Well it's a thesis, and (keeping in mind, I'm only a quarter of the way through it) it seems to be spending most of the first section just legitimizing that "Early Buddhism" has any legitimate basis upon which to speak on the subject Economic Philosophy, addressing and ruling out potential objections from the likes of Max Weber.
Many interesting sutta quotations along the way, and whilst it's not yet putting forward a theory as such, the purpose is to show that material and spiritual development may not be merely compatible, but mutually synergistic.
As it is, the main thrust of what's been said to date, in a practical sense, is that it's very important for the lay Buddhist to find appropriate balance between material and spiritual cultivation.
“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)
What is the final conviction that comes when radical attention is razor-edge sharp? That the object of the mind is mind-made (manomaya). (Ven. Ñāṇananda)
"If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 50 years ago, a liberal 25 years ago and a racist today." (Thomas Sowell)