Buy new:
-24% $12.93$12.93
$3.99 delivery March 10 - 17
Ships from: allnewbooks Sold by: allnewbooks
Save with Used - Good
$6.60$6.60
FREE delivery March 5 - 10
Ships from: ThriftBooks-Phoenix Sold by: ThriftBooks-Phoenix
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
After the Fall: Saving Capitalism from Wall Street-and Washington Paperback – April 19, 2011
Purchase options and add-ons
Washington's actions weren't the start of government distortions in the financial industry, Nicole Gelinas writes, but the natural result of 25 years' worth of such distortions.
In the early eighties, modern finance began to escape reasonable regulations, including the most important regulation of all, that of the marketplace. The government gradually adopted a "too big to fail" policy for the largest or most complex financial companies, saving lenders to failing firms from losses. As a result, these companies became impervious to the vital market discipline that the threat of loss provides.
Adding to the problem, Wall Street created financial instruments that escaped other reasonable limits, including gentle constraints on speculative borrowing and requirements for the disclosure of important facts.
The financial industry eventually posed an untenable risk to the economy -- a risk that culminated in the trillions of dollars' worth of government bailouts and guarantees that Washington scrambled starting in late 2008.
Even as banks and markets seem to heal, lenders to financial companies continue to understand that the government would protect them in the future if necessary. This implicit guarantee harms economic growth, because it forces good companies to compete against bad.
History and recent events make clear what Washington must do.
First, policymakers must reintroduce market discipline to the financial world. They can do so by re-creating a credible, consistent way in which big financial companies can fail, with lenders taking their warranted losses. Second, policymakers can reapply prudent financial regulations so that markets, and the economy, can better withstand inevitable excesses of optimism and pessimism. Sensible regulations have worked well in the past and can work well again.
As Gelinas explains in this richly detailed book, adequate regulation of financial firms and markets is a prerequisite for free-market capitalism -- not a barrier to it.
- Print length240 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherEncounter Books
- Publication dateApril 19, 2011
- Dimensions6.08 x 0.65 x 9 inches
- ISBN-109781594035258
- ISBN-13978-1594035258
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Similar items that may deliver to you quickly
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
Product details
- ASIN : 1594035253
- Publisher : Encounter Books (April 19, 2011)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 240 pages
- ISBN-10 : 9781594035258
- ISBN-13 : 978-1594035258
- Item Weight : 12.8 ounces
- Dimensions : 6.08 x 0.65 x 9 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #6,738,393 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #3,068 in Government & Business
- #5,629 in Economic Policy
- #6,393 in Economic Policy & Development (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Nicole Gelinas, a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) charterholder, is a Manhattan Institute senior fellow and contributing editor to City Journal. She lives in New York City.
Customer reviews
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star5 star67%23%10%0%0%67%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star4 star67%23%10%0%0%23%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star3 star67%23%10%0%0%10%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star2 star67%23%10%0%0%0%
- 5 star4 star3 star2 star1 star1 star67%23%10%0%0%0%
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonCustomers say
Customers find the book provides a good overview of events leading up to the recent economic crisis. They describe it as an informative and well-researched introduction. The writing style is concise and jargon-free, making it easy to read yet involving.
AI-generated from the text of customer reviews
Customers find the book provides a good overview of events leading up to the recent economic crisis. They find it informative and well-researched, with a flowing writing style. The author does an outstanding job of logically presenting factual material yet doing so in a very easy to read manner. Overall, readers describe the book as engaging and interesting, providing a great historical perspective on how the financial industry broke down.
"...For a very inexperienced amateur in finance, this has been a very interesting book and a quick read although I have marked places to read again...." Read more
"...She gives great historical perspective on how the financial industry break down the reasonable regulations that had existed 30 years ago...." Read more
"...I learned a lot from Fool's Gold, which was also clear and informative, but for me it was a history, showing what happened and why the participants..." Read more
"...Her book is very well researched and crafted; Nicole has a complete understanding of what lead up to the current financial crises and what should be..." Read more
Customers find the writing style concise and jargon-free. They describe it as a friendly, quick read that contributes to knowledge and understanding. The author is intuitive and well-researched, making the book easy for the layperson to grasp the market's complexity.
"...amateur in finance, this has been a very interesting book and a quick read although I have marked places to read again...." Read more
"...It's just an amazing book. It sounds too simple to be true. Now I'll look for critiques of her ideas, because if this is for real, we need to do it." Read more
"...Nicole Gelinas; she is intuitive, very well researched and writes in a flowing manner that allows the layman to grasp the complications of the market..." Read more
"...are the hallmark of present day Wall Street in a way that was easy to understand...." Read more
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
- Reviewed in the United States on November 9, 2009First, I am not a financial analyst or even a very sophisticated investor. I just wanted to know what happened and, after reading this book, I think I know. Ms Gelinas is a financial analyst and seems to have spent quite a bit of time thinking about what happened and how we might start to put things back together. It began with the changes in banking in the 1980s, largely I believe (although she does not say so) due to inflation. For decades, the savings and loan had a business model of borrowing from savers at four percent interest and lending to homeowners at six percent interest. All that changed when inflation drove those savers, including me, to look for higher returns to compensate for the loss of value from inflation. Most of the evil that followed, in my opinion not hers, can be traced to this phenomenon. Now that I have demonstrated how naive I am, let's consider her book.
She describes the history of the crash in 1929 as a consequence of irrational exuberance and unregulated financial manipulation during the 1920s. She describes, for example, the fall of Sam Insull who built Commonwealth Edison into a modern utility but lost track of all the financing until, in the wake of 1929, it collapsed and took thousands of savers' investments with it. She compares Insull to Enron, a valid comparison, I think. She describes the regulatory steps that were taken by Roosevelt's administration and how it stabilized the financial world for 70 years.
The story of the 2008 collapse begins in 1984 with the rescue of the Continental Illinois Bank. Here began the "too big to fail" story. Two things happened here that led to the crisis. One was the decision to bail out all depositors, including those whose deposits exceeded the FDIC maximum. Secondly, the FDIC guaranteed the bond holders, as well. Thus began the problem of moral hazard. Another feature of this story was the role of Penn Square Bank, which had gone under two years earlier in the wake of the oil price collapse, which devastated many of its poorly collateralized loans in the oil industry. Both banks had been caught seeking higher returns through risky investments. Penn Square, however, had been allowed to collapse. Continental was rescued and that began a trend that the author lays out in detail through most of the rest of the book. It was here, in Chapter three, that I began to underline and take notes. Continental had relied on large amounts of short term money from uninsured depositors. That would be seen again and again in the years to come.
The fact that large banks would be rescued placed small banks at a disadvantage and they complained. Congress, in the first of many well intentioned but useless measures, passed a bill that prohibited the FDIC from protecting uninsured depositors but they added the fatal proviso that exempted "systemic risk" situations. At this point, Charles Schumer, then a Congressman, opposed allowing banks to enter the securities business. The 1984 legislation ignored his concern and the wall was lifted a bit between investment banks and conventional banks. By 1999, when the Glass Steagall Act was largely repealed, Schumer had switched his position to favor the change.
The investment banks took a major step as they became publicly traded companies. This began with Dean Witter in 1972 and Morgan Stanley took the step in 1986. Now, the traders would be risking someone else's money and this was a fateful decision. The author points out that Brown Brothers Harriman remained a partnership in which partners risk their own capital and it has not gotten into trouble with the speculation of the 90s and beyond. By 1993, the six largest commercial banks earned 40% of their profits in trading. Corporate financial services became a larger and more powerful part of the economy. I'm sure I am not the only one who has noted the coming and going of major New York financial figures to and from administrations of both parties.
The next step was the securitization of debt, especially home mortgages but also credit card debt and auto loans. She points out how this resembles Insull and Enron in that long term obligations were rolled into securities and sold to acquire immediate profits. No longer did banks service their own loans. More money could be earned by lending the money several times over. Initially, the risk of the securitized mortgages was early retirement of the debt to refinance at lower rates. In 1986, a drop in interest rates brought an early crisis. At the time, no one dreamed that the next big crisis would be not the risk of early repayment but the risk of default.
She describes the junk bond phenomenon and the development of derivatives. Finally comes the credit default swaps and the stage was set. An opportunity was missed in 1999 and 2000 when the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Brooksley Born, tried to regulate over-the-counter derivatives. Congress passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which barred such regulation and set the stage for the next act, the real estate bubble and collapse. By 2000, the unregulated OTC derivatives markets, which had not existed a decade before, totaled $95 trillion. These were unregulated and there were no margin or capital requirements.
I would have to summarize the whole book, which is only 250 pages, to describe all the points she makes about how this happened. Read it yourself. I will summarize her suggestions for next steps now that the fall has taken place.
An opportunity was missed in the summer of 2008 when Merrill Lynch sold some mortgage backed assets at 22 cents on the dollar. The price was low but nobody knew what the right price was. Allowing these fire sales to proceed would begin to establish a market for these securities. The TARP plan put a stop to this as no one would sell to private bidders when the government would pay a higher price. That was a big mistake and it was soon decided to merely give the banks the money as valuation proved impossible without a market. Some banks that were not in dire straits were forced to take money to conceal which banks were the most shaky. All these were mistakes. Artificially inflated asset values are part of the problem and will delay resolution.
There needs to be a mechanism for bankruptcy of these interconnected institutions. She discusses some options. The markets have been weakened by changes in contract law, especially the Chrysler bailout when senior creditors were forced to the back of the line. She points out that there would have been no outcry about AIG bonuses if the company had been liquidated in some modified bankruptcy proceeding. She wants better disclosure of risk and part of that is regulation of all the exotic derivative products that will remain. There is no possibility that we could go back to the era of Glass Steagall. Times have changed. To big to fail must end. With all the interlocking financial instruments like CD Swaps and other derivatives, that will require a complex system to unwind such networks. On page 177, she recommends a division of failed institutions into two entities, one holding the toxic assets. I believe this is the Swedish "Bad Bank" concept although she doesn't use that term.
The bubble was also stimulated by errors on the part of bond rating agencies that "rented" their AAA ratings, in her estimation. This allowed abuse of the securitization process as tranches of weak loans were sold paired with tranches of "good" loans and the capital requirements differed between the "good" or AAA rated tranches and the lower rated tranches. When the crisis came, the ratings did not work and she recommends that capital requirements for institutions holding such instruments be the same regardless of rating.
For a very inexperienced amateur in finance, this has been a very interesting book and a quick read although I have marked places to read again. I could also see it as very useful for college courses in basic finance. I highly recommend it.
- Reviewed in the United States on March 24, 2010I'm astounded that someone from such a right wing think tank would produce something so sensible and so pro-regulation, but I think Gelinas is right on the money. It's ironic that she often uses the phrase "free market" when she really means regulated markets. Of course, she is against bad regulation and in favor of good regulation, and I think her proposed regulatory framework are exactly right for fostering healthy markets.
Gelinas argues for simplifying but strengthening the regulations governing the financial industry to make the industry far less sensitive to hiccups by making sure that everyone who plays has skin in the game. She proposes that financial instruments be divided into several classes, each with specified consistent minimum margin requirements that apply regardless of ratings and risk assessments. Then leave the market to work its magic. And doing the latter means that no company should ever be considered too big to fail. She points out that with consistent margin requirements, the system will be resilient enough to withstand having even the biggest financial firms collapsing. She explains the value of collapsing firms having to go through normal bankruptcy procedures so that investors and lenders and treated according to the laws as they understood them when they invested--bailouts undermine the laws, introducing uncertainty for investors, and the expectation of bailouts makes companies take more risks.
She gives great historical perspective on how the financial industry break down the reasonable regulations that had existed 30 years ago.
Unfortunately, I don't think either political party has the will to follow her arguments because it will lead to far lower levels of debt/credit, and both sides and all their constituents are addicted to debt/credit. She also does not address the influence of money in the electoral system which is partly how the reasonable regulations of 30 years ago were broken down.






