Mankiw’s Principles of Economics, ‘dumped down’

An interesting course taught by Mankiw's colleague at Harvard, Stephen Marglin-Economics: A Critical Approach. From the syllabus;

This course critically examines the assumptions of modern economics and how these assumptions mold the ideas and conclusions of the discipline. A recurrent question is the appropriate scope of the market. Examples, drawn from both microeconomics and macroeconomics, will emphasize issues likely to be relevant over the coming decades: trade liberalization, health care, social security, and global warming…

How should you choose between the texts? Mankiw is a “conservative” text—he was the Chair of President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers back when Bush was a popular president. Baumol-Blinder is a “liberal” text—Blinder was a member of the Council under President Clinton and the vice-chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve when Alan Greenspan was the chair. I would say that Baumol-Blinder is more nuanced and careful in its defense of the market, but what is striking is the similarity between the texts, not the differences. This is not, after all, so surprising: the unity of the economics profession on the principles of economics transcends political differences that separate Republicans and Democrats. Nitty-gritty: Mankiw’s is easier to read; a colleague once described it as dumbed down, perhaps a necessary correlate of it being the largest selling text. Baumol-Blinder is better on macroeconomics...