What will you get from reading a book about the financial crisis? The facts? The reasons? Or maybe both? Now imagine, what will you get from reading 21 books about the financial crisis?

In the blog Planet Money, author Jacob Goldstein has addressed this tricky, but attention-grabbing question. According to MIT economist Andrew Lo, after each book, he felt like he knew less. You must wonder what kind of books did he read. The answer is: Basically everything. A book that summarizes 800 years of financial crisis; 11 theory books written by academics; Or 9 journalistic books that are matter-of-fact recounting of what happened by editors and columnists. What was the reason for Lo’s sense of being misinformed after managing his way through all these different perspectives?

As Jacob Goldstein describes, Lo sets out to give his own perspective of what happened during the crisis, which in my opinion, bears much similarities with Paul Krugman’s criticism of perfect market and rational individuals – one of our class readings. Lo describes this notion as” a false sense of safety, security and prosperity” that was initiated by an economic boom, then further puts part of the blame on the newly and cleverly constructed financial models such as credit default swaps. Encompassing this view, there is his deep concern over economists’ inability to come to an agreement over the causes of the crisis, much akin to the saltwater vs. freshwater economists dispute mentioned by Krugman. 21 books, 21 different perspectives, which raise nothing more than a collection of contradictory interpretations and merely informative conclusions. All the recounted facts and analysis are too fragmented; each offers a little bit of truth, but never the entire truth. Lo even goes as far as making an out-of-the-ordinary comparison, by putting scientists agreeing on data about climate change side by side with economists fighting over what caused crisis. Underlying all these, he implies the need for economists to establish a set of factual information and empirical evidences from which precise conclusions and narratives can be deduced from.

Author Jacob Goldstein seems to be much in agreement with Andrew Lo on this matter. Personally I agree with much of what Lo and Krugman criticize about the perfect market notion. However, I think that what Lo describes about the economists’ debate is along the line of a matter of fact. As Robert Teitelman, who questions the usefulness of Lo’s arguments, exclaims: “If there’s one thing that we’ve learned in the Internet age, it’s that the quest for comprehensiveness and universality is a form of folly”. Having various perspectives on a controversial issue has never been something rare or unusual. Economics is more than just theory; it also encompasses individual behaviors and society, and therefore, comparing economics to climate is utterly unconvincing. Frankly, the world is a strange place and thus, it is impossible to accurately predict market and individual behaviors. While it is very true that economists’ inability to reach an agreement will hugely affect the ability to come up with a solution to get out of the crisis, it is only a utopia in which one can to set up a single set of facts to solve all economic problems. There is no basic principles underlying every aspects of economics, and I do not think there will ever be. I believe in order to find the causes and solve the crisis, we need to look more beyond just the patterns of facts and principles, to social science and behavior patterns that might give rise to more issues than we can expect.

Do you think that there are way too many people writing and reading books about financial crisis, instead of actually standing up and doing something about it? While I think Lo does have a point, I disagree with his conclusions. It almost seems to me as if he already decided upon the answer he was looking for, and simply could not find it in any of these 21 books. If that is not the case, then maybe, once again, it is simply a matter of fact. If one has more than one clock, one will never know what time it is.


6 responses »

  1. KCasty says:

    I definitely can see where Lo is coming from — in this information and technology age, there is no doubt that whenever we search for information on a certain topic, instead of one concrete answer, we are bombarded with an information overload!! On his suggestion that there are too many books about the financial crisis… perhaps he should have stuck to reading just a few.

    • Cheryl says:

      I do agree that Lo made a really good point in his review; having too many sources of information at once will not necessarily help improve the situation, and rather, sometimes it just sort of magnify the confusion. I think he also sort of implies that maybe people are just wasting time and resources trying to argue over what happened and why it happened, instead of getting back to the present, sitting down together and trying to figure out how to improve the economy. Other than that, I don’t really see the point of reading more than 20 books about the same topic, and then claiming that there are too many of them

  2. Jim says:

    I definitely agree that too much information can be extremely confusing and frustrating and I think that the financial crisis is a great example of an area where there seems to be an abundance of information and no true consensus on the root causes of the event. I really liked your quote, “If there’s one thing that we’ve learned in the Internet age, it’s that the quest for comprehensiveness and universality is a form of folly”. I guess I agree with the speaker referenced here, but what is to reconcile the fact that we will never have a comprehensive understanding of these events? Am I to just pick the version I like the best? Or should I try to obtain as much information as I can and end up like Lo?

  3. I really enjoyed this post. A lot of my classes this year and last have touched on the ’08 crisis in atleast someway. I have read through a lot of sources that have tried to explain who the main players were in the collapse, and it seems to me that there are too many to point the finger at one person, policy, bank, group, fallout, etc…. I do think that your response to his not finding what he was looking for is realistic. I also think that perhaps there is so much information out there and that there really is no way to boil it down, simplify it, and have one set of facts. As students and citizens, it may be the responsibility of each individual to absorb as much information as they can, and formulate their own opinion backed by data and information they believe to be true and relevant.

  4. […] Best Post Award goes to Cheryl (What if you read 21 books about the financial […]

  5. […] What if you read 21 books about financial crisis… (bizgovsociii.wordpress.com) […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s