What's everyone's opinion of this? I'm currently halfway through the second chapter, and, honestly, it's kind of boring. Does it get better? Furthermore, is it something that is absolutely essential to read, or should I read other stuff, like The Mystery of Banking, MES, Socialism, etc. before it?
I suggest you start by actually learning some Austrian econ before trying to see what the Austrian perspective on the history of economic is :P
Yeah, I figured I'd do that. The only econ books I've read are Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson and Rothbard's What Has Government Done to Our Money?
Is it worth reading something like Economics for Real People or Lessons for the Young Economist? Or can I just move right on to stuff like The Case Against the Fed, History of Money and Banking, etc.?
The way I started was by reading random articles on the Mises website. Also, I had an AP Micro and Macro class. I actually like to suggest that people read a textbook in mainstream economics first (or at least at the same time).
Umm.. Why? You can learn a lot of good econ. from reading a history of thought, especially when it's written by someone like Rothbard.
Have you ever read the book?
I think Murphy's intro, Lessons For the Young Economist is a great introduction. Hazlitt's is a classic of course, but it left me wanting more depth when I read it at 19. If you're in your teens, go for it. If you're a bit older, I suggest something more advanced (Reading Rothbard's HoET kinda suggests you were looking for something more advanced, anyway). MES isn't too rough to jump right into.
Edit: Didn't see other posts. I say go for MES.
I think that a mainstream econ education has helped me very much to grasp the "big picture" things. MES is like intro micro at least. It's like micro on steroids.
I'm in my 3rd year of high school. I've read the first part of Murphy's book, where he talks about praxeology and stuff like that, as well as the stuff on "Robinson Crusoe" economics, and a bit of stuff about value scales, but then I put it down to read Rothbard's What Has Government Done to Our Money?
So should I...
keep reading An Austrian Perspective?
quit, and return to Murphy's work?
quit, and read something like MES?
fegeldolfy - my opinion, if its boring you read something else. There are too many interesting books out there for you to be weighed down by one. Something will spark your interest and you will go back to it.
I havent read it yet, though its on my to do list of about 30 books haha, so no i dont think you NEED to read that one
my favorite is mises - socialism and i think it is a must read. though it can be boring so i must of put it down and came back to probably a dozen times before finishing.
i liked case against the fed and you dont need to have really any prior knowledge. very easy book.
Economic history isn't for everyone. Go to the history section. There is a whole reading list there if history in general interests you. I can also recommend some works if you describe your interests.
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
I've got a pretty substantial history reading list. It takes me a while to read a book, since I usually read 4 at a time. I've got four seperate reading list, one fiction, one economics, one politics, and one history/biography.
I think I'm gonna put down An Austrian Perspective for a later date and get started on The Case Against the Fed.
Although, Andrew Cain, if you know of any good (and free online, preferably as an ebook file) history books, please send links to them to me in a PM. I like all areas of history, but I especially like roman history and american history. Thanks.
1. The history of economic thought is a great way to learn economics. The problem is that Rothbard died before he could actually get to any modern theories. For this reason and this reason only I would stop reading Rothbard's work for now and if you want to read economic history of thought then pick up Skousen's work on the matter. I would start on higher material if I were you.
2. Don't read Economics for Real People. I still think that its a bad introduction at best, and it's only worth reading as an introductory piece.