Felice Laverne's Reviews > The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine

The Big Short by Michael   Lewis
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
50404233
's review

it was amazing
bookshelves: cultural-surveys, non-fiction, read-2017, reviewed-on-amazon, full-review

...there's a difference between an old-fashioned financial panic and what had happened on Wall Street in 2008. In an old-fashioned panic, perception creates its own reality: Someone shouts "Fire!" in a crowded theater and the audience crushes each other to death in its rush for the exits. On Wall Street in 2008 the reality finally overwhelmed perceptions: A crowded theater burned down with a lot of people still in their seats. Every major firm on Wall Street was either bankrupt or fatally intertwined with a bankrupt system. The problem wasn't that [they] had been allowed to fail. The problem was that [they] had been allowed to succeed.

I must just have a thing for any work having to do with the "Doomsday Machine" that was our economy at and around the Great Recession. Not only did I thoroughly enjoy this book--and learned a hell of a lot from it as well--but I also would put Carousel Court , a fictional account of the Great Recession, in my top 5 reads of 2016.

There are 2 major reasons for why I'm so enthralled by this phenomenon that occurred in our country and had ripple effects throughout the world economy: 1) When this was happening in 2007 and 2008, I was in college. Just another undergraduate student with big dreams and small money. I didn't notice what was going on, as so many around me didn't, because I was used to living off of Ramen noodles and Red Bull, me and 5 of my friends piling into my sedan to go to parties, then still holding down jobs we hated on top of it all. The struggle was real--and it was normalized at that point in our lives, so, at that time, it didn't occur to me that what was going on around me was not the norm. But now, in retrospect, with the sharpened eyes and heightened cultural awareness I have now, it enthralls me for another reason too (2): because the greed, stupidity and raging capitalism that brought this country to its knees (only for our taxpaying dollars to bail it out and pick it back up again, of course) is what I came to understand that we are widely known for and understood as the world over during my time living overseas. Not the Recession itself, but the mentality that got us there. To see it here, to experience it as close to the inside as I can be, so many years removed, through Michael Lewis' The Big Short is to understand what has become our weakness and our strength (depending on who you ask) and a global caricature of our mores, our values and our very personalities: greed to the point of raging ignorance.

Don't worry, I won't soapbox here unless you ask me to.

The basic idea here stemmed from what we already know of America: it is a land where quite often the rich do get richer while the poor do get poorer, and, because of that, there opened up a market for subprime lending like a yet-undiscovered sea full of plentiful fish just waiting to be pillaged and plundered by Wall Street and the big banks. Not only that, but the big banks functioned like dope boys, essentially, flipping their profits at the buyers' expense, destroying their surroundings as they did so--only, these flips yielded billions upon billions, and the companies lost billions upon billions as well. The system was set up to profit from others' losses: as homeowners went into default, homes were lost and lives derailed, there was always someone else there on the other side of the bet (or swap) to get rich off of their loss by buying and betting on the debts of average Americans.

The subprime market tapped a segment of the American public that did not typically have anything to do with Wall Street: the tranche between the fifth and twenty-ninth percentile in their credit ratings. That is, the lenders were making loans to people who were less creditworthy than 71 percent of the population.

I can't even go into the ratings companies, Moody's and S&P, who should have been policing this, but were instead lining their own pockets by selling AAA ratings for fees and looking the other way. And, I won't even further comment on how the mortgage bond market was born and allowed to grow to the size that the U.S. economy came to depend on its stability, all out of greed and ripping off subprime borrowers. Nope, won't do it--but what I will do is say that anyone who's never read this book, anyone who is still scratching their heads and trying to figure out, "What the hell was that about?" should pick up this book and read it.

Not only was it a phenomenal read--wholly entertaining, comedic even--but it was also very insightful. I guarantee you, love this country though we do, you'll understand the next time you're abroad and you get the side-eye glance from the natives. Our reputations precede us, and this is only one of a million reasons why. An easily earned, happily given 5 stars. *****

FOLLOW ME HERE:

Goodreads | Twitter | Instagram | Get a Copy of My Book | Book Editing, Author Coaching, Submit Your Book to Me
105 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Big Short.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

December 21, 2016 – Shelved
December 21, 2016 – Shelved as: to-read
April 14, 2017 – Started Reading
April 23, 2017 – Finished Reading
April 24, 2017 – Shelved as: cultural-surveys
April 24, 2017 – Shelved as: non-fiction
April 24, 2017 – Shelved as: read-2017
April 24, 2017 – Shelved as: reviewed-on-amazon
May 1, 2017 – Shelved as: full-review

Comments Showing 1-17 of 17 (17 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Sharon (new)

Sharon Wonderful review Navidad. Dunno if my blood pressure can take this book. :)


message 2: by Michael (new)

Michael Very illuminating review, and entertaining too (it's hard to enjoy Ramen meals these days). Such a house of cards. It's odd to say I enjoyed the movie which was somehow made from the nonfiction book you extol. That Burry real-life character (Christian Bale in the film) who risked and won zillions by shorting the housing market came to resemble the role of wolves and other predators in an ecology. Maybe if he'd been around with shorts earlier in the bubble, ,aybe the landing would be softer. I'm still underwater with my mortgage, first home bought as the bubble was popping.


Felice Laverne Michael wrote: "Very illuminating review, and entertaining too (it's hard to enjoy Ramen meals these days). Such a house of cards. It's odd to say I enjoyed the movie which was somehow made from the nonfiction boo..."

Wow, Michael, that's crazy. The "bubble" definitely had long-lasting effects that people are still feeling today.

@Sharon Thank you!


message 4: by Steven (last edited Oct 04, 2017 05:26AM) (new)

Steven  Godin Interesting review Navidad, loved the film so will have to read this.


Felice Laverne Steven wrote: "Interesting review Navidad, loved the film so will have to read this."

Thanks Steven! I learned while living in Paris that our system is so different from the French system. Living there is the first time I realized how "American" my ideals were, and reading this was a great exploration of those ideals and mores Americans harbor.


message 6: by Ashley (new) - added it

Ashley Great review, Navidad!


Felice Laverne Ashley wrote: "Great review, Navidad!"


Thanks, Ashley!


message 8: by Zak (new) - rated it 5 stars

Zak Nice review, Navidad, though I do have one question... what do you mean by "ripping off subprime borrowers"?


message 9: by Felice (last edited Oct 04, 2017 07:42AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Felice Laverne Zak wrote: "Nice review, Navidad, though I do have one question... what do you mean by "ripping off subprime borrowers"?"

Their intention with subprime borrowers, aside from getting their hands on a larger pool of people to loan to because they were running out of people with enough credit/income to lend to, was to give borrowers the teaser rates to start off with (typically they lasted for 2 years). Then, the banks assumed that people would simply refinance their loans once the teaser rates expired and their APRs shot through the roof. This worked in the banks' favor--if people were to refinance their loans, they'd have to pay the bank fees for doing so (thus the bank was making additional money off of loans they'd already made, and on top of the interest they were already collecting, and they were doing this by design). Somehow, they didn't anticipate that the market would stall and that refinancing wouldn't be possible for these people who'd gotten loans on shaky credit in the first place. So, the result was people were stuck under loans they couldn't afford that were sold to them under false pretenses (and with the understanding that these people wouldn't read or understand the fine print before signing). Millions of people lost homes, jobs, money, etc. because of bank greed. Banks knew this could happen (though they thought it highly unlikely) and did it anyway.


message 10: by Zak (new) - rated it 5 stars

Zak Thanks for your detailed explanation. The flip side of this is people were buying homes they couldn't afford and taking loans they knew they couldn't repay (many even had multiple homes and the attendant mortgages) simply because property prices had been rising strongly and they thought as long as it kept rising they could keep refinancing and make more money with more properties and so on. Of course, property prices didn't keep rising forever and we now know the end result. Both banks and borrowers had a part in the debacle and let greed take precedence over common sense. I believe to blame it all on one side is to forego lessons to be learned on the other side.


Felice Laverne Zak wrote: "Thanks for your detailed explanation. The flip side of this is people were buying homes they couldn't afford and taking loans they knew they couldn't repay (many even had multiple homes and the att..."

I completely agree with that. It was never my intention to say that borrowers weren't taking advantage of the stupidity and greed of the banks as well. However, the lending institutions set the guidelines, the precedent and the rules. Under no circumstances should you believe that if you hold a dollar out to a child, they won't try to grab it, just like you shouldn't believe that if you tell a poor, immigrant strawberry picker they can have a $700,000 house by just signing "here" that they won't take it. The banks and lenders are the "adults" in this scenario. To hold that dollar out for their own personal greed is wrong. To break and bend their own lending rules--and the law--to try to squeeze out more money is wrong. Uh, to ignore their own advisers who are telling them that imminent doom is a real possibility to try to get more money is wrong (and stupid). Period. And then to come to the government with their hands out for money to fix their "boo boo" (while still giving the CEOs of these companies millions of dollars to get pushed out of the company, no less) is offensive in its audacity. Period.


message 12: by R.K. (new)

R.K. Gold was it better than the movie?


message 13: by Zak (new) - rated it 5 stars

Zak I take your point completely about greedy banks and CEO's. To this day I'm still pissed that none of the rating agencies were shut down or their executives prosecuted. But to say that irresponsible borrowers are like "children" who were ripped off just doesn't cut it with me. These are adults who could and did own homes, cars, etc. In many cases, mortgages were refinanced and the extra equity used to buy consumables like cars, flat screen tv's, etc. There were other good, responsible people who bought homes at the peak but due to bad timing, their mortgages became underwater. But the key difference is they borrowed within their means, still continue to service their loans and are therefore not part of the problem. On the other hand, the ones who borrowed, speculated recklessly and defaulted on their loans ARE part of the problem. People will never learn if they are able to absolve themselves of all responsibility by playing the victim card and claiming they were ripped off by banks giving them loans "under false pretences". Nobody put a gun to their heads and said "take this or else...".


Felice Laverne R.K. wrote: "was it better than the movie?"

I'd say that this is one case where I'm actually glad that I saw the movie first. That's a rarity, but I felt it made everything easier to grasp.


message 15: by Felice (last edited Oct 04, 2017 11:27AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Felice Laverne Zak wrote: "I take your point completely about greedy banks and CEO's. To this day I'm still pissed that none of the rating agencies were shut down or their executives prosecuted. But to say that irresponsible..."

Again, I agree with that point. However, it seems like the point that we will agree to disagree on is that banks DO set the rules and the banks DID bend and break and loophole their own rules for profit to the detriment of our society and economy. You give someone a little leash and they'll run crazy with it; that's true that that's what consumers did. But so did the banks. Do I want to invest my money with banks that will be so reckless with it? The answer is no. And, those people who were responsible with their borrowing and consumer practices still suffered because the banks bent and broke their own rules. Cause and effect. Those rules had to be bent, broken and loopholed before consumers could run a muck, which means that banks are ultimately responsible for even the good people who suffered.


message 16: by Jay (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jay Pruitt great review!


Felice Laverne Thanks, Jay!


back to top