The Economics Anti-Textbook is both an introduction to, and critique of the typical approaches to economics teaching, written by Roderick Hill and Tony Myatt in 2010. The main thrust of the authors' argument is that basic economics courses, being centered on models of perfect competition, are biased towards the support of free market or laissez-faire ideologies, and neglect to mention conflicting evidence or give sufficient coverage of alternative descriptive models. Goals The book seeks to both teach economic material and also to counter what is written in other economics texts. The book encourages its readers to become skeptics, urging critical thinking against the hegemony of rigid free market ideology. The book advocates for empiricism in economics and demonstrates the abundance of un-empirical free-market ideology in undergraduate economics classes. Many authors have since repeated similar concerns about economics education. Structure Each chapter begins with a dense but readable summary of common neoclassical economic textbook teaching on a topic, and then proceeds to discuss the limitations of these teachings and their public policy implications. Throughout the text are suggested "Questions for Your Professor" designed "to reveal the ignorance of neoclassical economics professors of their own discipline, their lack of understanding of alternative theories and their wilful neglect of conflicting evidence." Content The book primarily discusses major topics of microeconomics, including consumer behavior, firm behavior, market structure, externalities, income distribution, government, and international trade. An appendix discusses the 2008 financial crisis in light of the earlier discussions of markets. Example An example of the book's approach is the theories surrounding minimum wage. Classical micro-economic theory dictates that in a perfectly competitive market, raising the legal minimum wage will increase unemployment, as it prevents the hire of workers whose market value falls below the legal minimum. Society therefore loses from the imposition of a minimum wage due to the loss of allocative efficiency. While real markets may not be perfectly competitive, the model of perfect competition provides a good approximation to real market behaviour. A number of counterarguments to this are given. The classical model, while neat, is only a hypothesis which should be experimentally verified before being accepted as fact. Over 30 years of econometric studies have failed to conclusively prove or disprove the hypothesis that raising minimum wage will increase unemployment. The theory is surrounded by a `protective belt of assumptions' which makes conducting such studies near impossible. The existence of market