Product Description

For nearly three decades, Washington has been in the grip of an economic orthodoxy defined by Ronald Reagan and embraced ardently by George W. Bush. It rests on four pillars: 1) Cut taxes on the wealthy, 2) Reduce regulation, 3) Fear inflation above all else, and 4) Insist on free-floating currency rates. Yet mainstream economists have spent much of the past decade examining the results, and declaring them rotten. Supply-side stimulation is a mirage. Deficits matter. Inequality matters. The disasters in Latin America--bread riots in Argentina, inflationary madness in Brazil - and Africa - bankrupt governments and capital flight - were a direct result of the Reagan-Bush agenda. James Galbraith is fed up, and determined to close the gap between what the economists know, and what the politicians ignore. In plain English, the Republican Party has been hijacked by political leaders who long since stopped caring if reality conformed to their message. Galbraith exposes the crumbling pillars one by one, naming names and pulling no punches. If you thought you should vote Republican for the sake of the economy, think again.Here's the "j'accuse" that the Bush economic agenda richly deserves - and a plan for what should replace it.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #259524 in Books
• Published on: 2008-08-18
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 240 pages

Review
"James Galbraith has written an extremely challenging book. Although its principal target is conservative economics, it is no less critical of conventional liberalism. Galbraith correctly recognizes that today both approaches are intellectually bankrupt and incapable of addressing the nation's pressing economic problems. I hope The Predator State stimulates needed debate among both liberals and conservatives on the mistakes both sides have made that have gotten us to where we are now."-- Bruce Bartlett, author of "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy"

Customer Reviews

An Important Book
Galbraith is writing from a uniquely interesting vantage point, as a scholarly economist (son of one of the most celebrated economists of the past century) who has also spent a lot of time in the political system of the U.S. As such, he is itching to point out the numerous and serious discrepancies between political doctrine - not of any one political party, but the premises of the entire political debate - and economic reality. He sets out to do this in part one of the book.

In part two, he asks the all-important question: Who benefits?
Answer: The predators - those private parties who feast on institutions built up for the public good, using lobbyists and bought politicians, exploiting the free-market dogma to privatize gains and socialize losses.

In part three, he takes a look at what can - must - be done. The most important point here, in my view, is the need for long-term planning, and its implicit need for greater governmental control. Markets don't plan; governments can.

Sadly, I think Galbraith is too far ahead of the curve. He takes the free-market ideology as not only wrong, but self-evidently wrong. And, while I am inclined to agree with him on this, I suspect it will only make its adherents throw the book away in disgust.

Indeed, many of the more important points, points contrarian to views often encountered (indeed dominant) in mainstream media, he doesn't really argue at all. He states in the preface that

"This is a short book, lightly referenced, written for a general audience, and not especially for a scholarly one. I have by no means attempted to cover every argument or document every point [...] Readers who have followed my work will recognize this as a departure from my usual methods; some may be disappointed. A price of accessibility is that the evidence behind some of the strongest factual claims made here cannot be laid out in full; I rely on the reader's trust that while errors are certainly possible, claims are stated in good faith, based on what I believe to be true".

I found the resulting lack of depth a bit frustrating; I don't quite buy the idea of fighting rampant misperception and disinformation by relying "on the reader's trust".

But then again, psycology has shown that our perceptions of the world have little to do with actual truth and a lot to do with the claims about the world we hear repeated frequently... this may be Galbraith's attempt to up the frequency of sane claims in the meme-stream.

Further, Galbraith covers a lot of ground here. Fully arguing every point would require ten thick volumes and a lifetime of work... in this respect, the current book is likely a good trade-off: Its timing is superb, as the American public should be experiencing a rude awakening right about now, and Galbraith is offering both a very reasonable explanation of what's wrong, and an equally reasonable course of action.

But still: For my (largely intellectual) purposes, the book would have gained greatly by a (possibly short) list of references or suggested further reading. This wouldn't necessarily have to be in the book, but could be made downloadable on the publisher's website... (Free Press, that's a hint for you).