The Law of Large Numbers (LLN) suggests that in the US one could find 50 cases of anything, which means Dr. Phil and Jerry Springer will never want for material.  In Phishing for Phools, Nobel laureates Akerlof and Shiller team up again after Animal Spirits (CH, Jul'09, 46-6301) to cast cold—but well-advertised and deceptively marketed—water on free markets once more.  The authors regurgitate behavioral economics paradigms in story after story to castigate the financial sector, real estate practices, credit card companies, automobile showroom tactics, food and drug industry advertising, and tobacco firms.  Somehow the ASPCA's appeals with forlorn puppies and gross exaggerations from environmental groups—not to mention teachers' unions, trial lawyers, and designer coffee shops, likely sectors more politically acceptable to Akerlof and Shiller—get a complete pass.  The same is true of dating and marriage markets.  Almost 100 pages of reference material complement the biased prose, in which Suze Orman gets more plaudits than mainstream economists.  The fact that the arguments are fundamentally unfair will dissuade few readers.  Uncritical audiences will adore the book, but are they running the risk of being called Phools? Summing Up: Recommended. With reservations. All readers.

--A. R. Sanderson, University of Chicago

Allen R. Sanderson

University of Chicago

http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/CHOICE.194469

Nobel Prize-winning economists Akerlof (economics, Georgetown Univ.) and Shiller (Sterling Professor of Economics, Yale Univ.), who previously collaborated on Animal Spirits, here look at the concepts of manipulation and deception from the idea that markets give and take away. Narratives in this impressive book tell how to avoid being tricked by means of better enforcement and being told of pending scams. The authors show how money is spent up to the limit and the resulting concern about meeting the next month's bills. They also provide a useful explanation for the Great Recession. Actions of rating agencies such as Moody's and Standard & Poor's, explain the authors, have been built up over a century and generally do a good job of evaluating the probability of a default of bonds. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, however, the agencies took on the job of assessing more complex securities that were almost impossible to rate accurately, yet the public still relied on the assessments. VERDICT As one of the few titles dealing with fraud in the marketplace, this should be a part of any collection strong in business and economic holdings. A background in economics is presupposed. Readers might also consult Scambusters! by Ron Smith.—Claude Ury, San Francisco