Here are the books in economics I consider "Great", with a capital G. Not because of their intrinsic importance to the subject, because that's taken for granted. But because they shaped how I think about economics today. Hey, it's my list. You got a problem with that? Make your own. Suggestions for new 'great' books to read would be most welcome in the comments.
Here they are, in no particular order.
"Power: A New Social Analysis (Routledge Classics)" (Bertrand Russell)
"The General Theory of Transformational Growth: Keynes After Sraffa" (Edward J. Nell)
"The Microeconomics of Capitalism: An Introduction to the Theory" (John Broome)
"John Maynard Keynes" (Hyman Minsky)
"Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds" (Charles Mackay)
"The Grapes of Wrath (Penguin Classics)" (John Steinbeck)
"The Road to Serfdom (Routledge Classics S.)" (F.A. Hayek)
"Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business" (Neil Postman)
"Computable Economics (Arne Ryde Memorial Lectures)" (Kumaraswamy Velupillai)
Perhaps 'Economics in One Lesson' has educated enough everymen to earn a place here?
Hugh, great example--I've not read it myself, but I've just ordered it, thanks for the suggestion!
What about "The richest man in Babylon" by George Clason. Maybe not a 'Great' economic book, but for those who are not used to reading books of an economic genre its definitely an excellent book to begin with.
Stepehen, you should also look into How an economy grows and why it doesn't By Irwin Schiff.
http://freedom-school.com/money/how-an-economy-grows.pdf
Also, what do you think about Austrian Economics?
Stephen, cancel your order of Economics in one lesson, you can get it for free.
http://www.hacer.org/pdf/Hazlitt00.pdf
Here's another one from a Richard Cantillon.
http://www.econlib.org/library/NPDBooks/Cantillon/cntNTCover.html
Kickass Mossy, thanks!
Human Action can be a tough read, though I'm a big fan of the Austrian school. It's really fascinating to sit down and compare it with 'the general theory', the style of language is so different. Keynes has a very 'matter of fact' 'this is the way things are' while Mises is openly honest that some things are beyond calculation.
"It is possible to determine in terms of money prices the sum of all the income or the wealth of a number of people. But it is nonsensical to reckon national income or national wealth. As soon as we embark upon considerations foreign to the reasoning of a man operating within the pale of a market society, we are no longer helped by monetary calculation methods. The attempts to determine in money the wealth of a nation or of the whole of mankind are as childish as the mystic efforts to solve the riddles of the universe by worrying about the dimensions of the pyramid of Cheops. If a business calculation values a supply of potatoes at $100, the idea is that it will be possible to sell it or to replace it against this sum. If a whole entrepreneurial unit is estimated $1,000,000, it means that one expects to sell it for this amount. But what is the meaning of the items in a statement of a nation’s total wealth? What is the meaning of the computation’s final result? What must be entered into it and what is to be left outside? Is it correct or not to enclose the “value” of the country’s climate and the people’s innate abilities and acquired skill? The businessman can convert his property into money, but a nation cannot."
http://mises.org/books/humanaction.pdf (page 217)
Oh, and I'd definitely still recommend buying a physical copy of 'Economics in one lesson', it's the type of book you can hand out to anyone you know that shows an interest in economics. Very readable, full of 'a-ha' moments. Especially useful in quietening trade union advocates (where possible).
How about "Globalisation and its Discontents". It might help to put into context all this talk of IMF intervention.
Hi Niall, That's a good book, but I don't think it's Stiglitz' best. Perhaps his 'whither socialism' might be a better one?