Despite these undeniable qualities, I was a little disappointed because a number of economic arguments, the same elementary, are inaccurate. The author considers that there are no "laws" worthy of the name in economics and prefers to focus on the facts. Unfortunately, this leads to reel platitudes: "It happened this then it happened that, but then there was this, then this happened."
In short: to read if one is curious to know the facts in economic history - they are well told - not if we want to understand them, explain them. But the explanation is more important than the facts if we want to "learn from history" to answer these questions.
Here is a review of the first chapters:
Preface
We focus on economic history and ideas, as well as issues of power. The theory is relegated to the background.
1) The invisible hand (...- 1820)
Very good presentation of Colbert, Quesnay, Smith, Malthus and Ricardo. We regret the absence of Cantillon and a small confusion between the capitalist and the entrepreneur. "A model does not prove anything" ... Good explanation of Ricardo's comparative advantage.
2) The steam engine (1820-1865)
The presentation of the "industrial revolution" leading to a theory of crises. This is only a variant of the crises of overproduction or insufficient demand, the Malthus Marx Keynes. The author seems to know the monetary explanation of crises (Ricardo). On the currency, it ignores the conclusions of the classical economists, for whom the quantity of money is not a growth factor. "Money is debt" ...
The chapter ends with Marx, Engels, Bismarck and neoclassical economics Jevons, Walras (Menger is forgotten by the way) and Marshall. The presentation of the laws of supply and demand in the manner of Marshal misses the true marginal revolution, instead of explaining the price by cost of production as conventional, is to explain the production costs by (expectations) price (entrepreneurs).
3) The power of money (1865-1914)
Good presentation of "industrial policy" of Lincoln, but then skid. The emergence of huge conglomerates Rockefeller and Morgan is presented as a form of socialism, under the pretext that these are large groups whose activities are planned as a command economy. The weaknesses of the Chapter 1) appear in the exhibition of the agricultural revolution of the late nineteenth. The author explains that the abundance of land, the discovery of new cultivation techniques and inelastic demand are driving down the price of food (ok), "forcing" the farmers to invest more to make a living (fertilizers , machines). One wonders what entrepreneur invests especially as the price of their product down ...
4) Any collapse (1914-1945)
Less interesting, we swim in public places. Stagnant wages 20s have caused the explosion of debt, resulting in a bubble that eventually burst and opens the decade of the Great Depression. Post hoc ergo propter hoc ...
