(Part 3) Best international economics books according to redditors

An cap doesn't have a stance on anything, its not a person.

My personal opinion as an an cap is that it is a communist union. Anti-democratic, anti-business, pro centralization, pro over regulation, its about creating a federal europe and against the sovereign states. It is going in the wrong direction, we should be moving towards more localisation and local governments, not larger more unaccountable governments.

I could go on and on for hours about all the problems it creates.

I read a book by ex Czech president who drew many comparisons with the soviet union from his own first hand experience with what i call the european communist union or the ECU.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Europe-Shattering-Illusions-Vaclav-Klaus/dp/1408187647/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOeEZaTjAjw

Another book that i have been looking for, for a while is this one, if you have it in pdf please share.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Great-European-Rip-off-Wasteful/dp/1847945708/

It depends on what level you want. I think Feenstra and Taylor's International Trade or International Economics are the normal beginner-intermediate undergraduate level ones

https://www.amazon.com/Globalization-Introduction-Jan-Aart-Scholte/dp/0333977025

This was the study book for my 400 level Anthropology class. It's an excellent summary of human history and governance aside from explaining all the aspects of Globalization.

Massive topic. Commission is the executive or cabinet of the EU, they are responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the EU. There are 28 commissioners, one from each member state and they are responsible for different policy areas. They are nominated by their government but they take an oath to act on behalf of the EU an not their home country. The European Parliament approves the Commission as a whole.

The European Council is part of the 'legislative branch' of the EU and is comprised of the relevant ministers of the EU Member States (so the Finance Ministers if that's what's being discussed). The council helps make the laws in conjunction with the Parliament (the Commission can only propose them) and sets the budget, again in conjunction with the Parliament. Most decisions of the council are made by a qualified majority.

The European Parliament is the other 'legislative chamber' and also deals with the budget and the process of making EU law. The Parliament is the weakest of the three institutions.

Citizens directly elect Members of the European Parliament (elections were last held in 2014) and elect their governments. Citizens have rights under EU law and EU treaties and can petition the EU parliament (and their MEPs and their national governments)

Can't really go into any more detail without either writing a book or having specific questions to ask. Google is your friend, there is tons of information out there from the EU itself (and others) and there's a good series of informative books from Palgrave Macmillan.

This is the 'introduction', well worth a read
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-European-Union-Concise-Introduction/dp/1137362324/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1467242352&sr=8-8&keywords=European+union

It didn't start with "No Child Left Behind", it escalated there. The assumption prevalent in US today that anyone can teach and those who can't do, teach, is common throughout the history of public education in the US. In the early nineteenth century, when most states made elementary school open to all, they used to hire girls who just graduated 6th grade with good marks to teach the lower grades, and the common practice was to hire unmarried women as teachers--because they are cheap. The justification was that women are natural caregivers anyway.

In the nineteenth century, the practice was only slightly modified by Normal schools, which were pulled in too many directions to be effective. They worked on the agreed-on premise that to teach at a particular level, you need to have one degree above that, so elementary-school teachers needed middle-school degree, teaching middle-school needed high-school degree, high-school needed bachelors degree. So the Normal schools were accepting a great variety of students, some who haven't completed high-school, so their subject classes weren't up to the standards of other colleges.

My source is "Teacher Education In America", and if you have access to it, read the first chapter. It gives a good historical perspective.

In the order that I would rank them--

Lament for a Nation by George Grant


While Canada Slept: How We Lost Our Place in the World by Andrew Cohen


The Friendly Dictatorship by Jeffrey Simpson


EDIT: These are particularly Canadian politics reads.

Προτείνω αυτό για το πως λειτουργεί η οικονομία: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Books-Living-Economy-Reuters-Modern-Britain/dp/0273650173
Και κάποιο βιβλίο των The Motley Fool (fool.com) για personal finance.

Ben Judah's The Fragile Empire (http://www.amazon.ca/Fragile-Empire-Russia-Vladimir-Putin/dp/0300181213)

Also see this discussion (including Judah) On LSE:
http://www.lse.ac.uk/newsAndMedia/videoAndAudio/channels/publicLecturesAndEvents/player.aspx?id=2327

Senator Collins' book (Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in the World Economy):

https://www.amazon.com/Eastern-Economy-Analyses-International-Economics/dp/0881321575

You don't know what production means do you?

If I produce $10b of something the fact I import $2b of something else doesn't change the fact I produce $10b of something.

Treat yourself to this and this before you try and converse on economics again.

This, Global Political Economy by Robert Gilpin, has a whole chapter covering the debate surrounding liberalization, the Washington Consensus, structural reforms and the IMF, the World Bank, neoclassical vs. endogenous growth theory, and what exactly spurred rapid industrialization in the NIEs of east and southeast Asia.

Are you talking about this "Producing Security?" It seems relevant and it's the only one I could find, but it's from Princeton.

Now that's fucking smart. Al Swearengen would approve.

Sit back and watch the suckers fight while making money off their stupidity. Business is always business: first, foremost, and always.

After all, plenty of American companies did the same damn thing. And they still do.

Dave McNally wrote an interesting book on international economics following the economic meltdown in 2008-9. The hardcover is rather pricey but the electronic version is decently priced. It has a very "leave no reader behind" style of writing that IE doesn't often subscribe to.

http://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/085036678X

You already get the idea here. Just elaborate more in your answer regarding the specifics. You could get into comparing this to a manufacturer or reseller who is debating buying from two different suppliers. Makes it a little more easy to wrap your head around in my opinion. You seem to get the "how?" so I'll focus on the "why?" I'll just try to give a couple scenarios that I hope will make this less abstract

Example:
A manufacturer is in the EU and needs 100k microchips as part of a device they are making. She can choose to get them from supplier A in the U.S. or supplier B in Japan.
Both A and B can make + deliver 100k chips 4 months from now for for either $250,000 or 5,000,000Y. Both amounts currently = 500,000EUR, and this is to be paid upon receipt (again paid in suppliers local currency). So the manufacturer figures the USD is going to fall some and that the Yen is going to strengthen vs the EUR and she decides to go for the US supplier. So 4 months from now the EUR has gone from $1/€2 to $1/€1.80, so she can get $250,000 for only €450,000 and save €50k in expected costs.

But, as you touched on, the risks from this are really not worth it and that is why a manufacturer like this would hedge against such risk paying a forward rate in a futures market or an option contract in a forex market....

Example:
A market trader could take these kind of risks but they would need a good deal of money to put up and to be very knowledgable about different nations monetary policies/economies/etc. I mean if I know the nation of Introvertia (where 20IVs=$1) is highly dependent on their oil reserves to finance their government and that OPEC plans on increasing supply more and more for the next 2 year (causing oil prices to fall) and that Introvertia's credit has been downgraded then I might buy an option contract for 6 months from now for the right to sell 200,000IVs at a price of 22IVs/$1. Thus in 6 months if the price of the IV is 50IV/$1 I can get 200,000 for only $4000 and sell them for $9100.

edit:
source/recommended reading: Salvatore's "International Economics", Ch. 14 (in 11 ed. anyway, titled "Forex markets and rates")

Like I said -- you can't afford my tutoring. Start here if you have a JSTOR account and actually care about the topic: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7zvwx0

Then work your way up to: https://www.amazon.com/Road-OPEC-Relations-Venezuela-1919-1976/dp/0292741537 for a background on why we're so involved with or concerned about Venezuela to begin with and for proper context on why Bolivarianism was a threat to US interests.

And then finish up with: https://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1147&context=honors for a better understanding of why "these statements" matter.

Hope this helps.

re: your edit -- you literally just posted the paragraph on why there's doubt that they did actually warn him.

>But questions remain over how much the United States told Mr. Chávez ... a 95-page report produced after the coup ... devoted only one sentence to warnings

How's your reading comprehension? I know it's early, do you need a coffee or something bud?

Survival Investing by John Talbott provides a good big picture perspective on alternative investments (gold, real estate mainly) while not getting too technical.

These three books are small (really small) but give a really good overview of the main points and will set you back about £15. I'd start there.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/British-Politics-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0199661103/

https://www.amazon.co.uk/British-Constitution-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0199697698

https://www.amazon.co.uk/European-Union-Short-Introduction-Introductions/dp/0198808852

Why not open the border on all sides and work towards a North American Union with general free economic trade and immigration like EU countries? It certainly hasn't been tried before.

No, I was saying that US exports are revered because they're percieved as high quality. There are many factors that contribute to this, including things like socioeconomic affection and the success of American branding.

edit: If you're genuinely interested, some further reading.