Here's a quick rundown of some books I've read recently, with some brief comments on them. (I'm hopelessly behind in my book blogging, and could write a lot more about each of these, but I know I never will )

On Age and Aging by Richard Posner. About how individuals and societies deal with aging. He takes an "economic" perspective, by which I mean describing how people and groups handle aging as rational actors (i.e., it isn't all about money, but rather what incentives people have to do things differently as they age, and how society might be or is structured to cope with the fact that, well, people age). Interesting book, though he jammed in too many made-up equations (I felt like they were in there to get economists to take the book seriously) that were better explained with words and more general comments. The book was also pretty depressing. I'm not looking forward to getting old, and can already feel some of the effects Posner mentioned.

Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson. A sci-fi story about colonization of Mars. Remarkably detailed about Mars itself. Not a great series, and it got considerably worse as it went on, but I enjoyed the first book a lot.

The Logic of Life by Tim Harford. An economist describes all sorts of social structures and occurrences in terms of rational decisions of the people involved. A very interesting book, arguing that underlying all sorts of illogical-looking human pursuits are people logically pursuing their interests and responding to incentives.

Gridlock Economy by Michael Heller. Heller argues that too many property rights can be a bad thing, in that they can stop productive use of resources. For example, if a patch of land that is prime real estate is owned by 45 different people, but can only be developed if they all agree, then that land is essentially "locked" -- no one can develop unless they get all 45 to agree. He shows examples in patent law (particularly medicine) and a number of other areas. He's convincing that there is a problem in some areas, but I think he overstates his case in others. (To be fair, he concedes that property rights drives development on the medical front. He does note that the system works itself out as competing claims find a way to cooperate. I think his main complaint is that they work these issues out too slowly. My answer: it beats the alternative, which is that there is nothing to work out at all.) He does offer some prescriptions for dealing with what he cleverly calls the "tragedy of the anticommons". In some areas, his proposals seem pretty workable. But I think his main point in writing the book is simply to make it clear that there's a problem, and that acknowledging that you're in a property rights-induced gridlock is a first step to getting out of it. He does a very good job at least in this.

7 down. Many more to go...