This is the essential starting point for anyone interested in learning economics. The authors start at the very beginning and work through every aspect of microeconomics by developing a very clear model, and punctuating it with real world examples and historical anecdotes.

Mr. Samuelson is most undeniably a great economist, and a great liberal, but from the distant past. As a textbook writer I find him very poor; even irrelevant. He has a way of presenting the subject in a technical/mathmatical way that leaves the reader no better off at all at understanding and discussing the basic economic issues of the day. Besides that he was a remarkably biased teacher/textbook writer. He will perhaps go down in history as the man who said that Russia was a great example of how well a planned economy can perform (even though it really just impoverished its citizens) and that Milton Freidman's work was mistaken (even though it finally became intellectually dominant and was used by the Fed to create the current economic miracle). If you had a choice to spend two semesters plowing through Samuelson or a weekend reading "Capitalism and Freedom" or "Understanding The Difference Between Democrats and Republicans" you'd be wise to pick the later. You'd learn 10 times as much in a fraction the time.

Absolutely easy to read and understand! I never thought I could actually "enjoy" reading about the subject before I came across this book.

I was amazed to discover how good the original edition of Samuelson's classic economics text is. Virtually everything in it is just as relevant today as it was in 1948. Of special interest to me was chapter 10, Personal Finance and Social Security, for the light it sheds on the current debate about retirement income security. I think Samuelson ECONOMICS 1 ed. would be my textbook of choice for a course in introductory economics.

It's a great book for first year business students and all those who want to learn something about basic principles of macroeconomics and the influence it has on everyday business activities

In comparison with other macroeconomic texts around it should get 5 stars. It starts with a historical perspective of the crisis in economics at the time of Keynes, setting the picture for why anyone bothered to invent macroeconomics in the first place. It then rapidly proceeds to introduce the major schools of macroeconomics and to develop the relevant ideas and models. It is an ideal introduction for the interested or serious student and manages to be exciting as well as fairly comprehensive. If you're taking an introductory macroeconomics course, get this book instead of your text. If you're coming from outside the economics profession and have a mind of your own, this ones for you.

This is a classic Macro text used for many Intro to Macro-Econ.

I used a similiar text (many editions before) when I took my first econ class in college over 10 yrs ago.

This is a great book, easy to understand and fluid reading.

Thumbs Up!!!

Want to know why the US and other countries have had such up-and-down economic problems for the last several decades? You can thank Paul Samuelson and other incompetent buffoons like him (I don't mind buffoons that much, but incompetent ones are just too much). Samuelson and his ilk operated on the false assumption that mathematics actually describes economic activity. Once you believe this, the next logical step (in Wacky World, at least) is to have math-oriented "economists" (most of whom are failed wannabe mathematicians, anyway) plan and run the economy.
Fortunately, free markets are stable; they only destabilize when the government intervenes. No neo-classical "economist" understands this, and mathematicians certainly don't (see review
below). The only economic school that describes the real world
is the Austrian school; they are of course are taught in very, very few colleges. Government interference has never worked, and it
never will. And Samuelson got a Nobel Prize? You might as well give me one, too.

When I was required to take econ as undergrad physics student and used this text, the professor made a big deal of econ students not understanding 'curves', by which assertion he implicitly meant the plotting of y=f(x) when f is smooth and invertible. Well the professor didn't understand 'curves' at a higher level: he failed to note that nearly all the 'curves' presented in the text were only 'cartoons', mere mental constructions not based on real data, and agreeing with no real data (excepting corn flakes sales in British supermarkets, if Paul Ormerod is correct). The idea of 'utility' is a useless fabrication that has no basis in empirical data. Those mental constructions represent instead the expectations of neo-classical economic theory, the religion of the IMF, World Bank, and a host of other neo-classically-educated economists. To be specific, the price-demand, price-supply 'curves' touted in the text do not exist in reality and also not in theory: e.g., see Osborne's book Finance and the Stock Market from a Physicist's Perspective for the explanation why. See also the economists' own proof that aggregate price-supply demand-suppy curves 'can be anything' even if individual supply-demand curves would behave as they expect! Furthermore, no real market is approximately in equilibrium, all real markets are examples of far from equilibrium systems. Unregulated free markets are unstable. None of this is hinted at in the text, where equilibrium and stability are implicitly and unfairly assumed without warning the unsuspecting reader. Worse, in the introductory chapter Samuelson uses a hokey, irrelevant pictorial argument to try to convince both himself and the reader that physics is as unscientific as neo-classical econ theory. For good information about econ theory, see the following books: Ormerod's The Death of Economics, Mirowski's More Heat than light, and Osborne's book. For those with enough intellectual stamina, there is also Giovanni Dosi's Innovation, Organization, and Economic Dynamics, a collection of essays that also points out that the emperor wears no clothes and tries to find a reliable ruler to replace His Uselessness. Instead of propagating misleading mythology it's now time for economists to face the facts and explain why, after convincing governments to follow their advice and deregulate, we face one big financial instability after the other: LTCM, Argentina, Enron, .... .

As text or as literature, this book is terribly written. Unsystematic, like a hodgepodge of review articles. Samuelson has noted that economists (like Galbraith) who write too well may be suspect by other economists, but this is an unfortunate viewpoint. The best writing is done by the clearest thinkers: Einstein (in both German and English), Feynman, V.I. Arnol'd, and Fischer Black are examples. Bad writing, in contrast, often reflects sloppy thinking. In short, this text could have been cut to half it's size, to the benefit of the reader who wants to understand what Samuelson has to say.

For the story of how neo-classical econ won out academically, see Mirowski's 'Machine Dreams'.

This book is very famed in China.
The reader of the book is not college student but postgraduate.
The publisher in China have translated and published the textbook for above 4 times, The lasted one in 16th edition.

i am a editor.
who can help me that i want to know the top 10 or 20 business textbook in the world? it's including Economics?

liuhui@wise-link.com

This book is the worst finance book I've come across. I had to resort to a past finance book in order to get through the class that this book was assigned for. It has no mathematical basis for serious students of finance. There are numerous typographical errors.
An excerpt, "To give a simple example, consider the choice between alternative A - you get $100 today - and alternative B-you get $95 today. Suppose you had to guess how a stranger, about whose preferences and future expectations you nothing at all, would choose." This is UNIVERSITY LEVEL MATERIAL?!?
Do yourself a favor, look somewhere else and do not buy this [book]

I was required to purchase this book for an MBA class in Business Finance. To put it simply, this book is terrible. There are errors in calculations from front cover to back. The describers used to name calculations are changed from page to page, without any consistency whatsoever, requiring a flow chart to understand what it is Bodie and Merton are discussing. Nobel prize or not, Mr. Bodie and Mr. Merton should be embarrassed to publish such trash.

Also, the way the questions are worded in the end of chapter reviews leave little relevance to what was taught in the preceding pages. Often questions that are asked are open-ended and very ambiguous.

I would not recommend this book to anyone and have asked my University to stop using this book because it is so flawed.

Like others, I too first saw this book in paper. I am now using it to teach a class of law students -- smart kids but mostly without great numeracy. I think it is working okay but (like so many coursebooks?) perhaps not as well as expected. One problem is indeed the typos -- I'm a sloppy writer myself and typos are my incubus, but with all the beta testing and with all the publisher support, you would think they could have done better (indeed, I sent my own list to the publisher back in the beta days -- I got a nice thank you but I don't see my name in the acknowledgments, so I suspect they hit the trash). Aside from that -- the presentation seems mostly clean and straightforward, but quite often too elliptical for my students -- I've felt I had to do a lot of backgrounding. Unlike other reviewers, I quite like the problems -- I think some of them press the envelope a bit, but that is just fine with me, exactly what they should do. I do feel that the authors bring together a remarkable lot of stuff in a compact and orderly manner. In this respect with this book as with so many other coursebooks, perhaps it is the case that the teacher is getting more out of it than the student.