Reviews for Words of fire

The average rating for Words of fire based on 2 reviews is 5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2019-08-25 00:00:00 Jo Ellen Taube 10 Oct. 2017 Just finished listening to the audio version of this book put out by Laissez Faire Books. Unfortunately, I don't think they even offer it to the public, since their audio book section/program seems to be pretty much dormant these days. I originally read the book shortly after the English translation came out in 1977, but listening over the last week or two has been very instructive, almost 40 years later. The book is a good one, but it is a bit peculiar for current audiences, since the particular authors (of interventionist ideas) it deals with are mostly Germans from about 100 years ago. Many of their ideas are still basically current, and Mises's critiques of the various plans and theories are fundamentally sound and therefore currently applicable too. But I fear the historical nature of the book's details will limit those who would be willing to stick through the whole thing. But the main ideas are as relevant now, perhaps even more so, than they were when written in the 1920s. The idea that there is a "third way" as different from socialism as from capitalism, stable, distinct and beneficial to society, is as fallacious now, as it was back then. Mises thoroughly shreds this idea from many angles and examples. Mises' basic idea that government intervention in the market leads to more and more interventions, and ultimately outright socialism, OR the opposite, massive repeals of interventions and a free market capitalism, because the interventions have the opposite results that the proponents of those interventions [claim to?] want, is totally relevant today. So if this book can inform and inspire any historian, political scientist, economist, sociologist, journalist, attorney, ... ANYONE, to understand this basic idea, and then simply apply it to modern day issues. the world will be better off. One issue screaming out for such treatment is the incredibly complex (legally and in it's effects), but fundamentally simple interventions of Obamacare (incredibly named: "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" since it has achieved virtually the opposite.) as well as so many other government interventions into healthcare markets over the last 80-100 years or so. There have been many studies from some good economists and policy analysts who have critiqued these interventions, and even using, more or less, the basic economic tools and perspective that Mises uses in this book. But they have not proven as influential, or marshaled the political backing to stop the interventions before being passed, let alone to repeal them once passed, despite the widespread acknowledgement that "the Patients" are NOT being "Protect[ed]" and "Care" is becoming ever less "Affordable" in most every instance, except for certain subsidized groups who do not pay the full costs. Other interventions also seem to reign supreme too often, from Minimum Wages (though occasionally repealed here and there, or more often just inflated away to insignificance), to rent controls, punitive tariffs, subsidies for housing, "green energy", etc. - you name it. So my recommendation is that this book would be great to skim for most anyone interested in whether a society that is "middle way" between socialism and capitalism is possible and a reasonable ideal or just practical goal. But don't get bogged down with worrying about the particular names of the people or certain old plans being critiqued. Look at whether they are fundamentally the same as what is being proposed or passed now. See if the analysis of Mises rings true theoretically, as well as in practice then and now. Are the interventions working, giving the proposers (and duped public) of them exactly what they promise? Does the min. wage actually raise the wages of *all* the workers who previously worked for a lower wage? Or does it kick some/many of them out of jobs? Do changes to the nature of some of those jobs occur: machines are substituted for the manual work? Or does the law push jobs to go away, since consumers are unwilling to pay the extra costs? ---------- About the narrator, Richard Sigler: He has a good voice. However, his pronunciation of some pretty important names, such as the translator Hans Sennholz, other names and words, made me cringe. Also his incredibly dramatic vocal tone and high volume in many places was way over the top, and not appropriate in my judgement. ----- This English translation of the original German book was ably accomplished by Hans Sennholz, who earned his PhD in economics at NYU under Mises. It is very good. If my review above has too many red flags for you, you might prefer his later, shorter and more succinct book "Interventionism" from 1940. See my review from last year of that wonderful little book: --- Here is an excerpt from the book that I especially liked: "The economic layman only observes that "interested parties succeed again and again in escaping the strictures of law. The fact that the system functions poorly is blamed exclusively on the law that does not go far enough, and on corruption that prevents its application. The very failure of interventionism reinforces the layman's conviction that private property must be controlled severely. The corruption of the regulatory bodies does not shake this blind confidence in the infallibility and perfection of the state; it merely fills him with moral aversion to entrepreneurs and capitalists." p. 30 And just a page later: "To be sure, public opinion is not mistaken if it scents corruption everywhere in the interventionist state. The corruptibility of the politicians, representative, and officials is the very foundation that carries the system. Without it the system would disintegrate or be replaced with socialism or capitalism. Classical liberalism regarded those laws best that afforded least discretionary power to executive authorities, thus avoiding arbitrariness and abuse. The modern state seeks to expand its discretionary power - everything is to be left to the discretion of officials."

Review # 2 was written on 2015-09-30 00:00:00 Kelly Nash "Quem pede maior intervenção estatal está, em última análise, pedindo mais coerção e menos liberdade" Apesar do cenário da obra se passar durante a República de Weimar em 1920, o livro é bastante pontual no que diz respeito ao combate dos programas sociais e econômicos promovidos pelo governo, mostra que os distúrbios causados pela interferência estatal só agravam determinada situação. O livro aborda muito bem a idéia de muitos que ao se verem encurralados em escolher o liberalismo ou o comunismo adentram no "meio termo" onde tentam controlar a economia em um livre mercado ou tentando democratizar o caos do comunismo.