Anónimo

A history Erik Larson praises is a must-read!

Revisado: 08-19-23

Egan paints a spellbinding tale of societal change, how one man marshaled fear of that change to his own, corrupt ends, and how millions of Americans banded together in hating Blacks, Jews, Catholics, and other "others." As thoroughly researched and comprehensive a history as I've ever read, Egan takes great pains to lay out evidence that punctures the common, comforting myths that have sprung up around the first group promoting "true Americanism." The story also profiles those who stood up to and confronted religious- and race-based hatred at great personal cost, in prose that frequently gave me chills. Egan has a gift for offering historical, hate-fueled rhetoric that sounds ripped from today's news without heavy-handed comparisons or ideological crusading. As Mark Twain advised, Egan "brings the lady out and lets her scream."

The author's narration, though occasionally spotty, makes the book feel like a story told by a friend. Would highly recommend for any student of history, especially one living in the Midwest. The startling aspects of this story aren't (necessarily) the parallels to the past, but how close this past is to the present: Stephenson lived until 1966, and many other characters lived well into the 20th (and one into the 21st) century. Truly a must-read!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Outstanding read!

Revisado: 09-14-22

An excellent book from one of the best new(er) financial writers. I loved "Don't Fall For It" and so was anxious to sample more of Ben's work. He presents financial issues in a simple--but not easy--manner, and shows how simplifying one's approach and assets yields the best results. A must-read for everyone who thinks that great results come from complex processes.

One note: the narration is excellent, but seems like an odd fit. I usually prefer narration that brings the author and his voice to life, and this is not it. A rich, baritone voice with a British accent is quite a mismatch for a Michigander author, but I loved it.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Interesting concept, questionable execution

Revisado: 07-01-22

The book does what it says it will do: tell you how money managers manage their own money. But having gleaned this information, it falls a bit flat.

The book begins with a strange recitation of all the thing Josh has talked about on CNBC, which covers at least two minutes and feels largely like an exercise in ego stroking. From there, it proceeds to a near-total cop-out: the chapter from Morgan Housel is lifted--word for word--out of Housel's own book, Psychology of Money. Other advisors' stories are more original, but still open with multi-minute laudatory throat-clearing.

The stories are an interesting mix and show how different people value different investments. Some value dividends because they're cash in hand, while others value their own business because they think they can control it, or so-called 'hard assets' like land, art, and wine because they're tangible. All three are, of course, biases: dividends dont make stocks safer, no one can "control" his own business because all bisiness is economy dependant, and being able to touch something doesn't make its value 'real'. Behavioral and hindsight bias may have been the biggest themes: touting past success in cryto, start-ups, and 'betting on myself' because they worked, not because the strategy had to work.

The book seems to have some definite 'bull market' biases, and the recent economic downturn maks it ripe for an update. How do the crypto investors feel now that crypto is melting down?

Another thing I took away is that all the folks profiled seem to generate lucrative livings from managing other people's money. Something to keep in mind when selecting an 'advisor.' The book didn't answer the age-old question: where are the customer's yachts?

Perhaps the book does exactly what it set out to do: show that financial advisors are subject to, and driven by, the same cognitive biases that afflict everyone else. Keep this in mind when determining whether an advisor will save you from yourself. Maybe worth reading to reassure yourself that advisors aren't Supreme beings.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

What a phenomenal book!

Revisado: 06-22-22

"Amazing" gets overused, but this book truly is. A real, raw look at a man's journey through hardship, hard times, and hard luck and what he learned--and most importantly, what he has un-learned--from that experience.

In a society and culture that simultaneously distort and decry masculinity, this should be required reading for all men over 18. A masterclass is the power that only comes from true vulnerability, and the strength that only comes from gentleness.

Terry narrating the story truly makes it jump off the page (as it were). It felt less like a book and more like listening to a friend tell his story.

It's a hard story, and a tough story to hear. And it provokes tough, challenging inner conversations for the reader. But it's worth it. I can't recommend this highly enough, and I'm grateful to Terry for his vulnerability and for telling some tough truths.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 5 personas

This book should have been a podcast

Revisado: 09-12-21

I must reluctantly describe this book as an overwhelming disappointment. The prevailing feeling is that the author took an interesting concept that naturally covered about 45 minutes, and stretched it to fill a book. The premise--that people make different decisions when they perceive they have nothing to lose--is a fascinating one. And the examples of this--such as outgoing presidents issuing ill-advised pardons and rouge traders making ruinous bets--make the book interesting. But in each topical chapter, the author includes far, far too much extraneous detail that seemingly serves only to bolster the page count. Rosa Parks' decision to refuse vacating her seat, when viewed and told through this lens, is an excellent story that the author tells well. But the extraneous detail concerning how many ministers it took to organize the Montgomery bus boycott, which church they met at, how many people showed up, and similar details--though worthwhile information for historical analysis--didn't factor in the author's assessment of decision making with nothing/little to lose. Ditto the assessment of President Bill Clinton's dubious decion to pardon Marc Rich: the author easily concludes that having 'nothing to lose' made Clinton pardon the unpardonable Rich for dubious, ulterior motives. But the lengthy recitation of detail presented but never analyzed makes the chapter a drudge.

In a variation on the theme, the author also includes superfluous information that both bolsters the page count and undercuts his premise. An interesting chapter dealing with how to make inmates serving life sentences have 'something to lose' is inexplicably headlined by instances of life-sentence inmates perpetuating grisly violence, which, for reasons of his own, the author recouts in blood-curdling detail. This strange miscalculation gives the instances the author considers outliers overly-comprehdnsive treatment. An inmate brutally killing another does nothing to support the claim (made only after delay) that life-sentence inmates are often model prisoners, and the graphic details, notes to prison psychiatrists, letters the attacked inmate sent home before the attack, and subsequent lawsuits seem wholly out of place and beside the point, which the author contends is that such attacks are rare.

This book has all the indicia of a great insight being padded with tangential information to fill a book. It would have been an excellent podcast had the author not gotten greedy.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 2 personas

Detailed, deep dive into Justice Holmes

Revisado: 09-16-20

This book draws heavily on private writings and letters, which give a well-rounded look at a flesh and blood individual, rather than the fawning portrayals commonly afforded to "larger than life" subjects. The author does, however, succumb to a bit of the "cult of Holmes" lauding for which he skewers others. At times, the author takes pains to shield his subject from criticism, emphasizing Holmes' prescient dissents in cases later reversed while marginalizing Holmes' sometimes-manifest errors in law and legal reasoning. The author's treatment of Holmes' decision in Buck v. Bell, for example, shifts blame for Holmes's admonition that "three generations of imbecile is enough" to prevailing societal atitudes, then-accepted pseudoscience, and alleged traps from other members of the Court. Still, it is a must-read for anyone seeking an insightful portrait of a legal icon.

My sole critique regarding style is the author's penchant for splitting infinitives.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A must-read for any baseball fan

Revisado: 08-29-20

Don't let the name fool you: this is much more than a look at Joe Torre's Yankees. an outstanding story of all that went on in baseball during the late 90s and early/mid 2000s, from the juice-ball era to the rise and domination of Sabermetrics.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Another outstanding Larson book!

Revisado: 07-05-20

Great narration and a vivid story. More time machine than book, Larson's prose crackles with detail from innumerable sources that paint a window into the people, events, and intrigue of 1930s Berlin.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Outstanding story!

Revisado: 06-25-20

An exceptional telling of a complex and terrible story, by a researcher with no equal.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

A bit of bait-and-switch

Revisado: 06-17-20

Starts out promising, but devolves into political tropes and doesn't "crack" the heists. A disappointment.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 11 personas