The author makes mention of potential careers in economics, but also points out how one will use one's economics background even if he or she does not ultimately pursue an economics career. The information that the author presents in this section is realistic and accurate, and includes ways to follow-up on an undergraduate economics education. It is easy enough to understand these concepts the way they are presented. By no means does the article purport to be a definitive selection of economic concepts, but it does provide a fair overview. Students who find the examples interesting may be compelled to delve a little bit deeper. Yet, it does not take long in one's economic studies to move far beyond issues of mortgages and investments. Indeed, an example or two about the GDP or another concept in which economic education spends much more time would have been appropriate as well. It would be good to give the students a sense of what they will really be learning -- it's not so boring that it needs to be avoided. In fact, for students attracted to the field, it is fascinating.

The last section, "Why Economics is Good Training No Matter What You Do" is perhaps the strongest section of the article conceptually. Although written a little thinly, this section makes the strongest case for learning economics. The practical examples given make something of a case for learning economics, but this section makes a stronger case. Economics is a relevant discipline precisely because it is the basis for nearly everything we encounter in the world -- from banking and finance, to retirement plans to the interest rates at the bank and the currency exchange when we travel. Economic concepts can be applied widely and broadly, far beyond simply mathematical...

If anything, the author should have expanded on this section -- it was intended as a conclusion but it introduced powerful new ideas and presented them well.
The sales aspect of the piece is interesting. While the concepts may be introduced in a first year economics course, most economics is not taught in this manner at all. Students may understand the concepts well as a result of the simplistic and colloquial models presented in this article, but they will find themselves disappointed when they being to encounter the complicated graphs and eventually complicated mathematics that comprises the bulk of the economics discipline. In this regard, the article serves more as a sales pitch for a first year economics course than for the discipline as a whole. The common sense approach to economics would indeed serve every student well, if only the discipline were geared to such an approach beyond perhaps the first semester.

As an economics student, I find that the article is probably not written for me, but perhaps former version of myself who was once skeptical about the value of an economics education. The tone perhaps does the discipline disservice -- to imply that it is known as the dismal science allows that such a view is reasonable. Thus, I feel there is opportunity to convey the sentiments expressed in this piece in a more powerful way. The ideas here are good. It is worth pointing out the value of an economics education in one's daily life and in one's decision making. Yet economics is about so much more. It is not "dismal" simply because those who do not study it say so. A tighter, more compelling and daresay more sophisticated writing style would serve this article well. The medium is, after all, the message.