"Angrynomics" by Eric Lonergan and Mark Blyth aims to give an overview of current economic problems, the anger that they cause and to provide new solutions. The book is written as a casual conversation between the two authors.
My one-sentence review is this: simplicity is "Angrynomics" greatest strength and also its biggest weakness.
Here are some of my thoughts.
Europe has a lot going for it, it's just got the wrong policy mix in terms of one currency, one central bank, one interest-rate, all imposed on this heterogeneous group of economies. (p.47)
There are also some points I have issues with.
The overly dramatic set-up and framing. I get that they have to sell books and get the readers attention. By most metrics, though, we have never had it better. Making sentences like this just absurd:
... what it really needs is a whole new operating system. (p.11)
Weirder still, they themselves contradict this later in the book, where they agree that the current system just needs some tweaks.
I did not appreciate Blyth's instructions that the public should be pissed about the right things. Obviously meaning the right things in his estimation. This is patronising, as if the public couldn't or shouldn't decide what it is angry about.
Recurring references to the elites. Implying that they are a homogenous, evil and/or incompetent group. I don't think this is helpful in any way.
There is a discussion about the role that inequality plays in the rise of anger in politics. Eric and Mark don't agree on how big its impact is. I appreciated this exchange. However, afterwards, the book carries on as if they settled this debate. As if they agreed that inequality is the single biggest problem we face (after climate change), which is not how their debate really ends.
In the last chapter, the proposed solutions to the described problems could have used a lot more elaboration. As is, the proposed solutions sound like magical silver bullets. The reader is led to believe that these solutions only haven't been implemented because of a lack of creativity or smarts by the legislative powers. I find it hard to believe, that there aren't any more serious downsides.
Overall I think the book is okay. It's too shallow in some crucial points, which is a shame. For my taste the book should have either been longer or narrower in scope to allow for more depth.
With the justification of writing an approachable book, the authors provide almost no references to support their claims. I think this was a mistake, as it makes their claims weaker. I also doubt that adding references would have made the book less accessible.
Additionally, I would have appreciated more disagreement between the authors. In disagreement I find the dialogue format makes the most sense. The part where they disagree about inequality and wage stagnation is great.
However, it does have many ideas in it. For most readers that means there will be something interesting to think about in this book. It works well as an entry into the topic and the authors do provide further reading recommendations at the end. And given it's only 162 easy to read pages, that might be worth your time.
Have you ever improved some aspect of your life, only to wonder afterwards why you hadn’t done it earlier?
What was stopping you?
It might have been our natural tendency towards the easy and familiar, the comfort zone.
In physics inertia is defined as the following:
Inertia is the resistance of any physical object to any change in its velocity.
Like a physical object, we tend to slide into a certain rhythm and a way of doing things. We resist change because it requires effort.
My goal is not to judge but to make the case that this inertia can be managed. Even better, with the right approach, it can be used to our benefit.
Diverse industries have independently developed methods that give their users an advantage over the competition. What these methods have in common is that they temporarily pause inertia's effects over us. This way, they put the rational part of ourselves back in control, opening the gates to meaningful improvements.
To pause the effects of inertia, I believe, the first step is to put our default and easy path into context. To realize that it's just one of many options.
Usually in software and web development, there are many ways to solve to the same problem. Once a decision is made, however, it can take substantial effort to revise it. That is why the pull of inertia is especially strong in technical development. Developers therefore, have had to quickly find effective methods to deal with strong inertia.
One such a method is a code rewrite. As David Heinemeier Hansson explains, code rewrites were once seen as expensive mistakes. A code rewrite means to intentionally rebuild a software project from scratch, starting from zero. Of course, this takes considerable time and resources. Why then, does Basecamp completely rewrite their main app every couple of years?
One reason is that when you start fresh, you get to implement new solutions. These solutions might not even have existed when the original project was started. This benefit is particularly significant in fast-improving areas, like technology. That alone can make an expensive code rewrite worth it.
More importantly, starting again means that you get to draw from all the experience you have previously accumulated. The bigger the difference in experience is, the more significant this effect is. For example, if you had been following the same morning routine for the past 10 years, you likely have gained an understanding of what parts are most useful. If you were to plan a new morning routine, you could put that experience to use by designing a routine that only incorporates the parts that help you most.
Similarly, the zero-based budgeting method, in accounting, opens the door to new solutions and reaps the rewards of experience. The standard way of budgeting is to take the last budget and to make some adjustments. For instance, you might decide that your business should spend less money on ads next year, so you would reduce the ad budget by X%.
In zero-based budgeting, you start from zero and then justifying every expense individually. That way “by how much should we reduce our ad spend?” becomes “how much is the right amount to spend on ads?”. This subtle difference results in better decisions and, in this case, the company's resources being effectively distributed.
In both code rewrites and zero-based budgeting a restart encourages exploring all the possible options. These methods work because they encourage a bird’s-eye view of the situation. With them, it becomes apparent that the familiar and easy are just one option among many.
To pause inertia, however, it's not enough to explore and recognize new options. Being aware of a better option doesn’t make us automatically take it. Not by a long shot. I believe that it also takes getting to an effort tipping point.
By effort tipping point I mean the point at which a similar level of effort is required to both keep going or to take a new approach. Thinking: "If I'm doing X, I might as well do Y" is an indication that you have reached such an effort tipping point.
In everyday life such tipping points are rare. Once we find a path that works we tend to stick to it. Sometimes we even fail to recognize when such a path becomes detrimental or even unhealthy. To prevent that and to get to an effort tipping point, deliberate effort is required.
Marie Kondo’s cleaning practice strikes me as the perfect example of such an effort. The method consists, among other things, of gathering all the items of one category, for example books, on one spot on the floor. Then, and only then, deciding which items to keep and which to discard.
The key is to really put all the items on the floor, even if it seems unnecessary. The reason being, that the moment you do that, you reach that rare effort tipping point. Because then, if you were to keep a book, you would have to put it back on the shelf. It would take approximately as much effort as discarding it.
At such an effort tipping point, there is no inertia because there is no easiest path. In this rare inertia-vacuum the rational self gets to make the decision.
I have argued that escaping the pull of inertia takes two steps. First, it’s helpful to explore and consider all available options. One generally effective way of doing that is (re-)starting from zero.
The second step is to deliberately use a method designed to reach an effort tipping point, like Marie Kondo's cleaning practice. Once we reach such effort tipping point, we can make unusually clear decisions and improve what needs improving. With no inertia the best possible path forward can be taken.
Cucumber (Cucumis sativus) is a widely-cultivated creeping vine plant in the Cucurbitaceae gourd family that bears cucumiform fruits, which are used as vegetables. There are three main varieties of cucumber—slicing, pickling, and burpless/seedless—within which several cultivars have been created. The cucumber originates from South Asia, but now grows on most continents, as many different types of cucumber are traded on the global market. In North America, the term wild cucumber refers to plants in the genera Echinocystis and Marah, though the two are not closely related.
A mango is an edible stone fruit produced by the tropical tree Mangifera indica which is believed to have originated from the region between northwestern Myanmar, Bangladesh, and northeastern India. M. indica has been cultivated in South and Southeast Asia since ancient times resulting in two distinct types of modern mango cultivars: the "Indian type" and the "Southeast Asian type". Other species in the genus Mangifera also produce edible fruits that are also called "mangoes", the majority of which are found in the Malesian ecoregion.