Monetary-policy

Unsurprisingly, my view is that the truth is halfway between these two positions. In my opinion, it is critically important for any reader of this book to read and understand the "Austrian" economic school's position on central banking. There is not space to go into the relevant conclusions - just read Rothbard's "The case against the Fed", "What has the government done to our money?", and von Mises "The theory of money and credit", and you will have a good idea.

Almost all Griffin's points against the Fed are contained in the works listed above.

The rest of his argument is mixed. Institutions like the IMF and World Bank, supposedly created to help cure poverty and world financial instability, are almost certainly disastrous for poor people and the world economy (I say this as a pro-free trade free-marketeer btw). Wars create great opportunities for financially literate speculators, and for governments to benefit at the expense of the common man, from harmful inflation and debt issuance. This does not mean, as Griffin claims, that such crises were created deliberately for this reason.

Furthermore, Griffin makes some entirely speculative claims about the UN and world banking system, implying that it is all part of some grand Fabian scheme to take over the world. Now this may have been the secret fantasy of Sidney Webb, George Bernard Shaw and J.M. Keynes a long time ago, but I suspect he is pushing things a bit far. Here I think Mr Griffin has been unable to realise the change in the last 10 years towards inflation targeting and central bank independence. Central banking is still a force for destruction and destabilisation, but not the same corrupt political tool that it was in decades past.

However, enough of the bashing. Griffin presents a 200 year+ history of the arguments and experiments for and against central banking and sound money (meaning a money supply that is not artificially increased - or decreased - each year). At times his historical accounts enter the realm of genius - I have never read an account as enthralling and informative as Griffin's description of the war between Nicholas Bidden and Andrew Jackson for whether or not the nascent American Republic should have a central bank. Sections like this will give you a truly new appreciation for history, and for the intelligence and conviction of many of our ancestors. In fact, I would argue that in monetary terms at least, we in the US and UK have seriously regressed since the 19th century (the Germans and Swiss would agree - at least until the 90s when they abandoned their own monetary discipline which had ensured their prosperity for so long.)

There are many such eras that Griffin covers with a masterly touch. His explanation of the monetary game of poker played by Bank of England governor Montagu Norman and Fed Chairman Strong in the 20s will give you an entirely fresh perspective on the 1929 crash and subsequent depression (including the superb anecdote from an average Englishman who met Norman incognito on a transatlantic steamer - he was asked not to mention anything, and in return told "get out of stocks if you can - there is a great disaster coming" - this being early 1929).

My conclusion is that this book is brilliant but flawed. Griffin is an incredible researcher (the footnotes are possibly the most rigorous and comprehensive of any book I have read - he puts most full time academics to shame), and his ability to explain difficult concepts of esoteric high finance in layman's terms is awe-inspiring. But he simply cannot resist filling the entire work with his political views (he's a self-confessed John Bircher after all). Furthermore, I feel that he is viewing today's central banking/international finance system as if it were virtually the same as 20, 50, 100 years ago. All in all though, the average layman or even intelligent financial/Wall Street person will learn and incredible amount from this book. It is an essential purchase.

This book should be required reading. And by all means do your own research.

Topics covered: founding of the Federal Reserve, war mongering, bail-outs, boom-bust cycles, the J.P.Morgans and Rothschilds of the world, the history of central banking in the United States, and most fascinating: how the money system really works in this country.

Despite its lack of perfection, this book is by far the most relevant and interesting thing I have read about economics in a long time. It is written in terms that anyone can understand, which will immediately rule out the kind of reader who is impressed by a lot of technical jargon that supposedly demonstrates an author's mastery of the subject while only serving to confuse laymen (and experts too). Combined with some of the author's own somewhat odd ideas, that does tend to make the book look less serious. But read it and you will see that the information is there. You can learn a great deal from this book.

So I was very pleasantly surprised when I picked up this book. Blustein does a really impressive job of examining in detail the crisis of 1997-1998 and the role of the IMF. The economics is impeccable and he explains it clearly. And he's tremendously effective at bringing to life the "drama" of the crisis and the very difficult decisions that policy-makers face during a crisis like this one.

I also appreciated the fact that, while being quite critical of the IMF, Blustein is also balanced in his assessment, and careful about avoiding gratuitous "IMF bashing" and about making it clear that there are a lot of very smart people at the IMF who work very hard to do their job well.

This is a great book for anybody who wants to gain a greater understanding of the international financial system and of the role of the IMF. Lively, accurate, never boring, it's one of the best non-technical books about an economic event that I've ever read.

While the book is not hawking a political slant, it is very honest about the fact that the IMF's solutions were at best partly successful. It addresses the very real concern that attempts to bail out countries in crises is really bailing Wall Street investors who took foolish risks with taxpayer money.

For a subject that has little coverage outside of technical studies this is a very good book.

William Greider's book is a good introduction to the system. It's well written, informative and easy, entertaining reading.

Early in the book he asks a question about why it is that during the period leading up to the end of the 19th Century "Money and Monetary Systems" were hot topics in American political life, but today they are really off the radar screen?

That's a good question. Do you know the answer? I'd bet the answer is you, like most Americans probably don't. This book will give you the understanding you owe it to yourself to get. After all, it's your money.

My only criticism (similar to Dale Franks') is that Greider's main grumble, i.e. that the Fed is mainly out to protect Money's interests, is a bit shallow.

It's no doubt true that bankers and plutocrats lobby vigorously for higher interest rates, and that the Fed Chairman depends, at least to a degree, upon their support... But, realistically, how could the world be different? What system could possibly be better than the current compromise? I doubt Greider would seriously maintain that things would be better if the Congress ran the Fed, which would almost directly lead to an unstable currency. It's true that Volcker's medicine was harsh, but are we to imagine that bondholders could have been convinced to accept lower long-term interest rates by moral suasion or government promises?

It's sad that the little guys suffer the most from high interest rates, but don't blame the Fed. Don't blame anyone!

Still, though, with a book this great, Greider earned the right to make a political statement in the midst of what really is a set of difficult technical issues.

Bottom line: One of the best books I have read on investing in the stock market.

The author does a great job of objectively summarizing all the expert advice by some very famous investors. It is obvious Mr. Sincere spent alot of time researching his subject. He is able to convey his ideas without getting technical and boring, one of the problems with other financial books, except for the Fool books.

The section I found most entertaining and helpful was when he wrote about the danger signals and pitfalls to avoid. All in all, well written and one of the better books about the market.