I'm reading a book by him at the moment- a biography of Siegmund Warburg.

I'm definitely getting a sense of a conservative bias in it- the Weimar Republic's fall is made out to be a simple case of "lefties spending too much". But his prose is good, stuff looks properly sourced, and there are interesting insights everywhere. Much better than his contemporary political stuff anyway. I'd certainly consider reading something else by him on this form.

What's everyone else read?

he's a fucking cunt.

An economically illiterate economic historian who spends his time telling comfortable versions of history to butress the powerful. There are people on RAWK and Red Issue who have a broader and more accurate worldview.

But I think we've done this before.

We have.

Hmm, well I'm consistent.

It's one of your most endearing traits.

hah, A guy I know from college who is a rather right wing economist when talking about that private university that ferguson and I think Dawkins were involved in said something along the lines of "You could pay Niall Ferguson £20,000 a year (or whatever it was) or alternatively buy 50,000 litres of sulphuric acid and stick your head in it, and emerge better informed on the topic of economics."

Ah fuck. Can somebody do a thread merge thing?

The book I'm reading is a biography. I wouldn't fancy a more directly political.

David Kynaston likes this book.

I need to get another book to read knocking around cool cafes, mind.

I'll have to dig out my Blake.

Tubbs, I've heard Ferguson discuss Warburg, and found him well informed on the man and his milieu (if a bit OTT on his role as a Great Man of History).

You don't need to put the book in a paper wrapper when you leave the house.

I probably said this on the other thread (too beer-addled at the mo to bother clicking on Urs' link), but whatever you think about the rest of his stuff, the Cash Nexus is a properly good book.

How has he managed to avoid writing a book with his usual biases which prove he is right about everything, that anglos are the best and yer darkie isn't as good?

In the case of the Warburg book, because he doesn't much like post war Britain, and the "hero" is an immigrant German Jew.

With a white British hero, I expect he would be unbearable.

He's not just an arsehole, he's incompetent as well.

www.guardian.co.uk/books/shortcuts/2012/...wsweek-article-obama

AB2 wrote:


That's what I meant when I was comparing the Warburg book with his contemporary politics stuff.

I'm ploughing through Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze

A forensic dissection of the economics of the Third Reich which is a burning page turner, a must read for anyone with even a casual interest in the field.

He reviews and debunks so many myths that have adhered to the nazi regime (mostly placed there by the nazis themselves)

Really recommended

Plus one.

The thing is, economics as an academic discipline has got it epicly wrong for decades with its over-focus on mathematical models and under-emphasis on people and institutions and NF is actually quite right to pick up on that.

Although the 'killer apps' phrase is dreadful.

That is quite an understatement. Tasteless, offensive, fatuous, inane, undignfied, wannabe-down-with-da-kidz, soundbite-spewing, inaccurate, crassly over-simplifying, foolish, revolting, twattish, obnoxious, stupid, smug and tacky might be a few of the words one could use to judge the phrase.

Torcida wrote:


But that's because he's innumerate. being an innumerate economic historian criticising people for being too focused on models, is like being an illiterate literary critic, criticising people for being too wordy.

Economic models are also useful just as long as you put the right amount of weight on them, and don't get too attached to them.

Ha, if he really is innumerate that's beautifully ironic, considering the number of finance-related conferences (hedge fund events etc.)at which he is a star guest speaker, judging by the fliers which used to land in my in-tray in my old life.