What do you think?
Rate this book
Finance and the Good Society
Nobel Prize-winning economist explains why we need to reclaim finance for the common good
The reputation of the financial industry could hardly be worse than it is today in the painful aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. New York Times best-selling economist Robert Shiller is no apologist for the sins of finance―he is probably the only person to have predicted both the stock market bubble of 2000 and the real estate bubble that led up to the subprime mortgage meltdown. But in this important and timely book, Shiller argues that, rather than condemning finance, we need to reclaim it for the common good. He makes a powerful case for recognizing that finance, far from being a parasite on society, is one of the most powerful tools we have for solving our common problems and increasing the general well-being. We need more financial innovation―not less―and finance should play a larger role in helping society achieve its goals.
Challenging the public and its leaders to rethink finance and its role in society, Shiller argues that finance should be defined not merely as the manipulation of money or the management of risk but as the stewardship of society's assets. He explains how people in financial careers―from CEO, investment manager, and banker to insurer, lawyer, and regulator―can and do manage, protect, and increase these assets. He describes how finance has historically contributed to the good of society through inventions such as insurance, mortgages, savings accounts, and pensions, and argues that we need to envision new ways to rechannel financial creativity to benefit society as a whole.
Ultimately, Shiller shows how society can once again harness the power of finance for the greater good.
The reputation of the financial industry could hardly be worse than it is today in the painful aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. New York Times best-selling economist Robert Shiller is no apologist for the sins of finance―he is probably the only person to have predicted both the stock market bubble of 2000 and the real estate bubble that led up to the subprime mortgage meltdown. But in this important and timely book, Shiller argues that, rather than condemning finance, we need to reclaim it for the common good. He makes a powerful case for recognizing that finance, far from being a parasite on society, is one of the most powerful tools we have for solving our common problems and increasing the general well-being. We need more financial innovation―not less―and finance should play a larger role in helping society achieve its goals.
Challenging the public and its leaders to rethink finance and its role in society, Shiller argues that finance should be defined not merely as the manipulation of money or the management of risk but as the stewardship of society's assets. He explains how people in financial careers―from CEO, investment manager, and banker to insurer, lawyer, and regulator―can and do manage, protect, and increase these assets. He describes how finance has historically contributed to the good of society through inventions such as insurance, mortgages, savings accounts, and pensions, and argues that we need to envision new ways to rechannel financial creativity to benefit society as a whole.
Ultimately, Shiller shows how society can once again harness the power of finance for the greater good.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published March 20, 2012
131 people are currently reading
2109 people want to read
About the author
Robert J. Shiller
51 books802 followersRobert James "Bob" Shiller (born Detroit, Michigan, March 29, 1946) is an American economist, academic, and best-selling author. He currently serves as the Arthur M. Okun Professor of Economics at Yale University and is a Fellow at the Yale International Center for Finance, Yale School of Management. Shiller has been a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) since 1980, was Vice President of the American Economic Association in 2005, and President of the Eastern Economic Association for 2006-2007. He is also the co-founder and chief economist of the investment management firm MacroMarkets LLC.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews
July 13, 2016
I think this book succeeds in about half its aims.
First the failures: It is incredibly naive. When describing government, or lobbyist action it basically ignores the findings of public choice theory. It treats them as publicly minded angels. It also is an utmost defense of the status quo. The book's premise is that the current political/economic arrangement of the world is basically functional and good. We just need to tweak it here and there with minor neoliberal or progressive reforms (the range of debate is bounded by Friedman and Krugman). I find all of this highly untenable.
But its still a great book! The first half is a crash course on all the major roles which govern the world's financial markets. He literally goes through and explains what an investment banker does, what an insurer does, what a mortgage lender/securitizer does, and why they are important to a well functioning financial market. That in and of itself was highly educational, but it did drag on a bit. Its a bit like a reference source. Part 2 is where I really started reading quickly because it grabbed my attention. There he talks about things like how financial markets react to human psychology (Hes really into the Keynesian "animal spirits" thing), the psychology of traders, some financial history, how derivatives work, how bubbles work, the problems caused by inequality of wealth generated by financial markets, etc etc. Its the meat of the book. This is where the core theme of finance as a tool of social welfare comes out strongest as well.
A constant tension in the book is the acknowledged sleaziness and criminality of some within the financial industry, as well as its systematic inefficiencies and defects-- and the fact that when financial markets do work properly they make the economy run more smoothly and improve the life of the common man (The Good Society). A lot of the book is preoccupied with showing minor flaws in the financial industry (uninteresting to me because he severely minimizes these problems), and showing minor reforms or tweaks to the financial industry (not just state regulations, but also entrepreneurial ideas) which could be done to improve outcomes for everyone (very interesting to me because if you are creative you can extrapolate a lot more radical and extensive changes from the minor ones he suggests).
Its partly a vindication of the status quo-- there it fails.
Its partly a 101 on financial markets, and a treatise on why they are important for a flourishing, equitable civilization--- there it succeeds. And since this is a much more important, attractive, and prominent aspect of the book, it gets 4 stars.
Would browse again for specific chapters. This stuff can be really confusing. Mortgage securities and derivatives in particular.
First the failures: It is incredibly naive. When describing government, or lobbyist action it basically ignores the findings of public choice theory. It treats them as publicly minded angels. It also is an utmost defense of the status quo. The book's premise is that the current political/economic arrangement of the world is basically functional and good. We just need to tweak it here and there with minor neoliberal or progressive reforms (the range of debate is bounded by Friedman and Krugman). I find all of this highly untenable.
But its still a great book! The first half is a crash course on all the major roles which govern the world's financial markets. He literally goes through and explains what an investment banker does, what an insurer does, what a mortgage lender/securitizer does, and why they are important to a well functioning financial market. That in and of itself was highly educational, but it did drag on a bit. Its a bit like a reference source. Part 2 is where I really started reading quickly because it grabbed my attention. There he talks about things like how financial markets react to human psychology (Hes really into the Keynesian "animal spirits" thing), the psychology of traders, some financial history, how derivatives work, how bubbles work, the problems caused by inequality of wealth generated by financial markets, etc etc. Its the meat of the book. This is where the core theme of finance as a tool of social welfare comes out strongest as well.
A constant tension in the book is the acknowledged sleaziness and criminality of some within the financial industry, as well as its systematic inefficiencies and defects-- and the fact that when financial markets do work properly they make the economy run more smoothly and improve the life of the common man (The Good Society). A lot of the book is preoccupied with showing minor flaws in the financial industry (uninteresting to me because he severely minimizes these problems), and showing minor reforms or tweaks to the financial industry (not just state regulations, but also entrepreneurial ideas) which could be done to improve outcomes for everyone (very interesting to me because if you are creative you can extrapolate a lot more radical and extensive changes from the minor ones he suggests).
Its partly a vindication of the status quo-- there it fails.
Its partly a 101 on financial markets, and a treatise on why they are important for a flourishing, equitable civilization--- there it succeeds. And since this is a much more important, attractive, and prominent aspect of the book, it gets 4 stars.
Would browse again for specific chapters. This stuff can be really confusing. Mortgage securities and derivatives in particular.
June 1, 2012
Robert Shiller is a genius and I love his thesis that finance is basically goal engineering. However, this book was simply a collection of book-report type essays that lacked cohesion and vision. Save yourself time a read his graduation speech to Yake finance grads instead.
February 21, 2019
Эта книга -- просто разрозненная коллекция банальных (а иногда и спорных) мнений автора о современной финансовой системе. Больше похоже на неудачную попытку политической апологетики.
Так, у Р. Шиллера, социальное неравенство частично можно объяснить тем, что кто-то более склонен к риску, и потому заслуживает большего вознаграждения.
А страх перед финансовыми инновациями, по мнению автора, иррационален, и только мешает движению к "идеальному обществу" (как необычно встречать такое понятие в книге 2014-го года!). Я не хочу сказать, что я совершенно консервативен по части финансов, но игнорировать печально известные алхимические опыты в этой сфере просто невозможно.
В 1990-е годы эта книга, может, и выстрелила бы. Но не сегодня. А сегодня нужно читать более критически настроенных авторов, коих стало в последние годы очень много.
Так, у Р. Шиллера, социальное неравенство частично можно объяснить тем, что кто-то более склонен к риску, и потому заслуживает большего вознаграждения.
А страх перед финансовыми инновациями, по мнению автора, иррационален, и только мешает движению к "идеальному обществу" (как необычно встречать такое понятие в книге 2014-го года!). Я не хочу сказать, что я совершенно консервативен по части финансов, но игнорировать печально известные алхимические опыты в этой сфере просто невозможно.
В 1990-е годы эта книга, может, и выстрелила бы. Но не сегодня. А сегодня нужно читать более критически настроенных авторов, коих стало в последние годы очень много.
September 16, 2016
Shiller is able to write about complex topics in a fluid and accessible manner, and the book is organized in a way that complements that style. For that, I'll give it a 2.
However, I found the book very grating because of its rather Panglossian view of financial capitalism. Finance, Shiller argues, is, has been, and can be a force for good in the world (as long as a few tweaks are made) and should be expanded into new realms. He attributes good faith far too often where there is none, underplays the significance of the revolving door, and fails to sufficiently address the relationship between finance and power. He never convincingly makes the case for a lot of unstated premises or priors to his argument, and there's an unpleasant elitism and anti-egalitarianism running through it, such as when he treats social insurance and a living wage somewhat dismissively. Although some of his ideas about "democratizing" finance are good, there's an anti-democratic sentiment in other policies offered--and in his views on philanthropy as a sufficient corrective and one in which there are no apparent problems with people of such great wealth exerting control over social priorities.
However, I found the book very grating because of its rather Panglossian view of financial capitalism. Finance, Shiller argues, is, has been, and can be a force for good in the world (as long as a few tweaks are made) and should be expanded into new realms. He attributes good faith far too often where there is none, underplays the significance of the revolving door, and fails to sufficiently address the relationship between finance and power. He never convincingly makes the case for a lot of unstated premises or priors to his argument, and there's an unpleasant elitism and anti-egalitarianism running through it, such as when he treats social insurance and a living wage somewhat dismissively. Although some of his ideas about "democratizing" finance are good, there's an anti-democratic sentiment in other policies offered--and in his views on philanthropy as a sufficient corrective and one in which there are no apparent problems with people of such great wealth exerting control over social priorities.
January 22, 2020
Market-based economies, aided by innovative financial tools, have provided opportunities for widespread, if not total, employment, scientific and technological advances, a better quality of life, and, in the best of circumstances, a chance to more people to become educated and prosper. History teaches that these markets are subject to dysfunctions and that regulation and oversight may be needed to ensure appropriate functioning.
Before 1853, runners from each of the New York City banks, throughout each business day, delivered the originals of bank notes, currency, drafts, securities, and drafts related to any transactions the banks were involved in with each other. Later still, when the accountants received those documents and the securities were properly accounted for, the banks squared their books with each other, a time-consuming process subject to theft and error. But in 1853, that changed when 54 of the New York City Banks gathered each business day in a large room around a circular table with 54 chairs occuried by a representative of each of those banks at a designated time every day. A representative of each bank, at a designated time, stood up and placed before any of the remaining 53 places those documents, securities, and drafts reflecting the bank business the delivering bank representative had with any of the other 53. That process consumed about 6 minutes, and all the preliminary bank business required to allow all banks to square their books was concluded quickly and promptly, the first and, after the creation of the stock and insurance exchanges, perhaps the most important financial innovation in information technology was completed.
People flourish and markets flourish when the opportunity to borrow, to buy and sell, and to ascertain prices through information these markets throw off every time a transaction occurs is made available to the broadest number of people and businesses. Shiller reminds us that so much of financial innovation--and the products that evolve from that innovation--have allowed ordinary people to own houses and stocks, to open and operate businesses, to take risks we might not feel financially secure enough to take if financial markets and its products were not available and functioning. In the end, it is to be hoped that values that are kind to everyone are promoted through these markets, making opportunity available to anyone seeking it.
In one very carefully thought out place in the book, Shiller identifies the four components of a market bubble that should help us detect extraordinary speculation from "brain bugs" in moments of "irrational exuberance:
1. ANCHORING. The tendency to be influenced by extraneous cues when circumstances are ambiguous.
2. STORYTELLING. A tendency to be influenced by human interest stories.
3. OVERCONFIDENCE. Extreme confidence when called upon to make judgments that involve the ego.
4. NONCONSEQUENTIALIST REASONING. The difficulty of thinking through the array of the many hypothetical results and events that could occur in the future.
5. SOCIAL INFLUENCE. A tendency to adopt the attitudes of others around us without realizing we are doing so.
And, making decisions accordingly. One sees immediately the feedback loop established that makes it extraordinarily difficult to think in or oppose the terms dictated by the crowd, or herd's, decisions. Eugene Fama, a Nobel Prize economist himself, once defended his efficient markets theory, remarking that he didn't believe such speculative bubbles existed, that indeed he "didn't know what a bubble is". I suppose if Fama knew what a bubble was, or even acknowledged the existence of it, the efficiency of the markets would be called into question and the presumption that all known information about a company or commodity is contained in the price of the firm's stock would be nullified. Shiller has no such problem with such bubbles and discusses them with ease and knowledge in a section of the book that makes the entire reading of the book worthwhile. He even reminds us of the research that questioned "efficient markets" unless someone defined as a constant the meaning of "efficient" (Fisher Black, one of the authors of the Black-Scholes option pricing theory which suggested that the stock price of any individual company is somewhere between 1/2 and 2 times its actual value "almost all of the time", making the market price of any company's stock unexplainable in economic or business terms at any given time).
Shiller points out the beauty of insurance and accounting as those tools that assist us in accepting and employing risk, and the need for regulation. But, he has a blind spot when he says that regulators as much as those lawyers and accountants from prestigious firms are smart, competent, aggressive, and sincere in their regulation of financial products and the exchanges that facilitate transactions. What he doesn't perceive, indeed cannot perceive because he has never worked within the system, is that regulatory institutions, those that are governmental (e.g. the SEC) and those that are private (e.g. NASD) often are inoculated with an institutional lethargy or institutional caution that resist them acting or reacting to new information. Unfortunately, he uses the example of Harry Markopolos' presenting his research of Bernard Madoff's activities to the SEC before Madoff's massive fraud was revealed by Madoff himself as an excusable oversight. My opinion, based on my having worked for 8 years in a regulatory environment and spending another 30 years representing people before regulatory bodies, is that they go for these agencies go for low hanging fruit or wait to be informed of a problem before they act. Even being informed often doesn't help. There may be an institutional attitude that, in a given matter, the resistance would be too intense, too expensive to push ahead, maybe even too complicated. My suggestion to Professor Shiller is that he is simply wrong in his conclusion and those regulated probably increase the level of their risk-taking with the knowledge that they may or may not, most likely will not be called to account for it. His oversight is good-natured because he obviously is a good-natured and optimistic man with a very big brain and big achievements behind him.
Before 1853, runners from each of the New York City banks, throughout each business day, delivered the originals of bank notes, currency, drafts, securities, and drafts related to any transactions the banks were involved in with each other. Later still, when the accountants received those documents and the securities were properly accounted for, the banks squared their books with each other, a time-consuming process subject to theft and error. But in 1853, that changed when 54 of the New York City Banks gathered each business day in a large room around a circular table with 54 chairs occuried by a representative of each of those banks at a designated time every day. A representative of each bank, at a designated time, stood up and placed before any of the remaining 53 places those documents, securities, and drafts reflecting the bank business the delivering bank representative had with any of the other 53. That process consumed about 6 minutes, and all the preliminary bank business required to allow all banks to square their books was concluded quickly and promptly, the first and, after the creation of the stock and insurance exchanges, perhaps the most important financial innovation in information technology was completed.
People flourish and markets flourish when the opportunity to borrow, to buy and sell, and to ascertain prices through information these markets throw off every time a transaction occurs is made available to the broadest number of people and businesses. Shiller reminds us that so much of financial innovation--and the products that evolve from that innovation--have allowed ordinary people to own houses and stocks, to open and operate businesses, to take risks we might not feel financially secure enough to take if financial markets and its products were not available and functioning. In the end, it is to be hoped that values that are kind to everyone are promoted through these markets, making opportunity available to anyone seeking it.
In one very carefully thought out place in the book, Shiller identifies the four components of a market bubble that should help us detect extraordinary speculation from "brain bugs" in moments of "irrational exuberance:
1. ANCHORING. The tendency to be influenced by extraneous cues when circumstances are ambiguous.
2. STORYTELLING. A tendency to be influenced by human interest stories.
3. OVERCONFIDENCE. Extreme confidence when called upon to make judgments that involve the ego.
4. NONCONSEQUENTIALIST REASONING. The difficulty of thinking through the array of the many hypothetical results and events that could occur in the future.
5. SOCIAL INFLUENCE. A tendency to adopt the attitudes of others around us without realizing we are doing so.
And, making decisions accordingly. One sees immediately the feedback loop established that makes it extraordinarily difficult to think in or oppose the terms dictated by the crowd, or herd's, decisions. Eugene Fama, a Nobel Prize economist himself, once defended his efficient markets theory, remarking that he didn't believe such speculative bubbles existed, that indeed he "didn't know what a bubble is". I suppose if Fama knew what a bubble was, or even acknowledged the existence of it, the efficiency of the markets would be called into question and the presumption that all known information about a company or commodity is contained in the price of the firm's stock would be nullified. Shiller has no such problem with such bubbles and discusses them with ease and knowledge in a section of the book that makes the entire reading of the book worthwhile. He even reminds us of the research that questioned "efficient markets" unless someone defined as a constant the meaning of "efficient" (Fisher Black, one of the authors of the Black-Scholes option pricing theory which suggested that the stock price of any individual company is somewhere between 1/2 and 2 times its actual value "almost all of the time", making the market price of any company's stock unexplainable in economic or business terms at any given time).
Shiller points out the beauty of insurance and accounting as those tools that assist us in accepting and employing risk, and the need for regulation. But, he has a blind spot when he says that regulators as much as those lawyers and accountants from prestigious firms are smart, competent, aggressive, and sincere in their regulation of financial products and the exchanges that facilitate transactions. What he doesn't perceive, indeed cannot perceive because he has never worked within the system, is that regulatory institutions, those that are governmental (e.g. the SEC) and those that are private (e.g. NASD) often are inoculated with an institutional lethargy or institutional caution that resist them acting or reacting to new information. Unfortunately, he uses the example of Harry Markopolos' presenting his research of Bernard Madoff's activities to the SEC before Madoff's massive fraud was revealed by Madoff himself as an excusable oversight. My opinion, based on my having worked for 8 years in a regulatory environment and spending another 30 years representing people before regulatory bodies, is that they go for these agencies go for low hanging fruit or wait to be informed of a problem before they act. Even being informed often doesn't help. There may be an institutional attitude that, in a given matter, the resistance would be too intense, too expensive to push ahead, maybe even too complicated. My suggestion to Professor Shiller is that he is simply wrong in his conclusion and those regulated probably increase the level of their risk-taking with the knowledge that they may or may not, most likely will not be called to account for it. His oversight is good-natured because he obviously is a good-natured and optimistic man with a very big brain and big achievements behind him.
January 1, 2023
This is a good book to get a reasonable view as to what finance does and should do for society. It takes for granted that financial capitalism defines the society we live in, fine. However, in its defense of this arrangement, it does not really take seriously anything but the most superficial criticisms. It also tends to accept uncritically the claimed motives of elites in a way that seems jarringly naive.
July 29, 2025
It's a pretty good book, written casually for everyone to understand. Shiller is quite funny and explains the basic principles very well. But fuck me this was boring as I knew most of the stuff. ALSO it’s absolutely pro capitalism. Like boots licking pro capitalism to the point it was cringe.
July 12, 2013
By Edward Hadas
Financial repression is the theme of the moment, and that’s a slap in the face for Robert J. Shiller, who thinks investors should be protected, not exploited. The possible UK government 100-year fixed coupon bond, which would be issued at an artificially low rate, is almost the antithesis of everything Shiller believes in.
Shiller the stock market commentator is much loved. But Shiller as advocate of financial justice? That’s another matter. Unfortunately, his latest book is unlikely to change many minds at the UK’s Debt Management Office either. That’s a shame, since there’s a 40-page near-masterpiece of the genre hidden in the 239 pages of his new book. A shorter paper would present Shiller’s distinctive, and mostly persuasive, vision of how finance can better serve the common good.
Shiller notes that the “democratisation of finance” has already come a long way, but he argues it could go further with better financial products and techniques. That key point is only made clearly at the end of the book, and he never discusses clearly the social benefits of finance. He should have dedicated a few pages to the ability of banks, insurers and financial markets to gather and allocate capital effectively and provide a healthy check on wayward governments.
That would take five or ten pages. The rest of the article would discuss some of Shiller’s extremely interesting proposals in more detail than he manages in the book as it stands. Flexible debt would come first: and bonds whose coupons are linked to rises (and falls) in GDP are not his only idea. There’s also the constant-value unit of exchange, continuous-workout mortgages and insurance against home price losses. Each of these raises practical issues but they are all far more appealing examples of financial innovation than the usual products of investment banks.
Also compelling is his idea of an inequality tax. Under that regime, tax rates would not be set in advance but would change along with pre-tax income inequality to be exactly progressive enough to ensure that the after-tax distribution of incomes was socially acceptable. It’s technically possible, politically desirable and deserves more attention.
There are also two more common but still good ideas – the further spread of corporate ownership, especially to employees, and the classification of some debts as odious and not subject to the same enforcement as salubrious obligations. In the ideal article, Shiller would give more attention to the practicalities of these notions than he does in “Finance and the Good Society”.
Sadly this is – at best – a hit-and-miss book. The first 18 chapters, 127 pages, are a whirlwind tour of the world of finance with a chapter for everyone from investment managers to philanthropists. But the purpose of this survey is unclear.
The rest of the book is better, though marred by simplistic discussions of neurology, animal behaviour and human psychology. The last does not rise far above the generalisations about group behaviour typical of popular treatises on investment. There are a few entertaining digressions – discussions of his grandparents’ character and of a 1910 book about war, for example – but the digressions from economics are at best the work of a clever amateur.
Shiller is arguably the most imaginative and informed thinker in finance today. Perhaps he will put those talents to better use in his next book.
Financial repression is the theme of the moment, and that’s a slap in the face for Robert J. Shiller, who thinks investors should be protected, not exploited. The possible UK government 100-year fixed coupon bond, which would be issued at an artificially low rate, is almost the antithesis of everything Shiller believes in.
Shiller the stock market commentator is much loved. But Shiller as advocate of financial justice? That’s another matter. Unfortunately, his latest book is unlikely to change many minds at the UK’s Debt Management Office either. That’s a shame, since there’s a 40-page near-masterpiece of the genre hidden in the 239 pages of his new book. A shorter paper would present Shiller’s distinctive, and mostly persuasive, vision of how finance can better serve the common good.
Shiller notes that the “democratisation of finance” has already come a long way, but he argues it could go further with better financial products and techniques. That key point is only made clearly at the end of the book, and he never discusses clearly the social benefits of finance. He should have dedicated a few pages to the ability of banks, insurers and financial markets to gather and allocate capital effectively and provide a healthy check on wayward governments.
That would take five or ten pages. The rest of the article would discuss some of Shiller’s extremely interesting proposals in more detail than he manages in the book as it stands. Flexible debt would come first: and bonds whose coupons are linked to rises (and falls) in GDP are not his only idea. There’s also the constant-value unit of exchange, continuous-workout mortgages and insurance against home price losses. Each of these raises practical issues but they are all far more appealing examples of financial innovation than the usual products of investment banks.
Also compelling is his idea of an inequality tax. Under that regime, tax rates would not be set in advance but would change along with pre-tax income inequality to be exactly progressive enough to ensure that the after-tax distribution of incomes was socially acceptable. It’s technically possible, politically desirable and deserves more attention.
There are also two more common but still good ideas – the further spread of corporate ownership, especially to employees, and the classification of some debts as odious and not subject to the same enforcement as salubrious obligations. In the ideal article, Shiller would give more attention to the practicalities of these notions than he does in “Finance and the Good Society”.
Sadly this is – at best – a hit-and-miss book. The first 18 chapters, 127 pages, are a whirlwind tour of the world of finance with a chapter for everyone from investment managers to philanthropists. But the purpose of this survey is unclear.
The rest of the book is better, though marred by simplistic discussions of neurology, animal behaviour and human psychology. The last does not rise far above the generalisations about group behaviour typical of popular treatises on investment. There are a few entertaining digressions – discussions of his grandparents’ character and of a 1910 book about war, for example – but the digressions from economics are at best the work of a clever amateur.
Shiller is arguably the most imaginative and informed thinker in finance today. Perhaps he will put those talents to better use in his next book.
July 6, 2022
Robert Shiller is very smart. It's not for nothing that he is a professor at Yale. But this is not the right book for appreciating his intellect. It's mostly finance 101, explaining the basics of lending, equity finance, markets and derivatives and telling us how these things help make a complex modern economy run. I agree that lending and equity finance serve a useful function and that sometimes markets can be a good way to for an efficient system to self organize. But even in these basic areas of finance, there is so much abuse and manipulation for the benefit of the rich at the expense of the poor that I wonder whether the whole thing needs an overhaul. And then when we get into derivatives and the financialization of everything, which Mr. Shiller defends, and things like flash trading and dark pools that he doesn't even touch on, I lose patience and want to call for the whole thing to be blown up. But you won't find any answers to the bigger problems in this book where Mr. Shiller is just an apologist for the worst behavior. Sure there are some bad eggs he tells us, but we just need to tweak it here and there. Just make a few changes in the tax code to encourage charity and we will build a more equitable society. I don't think so. He's trying to put a bandaid on a gaping wound. We need more creative and radical solutions that will reorganize our thinking about property and money, but you won't get that here.
July 22, 2012
Shiller masterfully illustrates the connection of finance to the good society. I must admit that I'm particularly drawn to his more optimistic outlook on finance and financial reform. I also believe that much of modern finance is enormously beneficial for humanity -- just as I believe that the excesses and the weaknesses need to be addressed. We cannot address contemporary problems with antiquated concepts. Shiller points out something that is completely missing from financial reform discussions -- we have witnessed the birth of financial products that are the equivalent to a Ferrari and our roads, infrastructure and traffic laws are built for Model Ts. Like any great innovation, the societal infrastructure and thinking must adapt to fully benefit from the powerful inventions and to encourage and allow for future beneficial innovations.
October 23, 2012
I expected more from Robert Shiller and instead finished a milquetoast survey of the financial industry. Why must academics in lofty positions who competed vigorously for their positions feel the need to belittle their reading audience with didactic drivel? I know what a CDO is, I know what a portfolio manager is, I know Daniel Kahneman's work, I know about agency problems. You repeat what others have written and others will keep repeating what you have written. You are Robert Shiller. Inspire me. Elevate the level of discourse. Challenge me and engage me the way you have engaged your own colleagues and the academic community for the past 30 years. Do not belittle me with this bosh.
January 1, 2014
Wat actoren in de financiële sector doen en zouden moeten doen. Het boek begint aarzelend en komt uiteindelijk goed op gang wanneer psychologische inzichten hun plek vinden en duidelijk wordt in welke opzichten actoren zich zouden kunnen verbeteren (na het al te zoetsappige verhaal over wat de actoren allemaal voor goeds doen) en waarom we meer aandacht moeten ehbben voor de maatschappelijke baten van financiële innovatie (inclusief een rijkheid aan ongeprobeerde voorbeelden).
April 23, 2016
The writer is attempting to "innovate" market based solutions for this and that and seems totally unaware that the problems he is trying to tackle are dealt with successfully by social security and social policy in many countries. But that ignorance could be excusable. What isn't is the way he dismisses Madoff fraud and Arthur Andersen/Enron and the shortcomings and responsibility of regulators.
September 26, 2019
Den einen Stern gibt es für das bisschen Sozialdemokratismus am Ende: "Gemeinnützige Beteiligungsgesellschaften" (S.281) zur Finanzierung bspw. der ansonsten privat und profitorientiert zu führenden Gesundheitsfürsorge- für die USA wäre das vielleicht ein Fortschritt! Der Rest ist bullshit! Und das in Potenz. Wer wissen möchte, wie US- amerikanische wirtschafts"wissen-schaftliche" (???) Ideologieproduktion (GESUNDBETEREI MIT MORALISCHEN APPELLEN UND FAST OHNE STRUKTURORIENTIERTE GESTALTUNGSIDEEN!) funktioniert, der lese Nobelpreisträger Shillers Heiligsprechung des Finanzmarktkapitalismus, der mit seinen Nieren- und Heiratsmärkten und anderen tollen Dingen wie dem Philanthropismus ganz zum Wohle der Allgemeinheit agiert und allein dazu befähigt ist, Wohlstand für alle zu generieren. Beispiele gefällig? "Denken Sie an die Partnersuche- das Bemühen, jemanden zu finden, um in einer engen Beziehung zusammenzuleben, in aller Regel als Mann und Frau. Das ist im Grunde ein Marktproblem, denn es geht nicht nur darum, einen passenden Menschen zu finden, sondern dieser Mensch muss auch noch vor derselben Frage der Partnerfindung stehen und bereit sein, Sie als seine erste Wahl zu betrachten. Den richtigen Partner zu finden, gleicht der Abwicklung einer Markttransaktion. Dazu gehören Informationen über den Marktpreis (auf dem Heiratsmarkt wäre das die eigene Attraktivität für bestimmte Typen potentieller Ehepartner) und die Ermittlung des optimalen Abschlusses zu diesem Preis." (S. 108) Nein, der Mann ist kein Spinner. Er ist Nobelpreisträger für Wirtschaftswissen-schaften und die zitierte Passage ziert seine Vorlesungen für Studierende. In denen lobt er auch seinen Kollegen Roth, der nach dem Modell eines "idealen Wohnungsmarkt(s)" (!) den Aufbau eines "einfachen Markts für Spendernieren" (S. 105) konzipierte, der alle Probleme löst. Natürlich nur in der Idee; in der Realität klappt das leider noch nicht so richtig, was nur daran liegt, dass die Leute zu konservativ sind. Außerdem setzt das "ideale Modell", dass "Risiken, Anreize, moralische Gefähr-dung und Produktion mittels komplexer vertraglicher Vereinbarungen" berücksichtigt, leider voraus, dass "de facto alle Operationen gleichzeitig stattfinden, damit es sich niemand anders überlegen kann..." (S. 106) Obgleich dieser Unsinn einer "idealen" Annahme klar benannt wird, schreibt Shiller, es wäre nur das "Bedürfnis nach Konventionalität... und eine übermäßige Abhängigkeit von Traditionen, was Finanzinnovationen [also den Aufbau des Organspendenmarktes- F.S.] nach wie vor behindert." (ebd.)
Ich habe nicht für möglich gehalten, dass so viele Dummheiten auf einem Haufen überhaupt möglich sind! Aber der Mann ist Lohnschreiber- schon klar: Leider nämlich "denken offenbar viele Men-schen, dass Unternehmen einen realen Anreiz haben, sich aggressiv und verwerflich zu verhalten. Bleibt eine solche Annahme unwidersprochen, wird das die Menschen gegen die Geschäftswelt aufbringen, was deren reibungsloses Funktionieren beeinträchtigt und damit das Wachstum des Wohlstands in den kommenden Jahren zu bremsen droht" (300) - Gott sei Dank wissen wir nun, dass nur die Dummheit der Menschen, die ihren eigenen Wohlstand verhindern wollen, daran schuld ist, dass in Sachen Kapitalismus noch nicht alles "in Butter" ist. Was für ein Schrott! Zur "Bedeu-tung der Finanzspekulation" (für den Wohlstand der Allgemeinheit- versteht sich) schreibt der Herr Professor: "Spekulation trägt zur Markteffizienz bei" (S. 231) Und das meint der nicht ironisch! Was für ein entsetzlicher Schrott, anzunehmen, es müssten nur alle Menschen "demokratisch" einen gleichberechtigten Zugang zum Finanzmarkt haben (und also alle gleichberechtigt zocken können), und schon würden dessen Dividenden alle reich machen. So blöd waren die Urväter der Marktwirt-schaft (Smith und Ricardo) noch nicht: Die wussten, dass jemand Werte SCHAFFEN muss, ehe der Geldmarkt sie in Zirkulation bringen und jemand sie sich aneignen kann. Shiller hingegen meint in gottgewollter (?) Naivität, Geld schaffe Geld und dann könne jeder kaufen, was er will. Er hat nicht einmal einen Anflug der Idee, dass es immer Verlierer geben muss, wo Gewinner sind. Kurz: Das ganze Buch ist so blöd wie Frau Merkels Idee, die anderen Länder könnten ja das deutsche Modell kopieren und selber Exportweltmeister werden. Ja klar, das leuchtet sogar dem dümmsten Fußball-fan (nicht!) ein, dass ALLE Weltmeister werden können. Und genausowenig kann Finanzmarktkapi-talismus alle reich machen. Das ganze dämliche Buch ist bullshit- ich wiederhole es gerne. Wenn jemand für solchen Mist kein Geld ausgeben und trotzdem kontrollieren will, ob ich Recht habe, sei darauf hingewiesen, dass dieses Machwerk bei der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung für einen Schutzbeitrag von 4 Euro billig zu haben ist. Ich habe aus dieser Ausgabe zitiert.
Ich habe nicht für möglich gehalten, dass so viele Dummheiten auf einem Haufen überhaupt möglich sind! Aber der Mann ist Lohnschreiber- schon klar: Leider nämlich "denken offenbar viele Men-schen, dass Unternehmen einen realen Anreiz haben, sich aggressiv und verwerflich zu verhalten. Bleibt eine solche Annahme unwidersprochen, wird das die Menschen gegen die Geschäftswelt aufbringen, was deren reibungsloses Funktionieren beeinträchtigt und damit das Wachstum des Wohlstands in den kommenden Jahren zu bremsen droht" (300) - Gott sei Dank wissen wir nun, dass nur die Dummheit der Menschen, die ihren eigenen Wohlstand verhindern wollen, daran schuld ist, dass in Sachen Kapitalismus noch nicht alles "in Butter" ist. Was für ein Schrott! Zur "Bedeu-tung der Finanzspekulation" (für den Wohlstand der Allgemeinheit- versteht sich) schreibt der Herr Professor: "Spekulation trägt zur Markteffizienz bei" (S. 231) Und das meint der nicht ironisch! Was für ein entsetzlicher Schrott, anzunehmen, es müssten nur alle Menschen "demokratisch" einen gleichberechtigten Zugang zum Finanzmarkt haben (und also alle gleichberechtigt zocken können), und schon würden dessen Dividenden alle reich machen. So blöd waren die Urväter der Marktwirt-schaft (Smith und Ricardo) noch nicht: Die wussten, dass jemand Werte SCHAFFEN muss, ehe der Geldmarkt sie in Zirkulation bringen und jemand sie sich aneignen kann. Shiller hingegen meint in gottgewollter (?) Naivität, Geld schaffe Geld und dann könne jeder kaufen, was er will. Er hat nicht einmal einen Anflug der Idee, dass es immer Verlierer geben muss, wo Gewinner sind. Kurz: Das ganze Buch ist so blöd wie Frau Merkels Idee, die anderen Länder könnten ja das deutsche Modell kopieren und selber Exportweltmeister werden. Ja klar, das leuchtet sogar dem dümmsten Fußball-fan (nicht!) ein, dass ALLE Weltmeister werden können. Und genausowenig kann Finanzmarktkapi-talismus alle reich machen. Das ganze dämliche Buch ist bullshit- ich wiederhole es gerne. Wenn jemand für solchen Mist kein Geld ausgeben und trotzdem kontrollieren will, ob ich Recht habe, sei darauf hingewiesen, dass dieses Machwerk bei der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung für einen Schutzbeitrag von 4 Euro billig zu haben ist. Ich habe aus dieser Ausgabe zitiert.
May 31, 2020
I thoroughly enjoyed this book's optimistic defence of capitalism - something few authors would be willing to do so unashamedly. The author summarises all the major roles in capitalism (brokers, accountants and so on) but with a focus on the moral purpose of those actors, before going into a more manifesto-like exploration of ways finance could be improved.
I've watched Robert Shiller's lectures from Yale and was captivated by his thoroughly good-natured manner and positivity. This, combined with his intellectual clout and use of behavioural economics, I think make him extremely well placed to extol why finance is so integral to the good society. This is most clearly achieved by describing the financial innovations that have improved people's lives but that, through lack of knowledge of history or lack of understanding entirely, people simply aren't aware of. It also pushes back and challenges lazy conceptions along the lines of "bankers are evil" or or no value to society, showing how important the financial edifice is to us all.
Perhaps the key feature of this book that makes it great is how the author repeatedly describes ways in which finance could be improved. This is not a vapid book full of air but no concrete ideas. As you'd expect from a Nobel prize winner, this book is full of interesting thoughts - such as linking debt to GDP and not interest rates to better align debt with economic conditions - that really made me hopeful that innovation could solve many of the problems financial capitalism is held up to cause.
The book is not perfect and I ummed and ah'd about whether or not to give it three stars. I found some of the optimism a little saccharine at times while this, combined with a lack of strong criticism of the clear excesses in the business and finance sectors (at least of some), feels a little naïve at times. In addition, those not versed in the basics of finance (options, derivatives, the inner workings of mortgages) might found the first half of the book pretty challenging: this is an ideological book for those with some knowledge and certainly not an introduction to finance.
However, these flaws aside, I couldn't fault the book's central message that finance is critical to the functioning of a good society - through its role in allowing humans to achieve their goals - and a key corollary of this - that financial innovation is crucial to improving the world rather than overthrowing capitalism entirely. A well-informed statement of capitalism's benefits - while perhaps a little soft in its treatment of capitalism's failings - is, I believe, an important statement in a world so angry and critical at the system that has benefited most of us and, through further improvements, could benefit us more.
I've watched Robert Shiller's lectures from Yale and was captivated by his thoroughly good-natured manner and positivity. This, combined with his intellectual clout and use of behavioural economics, I think make him extremely well placed to extol why finance is so integral to the good society. This is most clearly achieved by describing the financial innovations that have improved people's lives but that, through lack of knowledge of history or lack of understanding entirely, people simply aren't aware of. It also pushes back and challenges lazy conceptions along the lines of "bankers are evil" or or no value to society, showing how important the financial edifice is to us all.
Perhaps the key feature of this book that makes it great is how the author repeatedly describes ways in which finance could be improved. This is not a vapid book full of air but no concrete ideas. As you'd expect from a Nobel prize winner, this book is full of interesting thoughts - such as linking debt to GDP and not interest rates to better align debt with economic conditions - that really made me hopeful that innovation could solve many of the problems financial capitalism is held up to cause.
The book is not perfect and I ummed and ah'd about whether or not to give it three stars. I found some of the optimism a little saccharine at times while this, combined with a lack of strong criticism of the clear excesses in the business and finance sectors (at least of some), feels a little naïve at times. In addition, those not versed in the basics of finance (options, derivatives, the inner workings of mortgages) might found the first half of the book pretty challenging: this is an ideological book for those with some knowledge and certainly not an introduction to finance.
However, these flaws aside, I couldn't fault the book's central message that finance is critical to the functioning of a good society - through its role in allowing humans to achieve their goals - and a key corollary of this - that financial innovation is crucial to improving the world rather than overthrowing capitalism entirely. A well-informed statement of capitalism's benefits - while perhaps a little soft in its treatment of capitalism's failings - is, I believe, an important statement in a world so angry and critical at the system that has benefited most of us and, through further improvements, could benefit us more.
February 8, 2021
I have great respect for Prof. Shiller. His work on valuation is seminal to behavioural finance and modern econ. The fact that he is not a behaviouralist makes his contributions that much more impressive and important. When I had occasion to chat with him for a few minutes at a CFA conference some 8-9 years ago, he was witty and charming. I can only dream of the opportunity to engage with him professionally or academically.
This book has some interesting elements, and I agree with the core premise: finance can be a tremendous force for good. It’s unfortunate, however, that Shiller deals short shrift to the fundamental problems with finance that he identifies in the opening.
After declaring the victory of financial capitalism over Marxism, Shiller admits, ”It is true that social barriers prevent some from realizing, and profiting from, their talents.” The solution, so glibly pronounced, is to ”democratize, humanize and expand the scope of financial capitalism.” This, in turn, can easily be ”addressed by changes to our educational system.”
Wow. Democratised, humanised and expanded finance sounds a lot like Socialism to me. I agree that is the solution—expanding the Socialism currently only enjoyed by the criminally wealthy when they need bailouts and subsidies or are caught defrauding society, but it will take more than some ambiguous changes to the education system to bring about.
If you want insight into finance professors’ understanding of the world and how utter shmucks like Larry Summers can fail repeatedly and phenomenally, yet still command respect amongst academics, this is the book for you.
This book has some interesting elements, and I agree with the core premise: finance can be a tremendous force for good. It’s unfortunate, however, that Shiller deals short shrift to the fundamental problems with finance that he identifies in the opening.
After declaring the victory of financial capitalism over Marxism, Shiller admits, ”It is true that social barriers prevent some from realizing, and profiting from, their talents.” The solution, so glibly pronounced, is to ”democratize, humanize and expand the scope of financial capitalism.” This, in turn, can easily be ”addressed by changes to our educational system.”
Wow. Democratised, humanised and expanded finance sounds a lot like Socialism to me. I agree that is the solution—expanding the Socialism currently only enjoyed by the criminally wealthy when they need bailouts and subsidies or are caught defrauding society, but it will take more than some ambiguous changes to the education system to bring about.
If you want insight into finance professors’ understanding of the world and how utter shmucks like Larry Summers can fail repeatedly and phenomenally, yet still command respect amongst academics, this is the book for you.
November 30, 2024
Shiller's opening remarks in this 2012 book explain that it is a response to the almost universal contempt for finance professionals (fron the GFC of 2008) among the public. His claim is essentially that finance professionals are necessary to accomplishing the goals of the people of the 21st century, it is more remarkable that the financial system works so well almost all the time than that it sometimes falters, and that there is a great need for clever people to innovate and reform and improve it.
He explains various roles in finance and how they work together. He also offers some reflections on specific opportunities for improvement.
I rate this book 3 stars because my prior knowledge (I study financial engineering at university) was such that this book did not contribute very much. For another person, one who is not familiar with the industry or who is cynical about it (the book's target audience), this book would be very valuable. Even then, though, there are other materials which would serve that purpose better, such as a college graduation speech given by the same author.
He explains various roles in finance and how they work together. He also offers some reflections on specific opportunities for improvement.
I rate this book 3 stars because my prior knowledge (I study financial engineering at university) was such that this book did not contribute very much. For another person, one who is not familiar with the industry or who is cynical about it (the book's target audience), this book would be very valuable. Even then, though, there are other materials which would serve that purpose better, such as a college graduation speech given by the same author.
November 26, 2018
Phish, and previous books were not the first bullsh.t books Robert wrote. This time, he brings out the grand dish of Cicero of perfect society surrounded by enlarged Animal Spirits' society filled with greed and self-fulfilment. Robert has offered nothing, zilch about how to fix this society but to bring out the perfectness and zero default in all government, public sectors, private sectors, financial sectors, and even individual level with only one goal: tell me something I don't know..what a waste of money to read this bullsh.t kiss-assing his existing educational institute..little does he know that institutional bring about are nothing useful to change the society as a whole. I am not a cynical person..but practical scholar..Robert, is simply, a theoretical scholar..with nothing to offer..
July 28, 2023
Largely interesting, it covers a wide range of topic areas and unfortunately I feel some of its message is diluted in the process. There is a key focus on the temporal concern espoused by Occupy Wall St. protestors and I don't believe a particularly compelling rebuttal to the views of those who take a Minskyan opposition to the unified benefits of deregulated finance (e.g. the discussion of fluctuations is largely a hand-wave). Shiller tries to weave too many different and disparate theorists into his narrative and it suffers from a slightly scatterbrainish feel (why the need for a shoddy read-through of Nietzsche or outright strawman of Marx, for instance) which undermines the useful description of the role that the financial sector serves and ways it could be improved. Overall quite a good descriptive work but I find some of the critical elements less useful.
August 5, 2021
I read this after taking Shiller’s virtual class, useful overview of finance in it’s various and wide-ranging aspects of society, and a good recap of course material. I appreciate his ability to think broadly - this is a mile-wide and not-too-deep introduction to finance.
“If finance is the science of goal architecture, those who work in the field are the architects who structure these goals and manage the risks of small businesses, families, school systems, cities, corporations, and all the other vital institutions throughout society. If finance, properly understood in the good society, is the stewardship of society’s assets, it is these same people who are entrusted with the management and cultivation of those assets.”
“If finance is the science of goal architecture, those who work in the field are the architects who structure these goals and manage the risks of small businesses, families, school systems, cities, corporations, and all the other vital institutions throughout society. If finance, properly understood in the good society, is the stewardship of society’s assets, it is these same people who are entrusted with the management and cultivation of those assets.”
August 1, 2023
I found this a surprisingly naive book about finance. Shiller obviously knows far more about economy than me so I am probably not the person to write such a comment, but it seems to me that at every time where there might be a systematic problem with finance, then Shiller says that "there can of course be a few bad eggs" or something of the sort. I should confess that I am more toward the left side of politics and economic analysis, but even if Shiller obviously is not a marxist I think one can acknowledge certain systematic problems in finance capitalism. There is no acknowledgement of the link between economy and violence for example. What I take with me from this book is the second part where Shiller writes how one can use economy as an instrument for good.
March 4, 2021
This is my favorite book on economics. Shiller sees financial tools and innovations as “technologies” that, like physical or software technologies, expand the capabilities of individuals and societies. He calls finance the science of “goal architecture” that brings people together and structures the economic arrangements necessary for them to achieve their goals.In Shiller’s view the “good society”, an ideal in which an ever-increasing portion of people’s needs and desires can be fulfilled, is more fully achieved in a complex society through the innovative and imaginative creation of more sophisticated financial technologies.
May 8, 2019
3.5
esperaba mas de este libro. es una introduccion muy (enserio muy) basica a los participantes del mundo de las finanzas. indica quienes hacen que cosa y por que su trabajo es necesario en la economia actual. en la segunda parte comenta sobre las acusaciones que saben tener estos actores y como en algunos caso son acusaciones sin sentido.
su argumento es que las finanzas son un vehiculo para democratizar el capitalismo. y que la sociedad perfecta es la que abraza y acepta que las finanzas son necesarias para la riqueza comunnal.
esperaba mas de este libro. es una introduccion muy (enserio muy) basica a los participantes del mundo de las finanzas. indica quienes hacen que cosa y por que su trabajo es necesario en la economia actual. en la segunda parte comenta sobre las acusaciones que saben tener estos actores y como en algunos caso son acusaciones sin sentido.
su argumento es que las finanzas son un vehiculo para democratizar el capitalismo. y que la sociedad perfecta es la que abraza y acepta que las finanzas son necesarias para la riqueza comunnal.
July 14, 2021
A very basic book, but a good one for most parts. Has some minor flaws in ordering, like elaborates on CEO being given stock options but explains derivatives (including options) in chapter 8.
It describes the power of finance and financial innovation in modern societies, other innovations that might come in future. Also describes the shortcomings of finance and financiers.
The book also takes into account the role of finance in the 2008 crisis, and how much can we blame the financial innovations for it?
It describes the power of finance and financial innovation in modern societies, other innovations that might come in future. Also describes the shortcomings of finance and financiers.
The book also takes into account the role of finance in the 2008 crisis, and how much can we blame the financial innovations for it?
August 22, 2024
If Finance Apologetic existed, Shiller would be an economical saint!
Well, this book is just that: an apology for every thing we see in modern markets: every job title, financial product, company, even regulation and lack thereof. He not only describes why they exist and why they are good, but how they can (and sometimes do) go wrong, and how to help avoid it.
The nice part is: the ideas are presented very peacefully. Shiller belongs to the modern strand of American economy that is not so confrontational: he and his arch-nemesis Eugene Fama even shared a Nobel Prize!
Well, this book is just that: an apology for every thing we see in modern markets: every job title, financial product, company, even regulation and lack thereof. He not only describes why they exist and why they are good, but how they can (and sometimes do) go wrong, and how to help avoid it.
The nice part is: the ideas are presented very peacefully. Shiller belongs to the modern strand of American economy that is not so confrontational: he and his arch-nemesis Eugene Fama even shared a Nobel Prize!
January 26, 2022
I'm a huge fan of Schiller's Yale course and definitely think he's more than able to create amazing content.
This book just wasn't for me. Was hoping for something a lot more technical. Also, I feel if you're already slightly familiar with finance, the benefits described are pretty obvious/basic ones.
This would be good if you have little to no exposure to finance and actually deeply think finance is a pointless pursuit.
This book just wasn't for me. Was hoping for something a lot more technical. Also, I feel if you're already slightly familiar with finance, the benefits described are pretty obvious/basic ones.
This would be good if you have little to no exposure to finance and actually deeply think finance is a pointless pursuit.
September 25, 2017
This book is extremely comprehensive in its subject matter and delves into so many aspects of finance. However, I had problems with looking at environmental disasters, such as oil spills, as no big deal, because people were insured.
January 8, 2024
Outstanding book about the positive and negative aspects of Finance in our society. Covers many examples and has suggestions for how to design appropriate roles for finance and financial engineering in our society.
March 14, 2017
A lo largo del libro redacta cómo funciona el sector financiero en la sociedad, obligaciones de los miembros con la sociedad y explica cómo las finanzas ayudan al progreso e igualdad económica; tomando en cuenta que los miembros de la comunidad financiera también pueden ser artistas, escritores y filósofos.
Al inicio del libro, se define la función de las finanzas, se establece una perspectiva capitalista y de industria.
El sistema financiero tiene muchas ramas y puedan mejorar las actividades de varias maneras. Por ejemplo, Oficiales ejecutivos, Administradores de inversiones, banqueros y prestamistas hipotecarios, Comerciantes y fabricantes de mercado, Aseguradoras, Ingenieros Financieros y Proveedores de Derivados, Abogados, Asesores Financieros, Lobbyistas y Contadores, Reguladores, Formadores de Políticas y Financiadoras de Bienes Públicos, Educadores, Fideicomisarios y Filántropos, entre otros.
Finalmente el libro concluye que si en la sociedad tuviera una perspectiva del capitalismo financiero de manera negativa, la perspectiva económica del mundo puede llegar a dañarse y podría causar que el gobierno imponga restricciones a la industria, lo que puede lo puede llevar a retroceder, invirtiendo en la evidencia y reduciendo las oportunidades de innovaciones para el progreso de la civilización.
Al inicio del libro, se define la función de las finanzas, se establece una perspectiva capitalista y de industria.
El sistema financiero tiene muchas ramas y puedan mejorar las actividades de varias maneras. Por ejemplo, Oficiales ejecutivos, Administradores de inversiones, banqueros y prestamistas hipotecarios, Comerciantes y fabricantes de mercado, Aseguradoras, Ingenieros Financieros y Proveedores de Derivados, Abogados, Asesores Financieros, Lobbyistas y Contadores, Reguladores, Formadores de Políticas y Financiadoras de Bienes Públicos, Educadores, Fideicomisarios y Filántropos, entre otros.
Finalmente el libro concluye que si en la sociedad tuviera una perspectiva del capitalismo financiero de manera negativa, la perspectiva económica del mundo puede llegar a dañarse y podría causar que el gobierno imponga restricciones a la industria, lo que puede lo puede llevar a retroceder, invirtiendo en la evidencia y reduciendo las oportunidades de innovaciones para el progreso de la civilización.
August 16, 2019
Good book to understand the nittigritties of the financial, capitalistic system.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 77 reviews