Starting with the basics

[Issaiah1332]

I am wanting to learn the basics of economics. I have read a few things by Marx, but I still feel as though I have alot to learn. I am looking to understand the basics of economics, it doesnt matter the ideology (IE Marx, Ricardo, Smith, Keynes, Sraffa) I am just looking for a basic understanding of economics.

So...does anyone have any advice as to where to start?

thanks

[BIG BROTHER]

I hate to be the one giving the cheap advice but, I would suggest to go to wikipedia. Sorry man I know its a cheap advice but there's nothing like learning stuff on your own.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

If you're able to spend some time away in the crevices of a book, I recommend reading at least one work from famous economists.

All parties interested in economics should discipline themselves in the work of Adam Smith. Much of the earlier Greek and Mediaeval works are outdated (although enjoyable) reflections on subjects like fair price and lordly obedience. Smith compromises much of 17th and 18th century thought.

From there you can read Ricardo to get a view of the processes by which classical economics operate(d), and how they affected the average person. This view can be placed in juxtaposition with Jeremy Bentham, arguably one of the first welfare economists and animal rights activists.

Then move onto Marx (as you have, apparently) and the other socialist/anarchist thinkers. Keynes, Friedman, and Stigilitz are vital 21st century reads.

If you want a quick fix, Britannica or Wikipedia are okay. Look up classical liberalism, Marxism, Keynesian, Australian school, participatory economics, democratic economics, and information economics.

[Issaiah1332]

Thanks for your advice. I recently checked out The Wealth of Nations, as well as a basic economics book.

Thanks again

[blackstone]

These are the two books i would recommend. The first is a good introduction to get your feet wet, the latter is a bit more thorough debunking of classical economics.

The ABC's of Political Economy: A Modern Approach (http://www.amazon.com/ABCs-Political-Economy-Modern-Approach/dp/0745318576/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1203694020&sr=8-1) by Robin Hahnel

Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor of... (http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-Economics-Emperor-Social-Sciences/dp/1856499928/ref=pd_sim_b_title_24) by Steve Keen

[ComradeRed]

Thanks for your advice. I recently checked out The Wealth of Nations, as well as a basic economics book.

Thanks again I don't think a conventional economics textbook would be the best start, since it's little more than shameless justification of capitalism.

I would recommend starting by reading the books of these economics (Smith et al.). Take notes on it too ;)

Some of the more modern economists (e.g. Sraffa) are harder to obtain because few libraries carry them, except for university ones.

Even then, it's critical to have a thorough understanding of linear algebra before even attempting to read Production of Commodities.

So go straight for the horse's mouth is the best approach in my opinion...

[ComradeRed]

Have you read Capital and Value, Price and Profit? How do you suggest he understands Marx's Labor Theory of Value if he doesn't understand the Ricardian underpinnings of it?

Starting with Das Kapital, which is what it appears this fellow has tried, is why this thread was started in the first place.

The only necessary prerequisites for Das Kapital is Ricardo's Principles of Political Economy.

But the more the merrier ;)

[Issaiah1332]

How do you suggest he understands Marx's Labor Theory of Value if he doesn't understand the Ricardian underpinnings of it?

Starting with Das Kapital, which is what it appears this fellow has tried, is why this thread was started in the first place.

The only necessary prerequisites for Das Kapital is Ricardo's Principles of Political Economy.

But the more the merrier ;)

No, I have not read anything by ricardo. :(

I will def. do so though.

[Dros]

The Principles of Communism by Engels
The Communist Manifesto by Marx
The ABC's of Communism by Bukharin


In that order. All three are great ways to understand the basic principles behind what Communism is and what we are all about.

[More Fire for the People]

The Wealth of Nations; Wage-Labor & Capital; Value, Price and Profit; The Development of Capitalism in Russia; Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism; All available for free at marxists.org.

[ComradeRed]

The Principles of Communism by Engels
The Communist Manifesto by Marx
The ABC's of Communism by Bukharin


In that order. All three are great ways to understand the basic principles behind what Communism is and what we are all about.

The Wealth of Nations; Wage-Labor & Capital; Value, Price and Profit; The Development of Capitalism in Russia; Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism; All available for free at marxists.org. Uh, I think Hopscotch Anthill is more on the right track here.

If you want to start with the basics, start with:
The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith
Principles of Political Economy and Taxation by David Ricardo.

There are a number of economists between Ricardo and Marx that you may want to read if you feel so compelled to do so. It's up to you.

Actually, come to think of it, where you go from here is up to you. It depends with what you want to learn.

If you want to study the evolution of Marx's thoughts in economics, then you'd probably want to read Marx chronologically...and the various (major) economists that he cites.

On the other hand, if you want to work productively on Marxist economics, then you would need a good grasp of Marxist economics...and to do that it depends on who you ask.

You're asking me, so I say study Das Kapital, volume one.

Since Marx, there have been a number of interesting economists.

Notably most heterodox economists are of interest. You noted Piero Sraffa, but there are other schools of thought other than Neo-Ricardian Economics (consider: Complexity Economics, Evolutionary Economics, Post-Keynesian Economics, Econophysics, etc. etc. etc.).

I don't know what you want to do, so I can't tell you what the best approach would be.

[Dros]

My bad. I misread the op. I thought he wanted to know about the basics of Communist theory. If you wish to understand the basics of Marxist economics, I'd suggest:

Das Kapital volumes 1, 2, and 4(good for a general overview of most economic theories.)

The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith

[professorchaos]

Limits to Capital. Insightful examination of Das Kapital and other works on economics by Marx. Answers many criticisms against his theories.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

ComradeRed, do you consider the volumes of capital edited and compiled by Engels, reliable, or taken with a pinch of salt?

[Issaiah1332]

The Principles of Communism by Engels
The Communist Manifesto by Marx
The ABC's of Communism by Bukharin


In that order. All three are great ways to understand the basic principles behind what Communism is and what we are all about.

I have read them all...but thanks. :)

[Issaiah1332]

Uh, I think Hopscotch Anthill is more on the right track here.

If you want to start with the basics, start with:
The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith
Principles of Political Economy and Taxation by David Ricardo.

There are a number of economists between Ricardo and Marx that you may want to read if you feel so compelled to do so. It's up to you.

Actually, come to think of it, where you go from here is up to you. It depends with what you want to learn.

If you want to study the evolution of Marx's thoughts in economics, then you'd probably want to read Marx chronologically...and the various (major) economists that he cites.

On the other hand, if you want to work productively on Marxist economics, then you would need a good grasp of Marxist economics...and to do that it depends on who you ask.

You're asking me, so I say study Das Kapital, volume one.

Since Marx, there have been a number of interesting economists.

Notably most heterodox economists are of interest. You noted Piero Sraffa, but there are other schools of thought other than Neo-Ricardian Economics (consider: Complexity Economics, Evolutionary Economics, Post-Keynesian Economics, Econophysics, etc. etc. etc.).

I don't know what you want to do, so I can't tell you what the best approach would be.

Thanks. I always thought it would be a bad idea to jump into The Wealth of Nations and other books/theories without a grasp of basic economics. Things like, supple and demand, utility, the boom-bust cycle, etc. I kind of figured that before I read on, being that most theories are on capitalism, I should probably get a good grasp on capitalism (I.E its terms, principles, etc).

I have read Capital, but it is sometimes hard to understand. He cites alot of economists and alot of terms/theories that I am not familiar with, which is why I want to go and get a well rounded understanding of economics.

Right now, I have an over simplified understanding of capitalism and marxism. My goal is to get an in depth understanding of both, as well other schools of thought.

So, basically what you are saying is that I should jump right into the economists' works themselves and not worry about the economic text books?

Thanks again.

[ComradeRed]

Thanks. I always thought it would be a bad idea to jump into The Wealth of Nations and other books/theories without a grasp of basic economics. Things like, supple and demand, utility, the boom-bust cycle, etc. I kind of figured that before I read on, being that most theories are on capitalism, I should probably get a good grasp on capitalism (I.E its terms, principles, etc). The thing about Ricardo and Smith is that they tend to define the terms they are using, which is why they are a good place to start.

In my opinion, the terms are often used by modern "conventional" vulgar economists.

I'd recommend reading Debunking Economics by Steve Keen before reading any "conventional" economics textbooks. Also "conventional" economic textbooks require a knowledge of calculus :ohmy:


So, basically what you are saying is that I should jump right into the economists' works themselves and not worry about the economic text books? Well, the way I approached it was to study Adam Smith, and David Ricardo first.

Often Ricardo will cite some other economists, so what I do is read them. If they cite other economists, I read them too. So on and so forth.

Also take notes on them!

[ComradeRed]

ComradeRed, do you consider the volumes of capital edited and compiled by Engels, reliable, or taken with a pinch of salt? A cup of salt is prescribed.

[lombas]

Ricardo is so ... dry.

Economics don't have to be boring. Or difficult, for that part.:glare:

I prefer Bastiat.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Ricardo is so ... dry.

Economics don't have to be boring. Or difficult, for that part.:glare:

I prefer Bastiat.

It's funny you should mention Frederic Bastiat. The Law was probably the first book concerning politics or ideology that I've ever read. I'm still a bit impressed by it in how compressed and easily readable it is, although I disagree with some of his concepts, most notably his description of the evolution of class war, as he sees it.

[Os Cangaceiros]

In regards to the OP: I'd say run the gamut as far as economics are concerned. Obviously, the Wealth of Nations is a must. I'd also read works by Marx, Keynes, Friedman, Hayek, Ricardo, Rothbard, etc. I think that it is vital to ingest as many different theories and schools in this field as you can, and formulate your own opinion.

[lombas]

It's funny you should mention Frederic Bastiat. The Law was probably the first book concerning politics or ideology that I've ever read. I'm still a bit impressed by it in how compressed and easily readible it is, although I disagree with some of his concepts, most notably his description of the evolution of class war, as he sees it.

Coincidence. :D I agree wholeheartedly.

I still find more value in the classical liberal (?) theory of classes and the class war than the Marxist one.

[ComradeRed]

In regards to the OP: I'd say run the gamut as far as economics are concerned. Obviously, the Wealth of Nations is a must. I'd also read works by Marx, Keynes, Friedman, Hayek, Ricardo, Rothbard, etc. I think that it is vital to ingest as many different theories and schools in this field as you can, and formulate your own opinion. Rothbard and Hayek (like other Austrian economists) are jokes...it's to be expected as the Austrian school is a farce.

Particularly with their phobia of math.

Economics, if it describes anything or any change in relations or state of relations, can be formulated as a word problem...which can be dealt with mathematically!

So their phobias are self-defeating.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Rothbard and Hayek (like other Austrian economists) are jokes...it's to be expected as the Austrian school is a farce.

Particularly with their phobia of math.

Economics, if it describes anything or any change in relations or state of relations, can be formulated as a word problem...which can be dealt with mathematically!

So their phobias are self-defeating.

Praxeology is to economics what dialectics are to logic; both are pretty absurd.

That being said, I wouldn't completely write off Hayek. He had some interesting ideas, especially those which pertained to the command economy.

Rothbard is simply an entertaining curmudgeon.

[ComradeRed]

Praxeology is to economics what dialectics are to logic; both are pretty absurd. This is correct.


That being said, I wouldn't completely write off Hayek. He had some interesting ideas, especially those which pertained to the command economy. This is not.

Adam Przeworski's Capitalism and Social Democracy is a better reference on the subject.


Rothbard is simply an entertaining curmudgeon. Every time I pick up a book by Rothbard until the moment I put it down, I am overcome with laughter.

One day I'll read one of his books.

[Issaiah1332]

Note to self...do not worry about Rothbard:laugh:

[trivas7]

Would anyone recommend "The ABCs of Political Economy" by Robin Hahnel? He was instrumental in developing PARECON. I know, I know, he's not Marixian...

[birod]

I am wanting to learn the basics of economics. I have read a few things by Marx, but I still feel as though I have alot to learn. I am looking to understand the basics of economics, it doesnt matter the ideology (IE Marx, Ricardo, Smith, Keynes, Sraffa) I am just looking for a basic understanding of economics.

So...does anyone have any advice as to where to start?

thanks

hey man,me too is in the same boat as you are in.As far as my knowledge permit according
to marx economics ,capitalism is not the correct solution for correcting historical defects,
which only aggravates conditions of the poor severely.In Marxs economics,rent, interest
and profit earnec by land,capital etc is a deplorable form of exploitation.here in rent, interest
and profit we mean getting something out of nothing. In oder to get something we have to work.in this cruel world ,everything is for sale .we are made for selling our body, knowledge.our old values are being extinct,which was preserved so jealously.marxs economics esp is for uplifting the poor,who are in masses .most of the poor are being exploited for the gain of few riches.
Man according to this economics ,work according to ability and things according to needs.in capitatist eco,value ofany labour is underestimated
so that surplus value can be enjoyed by bourgeios.there in market economy,
government interference is limited,esp freedom in economic sphere is respected but in socialism on communisim democray is extended to economic sphere.
Here evry distribution happens in equitable form.but that doesnot mean
value of a sweeper and a doctor are same .communism tolerates natural
distinction but not man-made or artificial distinction for exploitation.it erases expoitative distinction for majority's benefit .to me it is somewhat
similar to utilitarian.productive forces are more dynamic than mode of production.as time goes by mode of production becomes obsolete but the progressive nature of productive forces doesnot be in consistent with old mode of production , so there arises conflict between two.because of very nature of the old mode of production,elements of opposite are born in its womb.

[ZeroNowhere]

Good friend for Jesus sake forbeare,
To dig the dust enclosed here.
Blessed be the man that spares these stones,
And cursed be he that moves my bones.

[Leaf]

I'm reading 'Economics for everyone, the economics of Capitalism' by Jim Stanford at the moment.
It's my first economics read and it is very easy to read. Written by someone who opposes capitalism. Well rounded.
It's really really great.
Especially for someone starting with the basics like you and me.

[ZeroNowhere]

See above.