each other. Read them all and pick which one seems sorta right

[Anonymous No.17867967]

>>17867798
Capital
Nothing after that because it ended economics

[Anonymous No.17868007]

>>17867951
Thanks anon

[Anonymous No.17868078]

[Anonymous No.17868079]

>>17868078
>>>/r/eddit

[Anonymous No.17868082]

>>17868078
This is on my list, is it worth it?

[Anonymous No.17868097]

>>17867951
ahem

[Anonymous No.17868108]

>>17868082
Not really. The author is a "heterodox" thinker, which just means his ideas are considered outside the traditional economic school of thought. Treating his book as an introduction, which it insists it is, is going to give a skewed picture of the subject as a whole. Best not read until far later in learning about the field

[Anonymous No.17868132]

>>17867967
Thomas Piketty is a pseud but you probably meant Marx who, by my estimation, is an actual intellectual but is still just a midwit.
Both contributed nothing that should be taken seriously in the field of economics.
OP should still read these faggots though, purely because their influence is becoming greater by the day (unfortunately).

[Anonymous No.17868142]

>>17868108
Ahh I understand. I’ve studied econ in high school so I do know a little bit about the different schools of thought eg Keynes, the Austrian school, and neoclassical school. I was planning on just reading Keynes, Hayek, and Friedman in that order

[Anonymous No.17868152]

>>17867798
The Road to Serfdom will break your delusions about socialism.

[Anonymous No.17868180]

>>17868097
Praxeology is pseudo science

[Anonymous No.17868190]

>>17868152
Lol

[Anonymous No.17868262]

>>17868180
all of economics is pseudoscience

[Anonymous No.17868276]

>>17868078
dont read this. its a meme.

[Anonymous No.17868311]

[Anonymous No.17868393]

>>17868262
Agreed

[Anonymous No.17868738]

>>17868190
What’s so funny you dumb commy

[Anonymous No.17868751]

>>17868738
>People control economy
Omg literally slavery
>A dozen corporations control economy and use state power to enforce their rule
ITS VOLUNTARY YOU COMMIE

[Anonymous No.17868765]

>>17868751
>>People

[Anonymous No.17868792]

>>17868751
Anyone who's a libertarian denounces crony capitalism and even corporatism for the most part.

[Anonymous No.17868809]

>>17868792
Crony capitalism is just capitalism. Monopolization is inevitable under capitalism and a state will always be formed to protect their class interests.

[Anonymous No.17868854]

>>17868809
The state is a monopoly in a socialist country, and a very inefficient one at that

[Anonymous No.17868890]

>>17867798
Progress and Poverty will change your life.

[Anonymous No.17868903]

>>17868809
"If being the biggest company was a guarantee of success, we'd all be using IBM computers and driving GM cars."

[Anonymous No.17868908]

>>17868809
exact opposite actually, sowell proved it, monopolies don't last in a free market, they can only form due to government regulation (and often regulatory capture leads to government agencies meant to prevent monopolies aiding them) and cartels. But cartels fall apart quickly because each member of the cartel has incentive to cheat the other members, can only be sustained if they all have perfect information or close to it.

[Anonymous No.17868972]

>>17868809
The state exists prior to the economy.
The state controls the economy, not the other way 'round.
Class divisions exists due to conditions originating from the state primarily, not the economy.
Therefore
>Monopolization is inevitable under capitalism and a state will always be formed to protect their class interests.
makes no sense. The state already existed before capitalism was implemented (or arose, what have you). If it was sanctioned by the state, it was for the state's benefit, not those who participate in the economy, let alone those who supposedly reap the most benefit from these particular configurations.

[Anonymous No.17869010]

>>17867798
Satoshi white paper /thread.

all other economists are BTFO after that.
not only did satoshi write the white paper
then he transubstantiated his economics into code and actually built it and deployed it globally.

That's it.

[Anonymous No.17869178]

>>17868809
monopolies were much more common with monarchs that sold monopooly rights to various things to raise money

[Anonymous No.17869243]

>>17869010
Dude, Hayek literally predicted something pretty similar to a stable(bit)coin in his "The Denationalization of Money"; It was ideas like his that directly influenced the cypherpunk movement and cryptocurrencies in general.
Anyway, Satoshi wrote his whitepaper not so much on monetary theory but more on a specific technical problem in the technology which he solved brilliantly. He wasn't the first to do research on crypto though.
Cryptocurrencies existed theoretically since the '80s with David Chaum's 1982 dissertation "Computer Systems Established, Maintained, and Trusted by Mutually Suspicious Groups", being the first known conception of a blockchain protocol.
>https://nakamotoinstitute.org/static/docs/computer-systems-by-mutually-suspicious-groups.pdf
In short, economic theory was in no way central to Satoshi's whitepaper and it's weird to say that his whitepaper ended even the theoretical field of cryptocurrency which pretty much just started. Seriously, the field is so young that it's conceivable that one of (You) autistic faggots could contribute to it if you tried hard enough.

[Anonymous No.17869253]

>>17869243
>Hayek literally predicted something pretty similar to a stable(bit)coin

predicting and inventing a time machine very different thing

also the first crypto.

Also, btc is stable, if its the denominator

you're just used to <inster your fiat> as the denominator as your overlords teach you

[Anonymous No.17869316]

>>17869253
>btc is stable, if its the denominator
Huh

[Anonymous No.17869368]

>>17868792
Thats literally the same as every commie denouncing Stalin for muhnotrealsocialism. Crony capitalism is just capitalism in practice.

[Anonymous No.17869479]

>>17869253
>predicting and inventing a time machine very different thing
You're joking right?
Nigga, do you actually read?
We are talking about economic theory, if you can't appreciate theory as well as application then you are at most a mid.

[Anonymous No.17869495]

>>17869368
>Thats literally the same as every commie denouncing Stalin for muhnotrealsocialism.
Vanguardism is literally not Marxism. Dialectical Materialism says everything proceeds naturally without intervention and made no allowance for a class above and beyond but allied with the proletariat. If anything, "Marxists" are obligated to denounce the Soviet Union from inception (which by the way was founded with the crucial help of capitalists / the bourgeoisie) to its demise.
>Crony capitalism is just capitalism in practice.
That is a retarded commie take with not only no nuance but no rationality. As is mentioned before, it is state regulation of the economy which leads to the excesses of "capitalism" by creating conditions wherein competition in the free market by little guys against big fish becomes increasingly impossible.

[Anonymous No.17869509]

>>17867951
wait a second, does anybody actually read das kapital? like, if you had no interest in "primary sources" and just wanted to know what marx thought and why it was important, would really read das kapital or would you read some distilled secondary source?

[Anonymous No.17869535]

>>17869509
I had a classmate in college who was / is a socialist (also an organizer) and decided to read Das Kapital over his summer break, and during Paideia taught a class on it as an overview of its key points.

[Anonymous No.17869536]

Small is Beautiful

It's boomerish but charming nonetheless

[Anonymous No.17869559]

>>17869178
Grants of exclusive right in general are anti-free market.

[Anonymous No.17869584]

>>17867798
The cambridge capital debate is probably the most important.

[Anonymous No.17869585]

>>17869536
I've had that on my reading list for a while.

[Anonymous No.17869662]

No one’s said Capitalism Socialism and Democracy yet ?

[Anonymous No.17870154]

>>17869509
It's really not that bad. Sure it has its larpers, but if you've read anything technical/lengthy before it's pretty breezy. He wrote it to be understood by "the common man"

[Anonymous No.17870288]

>>17868972
>The state exists prior to the economy.

yes, if we start a small civilization, the first priority is to elect bureaucrats, so that they can make rules about how we can proceed to make trade among ourselves

[Anonymous No.17870312]

>>17869253
>Also, btc is stable, if its the denominator

even if all fiat were to be extinct and everything was priced in bitcoin, the demand would keep rising, and with the limited supple, it would be deflationary

dumbass nigger

[Anonymous No.17870324]

>>17867798
make your way around Austrian economy, everything else is horse shit vomited by economagicians

[Anonymous No.17870379]

Advanced micro
Advanced macro
Game theory
Math.

gods you are so retarded some times /lit/. do you think you go to study physics by reading Kepler?

[Anonymous No.17870562]

>>17869662
>Capitalism Socialism and Democracy
Based Schumpy Chad

[Anonymous No.17870722]

>>17870379
>Advanced micro
Sure.
>Advanced macro
Lies.
>Game theory
Misapplied half the time.
>Math
Misused 95% of the time.
From the top of my head, the only people who seem to have convincingly used math in economics were Walrus, Pareto, and von Neumann.
Statistics is also retarded.
>do you think you go to study physics by reading Kepler?
>Implying Economics has meaningfully advanced in a way comparable to an actual science like physics.
Bruh, Economist can't even agree whether any real math is even necessary in their field or if they're just bullshitting themselves...