Some of the most engaging and informative books I've read have been immersive reports from extreme economies: the slums of Mumbai (Behind the Beautiful Forevers), the Bronx (Random Family), Milwaukee (Evicted). Extreme Economies looks at nine outlier societies that are dealing with forces that promise to impact us all in the future, such as an aging population, increased automation, and economic inequality.
I really appreciate the approach, and each section has thought-provoking tidbits. However, the coverage of each society is superficial, about the depth of a magazine article, and the author frequently chooses to highlight one of the less compelling aspects of the situation. For example, the chapter on Tallinn focuses on the Estonian effort to automate government services, whereas the most interesting part of the story is the economic relationship between native Estonians and the huge numbers of Russians who settled here (or were moved here) during the Soviet era.
Davies quietly makes a case for conservative market-based economics. He never makes the argument explicitly, but most of his stories of failure involve ill-advised government intervention. This bias is most notable in the chapter about Glasgow, where the author exalts the social cohesion in the 19th century tenements then blames much of the city's current trouble on housing policy. One of his key conclusions is that we underestimate the importance of social capital when measuring wealth and setting policy.
I really appreciate the approach, and each section has thought-provoking tidbits. However, the coverage of each society is superficial, about the depth of a magazine article, and the author frequently chooses to highlight one of the less compelling aspects of the situation. For example, the chapter on Tallinn focuses on the Estonian effort to automate government services, whereas the most interesting part of the story is the economic relationship between native Estonians and the huge numbers of Russians who settled here (or were moved here) during the Soviet era.
Davies quietly makes a case for conservative market-based economics. He never makes the argument explicitly, but most of his stories of failure involve ill-advised government intervention. This bias is most notable in the chapter about Glasgow, where the author exalts the social cohesion in the 19th century tenements then blames much of the city's current trouble on housing policy. One of his key conclusions is that we underestimate the importance of social capital when measuring wealth and setting policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment