Throughout the book, there is a careful discussion of planned economy versus free market guided economy. It carefully frames the discussion as follows. A partially planned economy may be a good idea say some writers. He shows that if the largely planned economies have consistently failed, how can some one argue that a little bit of planning will be successful. He shows how well known liberal economists that think a little bit of government planning will be good are really lazy thinkers. He refers to the powerful accuracy of the market place in preparing the economy for the future and discusses the place for government regulation. One day someone will write a book explaining how poorly boards of directors and top management forecast the future for planning purposes. But given the greater knowledge on the micro pieces of the economy by corporate officials and investors, their chances of foretelling the future is far greater than government officials. The market place works in amazing ways. He rejects the desire of some economists to see decline as the future of the American economy if governmental planning does not address the bogeyman created in the minds of the liberal views he discusses. He holds fast to the expectation that the impulses and incentives of the private economy assure long term growth. The federal government has a role in monetary policy, fiscal sensitivity to the business cycle and environmental regulation. Partnerships between governmental officials and industry have a record of doing more harm than good.

For the first 200 pages, the book does provide a sleepy review of the American Economy in comparison to Japan, German and Europe for the period of 1947 to 1989. Big picture comparative data does not provide much insight. In a review of the economy since WWII, there is an attempt at comparing the economy under all the presidential administrations. It leaves out what is happening in congress and at the Federal Reserve. An economist should know better than to ascribe excessive economic powers to the respective presidents. The process is drawn out to show Democratic bias for government directed planning for the economy and the Republican commitment to market directed forces. He takes the Clinton administration to task for its heavy handed bias for government planning.

The first printing of the book is 1995 and yet the data in the book stops at 1990. Did the author die or vegetate. What ever the reason potential buyers should have been warned of its dated status at first printing.

The book's subtitle "The Struggle for Supremacy in the 21st Century" appears to be a belated addendum to help sell a book with a very shallow purpose. The chapter on Government-Business Relationship is lifeless particularly in its treatment of research and development and technology. The author is oblivious to the applied technology engine that is drive economic progress in many areas-- thanks to the venture capital community. He reveals a bias that university originated research is what really counts. In the long-run it is the vital raw material, but the venture capital applications that draw on any country (even the former Soviet Union science) are what is so uniquely American.

The book is not well written. It has ponderous sentence and paragraph construction. On many subjects a laundry list of topics are brought up but not dealt with in any depth. There is very little in the book about the struggle for supremacy in the past, current or about the future struggle. There is a message that the American economy keeps on winning due to its free market driven status, but there is little stimulating thought about the future of much of anything.