Kenneth Boulding used to have his office in the bungalow I work in now, so I became curious and had heard of his reputation as an economist. This book is basically a collection of lectures for high school teachers from the olden days. He interprets economics as it relates to different sciences and social sciences. Though some of his thinking is dated by now, it is nevertheless refreshing and inspiring to hear his perspective on different aspects of my favorite field of study. Because he is from the old school and because he helped branch the field out in different directions in his own research, he really understands where the ideas we study in economics came from, how they changed as their context changed. If you have a background in economics you find this book a good read and not demanding or quantitative. If you know a little economics you will find this book very informative. You may find yourself knowing more economics than many professional economists do! To me this sort of thing is important to general health of the social sciences and economics in particular.

If you are studying economics, or even if you know nothing about economics, this book has quite a bit to offer. It is great for a student doing research on economics, and even good for someone interested in sociology. A must read for anyone into either subject!

Boulding's analysis here is a good complement to an economics college education. When I finished my undergraduate degree in economics, I read further into theorists such as Friedman, Krugman, Lansburg, and Frank. This book deserves a place on the shelf among that class. Boulding's book intrigued me because it attempts to explain how the market exchange analysis is not perfectly applicable to human relationships. If you are familiar with economics and its basic assumptions about human behavior, that people are rational and self-interested, this is a good book to read for an alternative view on utility-maximizing behavior on the part of people. More than once you will have to pause and reflect on what Boudling says.

Unfortunately, the book is not the most exciting to read at all, but generally it keeps you engaged. It also does not appear that the subject he was wishing to advance, grants economics, was accepted by the academic community, which is a bummer.

Here is a bit of it: when the Fed lowers interest rates and the price level increases, the Fed's act serves to reallocate money between creditors and debtors. That is, debtors gain and creditors lose. If the loss in real purchasing power incurred by inflation is less than what debtor's gain in being relieved of their obligations, is that a grant from the Fed to debtors? A cool puzzle.

Read Friedman before you ever read this, though. Robert H. Frank is my second-favorite writer. Alan Blinder third.

PEACE