Industrial and Scientific Products

peluang berniaga online secara part time


Saturday, June 16, 2012

Mockingjay (The Final Book of The Hunger Games)


Mockingjay (The Final Book of The Hunger Games)

Product Description

The greatly anticipated final book in the New York Times bestselling Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins.

The Capitol is angry. The Capitol wants revenge. Who do they think should pay for the unrest?Katniss Everdeen.The final book in The Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins will have hearts racing, pages turning, and everyone talking about one of the biggest and most talked-about books and authors in recent publishing history!!!!


Customer Reviews


5Unexpected Direction, but Perfection (Potential spoilers, but pretty vague)
By A. R. Bovey

This was a brilliant conclusion to the trilogy. I can only compare it to "Ender's Game" - and that is extremely high praise, indeed.

When I first closed the book last night, I felt shattered, empty, and drained.

And that was the point, I think. I'm glad I waited to review the book because I'm not sure what my review would have been.

For the first two books, I think most of us readers have all been laboring under the assumption that Katniss Everdeen would eventually choose one of the two terrific men in her life: Gale, her childhood companion or Peeta, the one who accompanied her to the Hunger Games twice.

 She'd pick one of them and live happily ever after with him, surrounded by friends and family. Somehow, along the way, Katniss would get rid of the awful President Snow and stop the evil Hunger Games. How one teenage girl would do all that, we weren't too sure, but we all had faith and hope that she would.

"Mockingjay" relentlessly strips aside those feelings of faith and hope - much as District 13 must have done to Katniss. Katniss realizes that she is just as much a pawn for District 13 as she ever was for the Colony and that evil can exist in places outside of the Colony.

And that's when the reader realizes that this will be a very different journey. And that maybe the first two books were a setup for a very different ride. That, at its heart, this wasn't a story about Katniss making her romantic decisions set against a backdrop of war.

This is a story of war. And what it means to be a volunteer and yet still be a pawn. We have an entirely volunteer military now that is spread entirely too thin for the tasks we ask of it. The burden we place upon it is great. And at the end of the day, when the personal war is over for each of them, each is left alone to pick up the pieces as best he/she can.

For some, like Peeta, it means hanging onto the back of a chair until the voices in his head stop and he's safe to be around again. Each copes in the best way he can. We ask - no, demand - incredible things of our men and women in arms, and then relegate them to the sidelines afterwards because we don't want to be reminded of the things they did in battle.

 What do you do with people who are trained to kill when they come back home? And what if there's no real home to come back to - if, heaven forbid, the war is fought in your own home? We need our soldiers when we need them, but they make us uncomfortable when the fighting stops.

All of that is bigger than a love story - than Peeta or Gale. And yet, Katniss' war does come to an end. And she does have to pick up the pieces of her life and figure out where to go at the end. So she does make a choice. But compared to the tragedy of everything that comes before it, it doesn't seem "enough". And I think that's the point.

That once you've been to hell and lost so much, your life will never be the same. Katniss will never be the same. For a large part of this book, we see Katniss acting in a way that we can only see as being combat-stress or PTSD-related - running and hiding in closets. This isn't our Katniss, this isn't our warrior girl.

But this is what makes it so much more realistic, I think. Some may see this as a failing in plot - that Katniss is suddenly acting out of character. But as someone who has been around very strong soldiers returning home from deployments, this story, more than the other two, made Katniss come alive for me in a much more believable way.

I realize many out there will hate the epilogue and find it trite. At first, I did too. But in retrospect, it really was perfect. Katniss gave her life already - back when she volunteered for Prim in "The Hunger Games". It's just that she actually physically kept living.

The HBO miniseries, "Band of Brothers", has a quote that sums this up perfectly. When Captain Spiers says, "The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it."

But how do you go from that, to living again in society? You really don't. So I'm not sure Katniss ever really did - live again. She just ... kept going. And there's not really much to celebrate in that.

Seeing someone keep going, despite being asked - no, demanded - to do unconscionably horrifying things, and then being relegated to the fringes of society, and then to keep going - to pick up the pieces and keep on going, there is something fine and admirable and infinitely sad and pure and noble about that. But the fact is, it should never happen in the first place.

And that was the point, I think.

Read more interesting reviews or buy it now!

Thursday, June 14, 2012

Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You've Been Told About the Economy Is Wrong By Edward Conard


Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You've Been Told About the Economy Is Wrong

Product Description

In the aftermath of the Financial Crisis, many com­monly held beliefs have emerged to explain its cause. 
 
Conventional wisdom blames Wall Street and the mortgage industry for using low down pay­ments, teaser rates, and other predatory tactics to seduce unsuspecting home owners into assuming mortgages they couldn’t afford. 
 
 It blames average Americans for borrowing recklessly and spend­ing too much. And it blames the tax policies and deregulatory environment of the Reagan and Bush administrations for encouraging reckless risk taking by wealthy individuals and financial institutions.
 
But according to Unintended Consequences, the conventional wisdom masks the real causes of our economic disruption and puts us at risk of facing a slew of unintended—and potentially dangerous—consequences. This book addresses many essential but overlooked questions, such as:
 
  • If the United States had become a nation of reckless consumers rather than investors, why did productivity soar in the years leading up to the meltdown?
  • If predatory bankers took advantage of home owners, why did down payments decline, thereby shifting risk from home owners to lenders?
  • If the risks were easy to spot, why did top politi­cal and financial advisers encourage lenders to make unsound investments?
  • If new regulations encourage banks to hold enough capital to fund withdrawals and not just loan losses, how will the economy underwrite the risks necessary to reach full employment?
In an attempt to set the record straight and fill the void left by other analysts, Conard presents a fas­cinating and contrarian case for how the economy really works, what went wrong over the past decade, and what steps we can take to start growing again.

 

Editorial Reviews

Review
''Ed Conard has written a provocative and important book about the economy that challenges conventional wisdom about the financial crisis, the trade deficit, government policy, and the path to prosperity.'' --William A. Sahlman, senior associate dean, Harvard Business School.

''Ed Conard provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.'' --Nouriel Roubini, chairman of Roubini Global Economics.

''Ed Conard's book presents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the financial crisis to date.'' --Andrei Shleifer, Bates Clark Medal winner, Harvard University.

''There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in this book.'' --Steven Levitt, coauthor of the New York Times bestseller Freakonomics.

''Unintended Consequences will be the most talked-about economics book in 2012.'' --Kevin Hassett, senior fellow and director of economic policy, American Enterprise Institute.

Helpful Review

"Valuable even if you disagree with the author"
By Jackal

This is a data driven book written by a management consulting kind of guy. One key argument is that the wealthy class adds a lot of value to society because they invest money (as opposed to spend money). I think the author is half-right in this statement because risky equity capital is neither provided by the Fed, the banks nor small investors. However, it is only half-right, because the US economy is to some 70% driven by end-customer demand.

If Americans lack purchasing power, new products will not be in much demand. Any thinking person would realise that total income inequality (one guy earning everything) or total income equality (everyone earning the same) would be pretty bad societies. The optimal level of inequality is not much discussed in this book. More seems better for the author. (Just as less seems better for Krugman and Stiglitz.) It is a bit sad that we get just another book saying that more/less is better.

The author clearly wants to make an impact as a thought leader. I don't think this will happen for a couple of reasons:

- He is far too dogmatic in accepting market prices as unbiased. He seems to defend market prices in all situations, even when those markets are not very efficient. So while he rightly praises the highly paid IT or biotech entrepreneur, he also seems to praise all bankers. Somebody bought the subprime debt so some value must have been added, the author thinks. He does not take seriously the fact that some markets are seriously inefficient (e.g. the financial-services human-resources market). Had he analysed the lack of efficiency in some markets, the book would have been much stronger.

- Sometimes it is more intelligent, both intellectually and impact-wise, to concede a few points. The US government might have had something to do with the success of Intel and other companies due to huge government investments in R&D. And there are other kinds of motivation than money. Listen to what psychologists say about intrinsic motivation.

- Why not just state that rent-seeking or crappy bankers should just be fired? He probably does not have much sympathy for crappy bankers, so why not nail them hard? The author is super-rich so he can afford to pick a few names, trash their track record, and create some enemies. Instead he sits too close to the television; mechanically he finds some way to support them. He seems to believe that the bankers should not be punished because they took well-intended decisions, which only later turned out sour.

- Rather than just putting a lot of praise on private equity, what about acknowledging that the Fed's low interest rate policy makes it artificially profitable to do private equity deals? These funds can borrow at very low rates, which Joe the Plumber who wants to expand his business. Sure, the risk capitalists are rightly acting on the low cost of capital, but surely they don't deserve full credit when the price of capital is set by a monopolist (i.e. the Fed).

- The author also seems to hard-sell the book a bit too much. A lot of "friends" have given the book five stars on amazon without hardly having reviewed any other book. In fact, these "friends" have reviewed the ebook, but without actually buying the ebook (no "verified purchase" note).

- He considers art history students as spoilt because they use their talent on something that is not adding a lot of value to society. Irrespective of the truth of that statement, it will not endear the author to anyone. Just as tone death as Romney talking about his money and. Art historians are grappling with a very complex subject in trying to understand what is good/beautiful art. In other words, the unit of measure is complex. Economics is a little bit more like art history than the author understands.

So why do I give the book four stars? Well, the book presents a lot of interesting and thoughtful data. The book is at times thoughtfully and intelligently written. The book justly defends creative destruction which is an essential part of capitalism not just private equity. America has strong capitalist traditions, which have served the country well overall.

What Bain Capital has done might not be pleasant, but creative destruction never is. Still, it is part of American capitalism. The book is also fun because the author so needlessly overstretches himself; sometimes you think that he is metaphorically out to hang himself. Had he not trashed art history students, maybe he could have learnt one or two things from them.

If you are still undecided, have a look at Conard and Stiglitz having a five minute debate on a Bloomberg clip. The author has collected all media promotion clips on his webpage (thanks!), even the one in which he behaves like a disobedient, smart schoolboy that eventually gets reined in by his teacher (Jon Stewart).
 
Read more or buy now!

Sunday, June 10, 2012

Catching Fire (The Second Book of the Hunger Games)

Catching Fire (The Second Book of the Hunger Games)

Read books review online below. It's irresistible!

Product Details

  • Published on: 2010-05-28
  • Released on: 2010-06-01
  • Format: Kindle eBook
  • Number of items: 1
 Review
Praise for Catching Fire:
 
#1 New York Times Bestseller.
#1 Publishers Weekly Bestseller.
A Time Magazine Top 10 Fiction Book of 2009.
A People Magazine (Top 10) Best Book of 2009.
A New York Times Book Review Editor's Choice.
A Los Angeles Times Best Children's Book of 2009.
A Publishers Weekly Best Book of 2009.
A Booklist Editors' Choice 2009.
A Kirkus Best Book of 2009.
#1 USA Today Bestseller.
#1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller.

"...enough action to please Hunger Games fans and leaves enough questions tantalizingly unanswered for readers to be desperate for the next installment." — School Library Journal, starred review

"Whereas Katniss kills with finesse, Collins writes with raw power." — Time Magazine

"Collins expertly blends fantasy, romance and political intrigue (so who needs vampires?)." — People Magazine

"Collins has joined J.K. Rowling and Stephenie Meyer as a writer of children's books that adults are eager to read." — Bloomberg.com

"Catching Fire not only lived up to my high expectations, it surpassed them. It's just as exciting as The Hunger Games, but even more gut wrenching, because you already know these characters, you've already suffered with them." — Stephenie Meyer

Customer review

I wish I could give it 10 stars!!!
By Ello

When I read the Hunger Games, I read it straight through the night, from 1AM til 5AM. Couldn't stop reading even though I had to pee badly. After I finished it, I was dying for the sequel. DYING!!!! When I found out the ARC would be available in the spring, I bribed everyone I could think of to get me one. And yes, I got it. The day I got it, I couldn't look at it until 1AM again. This time, I promised myself, I would only look at the first chapter and then put it down. Riiiiight. It was 4:30AM when I finished reading and immediately began plotting to find out when the next book ARC would be available.

I thought the first one was fantastic. In the back of my mind I felt that the sequel just couldn't be as good. How could it? Boy was I wrong! It was even better! My heart was racing the whole time I was reading it and I simply couldn't put it down. I believe Ms. Collins is the MASTER of the pageturner.

Every chapter ends with almost a cliffhanger feeling. It compels you to keep reading. It physically traps you into the book so that you just can't put it down. If you can't read this book in one sitting, then I urge you not to even look at it until you can. Like the first one, you will not be able to put it down. The house could have been on fire and I doubt I would have noticed.

Since we got to know Peeta and Katniss so well from the first one, what the sequel does is invest us even more deeply into their emotional well being. I won't give any other spoilers than what has already been said. So the book starts with Katniss as the face of the rebellion because of her act of defiance in the first book.

As rebellion grows, the President sets up his revenge - and when I found out what it was, I literally sat up in bed and shouted "Oh NO! I can't believe they are doing this to them!!!" Yes I was talking to my book.

That's how deeply this book sucks you into this amazing and disturbing dystopian world. It makes you want to grab up a weapon and join the rebellion.

One thing I have to say, I was deeply satisfied with the ending of this book. The first book ended in such a way that I was bothered by it and itchy for the next book. With the end of Catching Fire, I felt it was absolutely right and thrilled with the conclusion. But I'm still DYING for the third and final book of this amazing book series.

irresistible? Buy it  now or read more reviews here