"Basic Economics" by Thomas Sowell. Helped me gain a more intuitive understanding of economics. On a side note, the man is a machine. He's been writing close to a book a year since the age of 80 (he's 92 now).
Incredible summarization on the topic. Chewed through this during Covid and gave me a new appreciation for the high-level implementations of economic concepts in society. Second-order thinking is a crucial skill in economics, and Sowell makes it clear that incentives drive everything. Most notably, incentives must actually encourage behavior that they were designed to implement, not 'promise' they will, something government and politicians fail to grasp even today (e.g. rent control, stimulus, etc.)
I've read the book partially (which reminds me I need to pick it up and finish it) and it's amazing yet frightening to realize how naive I am when it comes to economics. I like his arguments about how politicians use people's naivety and ignorance to peddle policies that aren't possible if we're to believe that economics is about "scarce resources with alternative uses".
His book "Race and Culture: A World View" was an eye opener. After being very politically naïve for many years, my reading of this book changed how I view economic, regulatory, and political consequences.
While slogging through an economics course in college I was frustrated that there were not teaching me anything. Then I discovered Sowell and Friedman and started watching every video I could find. Such a relief.
I just did what they wanted me to do for the rest of the economics courses but basically just ignored it all. No one in academia or the media wants to hear what Sowell and Friedman have to say. I should have been made aware of these guys and been assigned books and videos from them on day one.
I majored in econ. Friedman is as mainstream as it gets. Not sure why your econ courses ignored the guy. He made quite a few appearances in my 200 and 300 level courses.
"I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."
Can you give an example of "political bile"? Sowell is an incredibly even-keeled writer, and I'm surprised someone would find the book angry (or political, other than believing in traditional economics).
I dunno—another if-anything-even-more-right-wing economist seems to be the poster's point of comparison, so I too am curious what rubbed them the wrong way about Sowell. I certainly get a right-wing tone from the preface and first few pages of this book—I'm hoping later chapters will moderate the "if you're not maximizing economic utility you're definitely screwing up and must just be too stupid to realize it because there can't possibly be a good reason" subtext, and it just seems so strong at the beginning because he's trying to present the very-basics without nuance at this point, but I can't see that striking a Hazlitt fan as anything but a point in its favor.
It's "political" because when you start to actually understand how various incentives motivate human economic behavior, "if you subsidize more of A you get more of B", it shines an uncomfortable light on the consequences on many policy choices.
