Good Economics for Hard Times by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘In this revolutionary book, renowned MIT economists Abhijit V. Banerjee and Esther Duflo take on this challenge, building on cutting-edge research in economics, explained with lucidity and grace. Original, provocative, and urgent, Good Economics for Hard Times makes a persuasive case for intelligent interventions toward a society built on compassion and respect. It is an extraordinary book, one that will help us appreciate and understand our precariously balanced world.’

Good Economics for Hard Times is a book on topics of public policy the MIT economists and Nobel Laureates – Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo. The book is split into nine chapters, dealing with the most contentious topics of the day such as immigration, economic growth, healthcare, tax cuts, environmental policy, education, and the impact of behavioural aspects in all of these.

Much as the title of the book suggests that it is a book relating to personal economics/ microeconomics, it is entirely directed towards public policy. The authors analyse various popularly held myths – such as immigration lowering wages, tax cuts leading to higher economic growth, misuse of funds by welfare recipients, etc. Following the election of madman Donald Trump in the 2016 US Presidential Election – the sole talking point for the next four years was the need to address the concerns of the blue-collar workers in the former industrial towns in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This was analysed well in this book – about how there is very little that could be done about reviving a declining industry (like coal) but there was an interesting proposition about the government’s need to subsidise the wages of the employees who would be unable to immediately find another means of employment.

The book was very unlike a traditional economics book – wherein the ones proposing the theory is very sure of the list of chain reactions that is going to befall if a policy is implemented; for example, if rent controls are implemented, the rents will naturally rise to the market price and thus, the difference between the prescribed amount and market rate would lead to under table payments and undeclared income – leading to loss of federal revenue. The reality is, we are not sure if that would be the case and that is what is repeated several times in this book – that we do not know for sure what the effects of certain public policy would be, they might succeed sometimes and fail during other times. The authors start by saying that as of today, economists are one of the least trusted professionals after politicians and goes on to explain that economists are not like physicists but more like plumbers which involves a bit of intuition as well as experience. And as members of the public, we often try to draw our conclusions based on anecdotes rather than real data and the reasoning goes along the lines of, ‘I know my neighbour who spends all their welfare money on alcohol and cigarettes – therefore this policy is a failure’ whereas in reality, such persons are a small percentage of the total.

It could be frustrating for many to read ‘we do not know’ so many times for almost every issue but I found that refreshing because as someone who studied economics, I have never met a professor who was not certain of the consequences of a given policy. The goals of the writers seem clear here – it is only to inform the readers what their politicians and ‘experts’ is not based on fact but merely pursuing self-interests (eg – tax cuts).

The political positions of the authors are well known, and the bias is going to be present in the way they present the facts which I do not mind. But there were times I felt they were trying to justify a result which did not match with their hypothesis, which defeats the very purpose of the analysis. For instance – there was an analysis on whether privatisation of schools help and while the conclusion was that there was no evidence of efficient management / higher academic attainment in private schools, there was an exception noted in Libera – where the authors ended up explaining a result which they did not wish to observe.

I would also say that the title of the book is misleading – as the authors do not propose many solutions and thus, there is not much ‘good economics’ involved, merely identification of what is ‘bad economics’. I do not have an alternative to suggest and it is not my place to suggest one either.

This book was far less technical than the previous book of theirs that I read, which was Poor Economics, and I would have liked it better if this book had gone further into the details of each of these schemes and how it affected real people instead of presenting broad statistics. This does challenge a lot of perceptions that we popularly hold and in that sense, I would suggest that this could be read by everyone.

On that note, I would conclude by awarding this book a seven on ten.

Rating – 7/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Maybe You should Talk to Someone by Lori Gottlieb – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘Meet Lori Gottlieb, an insightful and compassionate therapist whose clients present her with all kinds of problems. There’s the struggling new parents; the older woman who feels she has nothing to live for; the self-destructive young alcoholic; and the terminally ill 35-year-old newlywed. And there’s John, a narcissistic television producer, who frankly just seems to be a bit of a jerk. Over the course of a year, they all make progress. But Gottlieb is not just a therapist–she’s also a patient who’s on a journey of her own. Interspersed with the stories of her clients are her own therapy sessions, as Gottlieb goes in search of the hidden roots of a devastating and life-changing event. Personal, revealing, funny, and wise, Maybe You Should Talk to Someone opens a rare window onto a world that is most often bound by secrecy, offering an illuminating tour of a profoundly private process.’

Maybe You should Talk to Someone is a collection of experiences from the clinical psychologist Lori Gottlieb, the experiences which include her personal struggles, her sessions with patients (I believe the names are changed for confidentiality) and with herself being a patient dealing with a personal situation where she approaches a therapist. The book has four parts – but there is no particular theme for each; and every chapter deals with her session with a particular patient or her experience with her therapist.

The book begins on her personal side, on her unable to deal with the breakup she had with her boyfriend. Through a recommendation from her friend, she meets Wendell Bronson – who is her therapist throughout the book. Her patients include John, a television producer – highly temperamental and to whom most people are ‘idiots’, Charlotte – a young woman who has trouble in her relationship and takes alcohol to cope with it, Julie – a woman in her 30s and diagnosed with cancer and Rita, a 69-year-old who has given herself another year to live. There are a few other patients whom there were passing references but were not repeated.

This book starts with describing what therapy is (and what it is not) – describing her everyday job, her office and how different Wendell’s office was, which caught her off guard at first. This clears scepticism and apprehensions many might have over therapy. Millennials were branded as the therapy generation which I would say is good – and this book can provide an insight into what it means to be in therapy, which could be required given the mental state of many people during the pandemic (across generations). I liked the way how her relationship with her patients progressed – especially the one with John, who seemed impossible to deal with initially but eventually, she could connect with him and looked forward to the sessions with him. It was also the same case with her therapist Wendell, who had often deployed some unorthodox methods to bring her to reality and refused to budge when she wanted someone to confirm her righteousness following the breakup.

Some of the concepts that the book talked about was very interesting – especially the Italy – Netherlands analogy that was used by the writer to one of her patients; when you are in a place you do not want to be (here, the example was – planned a trip to Italy, boarded the wrong flight and ended up in The Netherlands, but the latter is a wonderful place too and must be explored and has a lot to offer and is better to enjoy that rather than brood over what has been missed). The writer herself seems to have had a very interesting life, a single mother – who worked in the entertainment industry, then tried out at medical school before deciding to become a clinical psychologist – and she introduces each of these phases in different parts of the book (non-linear) where the reader could unpack her personality little by little.

My concern with the book was that I felt that it was at times directionless – what was she trying to say through her book? Her personal struggles? The struggles of her patients? Her experience with the therapist? A lot of it was brought out in the initial stages and many phases in between seemed redundant till the end when she decided to reveal the revelations on most of the patients. I also felt that she occasionally engineered a fitting end for each of the characters mentioned in the book – because therapy often requires a lot of time and is a continuing process rather than one that has a definite end. Here, I am making the assumption that the only change the writer has made to these persons are their names, whereas one could speculate whether all of them were fictitious to begin with. The book could have also perhaps had more men, the only men in all of it were John, her ex, Wendell and her son – that could also be because there are more women in the profession and women tend to seek help more than men.

Just to add my opinion, which is not entirely related to the book, is that therapy is something that anybody could benefit from (regardless of whether you are facing mental health issues or not, like how we have a general health check up with the GP even when we are not sick) – and it is good that such books dispel a lot of misconceptions and apprehensions that surround the practice.

To conclude, I would say that the book was a good read, well written and easy to go through for those not in the field, not many technical terms are thrown around. I would award the book a rating of seven on ten.

Rating – 7/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Don’t be Sad by Aidh al-Qarni – Book Review

Don’t be Sad is an attempted self-help book from the cleric Aidh al-Qarni. While the focus of the book is to urge us to not be sad, the book does touch upon other aspects of life – how to be grateful, how to serve god, how to improve oneself, etc.

I would add the disclaimer that I am an atheist and I did not grow up in an Islamic environment – however, I read the book with no pre-conceived notions and I am mature enough to convert a god inspired advice to a eliminate the elements of god and take in only the good.

The book turned out to be a best seller and was highly popular; I often read reviews that even though the writer was inspired from Islam, this book is appealing to everyone. There are some aspects of religion that I find common across all – an all powerful god who has everything pre-determined, a loving god who has created the entire universe, etc. – so these are aspects that I was not a stranger to even though I was not entirely familiar with the teachings of Islam. People of any faith if they are open enough to read a text from another source can appreciate these aspects. I also appreciated that he tried to encourage people to travel and read.

My laboured effort to say something positive on the book ends here, the book was neither well written, nor edited well and I normally do not mind minor printing errors when the book is good but for a book like this, the least that one could have had was flawless publishing (often had ‘1’ in place of ‘l’). Moreover, there was no clear distinction between when he was quoting from the Quran and when he was giving his own commentary; and for the first few pages – we had text in Arabic and I don’t know why. I do not mind the Arabic as I find the script beautiful even though I can’t read, but the use of Arabic has to be consistent. I found that in the first fifty odd passages and then, it was just lost and there were times where it was nearly impossible to distinguish where he was quoting the verses and where it was a commentary.

Coming to the contents, this is addressed to highly privileged Muslims of the world – where he told his readers not to be ‘sad’ because they have a roof over their head, clothes to wear, water to drink, food to eat, etc. I agree with the reasoning for those who have these privileges (and probably those who are reading this book do) – but then, I don’t think he can say these words with a straight face to the people struggling in Yemen and Syria, the poor in Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, etc. (the reason why I picked these states is because the author repeatedly claims that there is nothing to be sad as they are following the one true religion and have all their basic needs covered which is not true for a lot of people in these countries that have a substantial population who adhere to Islam).

I try my best to not bring in logic to a book that fundamentally draws its inspiration from religion but I need to say that this book had instances where it was unintentionally funny; among the many contradictions, I would note one – as to how everything is pre-determined by god so there is no reason to be sad, but that also implies that one being sad at a particular moment is also pre-determined by god and so, why should one resist this pre-determined decision of god to be sad at a particular moment?

It also must be noted that this author is a known plagiarist from with multiple allegations of plagiarism – including for this book (similarities with Dale Carnegie’s How to Stop Worrying and Start Living). There was a comment in his book where he condemned China for use of torture against their prisoners (and claimed they would face god’s wrath); while I condemn those acts too, it was very strange coming from someone in Saudi Arabia – which is known for its record on human rights violations. Moreover, Saudi Arabia claims to do all this in the name of Islam – I am not here to debate whether Saudi Arabia’s interpretation is right, they probably are not – but the least he could have done, if that was his opinion, was to condemn his own country there for misusing Islam for their own political goals (isn’t hereditary succession against Islam to begin with?).

This book can be read if you can overlook him using pejorative terms of people of other religions and countries, if you could overlook misogyny and the obvious logical contradictions. Whether you choose to be sad or not is different, but don’t read this book. I award the book a rating of two on ten.

Rating – 2/10

Have a nice day,

Andy

The Diversity of Life by Edward O. Wilson – Book Review

 

Afin de lire mon avis en français, cliquez ici

Publisher’s write-up:

‘In this book a master scientist tells the great story of how life on earth evolved. E.O. Wilson eloquently describes how the species of the world became diverse, and why the threat to this diversity today is beyond the scope of anything we have known before. In an extensive new foreword for this edition, Professor Wilson addresses the explosion of the field of conservation biology and takes a clear-eyed look at the work still to be done.’

The Diversity of Life is a text from the naturalist and biologist, Edward O. Wilson. The book has three aspects to it, the first exploring the origins of life in landmass (the author took the example of Krakatoa), and then explained the various aspects of biodiversity before moving on the human impact on biodiversity.

The author elaborates the importance of biodiversity – and how it helps the ecosystem at large survive. The book is high on detail, at times a tad too high. This was an issue considering I have no background in biology and I last heard words like phylum during high school biology. It was difficult to understand all aspects of the second part of the book. There were illustrations to support the reader but that was not of much help.

However, I enjoyed the third part – mainly because I could relate to it, when the author spoke of the human impact. The author analysed the impact humans have had since the beginning of the race – the impact of their arrival in North America, Australia, etc. which had a direct correlation with a loss of biodiversity. He also explored various economic challenges that we face in the quest to preserve biodiversity – as it is often a choice between livelihoods of people and life of other organisms. The challenge is amplified by the fact that most of the biodiversity is in the developing world and it is a difficult point to sell to not industrialise in the same manner as the developed nations of the past (the author did suggest alternatives).

I found it interesting that our habits when it comes to food has not changed for centuries – and this is an example the author gives as a benefit of exploring biodiversity – as there are several varieties of food which provide additional nutrients, are easier to grow / rear (in case of livestock), etc.

This is a highly informative book that could be enjoyed by people who have some background in the subject. In my case, I do not have any background in biology except up to high school and thus, that was also the downside of the book, that is, this book felt like reading a textbook. Also, this book goes back and forth when it comes to evolution / origin of life and I might have personally preferred if the author had approached a more chronological approach while presenting the facts which would have been easier for me to follow.

I would also need to mention that the book was published in 1992 and thus, the writer was unusually optimistic about politicians’ tendency to accept facts regarding climate change. The author took a pragmatic approach in what he believed were solutions – acknowledging that it is difficult to balance economic development and biodiversity – but believed that politicians regardless of their political view would see the threat of climate change and three decades on, we know that the opposite is true.

Considering the above, I would award the book a rating of six on ten.

Rating – 6/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

Lifespan: Why we Age – and Why We Don’t Have To by David A. Sinclair – Book Review

 

Publisher’s write-up:

‘In this paradigm-shifting book from acclaimed Harvard Medical School doctor and one of TIME magazine’s 100 most influential people on earth, Dr. David Sinclair reveals that everything we think we know about ageing is wrong, and shares the surprising, scientifically-proven methods that can help readers live younger, longer.

For decades, the medical community has looked to a variety of reasons for why we age, and the consensus is that no one dies of old age; they die of age-related diseases. That's because ageing is not a disease – it is inevitable.

But what if everything you think you know about ageing is wrong?

What if ageing is a disease? And that disease is curable.’

This is a book where the biologist for the Harvard Medical School, David A. Sinclair builds the case as to why ageing is not a natural phenomenon but a ‘disease’. The book is split into three parts, with a foreword from the author explaining the painful loss of his grandmother before moving on to the technical aspects of the subject.

The first part deals with what we know (the past) – and it is explanation of what is DNA, what are its components, and what are the damages it incurs during the course of our existence (and could it be fixed?). This was the most technical part of the book and while I understood the crux of it, I do not have the technical competence to fully understand all of it – if you have a background in the subject, you may read those paragraphs in detail. However, I appreciate the author for placing his best efforts to simplify – it was interesting how he wrote single paragraph science fictions during the book to simplify what was ageing and why it was a disease.

The next part is about the present and the research that is ongoing and in particular, his research. He discusses some simple lifestyle changes that could be incorporated to live longer – such as fasting. Many of it was a repetition of his assertion that ageing is a disease, that nobody dies peacefully and that every death is very painful. I found it interesting when he mentioned that the term ‘died of old age’ is used so often in common parlance though that is no medical term – and people die because of failure of some organ, which means all it needs to be done to live longer is to address these problems.

The final part is the author discussing the future – 80 is the current normal for a human being at present. Though immortality is not the author’s immediate proposition, he does assert that for millennials and the generations that follow, living up to 120 may not be rare and explains why this is scientifically possible – that there is no natural age limit for the human body. Much as the author is convinced of the premise, he does not ignore the economic and social problems that this change could bring – should people spend a longer part of their life studying? Should people have to prepare for a second career at the age of 60? What about the impact it would create on societal progress? It was never a case in history that a majority of people who were blocking progress – such as those opposed to women’s rights in the 19^th century, opposed to civil rights in the 20^th century, etc. suddenly changed their opinion after passing of a law, but that they were eventually replaced by the subsequent generations who did not hold their views.  

I appreciated two aspects in this work of the author – despite the subject being highly technical, the author tried his best to simplify for the sake of the readers. At this point I need to mention that there is a co-author, the journalist Matthew D. LaPlante and a lot of the efforts at simplification could have been his inputs. This was unlike the book that I read from Edward O Wilson on Diversity of Life (who was incidentally quoted in this book) – which felt like reading a textbook. The author unlike a lot of scientists, was highly appreciative of his team and till date, I have not read a longer list of names in the acknowledgements section of a book.

This book made me think – about what the increased lifespan could cause – especially what the author presents – one where you not only live longer but also healthier. Considering the progress that we have made in this field over the years, I certainly believe that the author’s prognosis is possible, but it is not a reality that I look forward to. That was another point addressed by the writer that he is an optimist when it comes to the capability of humans whereas his children are a lot more pessimistic about the future, and he does acknowledge that there are a lot of problems which do not have a clear solution at present (e.g., climate change).

There are times I felt that the author was convinced of his own research that he was not willing to consider any cons to his premise. I would have liked it if this book had discussed the scientific reasons on why there could be a problem with the premise. I understand after reading his bio on the internet that his anti-ageing position is controversial among the scientific community. One could also argue about the ethical issues about the nature of some of his experiments – I do not have a clear position on whether scientific progress must be chased at all costs and thus, I was not pricked while reading any of it, but I can imagine why some people might feel uneasy. I did find it rather odd that he analysed the DNA of his daughters to find out that they had a particular gene and if they did not make bad lifestyle choices, they could live till 100 without a problem. However, if one of them did not, how would he have felt with the knowledge that one of them was going to die earlier than the other and not to mention, till the final chapter, I did not know that he has a son, whom he never mentioned – so did he not conduct this analysis or did he not have the particular gene type? I would stop my speculation on this here.

To conclude, I would say that this is a great book providing a new perspective, on a topic that we perhaps do not think much about and the best part is, you do not have to be an expert in the subject to understand the essence of them book (there are sections you might have to skim through). Considering the observations above, I would award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Fire Next Time by James Baldwin – Book Review

 

Afin de lire mon avis de lecture on français, cliquez ici

Publisher’s write-up:

‘James Baldwin's impassioned plea to 'end the racial nightmare' in America was a bestseller when it appeared in 1963, galvanising a nation and giving voice to the emerging civil rights movement. Told in the form of two intensely personal 'letters', The Fire Next Time is at once a powerful evocation of Baldwin's early life in Harlem and an excoriating condemnation of the terrible legacy of racial injustice.’

The Fire Next Time is an essay written by the American writer and civil rights activist, James Baldwin. The book comprises two essays, first is a letter written to his teenage nephew – urging him to broaden his outlook and get away from the chains of what the American society has conditioned the black Americans to aspire for (mediocrity and not excellence as he had put it).

The second essay is the majority of the book, where he explores his experience as a black man growing up in the US. The book primarily deals with how the author initially tried to take cover with the help of religion – visiting the local black church and eventually realising the detrimental effect christianity was causing on the black community in the US. The author also describes his meeting with Elijah Muhammad and the Nation of Islam; of which he was soon disillusioned and describes the movement as merely illogical and merely creating a ‘black god’ to counter the ‘white christian god’.

The book is a short but powerful text exploring the life of an average black person during the time and also clearly bringing out the race relations between the segregated communities. He was often critical of the idea of god, the very idea of the US and its ancestors who are dubbed as people who fought for peace and ‘freedom’, the latter being ironic considering how deeply entrenched was the idea of racial superiority; not to mention that slavery was legal not too long ago.

However, I was not in agreement with the author justifying violence; whatever be the reason – and to be fair to him, his arguments were convincing. I must note that he did not directly endorse violence but at the same time, condemned the glorification of the ‘peaceful negro’ as the white people do not want to imagine any threat to their property and wealth.

Another observation which is less to do with the book as such; is that I was uncomfortable with repeatedly seeing the word ‘negro’; I understand that in the 60s that was a word commonly used in formal writing as well, but a footnote from the publisher would have helped to contextualise. I would not be surprised if I quote any line from this book in the future without this context, some white supremacist claiming the word to have legitimacy.

The book was insightful and considering the size of the book, it made us think a lot more about the forms in which discrimination could take place and how from a position of privilege, we can easily brand people as ‘criminals’ whereas in a society that systematically discriminates; there is little incentive to play by the rules. Given the current situation in the United States, with a president (Donald Trump, at the time of writing this review) who refuses to unconditionally condemn white supremacists and kowtows to far right groups, it is important to make people aware of the struggles people have had to come to the situation we have today and that the struggle is far from over.

On that note, I would award the book a rating of eight on ten.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy

The Maid and the Queen: The Secret History of Joan of Arc by Nancy Goldstone – Book Review

Joan was an illiterate maid from eastern France in the 15^th century. Legend has it that she saved France from English takeover during the Hundred Years War and is one of the figures with most statues around France. But the question remains – how did an illiterate teenager put up such a courageous fight and led the demoralised French forces against all odds (in decisive battles at Orléans, Beaugency, Reims, etc.)? Nancy Goldstone in this book tries to demystify Joan and rationalise the events surrounding her rise.

The first I knew of Joan was when I was a child; while playing Age of Empires II; wherein Joan’s story is one of the campaigns and since then – this history surrounding England and France has always fascinated me. This book does not start with Joan’s origins at Domrémy in eastern France, which was her birthplace, but instead in Aragon (present day Spain). It introduces us to another prominent woman from those times – Yolande of Aragon. The writer builds her case as to how Joan’s whole story was prop used by Yolande for her power grab (coincidentally or otherwise, Joan was from the Duchy of Bar – which was Yolande’s matrilineal place of origin).

To provide a context – the latter phase of the Hundred Years War was effectively a civil war between two factions, the Burgundian faction which had King Charles VI on their side who backed the English king – Henry V’s, claim to the French throne; the other faction known as the Armagnacs – wanted the succession to remain with the Valois family – the King’s son. And what was Yolande’s interest in this? Charles VII, the son of the King was Yolande’s son-in-law.

I would say the book highlights three aspects – the first is to provide us a brief account of the Hundred Years War during the latter phase and in particular – the role of Yolande and her diplomatic skills in bringing various factions together as France was a highly divided country during the time. The second was to demystify the myths surrounding Joan of Arc – while the book certainly portrayed her as heroic – it also emphasised as to how not all on the Armagnac side were in favour / in awe of Joan. The third was also to demonstrate how divided France was and while we might know Henry V’s exploits in the Battle of Agincourt through Shakespeare’s play, he also had the advantage of attacking a country so divided that his victory was not as surprising as dramatisations have portrayed.

I got a good sense of who was Joan of Arc, her motivations, and the legal systems in place in the 15^th century, considering how her trial is one of the most documented events of the era. I also got to know of some interesting anecdotes which I would surely like to read (like the folklore The Romance of Melusine).

My only suspicion is the extent to which the author’s bias has influenced the work. The book has two principal characters – the Maid – Joan of Arc and the Queen – Yolande of Aragon, Queen of Sicily. The book certainly glorifies Yolande a lot, and sometimes I suspected it was far more than her importance in history. Yolande held her court in her castle at Saumur (in the western French region of Pays de la Loire) and after having read the book, I visited Saumur and the castle. The museum in the castle had more mention of René I of Naples than Yolande herself. This was strange as the book was dismissive of René and described him as the incompetent son of Yolande who often needed his mother’s diplomatic skills to bail himself out. Yolande’s name was mentioned in the castle only once and if that is the extent to which her history is savoured in Saumur, I wonder to what extent it remains elsewhere. However, I would also consider that modern French historians are downplaying or ignoring her role during the Hundred Years War.

To conclude, this is one of the most interesting historical accounts that I have read so far, and I would look forward to reading more about the insights I picked up from this book. On that note, I would award the book a rating of eight.

Rating – 8/10

Have a nice day,
Andy