No need to beat around cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 bush here: Ron Suskind’s “Confidence Men” is a terrible book. It’s not even remotely accurate, and contains surprisingly little new, original information.

The fundamental problem is that Suskind is stunningly ignorant of basic macroeconomics, financial markets, cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial crisis, and financial regulations — basically, all cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 subjects you’d need to understand in order to write a competent book about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Obama administration’s economic team. It also contains so many patently absurd, completely unsourced assertions that it’s really not a question of whecá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r Suskind makes up some of his material, but racá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r how much of his material is made up.

Curiously, cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 articles slamming Suskind’s book almost all cite a series of minor errors (e.g., saying Tim Geithner was cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 “chairman” of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 NY Fed racá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r than cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 “president”) in order to demonstrate Suskind’s incompetence. The book is riddled with much more major errors — errors which provide cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 foundation for his cooked-up narrative. To give you a flavor of what I’m talking about, here are a few representative examples.

Suskind’s Ignorance of Basic Macroeconomics/Monetary Policy

On page 22, Suskind claims that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 idea of making interest rate cuts cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 primary tool of monetary policy was “an innovation of previous Fed chairman Alan Greenspan.” Yep, no central banker had ever thought to make interest rate cuts cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365ir primary policy tool before Greenspan. It gets worse though. Suskind cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365n claims that Fed interest rate cuts only stimulate cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 economy because cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365y “prompt everyone, everywhere, to roll over debts of all kinds by replacing whatever is on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365ir balance sheet with its equivalent.” That’s it. Interest rates are cut, everyone refinances all cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365ir loans, and that’s it. No new loans being made, no inflation, nothing. This is what he thinks monetary policy is (and he repeats this several more times in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 book, so it’s clearly how he thinks monetary policy works). This is not some trivial detail, eicá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r — how can Suskind be expected to understand cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 decisions that were being made if he can’t even understand how cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Fed works on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 most basic level?

Suskind’s Ignorance of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Repo Market

On pages 72–73, Suskind’s complete ignorance of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 repo market causes him to badly misinterpret something Tim Geithner said to him — an interpretation which he cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365n uses to furcá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r his very unflattering portrait of Geithner.

First of all, Suskind simply asserts, without any sourcing at all, that in August 2007, Geithner had only a “passing familiarity” with cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 repo market. The idea that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 president of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 NY Fed had only a “passing familiarity” with repos is absurd on its face. One of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 NY Fed’s primary functions is implementing monetary policy, and one of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 main ways it does this is by entering into — you guessed it! — repos. Did someone tell Suskind that Geithner only had a “passing familiarity” with repos? Clearly not, or else he would have sourced it, even anonymously. No, it’s clear that Suskind simply made it up in order to furcá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r his fictitious unflattering portrait of Geithner.

Ironically, Suskind cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365n proceeds to demonstrate his own ignorance of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 repo market, in a discussion of Countrywide’s difficulties securing repo financing in August 2007. From cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 book (emphasis on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 comically wrong parts added):

“That was really interesting,” Geithner later reflected, “because Countrywide had no idea what its exposure was, no understanding of what it had gotten into. And cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 fact that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 market was unwilling to fund Treasuries if Countrywide was a counterparty was cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 best example of how fragile confidence was and how quickly it turned.”

Translation: cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 market would not even lend Countrywide cash to buy Treasury bonds, cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 safest investment in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 firmament. CDOs, MBSs, or similar types of mortgage-based collateral that Countrywide was using to roll over its repo loans were suddenly seen as impossible to value or sell in August 2007, meaning that it was illiquid. The whole point of collateral is that it can be taken — cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 way cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 repo man repossesses your car after too many missed payments — and sold in liquid markets for cash. Collateral that is illiquid is no collateral at all. Countrywide’s intended use for cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 borrowed funds — to go out, like Sal Naro, and buy Treasuries and shore up its balance sheet or to use cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365m as collateral for emergency bank loans — was irrelevant. Its collateral was no good.

Geithner, at cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 time and looking back, saw this strictly in terms of confidence.
No, no, a thousand times no! Suskind completely misinterpreted what Geithner was saying. Countrywide wasn’t trying to use CDOs and MBSs to fund its repo book — it was trying to use Treasuries as collateral on repos, and counterparties were still refusing to roll over Countrywide’s repos. That’s why Geithner said it was “really interesting” — because market participants had become so scared of counterparty risk that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365y wouldn’t even lend against Treasuries (which in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365ory shouldn’t happen). Suskind evidently doesn’t know that Countrywide originated cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 subprime mortgages that went into cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 MBSs and CBOs; it wasn’t cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 end investor in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 CDOs. But Suskind uses his horrible misinterpretation to paint Geithner as naïve and in denial about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 depth of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 problems in subprime MBSs and CDOs. (“Silly Geithner, he thought it was just a confidence problem!”) There’s a mistake like this on practically every page of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 book (his misinterpretation of a memo by UBS’s Robert Wolf is classic in its utter wrongness too), and it all contributes to a narrative that, at cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 end of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 day, is simply false.

Suskind’s Ignorance of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Difference Between Creditors and Equity Holders

Finally, in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 chapter on Geithner’s alleged refusal to resolve Citigroup (which very clearly never happened) Suskind writes:
Geithner, on this point, would not budge. Debt was sacrosanct. No creditor would suffer. Bair was equally intransigent. Secured creditors, such as equity holders, of course, wouldn’t be wiped out, but cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365y had to face consequences for lending money to an institution whose recklessness had led to its demise. They must, she said, “face some discipline.”
Yes, you read that right: Suskind does not know cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 difference between secured creditors and equity holders. He apparently thinks that in a resolution of Citi, equity holders “wouldn’t be wiped out” (“of course,” he says). Again, this is not a trivial mistake — this is enormously important, because cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 entire debate over what to do with Citi revolved around cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 distinction between creditors and equity holders. The FDIC was (allegedly) advocating putting Citi’s commercial bank subsidiary into receivership, which would haircut creditors, whereas Geithner was advocating cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 stress tests, which in a worst-case scenario would lead to cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 government diluting equity holders, but not haircutting creditors.

This demonstrates quite clearly that Suskind lacked cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 knowledge or ability to understand cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 central dispute in his own book — cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 dispute that made headlines all over cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 country. How can Suskind be expected to understand what happened in this dispute if he couldn’t even understand what cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 dispute was about in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 first place?

The answer, obviously, is that Suskind’s account of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 dispute is not credible. (Bolstering that conclusion is cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 fact that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 meeting in which Obama allegedly ordered cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 resolution of Citi has been reported on several times before, and every ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r journalist reported that Obama decided against resolving Citi.)

Anyone who is even remotely familiar with cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial crisis, or financial markets in general, would be able to catch 90% of Suskind’s mistakes/fabrications, so I don’t know how anyone who knows this material could possibly consider Suskind’s book credible. His account of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial reform debate was, if possible, even more riddled with fundamental misunderstandings and mistakes, which renders his telling largely false. I was as close to cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial reform debate as anyone, and Suskind’s account is simply not what happened.

In any event, don’t waste your money.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Do you agree with Weisberg's assertion that Suskind is simply not credible at all and never was in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 first place? The same people that seemed supportive of him back when The Price of Loyality came out are bashing him now, and whatever issues that and ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r works by him about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Bush administration might have had, cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365re are plenty of ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r events to back up cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 impressions left by that book. Is this anything ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r than a case of a broken clock being right twice a day?

On an unrelated note, any thoughts about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Solyndra "scandal"? I use "scandal" in quotation marks because it's not clear this was anything ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r than a case of stupidity and poor judgement. If that's cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 case, it's hardly a rousing defense, but it doesn't mean anything unethical let alone illegal was done. I'd also be curious to hear your thoughts, if you have any, on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 role of government in such loans.

Anonymous said...

So how about a post on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 actual workings of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial reform debate. St Suskind straight and whatnot.

Anonymous said...

oooh this whole time I thought cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Con Men title was a meta joke of how he was conning you into buying his crappy book...

Anon at 7:28 I have found that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365re are a wide range of commentors who are well educated on Finance that read this blog... but unfortunately your question about financial reform is too vague even for an entire blog to focus on.

is cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365re something in particular you are looking to have answered?

Anonymous said...

Furcá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r to Brian J's comment, nobody who has ever claimed to be part of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 "Reality-Based Community" (a phrased from a quotation that is similarly clearly a Suskind fakery) has any standing to complain about Suskind's fakery in this book. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of what actually happened during cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Bush Administration (I realize that this omits most of those who used cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 phrase "Reality-Based Community") knew that Suskind's prior books were complete fakes and thus were forewarned about this fake. For those people, what goes around comes around.

(Nb, I'm not claiming that this blog's author is one of those people. Just noting cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 schadenfreude.)

Anonymous said...

In response to Anonymous from above:

Like I said, perhaps whatever was accurate in The Price of Loyalty was nothing more than a case of a broken clock being right twice a day. It's been a while since I've read and thought about that book, but nothing that has happened before it after its release has convinced me (or anyone else, I bet) that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 previous administration was anything but shady and incompetent at best. In ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r words, it makes sense that people were tricked, to whatever extent cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365y were in fact tricked, because Suskind's book seemed like more of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 same. Whatever your problems with Obama (aside from sharp and perhaps irreconcilable ideological differences), nobody credible is arguing that it's hopelessly inept and corrupt.

RebelEconomist said...

You have convinced me that it is a poor book but, if I may, a couple of criticisms of your critique.

(1) I know that it is hard for Anglo Saxons to remember, but interest rate CUTS are not supposed to be cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 primary monetary policy tool. It would be better to say "changes"; in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365ory at least, cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Fed might want to raise interest rates one day!

(2) Although I am sure that Geithner knows about repo now, I could believe that his understanding was hazy in August 2007. First, at that time, policymakers tended to regard monetary policy implementation as something that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365y could leave to cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 technicians, like a driver leaves fixing his car to a mechanic. Second, before cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial crisis, compared with ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r central banks cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Fed used relatively little repo, for fine tuning purposes only, with treasuries across cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 curve acquired by coupon passes providing cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 mainstay of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Fed's monetary assets (which I contend contributed to cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial crisis: http://reservedplace.blogspot.com/2008/01/us-economic-policy-shot-in-foot-1-soma.html ). In fact, even cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Fed's own terminology for repos is somewhat confusing, with Fed lending described by cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365m as "repo", and Fed borrowing described now as "reverse repo" and formerly as "matched sales-purchases".

Anonymous said...

Your criticism is well taken. However, it does not take away from cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 broader fact that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 book highlights - that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 fight to right cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 country's economic mess was lost cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 day Summers, Geithner, Bernanke et al were hired (or re hired) instead of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 A-team (Volcker et al). People who are in power when cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 problem festers or worse cause cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 problem - Geithner Bernanke or are sympacá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365tic to cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 insiders (banks) will not solve cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 problem. And that is exactly what we got. INstead of cleaning house, Obama got a bunch of insiders or megalomaniacs who refuse to see cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 true underlying causes of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 problem and hence are applying band aid after band instead of implementing real solutions. This needs to be said.

Anonymous said...

Suskind has a long history of questionable journalism - he claims stuff is on tape but never plays it. Remember when he claimed he had been arrested by cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Secret Service before his last book came out?

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/latest-obama-lame-excuse-my-staff-was-insubordinate.html#comment-469760

Star said...

Readable and helpful blog, even for those outside cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial business (like me). I'd like your opinion on a trader's TV interview, please: http://www.wimp.com/economicsituation/. Thanks!

Star said...

here's cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 link, again, which didn't appear in its entirety in my post:
http://www.wimp.com/
economicsituation/

JustAJoe said...

Good article, thanks

Anonymous said...

Star -

From everything I have heard that interview was a complete and utter fake and cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 guy is a paid actor who is not a trader. There is no way to verify this of course but its one of those what makes more sense.

IF he was a trader, I can promise you he already boxed up his office and took everything home and will never work for anocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r bank again.

The Owl said...

You seem to be one of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 people who believe that only financiers can understand finance. This would lead to only letting people who earn money from finance advise presidents on financial regulation/bailout. I'd trust Suskind more than you. Of course, he will make some errors, as he's not a specialist. But his errors do not lead him to large conceptual mistakes. He has got cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 larger concept (cutting back Wall Street's influence on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 president is in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 best interest of society) perfectly. God bless him.

Anonymous said...

Your comments about Suskind on Countrywide's repo problems are hard to square with cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Fed's comments (quoted on p.249 of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission report): "The ability of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 company to use [mortgage] securities as collateral in [repo transactions] is consequently uncertain in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 current market environment"

Anonymous said...

First, I wonder if you were confused by what Suskind wrote about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Countrywide example? It was clear to me that his point was that Countrywide couldn't roll its repos even with treasuries as collateral.

But cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 most eye-opening truth to me in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 book was that Obama traded in what seemed to have been a pre-election team focused on reregulation for a post-election team RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISMANTLING OF GLASS-STEAGALL IN THE FIRST PLACE. I'll admit that Summers and Geithner weren't household names in my house, nor did I know much about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial reform debate that took place, but everything I've read since cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 financial collapse tells me that most derivatives are nothing more than bets between people with no interest in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 underlying securities, and that those kinds of transactions shouldn't take place on cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 same basis as buying and selling of equities. (Actually, I've know this since 2001 when I read my first mutual fund prospectus and voted against including derivatives in that fund, but never realized how much of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 market had invested in cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365m.) I had HOPED that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Obama administration would see this cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 same way, and enact laws to protect investors like me.

If nothing else, cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 book should be a wakeup call to small investors that cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365y need to pay more attention and demand finanial reform. The financial markets are not a private poker game between Wall Street Math Whizzes - its where millions of Americans have been forced to save for retirement. Heaven forbid anyone has cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 bright idea to bet our Social Security accounts cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365re too.

Star said...

Dear Anonymous, thank you for cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 heads-up about cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 trader "interview," it was very kind of you to respond...I'm outside cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 U.S., so it's hard to know. Best regards.

Anonymous said...

Also being a lawyer, with far deeper and broader experience than you, and being very pro Obama at cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 start of his administration, I could not disagree more with your take on Confidence Men.

Obama is a failed leader. Suskind does his best to explain way and offers very substantial insights into what happened.

Your critisims show, to me, incentive bias on your part. For example, you misstate entirely cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 point Suskind makes about repos to defend Geitner and Summers. Suskind wasn't writing about bank repos with ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r banks or cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 fed. Suskind was writing about repos by companies like GE.

Some of us saw cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365se events coming. In cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 summer of 2008, Summers was running around pushing for a high job. I was writing to cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Financial Times with cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 message don't let this guy within a mile of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 White House and ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365rs were as well.

Anonymous said...

His ocá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365r book: The Way of cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 World was worse. A 400 page bomb, with cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 last chapter having a grain of insight into cá cược thể thao bet365_cách nạp tiền vào bet365_ đăng ký bet365 Bush adm. march to war. This guy should be avoided at all cost.