Results for “best book” 1715 found
I wrote this email, which in the interests of varying the “voice” on this blog I have not in the meantime edited:
Best food in the US, no real comparison especially adjusting for price.
Best driving for classic routes and views and also availability of parking along the way (NYC is awful for the latter).
Best walking city in the US (really), and year round.
The city has its own excellent musical soundtrack, Beach Boys, Byrds, Nilsson, etc., has aged better than the SF groups I think.
Incredible architecture and neighborhoods, almost everywhere.
Everyone goes to the movies.
First-rate concert life, including classical and contemporary classical.
Very interesting art galleries.
Few book stores (though disappearing everywhere, these days) and the people have no real sense of humor, but nowhere is perfect!
Tom Jackson asked me for a couple of best books for his year end column. I don’t read as many books as Tyler so consider these some favorite social science books that I read in 2013.
In The Undercover Economist Strikes Back, Tim Harford brings his genius for storytelling and the explanation of complex ideas to macroeconomics. Most of the popular economics books, like The Armchair Economist, Freakonomics, Predictably Irrational and Harford’s earlier book The Undercover Economist, focus on microeconomics; markets, incentives, consumer and firm choices and so forth. Strikes Back is that much rarer beast, a popular guide to understanding inflation, unemployment, growth and economic crises and it succeeds brilliantly. Mixing in wonderful stories of economists with exciting lives (yes, there have been a few!) with very clear explanations of theories and policies makes Strike Back both entertaining and enlightening.
Stuart Banner’s American Property is a book about property law, which sounds like an awfully dull topic. In the hands of Banner, however, it is a fascinating history of what we can own, how we can own it and why we can own it. Answers to these questions have changed as judges and lawmakers have grappled with new technologies and ways of life. Who owns fame? Was there a right to own one’s own image? Benjamin Franklin, whose face was used to hawk many products, would have scoffed at the idea but after the invention of photography and the onset of what would later be called the paparazzi thoughts began to change. In the early 1990s, Vanna White was awarded $403,000 because a robot pictured in a Samsung advertisement turning letters was reminiscent of her image on the Wheel of Fortune. American Property is a great read by a deep scholar who writes with flair and without jargon.
On June 3, 1980, shortly after the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. president’s national security adviser was woken at 2:30 am and told that Soviet submarines had launched 220 missiles at the United States. Shortly thereafter he was called again and told that 2,200 land missiles had also been launched. Bomber crews ran to their planes and started their engines, missile crews opened their safes, the Pacific airborne command post took off to coordinate a counter-attack. Only when radar failed to reveal an imminent attack was it realized that this was a false alarm. Astoundingly, the message NORAD used to test their systems was a warning of a missile attack with only the numbers of missiles set to zero. A faulty computer chip had inserted 2’s instead of zeroes. We were nearly brought to Armageddon by a glitch. If that were the only revelation in Eric Schlosser’s frightening Command and Control it would be of vital importance but in fact that story of near disaster occupies just one page of this 632 page book. The truth is that there have been hundreds of near disasters and nuclear war glitches. Indeed, there have been so many covered-up accidents that it’s clear that the US government has come much closer to detonating a nuclear weapon and killing US civilians than the Russians ever did. Thankfully, we have reduced our stockpile of nuclear weapons in recent years but, as in so many other areas, we are also more subject to computers and their vulnerabilities as we make decisions at a faster, sometimes superhuman, pace. Command and control, Schlosser warns us, is an illusion. We are one black swan from a great disaster and if this is true about the US handling of nuclear weapons how much more fearful should we be of the nuclear weapons held by North Korea, Pakistan or India?
The subtitle is Longing and the Art of Visual Persuasion. I believe this is her best and most compelling book. It is wonderfully researched, very well written, the topic is understudied yet of universal import, and the accompanying visuals are striking.
Here is Virginia’s list of personas to help us distinguish glamour and charisma:
Glamour: Barack Obama, Che, Thomas Jefferson, Jackie Kennedy, Michael Jordan, John Lennon, Leonardo, Spock, Tupac Shakur, Joan of Arc dead, and Early Princess Diana.
Charisma: Bill Clinton, Castro, Andrew Jackson, Eleanor Roosevelt, Earvin “Magic” Johnson, Janice Joplin, Raphael, Kirk, Snoop Dogg, Joan of Arc alive, and Late Princess Diana.
Except she does it in a nice vertical table which I cannot replicate.
She lists Ronald Reagan, Nelson Mandela, and Steve Jobs as having had both qualities. The book is definitely recommended, and it is out in early November.
Here is her TED talk on the power of glamour.
1. Ilya Somin, Democracy and Political Ignorance: Why Smaller Government is Smarter. From my colleague at GMU Law, I have not yet read this one.
2. Damien Ma and William Adams, In Line Behind a Billion People: How Scarcity Will Define China’s Ascent in the Next Decade. How often does a book have both a good title and subtitle these days? The authors are more pessimistic about China long-term than I am, but nonetheless this is a very interesting take on The Middle Kingdom.
3. Clare Jacobson, New Museums in China. Good text but mostly a picture book, I loved this one. Stunning architecture, no art, full of lessons in multiple areas, think of it as a Straussian picture book with beauty on its side too.
4. John Durant, The Paleo Manifesto: Ancient Wisdom for Lifelong Health. A useful overview of its topic, with an influence from Art DeVany, but you will not find recipes for either “grubs” nor “worms” here.
5. John Sides and Lynn Vavreck, The Gamble: Choice and Chance in the 2012 Presidential Election. Good, sane tome on how the fundamentals matter and lots of campaigning ends up being cancelled out by the campaign of the other candidate.
From another direction, In a World… is a subtle and entertaining movie with much economics in it, most of all the economics of superstars in the “voiceover” sector. The Autobiography of Nicolae Ceacescu is mesmerizing, like watching one of the great silent films of the past, and the scenes where the Chinese communists praise the Romanian communists are some of the best ever filmed.
The subtitle is Juries, Assemblies, Elections and the book focuses on the very Nordic concern of how to make better political decisions within a democratic framework. Elster thinks that social choice theory presents insoluble dilemmas with ranking outcomes, so we should focus on improving how political decisions are made. It’s all about “preventing the prevention of intelligence.” He promotes secret voting, public deliberations, incorporation of diverse opinions, waiting until passions have subsided, and various methods of running better jury trials. The influence of Bentham here is paramount, albeit a lesser-known Bentham, that of his own tract Securities Against Misrule, among other writings.
I found this one of the most stimulating social science books so far this year, and it has Elster’s impressive intelligence, breadth and clarity. But I see many points quite differently, so I will pass along a few issues that come to mind:
1. I worry about the standard philosopher’s comeback to Elster’s proceduralism. If we cannot very well judge or compare outcomes, how ultimately are we supposed to evaluate procedural changes? Furthermore the theory of the second best suggests that procedures which “sound good” may not in fact lead to better outcomes. We get stuck rather quickly.
2. I don’t myself find aggregation problems to be insuperable. We all know that Norway is a great place, and cardinal information will get us over the usual Arrow problems , a’la Sen (1984). A lot of the rest is what I call details. Without intending any bias against explicit norms of rational discourse, the more fundamental question is how a country can enjoy the luxury position of debating such matters peacefully in the first place. Ask Egypt.
3. If I think about the historical decisions which I consider wise and important, they very often are based on a certain amount of Machiavellianism, rather than on the standards for an ideal speech community. The ratification of the U.S. Constitution is one obvious example. Might Elster’s proceduralism work best at the micro level, when embedded in a broader realpolitik framework that already gives some Machiavellian control to “the good guys”?
4. Elster never considers markets or betting (apologies to Carow Hall) as mechanisms for preference revelation, though at one point he evinces skepticism about vote trading.
5. The idea of giving more influence to smarter people also is not on the table (see p.85 for a brief discussion, and also the bottom of p.5).
6. There is occasional talk of the private sector, such as the stipulation that Norwegian corporate boards appoint 40% women. Yet there is no systematic discussion of how private companies or private non-profits run meetings, conduct elections, obtain board consensus, or otherwise reach decisions. This point is not unrelated to #5. I’m not suggesting government can be “run like a business” but it is odd to write as if private sector experience with decision-making is irrelevant. It is those procedures which have to pass some kind of market test. So more Hayek, less Habermas.
7. At the end of the day, the losers in these dialogues will suffer under coercion and the winners will exercise power. This limits what kind of upfront discourse is possible. I wished for this topic to receive more attention.
Elster has been writing excellent books for over thirty years, and you can buy this book here.
From Chris Acree:
I’m planning a trip which will take me through Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam. I recently began selecting a few books about each country to read to cover the history, culture, or other interesting aspects of the area. In particular, my favorite books in this vein are Country Driving and China Airborne, both about China.
However, in searching, I’ve found Cambodia has plenty of literature (Cambodia’s Curse by Pulitzer winner Joel Brinkley seems a good starting point), and Vietnam has at least a couple good books (I picked up Vietnam: Rising Dragon at your recommendation), whereas Thailand seems bereft of strong English-language histories or non-guide travel books. Amazon searches return almost exclusively books targeted towards sex tourists, and the Economist article here http://www.economist.com/node/16155881 is mostly over 10 years old. Kindle availability is also unavailable for most of their selections, which, while not a necessity for me, hints at books that aren’t aging well or being actively updated.
Has no reputable author written a great Thai travel book in the last 10 years? If not, why not? What books would you recommend on Thailand?
How about this biography of Bhumibol Adulyadej? Falcon of Siam is historical fiction of note. Thailand — Culture Smart! is good for browsing. You can read a variety of books on Jim Thompson, and speaking of Thompson this cookbook by David Thompson is a must. Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives is one of the best movies ever made; watch these too, noting that Syndromes and a Century offers insight into the Thai health care system. I am not recommending use of such services, but perhaps the best of the books for sex tourists are interesting too? Siamese Soul is a good retro collection of Thai popular music from the 1960s through 1980s, hard on some ears but I like it.
People, what else do you recommend?
I picked up these two volumes on the basis of a very favorable review reproduced on The Browser, by Noel Malcolm. Yet the books sat around the house for months. I figured this was another overwrought survey by a famous person, valuable mainly as an introduction for those who don’t know much about the topic. The subtitle of volume one, by the way, is A History of Political Thought Herodotus to Machiavelli. Volume two picks up from there.
Overall I have been pleasantly surprised. When it comes to readability, interest, and integration of the intellectual narrative with actual history, I give volume one an A or A+. Along multiple dimensions, it would count as the very best book of the year. I do, however, have one major reservation. Whenever Ryan writes about a deep political philosopher, such as Plato, he makes that thinker sound prosaic and thus seem second-rate and shallow. Not terrible, just ordinary. Reading Ryan only, you would never know what all the fuss is about.
It is thus hard to assess the book as a whole, but I will continue with volume two. Ryan himself is a fairly deep thinker. Allan Bloom was a less deep thinker, and yet perhaps for that reason Bloom much better captured the depth of Plato.
High-speed trading tools pioneered in the stock market are increasingly driving price movements on Amazon’s website as independent sellers use them to undercut and outwit each other in a cut-throat online market place.
Product prices now change as often as every 15 minutes as some of the 2m sellers on Amazon’s site join the online retailer in using computerised tools – often developed by former data miners at investment banks – to lure shoppers with the best deals.
…Amazon sellers – using third-party software – can set rules to ensure that their prices are always, for example, $1 lower than their main rival’s.
…Some sellers have even created dummy accounts with ultra-low prices to deliberately pull down those of rivals so they can corner a market by buying their goods, say pricing experts. That practice violates Amazon’s rules of conduct.
Here is more, “Amazon robo-pricing sparks fears.”
I will nominate London, Paris, and Buenos Aires as leading contenders. New York is for me too familiar for me to judge objectively and so I exclude it.
Reasonable safety is a prerequisite, and then we have the following dimensions:
1. Chance of seeing a striking yet non-famous piece of architecture. All three cities are strong here.
2. The right mix of broad boulevards and narrower streets. Ditto.
3. The chance of spontaneously encountering good bookstores or excellent dark chocolate: London wins the former, Paris and Buenos Aires win the latter.
4. Cheap, convenient cabs, and places to sit and drink sparkling water: Buenos Aires is #1 on these.
5. Strangers are willing to talk to you: Tough to call, though NYC would win hands down if it were in the running.
6. Strategic and frequent use of historic plaques: London wins; yesterday I saw “George Canning lived here” and “Clive of India lived here,” among others.
B.A. loses points for imperfect safety and also capital confiscation, though it has by far the warmest weather of the trio. Overall I am inclined to pick London as first, perhaps because I prefer English to French for bookstores. Paris offers fewer surprises, even if it has a higher average level of beauty. Paris is also worse for spontaneous cheap dining in restaurants, though it has far better food stores for urban picnics. Berlin is perhaps the best city right now for living, but it is too spread out, and with too many broad boulevards, to be the best walking city. It is an excellent city to take a cab in.
Walking cities on the rise: Istanbul. I suspect it’s long been splendid, it’s now reaping the gains of being modern.
Underrated walking cities: Moscow, Mexico City, Toronto, parts of northern England, Los Angeles.
Overrated walking cities: Budapest, Krakow, Munich.
Best city to take the subway through: Tokyo.
If I had to pick a fourth in line: Barcelona.
I have an essay in that book co-authored with Veronique de Rugy. Other contributors include Paul Krugman, Robin Wells, Michael Lewis, David Graeber, Peter Diamond, Emmanuel Saez, Ariel Dorfman, Barbara Ehrenreich, Jeff Sachs, and Nouriel Roubini, among others.
Our essay is an…outlier…in the volume. Here is one bit:
Wall Street has contributed to some very real problems, but the core issues for poor Americans are often health care, education, and the cost of renting an apartment of buying a house. The best way to improve living standards and increase options for future success is to move toward greater competition and accountability in each of those areas, areas that usually have little to do with the financial sector per se.
Our goal is to propose an alternative vision for what OWS should focus on. You can buy the book here.
As I had predicted, it is very good. Most of all I like the suggestion that the economy is becoming more Ricardian with higher resource rents.
I am assuming that most of the United States will not follow Matt’s policy prescriptions, which are unpopular with homeowners to say the least. Which secondary adjustments and rent-seeking losses will result? If you cannot easily live in Manhattan, next to the stylish people, how will you respond? One option is to damn them and tune into NASCAR. Instead you might compete more intensely for their attention and approval. Write a blog. Send them ads. Try to chip away at the privileged status of their attention and capture some of that value for yourself. Either way cultural polarization seems to increase.
For all their other virtues, lower rents also help satisfy the demand for affiliation. I know people who are proud just to live in San Francisco and not only because it signals their income and status. It sounds cool. At what level of zoning is this consumer surplus maximized?
What is the most serious estimate of how much denser agglomeration — boosted by lower rents — would increase productivity? I do not take the urban wage premium as the correct measure here, since at the margin the extra worker currently does not move in. I would like to read a good study of this issue, which I have discussed with Ryan Avent as well.
Is this available improvement a level effect or a rate effect?
If people were the size of ants, without encountering any absurdities of physics or biology, how would the “public choice” of urban building change? Would urban centers be equally exclusionary?
How much space do we need to live? Say you have a 3-D printer nanobox which can produce (or obliterate) any output on demand. Is a studio apartment then enough? Just print out your bed come 11 p.m., or summon up your kitchen equipment before the dinner party. How much of the demand for space is for storage and how much is for other motives? My personal demand for space is highly storage-intensive, but I may be an exception in this regard.
If zoning stays too tight, are there (second best) general negative externalities from storage?
I don’t recall Matt calling for the widespread privatization of government-owned land, but would he agree this is the logical next step? It’s hardly as important as freeing up more urban and suburban building, but is there any good reason for government to own all that turf? I don’t think so. Let’s keep the public works and military facilities and national parks, and sell most of the rest.
Here is Matt’s summary of the book.
Charlie Clarke, a Finance PhD student at UConn, and a loyal MR reader, writes to me:
I’m a grad student teaching for the first time, and I was wondering if you had any recommendations for a book relaying evidence based advice for teaching methods. I know Cowen’s law, “There is a literature on everything.” Just hoping there is a good book or two synthesizing that literature so that I can use it to improve my teaching.
Love the blog.
The most important lesson is to use the right textbook. Beyond that:
1. Give a damn.
2. Get to the point when you speak.
3. Expect something from them.
4. Teach to the students who are interested in learning.
5. At all levels, do not overestimate the attention span of your audience.
6. Do not be afraid to be idiosyncratic, provided you adhere strictly to #2.
Those are my tips. But to be honest, I do not consider them RCT-tested and I am not sure they maximize social welfare. They instead start from the premise that the key question is what kind of person do I want to be, and then the method asks the students to conform to that vision. Some or all of them might prove RCT-neutral, or worse. Nonetheless, the approach is a good way to motivate me and that is part of the problem.
Doesn’t Bryan Caplan have a post on this? Here is John Baez on how to teach. Peoples, what can you recommend from the literature?
It is a wide-ranging dialogue with Timothy Snyder, you can buy it here. I will gladly recommend this book, but I have mixed feelings about it. It is Judt’s “deathbed conversations” with Snyder, when he was paralyzed.
Is it fascinating? Yes. Did I read it straight through without pausing? Yes. Did I learn a lot? Yes.
Yet it doesn’t show Judt in such an overwhelmingly favorable light. He is cranky, unfair to his intellectual opponents, and he repeatedly misrepresents thinkers such as Hayek on some fairly simple points. He conducts unsubstantiated attacks on various New York Times columnists, as if they had once beaten him in a debate and this was his revenge. It shows his lifelong and mostly unhealthy obsession with what Daniel Klein has called “The People’s Romance.” Unlike in some of his previous writings, his proposals for a one-state solution to the Israel-Palestine problem come off as an irresponsible and somewhat flip symbolic gesture, easy enough to make because he doesn’t have to live with the outcome. As a reader and reviewer it is hard to not wonder whether/how Judt was medicated during these conversations, and how well he had thought through his lack of editing options before publication. Or is this the real Judt? Are we all really like this? Pondering that question is as interesting as the dialogue itself.
The Austrians will be happy when Judt writes: “The three quarters of century that followed Austria’s collapse in the 1930s can be seen as a duel between Keynes and Hayek.” Yet he has the odd view that free market ideas were “imported to the U.S. in the suitcases of a handful of disabused Viennese intellectuals.” Others may underrate the importance of central/eastern Europe but in these dialogues he overrates it.
One does not have to agree with Hayek’s Road to Serfdom to find this an unfair characterization:
Hayek is quite explicit on this count: if you begin with welfare policies of any sort — directing individuals, taxing for social ends, engineering the outcomes of market relationships — you will end up with Hitler.
My favorite part of the book comes at Kindle location 1294, here is part of that discussion:
But even when Blunt was outed as a Soviet spy, in 1979, his standing in high society, and in the distinctive codes of that society in England, still protected him…Thus Blunt — a spy, a communist, a dissembler, a liar and a man who may have actively contributed to the exposure and death of British agents — was nonetheless deemed by some of the his colleagues to be guilty of no crime serious enough to justify depriving him of the fellowship of the British Academy.
If you are seeking to “normalize” this review, I consider Judt’s Past Imperfect to be one of the best books of the last few decades, his Postwar to be one of my favorite books ever, and his late essays to be some of the best writing, in any genre, in a long time. (Though I didn’t like Ill Fares the Land.) I can recommend this too, as something worth consuming and pondering and spending money on, but I still have a slightly queasy feeling in my stomach.
It is by far the best book on how to fix our current innovation dilemma and it is entitled appropriately Launching the Innovation Renaissance (Amazon link, B&N for Nook, also iTunes). I’ve read it twice and bought it once, even though Alex might have given me a copy had I asked, and now I am reviewing it once and probably will review it again.
The first and most obvious objection is, why not give the books to the poor? They need stuff to read. Or to prisoners? Or to sick kids? Or to struggling independent booksellers? It doesn’t cost a thing to give something away, right?
The problem is the situation for a library is more complicated than when you just take a bunch of old clothes and unwanted porn down to the Salvation Army. A library book is stamped and bugged and cataloged so that the library knows that it belongs to them. When a book is given away or sold, the library has to go through and remove all that crap, so whoever winds up with it can prove they didn’t just steal it off the shelf. I’m not kidding about that, either — some people who wind up with such books helpfully return them to the library.
And we’re talking about a lot of books here — these libraries are having to cut down their stock in a hurry. Imagine you’re the manager of a library, and some accountant tells you that you need to get rid of 100,000 books, and do it in a week. You really have two options. One, you can get a bunch of academics to scour your collection and painstakingly rate each book according to its value and importance. Then you can hire a bunch of people to take down the 100,000 least important books and painstakingly stamp and debug them, one by one. Your second option is to get the computer to spit out a list of the 100,000 least borrowed books, and hire a few people to walk down the aisles with their arms out, throwing those books in a shredding machine.
That second option is much quicker and much cheaper. Sometimes you can find a paper recycling centre that will pay you for the pulp, so destroying the books leads to a net profit. Nobody likes it, but for a librarian it’s like your best friend just got bitten by a zombie and you’re the only one with a gun.
Also, remember that the stuff worth saving is buried among a lot of other books that are basically garbage. Though everyone realizes that extremely valuable books are going to inevitably get caught in the same net, there’s not much that can be done about it. Nobody is going to order a first-edition Moby-Dick from a library warehouse if the 2011 reprint is sitting right there on the shelf. A computer list that ranks books by popularity can’t tell the difference.
Another downside to this option is that you have to ensure total destruction. You can’t just throw the books in a Dumpster for some asshole to come along and grab later. If you go the Dumpster option, you have to tear out chapters so that people won’t want them, or just fill the Dumpster with detergent. You don’t want people to get in the habit of treating your Dumpster like the clearance rack — it’s dangerous and messy for everyone involved.