Coyle, D. (2011). the Economics of Enough: How to Run the Economy As If the Future Matters

Diane Coyle: The Economics of Enough: How to Run the Economy as if the Future Matters
Provide a concise discussion of the strengths and weakness of three key arguments in the book. Your discussion for each argument should be analytical rather than descriptive. Avoid lengthy quotes (do not include quotes over one line).
Please submit your critique (using the template and guidelines on the following page):
• 150 points total
• Length: 50 words max. for the summary of the key argument; 250 words max. for each argument; provide a word count for each section; (300 words total for each essay); We will not penalize you, if your word count is slightly longer, however you should attempt to remain within the maximum.
• Double space
• 12 point
• One-inch margins
• Word document
• Submit to Oliver () AND Rectanus () as a Word attachment. (No pdf files please.) Do not submit on Blackboard.
Please use the following template for all responses!
Argument I (50 points)
A. Briefly summarize a key argument in the book regarding an assumption of globalization that the authors address. Provide page number(s) or section/chapter numbers (for e-books) in parentheses to indicate where the argument is made in the book (50 words max.):
The key argument in Doyle’s (2011) book is that organizations of today need to think about the future in regards of environmental, social and economic impact that they are leaving on future generations.
B. Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the argument and the effectiveness (250 words max):
Strengths of authors’ argument:
The strengths of the author’s argument is that she focuses on the current economic situation at the time of writing the book and discusses the impact of a Recession in the United States and all over the world that was even greater than the Great Depression earlier in the past century. Doyle (2011) points out those organizations need to understand when it is enough that they are taking from the economy, the environment and from the social arena in order to leave behind a strong legacy for future generations.
Weaknesses of authors’ argument:
Doyle (2011), points out that our economy and our resources have reached the level of unsustainability, however she seems to blame all Americans for this, rather than acutely pointing out that it is the people who are in positions of power who are the true culprits of this situation. Not everyone lives in non-sustainable ways and there are many Americans who understand and live by the words that Doyle (2011) is writing about and have been doing this well before the book was written.
To what extent do the authors successfully provide a more nuanced or differentiated analysis of the common assumption? Explain.
Doyle (2011) discusses the Gross Domestic Product and that the quest for growth in an economy should not exclude the sustainability and future growth of any economy.
Argument II (50 points)
The second argument that Doyle (2011) makes is that we as a country must look towards avoiding catastrophe in future and look to how we can improve society for our future generations.
A. Briefly summarize a key argument in the book regarding an assumption of globalization that the authors address. Provide page number(s) or section/chapter numbers (for e-books) in parentheses to indicate where the argument is made in the book (50 words max.):
On page 48, Doyle (2011) notes that the decline in trust needs to be reversed amongst our young people towards the current power holders of society so that they can feel comforted that a strong future lies ahead of them.
B. Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the argument and the effectiveness (250 words max):
Strengths of authors’ argument:
The strength of this argument is that it is true that many young people do not trust older people who are in power-making decisions. They see that it is difficult for them to find employment and that it seems as though all of the older people have taken all of the jobs and squandered the wealth of society.
Weaknesses of authors’ argument:
The weakness to this argument is that some of the young people are the children of the people who are squandering the wealth of society and are reaping the benefits of ill decisions by decision makers. Doyle (2011) also does not project that just as the Internet has revolutionized the way in which the economy works today, each generation tends to have a revolutionary act which changes the paradigm of how things are done from generation to generation. This too is bound to happen again in future as it always has.
To what extent do the authors successfully provide a more nuanced or differentiated analysis of the common assumption? Explain.
According to Doyle (2011),she notes that political and governing groups must align themselves with the changes in the Information and Technology arena.This should be done in order to maintain a relevancy with what is happening in the world today.
Argument III (50 points)
Doyle (2011) briefly touches upon education, however does not delve into this issue enough in the book.
A. Briefly summarize a key argument in the book regarding an assumption of globalization that the authors address. Provide page number(s) or section/chapter numbers (for e-books) in parentheses to indicate where the argument is made in the book (50 words max.):
Doyle (2011) discusses in an entire chapter about fairness and altruism and how important it is for our organizations to be practicing this while keeping our future generations in mind.
B. Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the argument and the effectiveness (250 words max):
Strengths of authors’ argument:
The strength of this argument is that Doyle (2011) is right about fairness and altruism. There needs to be more of these concepts incorporated into the existing economic organizational structures, as well as political and governmental structures, as well as businesses in order to reach the goals of safe-guarding the future for generations to come.
Weaknesses of authors’ argument:
The weakness of the argument is that Doyle (2011) does not delve deeply enough into the importance of education and the role it plays in the discussion that she has throughout the book. Education is a key factor in safeguarding the future of upcoming generations as well.
To what extent do the authors successfully provide a more nuanced or differentiated analysis of the common assumption? Explain.

Although Doyle (2011) does not discuss education in depth, she does finally point out at the end of the book that education is vital to safeguarding the future of upcoming generations and to having the points that she raises in the book reach fruition.

References

Coyle, D. (2011).The economics of enough: how to run the economy as if the future matters.

Princeton University Press.