Rating: 
Summary: A Polemic Against Money
Review: A didactic and turgid historical narrative about the Federal Reserve (the Fed), focusing on the Volcker era. The first part has some interesting tidbits. For example we learn that the Fed did not think it should pay property taxes on its Washington headquarters building because it was an "independent government agency." However, the member banks paid the US government $750,000 for the land and got a deed from the Treasury Department. How can the US government sell property to itself, the Washington DC assessor asked. Good question. The Fed lawyers insisted it could, only to find the property in foreclosure some years later. Eventually the Fed had to quit claim the property back to the government. A nice example of the arrogance of power and lack of accountability of some government agencies. Greider does a fair job on explaining the mechanics of how the Fed operates to control interest rates, this part of the book has some real information. Alas much of the book consists of moralizing against the high interest rates we got after Jimmy Carter appointed Paul Volcker chairman of the Fed. He provides seemingly endless details about the winners (those who hold financial assets) and the losers (almost everyone else). His argument in a nutshell: people who have money get interest on this money and they don't really need it or deserve it. On the other hand people without surplus money can lose their jobs, homes, farms, businesses, even their lives. Thus Paul Volcker emerges as the "slaughterer of the innocents." He inflicted more pain on the US economy than was necessary and a tiny minority reaped the benefits.Despite the immense amount of detail and extensive reference notes, Greider does not say much that is new, and at times he seems ignorant of basic finance. For example he claims that as a result of high interest rates driving up the dollar, a bushel of wheat that sold for $3.85 in Kansas City would fetch $5 or $6 in Europe, an apparent violation of the law of one price. He does not explain why arbitrageurs would not have closed this gap in short order. As to the rewards for collecting interest here is the record. One dollar invested US T-Bills at the end of 1925 grew to $14.25 in 1997, an annual compound return of 3.8%, but inflation had an annual compound rate of 3.1% over the same period. If we include the effect of taxes then the return is negative. So in general you do not make money collecting interest unless you make risky investments. How about during the rein of Volcker? For the period 1979-1988 adjusting for inflation, the T-Bill return was about 6% without allowing for taxes. If we take off 2% for taxes, then one dollar becomes about $1.50, for the whole decade. Nice but not thrilling. The ruling classes in the US do not make their money from interest. In this sense the thesis of the book is flawed. However, the idea of having an unaccountable quasi-governmental agency, neither fish nor fowl is another matter. Our elected leaders should make policy decisions and face the heat instead of hiding behind these synthetic agencies. On this issue the book is right on.
Rating: 
Summary: Populist, but not bad
Review: A good basic look at how the Fed operates. However, Greider is a bit biased toward the left here, I mean he basically takes the Populist "rich vs. poor" stance throughout the entire book. Almost a fan of inflation, Greider does not seem to realize that such an environment stifles any incentive toward investment in the future. Without this investment, the 55% of Americans that Geider believes are the "victims" of Federal Reserve Policy would eventually be without jobs. However, all political views aside, the author does an amazing job of putting the operation of the Fed into layman's terms. In addition, the research done to produce this piece is impressive. Again, although I disagree with his politics, this book is worth a read.
Rating:
Summary: Populist, but not bad
Review: A good basic look at how the Fed operates. However, Greider is a bit biased toward the left here, I mean he basically takes the Populist "rich vs. poor" stance throughout the entire book. Almost a fan of inflation, Greider does not seem to realize that such an environment stifles any incentive toward investment in the future. Without this investment, the 55% of Americans that Geider believes are the "victims" of Federal Reserve Policy would eventually be without jobs. However, all political views aside, the author does an amazing job of putting the operation of the Fed into layman's terms. In addition, the research done to produce this piece is impressive. Again, although I disagree with his politics, this book is worth a read.
Rating: 
Summary: The Federal Reserve Isn't What It Appears To Be
Review: Although I read this book years ago I'm reviewing it today because I perceive it is very important that more of us understand money, our monetary system and the intersection between money and power. Recent financial meltdowns in Thailand, Russia and Argentina provide a roadmap of the risks we face and which could be coming home to roost. 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.
Rating:
Summary: Good
Review: Although some might state that Greider has a liberal slant (I'd say more popularism than liberal) it is indeed a long and good read. In particular it shows the reserve under Volcker from the late 70's to early 80's. Many have praised his successor Alan Greenspan, however the real reasons as to are quite sad. Volcker simply went from one extream to another in modetary policy.He single handedly put the USA into a recession in the early 80's.He took years to actually understand that rates should go up and down S-L-O-W-L-Y, rather than making the rates change almost every day (which they did).Quite recently he's been picked to audit Anderson Consulting, that's like taking a sledge hammer to swat flies.Sure it can get the job done but it's going to be messy afterward. Considering the recent events with the economy (the terrorist attacks, dotcom crash, election debate etc).Greenspan will have to answer some serious questions (why the rates weren't lowered in 2000). Reading this books shows how much buracracy there can be simply in the establishment of a fiat currency and running it efficiently (or lack of)
Rating:
Summary: A solid look at the wizard behind the veil.
Review: Although some might state that Greider has a liberal slant (I'd say more popularism than liberal) it is indeed a long and good read. In particular it shows the reserve under Volcker from the late 70's to early 80's. Many have praised his successor Alan Greenspan, however the real reasons as to are quite sad. Volcker simply went from one extream to another in modetary policy.He single handedly put the USA into a recession in the early 80's.He took years to actually understand that rates should go up and down S-L-O-W-L-Y, rather than making the rates change almost every day (which they did).Quite recently he's been picked to audit Anderson Consulting, that's like taking a sledge hammer to swat flies.Sure it can get the job done but it's going to be messy afterward. Considering the recent events with the economy (the terrorist attacks, dotcom crash, election debate etc).Greenspan will have to answer some serious questions (why the rates weren't lowered in 2000). Reading this books shows how much buracracy there can be simply in the establishment of a fiat currency and running it efficiently (or lack of)
Rating:
Summary: Important, but look out for the bias
Review: Bill Greider tells a darn good story, even when the story concerns the impenetrable mysteries of monetary policy. This is an encyclopedic study of the Federal Reserve under Paul Volcker. To tell this story, Greider illuminates what monetary policy is, how it works, and how it is made. The book is written in crisp prose, with an almost novel-like writing style. It is the best book available for anyone who wants to know just exactly what it is that Alan Greenspan has been doing for all these years, and why it is so important. The only problem with this book is that Mr. Greider has a "point", which is the old populist refrain of the rich versus the poor, the owners of capital versus the producers of it. In reality, of course, the situation is far more complicated than Mr. Greider makes it. The owners of capital aren't sitting around sipping Curvoisier and puffing on fine Havanas. For the most part, they are the people who are actually providing the money to run and expand businesses, and to provide all those jobs that keep the producers...well...producing. Oh, and by the way, a majority of Americans are now invested in the stock and bond markets, which makes them owners of capital as well. Mr. Greider seems to view these two groups as distinct classes. In the real world, the lines that separate them is very blurred, and becoming more indistinct every day. So, be aware that Mr. Greider is not just telling a story, but selling an idea. It is a politically compelling idea for some. It may not, however, be entirely reconcilable with the economic truth.
Rating:
Summary: Important, but look out for the bias
Review: Bill Greider tells a darn good story, even when the story concerns the impenetrable mysteries of monetary policy. This is an encyclopedic study of the Federal Reserve under Paul Volcker. To tell this story, Greider illuminates what monetary policy is, how it works, and how it is made. The book is written in crisp prose, with an almost novel-like writing style. It is the best book available for anyone who wants to know just exactly what it is that Alan Greenspan has been doing for all these years, and why it is so important. The only problem with this book is that Mr. Greider has a "point", which is the old populist refrain of the rich versus the poor, the owners of capital versus the producers of it. In reality, of course, the situation is far more complicated than Mr. Greider makes it. The owners of capital aren't sitting around sipping Curvoisier and puffing on fine Havanas. For the most part, they are the people who are actually providing the money to run and expand businesses, and to provide all those jobs that keep the producers...well...producing. Oh, and by the way, a majority of Americans are now invested in the stock and bond markets, which makes them owners of capital as well. Mr. Greider seems to view these two groups as distinct classes. In the real world, the lines that separate them is very blurred, and becoming more indistinct every day. So, be aware that Mr. Greider is not just telling a story, but selling an idea. It is a politically compelling idea for some. It may not, however, be entirely reconcilable with the economic truth.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most significant books of the 90's
Review: Compelling book which combines a primer on marco economics, the creation, history of, and influence of the Fed, and the history of Paul Volcker's reign as Fed chairman. Should be on every investors must read list. Not only a fascinating tale, but a revealing picture of the issues which shape fiscal policy in America.
Rating:
Summary: Required reading, though...
Review: Definitely one of the best books I've ever read. I concur with another reviewer who said that it explains central banking better than any college professor ever has. 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.
| 
