The Big Three in Economics: Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and John Maynard Keynes

This book is ok. Unfortunately it is pretty much a "cut and paste" book assembeled from his earlier works. Instead of this one, buy "The history of modern economics" by the same author.

If you listened to Skousen's Making of Modern Economics then there really is no reason to pick up this volume. There are whole passages lifted from the prior text and this volume offeres really no new insight. This is more of an abridged version of his earlier volume. There is a lot of really good theory in this book and perhaps a little more focused that the purposely broader volume published earlier. I recommend it for someone who just wants the major thinkers instead of the progression of economic though.

This was my first book about pure economics (vs. economic history) and I learned a tremendous amount. Skousen takes a circumspect approach to each school of thought, briefly addressing the biography of each character and then describing his ideas and their ramifications.

It's worth pointing out that book is really about the big 3 schools of thought, rather than just the central personalities of the "Big Three". Skousen addresses the primary evangelists of each school who followed the three greats as well. Overall, his coverage of the topic felt thorough as he deftly switches between history, the nuts of bolts of each theory, and the effects of each.

One word of caution, however. I expected this book to be more "Just the facts, Ma'am" as it discussed each school of thought, leaving true evaluation of the theories up to the reader. However Skousen's neo-classical bent comes through almost immediately. His opinion is well-reasoned and I found myself agreeing with it almost unanimously, but the title left me expecting something slightly different than what the book delivered, which made it a 4-star overall.

The reading didn't detract from the text. Hey, we're talking economic theory, right? How much do you expect with regards to dramatic reading?

I fairly don't understand people who complain this book is biased. So what? The bias is easily distinguishable and it doesn't compromise the facts presented in the book. You don't need to convert yourself in to a free market economist to learn a bit of the history. At worst, you would know one biased point and it'd give you an even better perspective while reading a different point of view on the same economists or events.

As the author noted, it is important to try to avoid discrediting all of the person's work just because his or her major theory was proven or considered false (he was talking about Marx, btw). Thus if you disagree with the author on some major grounds, I think it's always a good exercise to try to find things that you agree with and can make use of.

Good book, great narration. Giving four stars because the story may have been a bit monotonous at times.

The problem was my memory. I bought the same book years ago when it was first published. In my mind, it was a Okay book that presented three heavy weight economists. That's the reason I purchased the Audible version so that I would listen the story again while I am hiking. LOL! I forgot that Mr. Skousen was disciple of Milton Friedman who treated Karl Marx as sub-text.Money wasted !

This would have been much better if it had been a more balanced book. It is definitely in the free market + religion + tea party ballpark. If that's your inclination then you'll like it. But if you want an objective and balanced view of economics ... definitely pick another book than this.

That is what is in this book and I loved it. You can't go wrong if you buy this book.

The text was a bit dry. Good topical information.

Okay so it's bound to be dated, right? My problem is with its ideological stance. I was really excited to get 9 hours of info about these economists. I was not prepared for attacks on Marx's character, using such words as "demonic" and "depraved" to describe him. In addition the author goes to pains to find evidence that Smith believed in God, of which there is little to none. These character notes are absolutely silly in a book of this nature, and made me suspect the quality of all of the information. Is he so determined in his opinions that he is unable to give a full account of which practices work and what don't? I am not at all confident.
And of course aside from that, his triumphalist last chapter, in which he maintains (spoiler alert!) that Adam Smith has been proven undeniably right, is entirely thrown in to question these days.

This book was incredibly disappointing. I was looking for and intelligent, factual look at all three theories on economics; instead got a rambling, falsifiable, bias rant. What was most disappointing was the bit on Marx; instead of putting forth and explaining the theory behind Marxism, the author went on a complete character assassination. Not only were the accusations consistent with a cheap tabloid smear, they brought into questions the competence of the author. If you have nothing intelligent to say, say nothing…a sad waste of time.