I'm planning to read it before reading 'Human Action' and 'Man, Economy, and State' so that I can start from a more mainstream perspective. What are the differences in these books, in terms of substance, style, approach to teaching economics, etc. ?
I don't know anything about Reisman, but Capitalism is $80 compared to Human Action which is $20. Just get Human Action and MES. I don't think you'll be missing anything by not reading Capitalism.
The book is huge.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
Bert: I don't know anything about Reisman[...]. I don't think you'll be missing anything by not reading Capitalism.
I don't know anything about Reisman[...]. I don't think you'll be missing anything by not reading Capitalism.
Pretty irresponsible.
If I wrote it more than a few weeks ago, I probably hate it by now.
It's a responsible decision as far as buying books. $80 on one book, or $60 for two. I'm not in any way bashing Reisman or Capitalism, but it also makes more sense to start off with HA or MES.
While Reisman is not explicitely Austrian, he is not "mainstream" either. He is an Austrian "with Ricardian tendencies" (his attempt to vindicate post-Smithian classical economists was perhaps one of the main differences he and Mises had [from the introduction to Capitalism]). I think Reisman is wrong on a lot of different specific points (such as his criticism of the Ricardo Effect), but overall Capitalism is a very good book. Reisman writes one of the best critiques of Keynesian economics that I've read, although I think that his critique is a bit outdated (regarding liquidity preference). Keynesian IS/LM theory evolved during the late 1980s and early 1990s, so that it no longer matches that put forward by Reisman (largely based on work by Hicks).
Capitalism is a very good book, but you can't read it over Human Action.
I think Reisman is wrong on a lot of different specific points (such as his criticism of the Ricardo Effect), but overall Capitalism is a very good book.
Can you go into detail please? How is the Ricardo effect theoretically tenable in anyway whatever?
"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."
I don't agree completely with Hayek's Ricardo effect, but I don't agree with Reisman's criticism of it, either. I think there are elements of truth proposed by both, though.