Life is logical, it's rational to be lazy

[matgb]

Tim Harford simply rocks. One of my three choices for best book I read last year was his Undercover Economist. He's currently on a major tour plugging his follow-up, The Logic Of Life. Which includes appearing on The Colbert Report:

I keep meaning to write it up, I've been promising a few people a post on markets and why they're important for ages, just haven't actually done it. You'd be better of reading his book anyway. If you want a more sane but long reason, he's on Authors@Google as well:

Logic of Life is heading rapidly up my wants list, paperback is out in a week or so, yay!

Comments

[absinthecity.livejournal.com]

Heh ;) I used to drink with Timmy in Oxford. Nice guy.

[matgb]

I had no idea what he even looked like before these vids, I picked up the book for a train journey, and subbed to his blogs because they were interesting, but he does come across as a nice bloke in the vids, if a little geeky.

Small world strikes again!

[fearmeforiampink]

What about markets are you trying to say is important? That they're good cause you can buy stuff at them?

Or are you refering to free or 'mostly free' markets?

[matgb]

Markets in the open sense, as economists use the term. Huge amount of negative perception surrounding them, linked to misunderstandins of both economic thought and Thatcherism :-(

Why economics matters or similar would be part of the post title, although it might end up at LDV, in which case it'd need to mention liberalism in the title.

[fearmeforiampink]

So, free markets then. If you're talking about free markets (or at least markets with few restrictions, rather than totally free markets with no quality control or limits to what can be sold), then you shouyld probably say free markets, as even the most controling states haven't got rid of markets, they've just controlled them, or attempted such.

[springhazsprung.livejournal.com]

So, the 'Undercover Economist'..is that a bit like 'Freakonomics'?

[matgb]

Possibly, it's actually a book I've not read yet, in one of those can't-quite-explain-why weirdnesses. Have you read it? Everyone says it's good but I just haven't picked it up yet...

[jackthomas.livejournal.com]

It's better than the Undercover Economist, but different.

[matgb]

So I've heard. I think Economist is more of an intro primer, which is partially why I bought it as I needed some basic explanations when talking to people.

Freakonics is a bit more interesting in terms of cool, I guess. So I'll have to buy a copy.

[springhazsprung.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I read it about a year ago, very interesting and worth reading... this other book sounds quite similar, with the addressing topics which you wouldn't usually associate with economics. It's all quite light-hearted and fun to read, but with some quite interesting theories and stuff. I would be interested to read another book like Freakonomics that has similarly interesting topics.

[matgb]

Economist is basically a good primer on economics, I wanted tor ead it because while I 'get' how markets etc work, I've not had formal training in it really and thus find it hard to explain.

Logic is from what I can see more in the Freakonomics vein, it has stuff like why people do/don't marry depending on local circumstances, why women are more likely to want to go to university/move to the city, etc.

But like I said, not read that yet. I'll get Freakonoics soon, it's not been bought simply because it's not been bought, it'll happen.

I like daft examples and parallels when explaining stuff-Economist opens with a large section on coffee shops and Rents, effectively using Ricardo to explain the cost of coffee in Waterloo station.

[rhythmaning.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the prompts. I loved the Undercover Economist - it worked better for me than Freakonomics. I must buy the new one. Ta.