Reddit mentions of Vienna & Chicago, Friends or Foes?: A Tale of Two Schools of Free-Market Economics

http://www.amazon.com/Vienna-Chicago-Friends-Foes-Economics/dp/0895260298/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255323840&sr=8-1

I highly recommend the above book. It's an easy to read introduction to both the Austrian and Chicago schools of free market economics, as well as concepts like 'free banking' (which I know sounds like a line from a bank commercial, but is actually an interesting alternative to both fiat currency and the gold standard) and supply-side economics (which is actually apparently a school of consevative Keynesianism).

This book explains things well. I think Skousen's from the Austrian side, but he gives an evenhanded look.

As someone who majored in economics as an undergrad and who is now studying decision-making/psychology in grad-school, I suggest you focus more on economic philosophy than on traditional intro to econ stuff, like the text books being suggested, which usually focuses on micro and macro models.

I feel this way for two reasons.

1. The of field of economics has not given up on B.F. Skinner-esk behaviorism. Many of the theories about preference, risk, and decision-making are just now starting to accommodate what Psychologists have understood for around 40 years. People are not perfectly rational decision makers. An example of this: It has only been a decade since Daniel Kahnemen won the nobel prize in Economics for Prospect Theory. A theory he devised in the 70's and which is increasingly seen as out of date/incomplete in the psychology literature.
   
   Utility theory was a useful first attempt at understanding how people make decisions, but like many first attempts, it just doesn't hold water 60 years later. Unfortunately economics has not adapted.
   
   Much of this is focused on the micro side, but I can do an equally long rant about how ridiculously out of date metrics like GDP, CPI, etc are in the realm of macro economics.
   
   
2. Learning the models and mechanism won't actually illuminate which side of debate is right or wrong. Economics simply isn't advanced enough to tell us if Keynes, Marx, or Milton Friedman was right. I could go on at length about this, but I feel strongly that none of these theories will ever really be able to undermine the others because they start with the incorrect hypothesis that human behavior can only be predicted by strictly observing people's choices (meaning that the mechanisms driving those choices do not matter) and that people behavioral rationally.
   
   So, with that being said, I suggest a broader approach. Something like The Big Three which details the lives and philosophies of the 3 most influential thinkers in Economics (Smith, Marx, and Keynes)
   
   To further round out you knowledge I would also recommend Vienna & Chicago Which gives a good overview of classical and modern free market economics.
   
   Finally, I recommend Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman and Predictably Irrational, if you are unfamiliar with the work, as a good moderators of the two fields.