The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means by George Soros

Aug 21, 2008 Peter marked it as did-not-finish · review of another edition

Maybe it's just me, but this book felt overly complex. I personally believe the true mark of genius is someone who can both understand what is seemingly infinitely complex, while at the same time convey that concept to lay people with ease and in simple terms. George, while likely intelligent (I can't tell, I spent too much time trying to decipher what he was trying to say... and not much time really understanding what he was talking about) either cannot, or chose not to do this. The book is com...more

like · see review

Apr 12, 2008 Rob rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: economics-finance

I felt let down by this book. At first it gives a good overview and timeline of the current credit crunch (although nothing someone wouldn't have known from reading the paper once and a while over the past 6 months). Then, it delves into Soros's theory of "reflexivity", which attempts to debunk efficient market theory. I was highly disappointed in this section. I didn't think it was convincing at all, which says a lot since I'm not a big believer in efficient markets to begin with! All in all, i...more

1 like · like · see review

Nov 21, 2008 sleeps9hours rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

The first Soros I've read. Very interesting. I like his philosophical take on the machinations of the financial markets. Very timely.

Copious notes:

p. 36 Scientific laws cannot be verified; they can only be falsified. That is the role of testing. Scientific laws can be tested by pairing off initial conditions with final conditions. If they fail to conform to the scientific law in question, that law has been falsified. Statements that are not subject to falsification do not qualify as scientific....more

like · see review

Jan 10, 2011 Lumpenprole rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2011, adobe-epub, borrowed, economics, finance, philosophy, politics

Interesting and thought provoking concerning Soros' theory of "Reflexivity," silliness raised to a power of ten when Soros accuses others of being ideological. Curiously, it does not look like most of the predictions he had the cojones to make at the end of the book have come to pass. Yet.

I would also have liked more information on the "Super-bubble" he posited, and whose start date seemed to shift from the end of World War II to the election of Reagan and Thatcher, to whenever was most convenie...more

like · see review

Jul 06, 2010 Celine rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

We were used to Soros thinking of himself as a genius of financial markets - he's been pretty successful (read: lucky) at dodging black swans, you can't take that from him... Now meet the Soros who thinks of himself as a genius of economic theory - one step short of a genius full stop. He confesses to having started "reading classical philosophers in [his:] early teens" (!) and now rubs his 2 neurons together to try and deliver a holistic theory of financial markets through a rather shallow and...more

like · see review

Feb 09, 2009 Wayne rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: 2009, investing-trading, economics, biographical-real-life

I really want to like this book and can't deny that Soros obviously has some fundamental truth to his Reflexivity Theory.

The first half of the book is spent explaining his theory of reflexivity and how it contradicts to the financial equilibrium theory. Both theories are philosophical ideas and the first half of the book reads like a mixture of a philosophy text and an short autobiographical summary of his role in the financial market. This is also the part that I leaves me finding it hard to r...more

like · see review

Apr 04, 2012 Bruce Caithness rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Let me start my review of George Soros’s “The New Paradigm for Financial Markets” by stating that there is much I like in this book, however there is also much that I don’t like. I can only marvel at his skill as a fund manager and his rebuttal of the foolishness of efficient market assumptions. I also applaud his evangelising the philosophy of Karl Popper. If Karl Popper is not the greatest 20th century philosopher I don’t know who else could possibly take the mantle. It is precisely over Karl...more Let me start my review of George Soros’s “The New Paradigm for Financial Markets” by stating that there is much I like in this book, however there is also much that I don’t like. I can only marvel at his skill as a fund manager and his rebuttal of the foolishness of efficient market assumptions. I also applaud his evangelising the philosophy of Karl Popper. If Karl Popper is not the greatest 20th century philosopher I don’t know who else could possibly take the mantle. It is precisely over Karl Popper however that my following of George Soros’s line of argument unravels.

Karl Popper stated that the great mistake of Western philosophy is to conflate truth with justification. In other words we should try to make our knowledge claims objective, rather than trying to justify them as probably or conclusively true. We never experience uninterpreted data. Even sensations are soaked by presuppositions in our neural networks.Empiricists wrongly believe in absolutely given perceptions or facts or data that justify our knowledge. There can be no way to verify our beliefs or perceptions, all we can do is make them open to testing, to being proven wrong. If they pass the test it only means they have been corroborated for now.

Strangely, George Soros, as an avowed follower of Karl Popper, seems to misinterpret or ignore the above core Popperian tenet.His error is to define a “cognitive function” that is somehow able to know with certainty as opposed to “a manipulative function”. This cognitive knowledge says Soros is represented by true statements as opposed to the guesswork of the manipulative function. Soros makes the mistake of interpreting Tarski’s correspondence theory of truth ( a statement is true if and only if it corresponds to the facts) as a concrete achievable goal rather than a regulatory concept. Karl Popper would have been aghast. One of Popper’s core dictums was that the answer to the question: “How do we know?” is “We don’t!”. Rationality requires no foundation, no grounding on expert opinion or consensus. It needs only critical dialogue.

Once Soros makes the claim for justified knowledge via the cognitive function he than needs to find a separate source for biases, reflexivity. He has the cart before the horse. All our knowledge starts with biases, even the cognitive function. There is no possibility of pure knowing, all our knowledge is guesswork. Far from being meaningless, biases and myths and thence critical metaphysics provides the background for the growth of science. The job of reason is to seek evidence not to support our biases but rather to see if they can be refuted.

Nassim Taleb in “The Black Swan” covers similar ground to Soros without the logical inconsistencies. I think there is much of value in Soros’ demolition of the academic hubris that contributed to the 2008 credit crisis but his misreading of Popper could severely confuse readers who have an interest in exploring Popper’s legacy. George Soros is right, the world needs more exposure to Popper’s critical rationalism.
(less)

like · see review

Jul 06, 2010 Lucas rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: economics

It's best to avoid any book with 'paradigm' in the title, but it was the only financial crisis book I could find in the Good Will I was in. The first third of the book should have been cut in half, Soros repeats himself using mostly the same phrasing many times. Also his invented terms for what already has good names in other fields is annoying. One thought provoked was that his view of the economic system that has participants with faulty knowledge (rather than the perfect knowledge assumption...more

like · see review

Apr 08, 2012 Anna Murray rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I paid $2.97 for this book. It was regularly priced at $22.95. I was ripped off! Now I know how the Bank of England felt!

It is amazing that George Soros could be a billionaire, yet have such convoluted and immature thought processes. While he repeatedly claims to be seeking the historical truth, he utterly fails to acknowledge (even once!) the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 and its ramifications on the current financial crisis. While he seems to want to be an oracle of the economy, he makes...more

like · see review

Dec 21, 2008 Peter added it · review of another edition

Soros' theory of reflexivity is interesting, even if I am not sure that what he is talking about is really what should be called a theory. I mean what he has to say about reflexivity is more along the lines of descriptive. But difference between description and theory is so hard to draw. He has a lot to say about why Economics is not a science. I think few would disagree.

However the book is obsessed with random references to various other authors, all of which seem like apostrophes. Certainly h...more Soros' theory of reflexivity is interesting, even if I am not sure that what he is talking about is really what should be called a theory. I mean what he has to say about reflexivity is more along the lines of descriptive. But difference between description and theory is so hard to draw. He has a lot to say about why Economics is not a science. I think few would disagree.

However the book is obsessed with random references to various other authors, all of which seem like apostrophes. Certainly his understanding of the general movements of financial markets is informed and I enjoyed his synopsis of the events leading up to but not including these last few months of the current economic debacle. He is by reputation a very successful trader, but I am not sure he shed much light on either how he applies his 'theory' to his trading or how he thinks reflectivity should be applied to policy decisions. And yet I would not call his effort philosophical. I am not sure what he is really trying to accomplish beyond the brute act of speaking.

At one point he tells an interesting story: his son thinks his financial decisions are motivated more by his aching back than his theoretic understanding of the markets. I become more and more sure, as I continued to read, that his son was probably right. How theorectic speculation affects ones understanding or feeling for something is a very difficult thing to talk about. He does really get into it at all.

Neither was I convinced that the notions contained in the book are as radical or as new as he suggests they are. I am not an expert but I am pretty sure there are many out there who are not big believers in equilibrium assumptions concerning market cycles. And the idea that market movements are self motivating and so ultimately none responsive to static economic models seems to have been around a good long while as well. But who knows?

But mostly the book is hampered in its efforts to explicate what it is it has to say by being as badly written as it is. My word. The book is openly obsessed with its own reception in ways that are not only a little pathetic but have so much of our attention as to systemically interfere with his presentation. The organization of the material, in general, is just awful. To call it sophomoric would be kind. I guess he sells a lot of books. I read this book in a few hours in the bookstore. If his notion of the reflexive nature of market cycles is a jewel, it is a jewel still very much in the rough. (less)

like · see review

Jun 16, 2012 Jonny99 rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

George, I'll just take your word for it. If you invested $10,000USD with George Soros when he started his hedge fund in the late 60's and stayed with him into the late '00's when he closed it, your payout would have been $43,000,000. Suffice to say Soros knows what he is talking about when it comes to investing. Unfortunately, you'll need to be similarly intellectually endowed to grasp his ideas. Soros covers his concept of reflexivity first as an abstract philosophical framework and later as a...more

like · see review

Dec 07, 2008 Chris rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Recommended to Chris by: Matt

The other reviews for this book mostly get it right, so I will not rehash what they have written. I have read the last few books by Soros, and his philosophy takes a while to sink in, but I did not find this book to be overly complex or confusing. Rather, I feel that in explaining the current crisis, Soros's theories on reflexivity, fertile fallacies and his attacks on market fundamentalism are perfectly timed - and if people are serious about a more sophisticated and subtle understanding of the...more

1 like · like · see review

Feb 19, 2009 Robert rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

First off, I must start by saying that I have a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for George Soros! I think he has achieved an incredible amount of good with his wealth while showing the world what is possible when the powerful apply themselves to highest of human ideals. His Open Society foundation is a remarkable achievment and a grand testament to those ideals.

Having said all that, he really needs to move on from this whole Karl Popper/Reflexivity thing. I understand and agree with...more

like · see review

Jul 30, 2009 Steve Venick is currently reading it · review of another edition Recommends it for: anybody trying to understand the financial crisis from a somewhat "philosophical" perspective

I'm not very far into this book so I'll reserve my final judgement until I've finished, but already I find it extremely compelling. The strength of this book is that Soros is very explicit about the conceptual framework that he uses to understand and explain the financial crisis. This allows the reader to judge the argument on its merits because Soros' perspective is out in the open (which is not often the case). The added bonus is that his conceptual framework (he calls it "reflexivity") is, in...more

like · see review

Nov 28, 2008 Jon rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: economics, politics, finance

If you haven't read any Soros books in the past then you'll be frustrated by the first half of the book. He talks about his reflexive theory which his attempt at providing some kind of philosophic idea. The problem with this presentation is that 1/3rd of the time he apologizes for his previous books and attempts to explain reflexive theory. Unfortunately you're not given enough information in this book to fully understand the theory nor make a determination of his motives of this theory. (I alwa...more

like · see review

Jul 27, 2010 Joel rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Very good. Soros is a prescient hedge fund manager and seems to anticipate major moves in financial markets before anyone else. His lack of ego and concerted will to what is right are admirable. The chapters on reflexivity and the fundamentally irrational nature of the human psyche have much broader implications that just financial markets. I also found the section on ways to provide more secure housing and mortgage markets fascinating; in this case, by creating better bankruptcy judges and deve...more

like · see review

Sep 01, 2012 Geoff rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

This is not good literature. Mr. Soros’s writes in a condescending tone throughout the whole thing and uses “I” waaaay to much. He doesn’t explain his theory of Reflexity in a clear, succinct manner. Really couldn’t tell you what it means, other than what you think affects what see and experience, kinda like self-actualizing.. but again, I could be off, b/c Soros does not explain things at a simple level.
His bias permeates the whole book. He constantly impugns Bush administration, but give no fu...more This is not good literature. Mr. Soros’s writes in a condescending tone throughout the whole thing and uses “I” waaaay to much. He doesn’t explain his theory of Reflexity in a clear, succinct manner. Really couldn’t tell you what it means, other than what you think affects what see and experience, kinda like self-actualizing.. but again, I could be off, b/c Soros does not explain things at a simple level.
His bias permeates the whole book. He constantly impugns Bush administration, but give no further explanations as to why said action or policy was wrong...very weak arguments, which is sad b/c knowing he was a liberal going into this book, wanted to hear some cogent arguments. Not here.
Some points on Reflexity:
He makes the distinction that the study of economics cannot be observed like natural phenomena, like nature, and it not a true science. Is this a novel idea among liberals and/or economists? He seems to state this fact over and over again in the book like some profound statement, that humans behavior study at the macro level is not like the laws of nature and cannot be studied like a true science. This is somewhat baffling to me because I knew that for a long time, humans have a free will, emotions, psyche, etc. and this will play into financial markets and in the boarder course of history. Possibly it’s the liberal mindset to “know it all” and have answer for everything and force policy or regulation that makes this fact profound to someone like Soros. Just a thought.
If I had to summarize his theory of Reflixity, it would be that human actions and though can affect reality (duh) and because of this, current economic theory cannot adequately be used in the field of economics for policy, regulation, etc. It’s more confusing and high-minded than that… I’d say its like a self fulfilling prophecy… or something. Mr. Soros states b/c of this fact, older models of economics, i.e. conservative or traditional, market equilibrium, are proven wrong by the recent crash. Oh should probably have wrote that earlier, the crash of 2008 was the reason for him writing this book, and in his mind a test to “prove” his theory. He criticizes the Wall Street and the creation of CDO, CDS, and various other financial products that were heavily involved in the crash of 2008… but I think he misses that a lot of these tools where a result of government policy, i.e. the dream of affordable house, i.e. the extension of credit, i.e. the massive expansion of subprime loans, that where the foundation of the derivatives.
Here’s a walkthrough of how his theory is applied with short selling:
1. Typical risk in short selling stocks is asymetirical with long positions; when going long, the risk is limited when said stock loses all value (most you can lose is the initial capital), the potential upside is unlimited. With short selling, the risk is theoretically unlimited, a stock could up to infinity. Thus short positions are closed very quickly when the market moves against them. This asymmetry discourages shorts.
2. The CDS offers a much better risk/reward scenario for a bear wanting to short a bond. In this situation, the asymetircal relationship is reversed that of stocks. Selling the insurance offers very little reward but much risk; buying the insurance offers little risk with much potential.
3. Reflexity. Mispricing of the CDS contracts on bonds can affect the market price of the bond the CDS was supposed to insure. B/C the CDS where mispriced, market will assume the bonds are worth much less. Bear raids on the institutions become self-validating..
Soros’ then prescribes an economic recovery program. Critical of Paulson letting Leaham fail, then asking for 700 billion from congress…this needs further studying…
Soros does recommend getting rid of the twins, and moving to the dutch mortgage system; of all his ideas this one appears to be good one. All of his other points are a elaborate redistribution scheme; at one point he prescribes inject massive capital into the banks (stimulus) but didn’t specify where this money would come from.
(less)

like · see review

Oct 22, 2009 Ben Pu rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

As a work of philosophy, obtuse and pedantic. Applied outside of the markets, Soros' philosophies are a nice intellectual exercise, but he himself offers very little insight. Additionally, his work is overly simplistic to apply to finance. Reflexivity is a reductionist philosophy that manages to remove the actual insight required to make intelligent investing decisions. His, and any good, investment decisions are based first and foremost on sound fundamental data, good counsel, research, and imp...more

like · see review

Jul 29, 2011 Nilesh rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

The title is misleading. There is no new paradigm truly suggested here. Despite the claim at the outset, the majority of the book focuses on reflexivity explanation again. Surprising why a successful billionaire is so obsessed that his theories are not picked up by some academic philosophers. His bitterness on the front is visible everywhere. For a believer of reflexivity like me, the book provides nothing new on the theory and forecasts for the near-term as well as solutions offered are more li...more

like · see review

May 25, 2009 Caroline rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I appreciated the candid description of the ideology that has gotten our economy into trouble - he calls it 'market fundamentalism'. Too many politicians & regulators have been thinking & acting as if market forces on their own would automatically correct the economy so there wasn't any need for any regulations... never mind the lessons from the Great Depression. The laws passed during FDR's presidency in the 30's to ensure nothing that bad could ever happen again are not relevant to our...more

like · see review

Nov 18, 2008 Austen rated it 1 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Recommended to Austen by: Amanda Yaggy

"People want to know what lies ahead. I cannot tell them because I do not know. What I want to tell them is something different. I want to explain the human condition."

I am not an economist, nor do I participate in financial markets in any significant way. Really, I never even took a business course as an undergraduate. I mention this because many of the specific details that Soros presents are cloaked in a specialized language that is almost totally unfamiliar to me. Even Wikipedia can't help m...more "People want to know what lies ahead. I cannot tell them because I do not know. What I want to tell them is something different. I want to explain the human condition."

I am not an economist, nor do I participate in financial markets in any significant way. Really, I never even took a business course as an undergraduate. I mention this because many of the specific details that Soros presents are cloaked in a specialized language that is almost totally unfamiliar to me. Even Wikipedia can't help me understand what a Hedge Fund is...

However, there are some concepts that I can wrap my head around. Th Federal Reserve Bank lowered interest rates significantly after the internet bubble (think .com entrepreneurs who made tons of money) burst in 2000, and then again after September 11th, 2001. They continued to do so until the federal interest rate had reached just 1% in 2004, from 6.5% in early 2000. This is done, of course, to stimulate economic growth when a possible economic crisis looms. However, this extremely low interest rate meant that central banks and other financial institutions took out alot of money from the Fed, so that they could turn around and loan it out (think mortgages to people who really can't afford them). This however, is only part of a larger "super bubble" that Soros perceives in today's (semi-global?) economy that has been growing since Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980.

Soros is proposing that an economic era is ending--an era that has placed the United States in the center of a global economy, and that has meant lavish and relatively unrestricted profits for largely-American companies and corporations. He insists that traditional ways of looking at the marketplace are fundamentally incorrect because they assume that free (unrestricted) markets are self-correcting, and that equilibrium is the default state. Soros, instead further develops his idea of (two-way) reflexivity, which has led many over the years to refer to him as a failed philosopher, if an extremely successful investor and Hedge Fund manager.
His concept of reflexivity doesn't strike me as profound--that there is a difference between the reality we perceive and reality, itself. In the case of financial markets, this is difficult because we affect the reality we perceive because we act upon it, based upon our assumptions of a reality that we are constantly manipulating. As such, Soros says that his theory can help us to understand the past, but not the future--markets tend toward unpredictability, and humans possess an imperfect understanding of reality. Also, complicating his and our understanding of modern day economic trends are the increasing abstraction and complexity of recently developed market tools. These new ways of buying, repacking, trading, rearranging, and selling are so complicated that when, for example, I default on my mortgage, it is extremely difficult to figure out who owns what, and who has to pay whom. The increasingly amorphous and abstract way that investments are rearranged and exchanged has created a situation (already abetted by Republican politicians infatuated with the self-regulating, free market myth) where regulatory agencies can sometimes no longer assess the risk of a given investment, and instead rely upon the information provided by the institution offering the investment, itself.

Our economy is out of control, but it appears that the past few decades of economic deregulation, bold risk-taking, and unimagined prosperity for some (perhaps even the reality of the dollar standard!) has largely come to an end. Although, no one, including Soros seem to know what even the next few years will hold for our economy. (less)

like · see review

Nov 06, 2008 Bart rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Those interested in the economic theory of reflexivity

This book marks what George Soros promises is his final treatment of the invaluable theory of reflexivity. The New Financial Paradigm is too long by half, yes, and Soros occasionally tries to cram reflexivity into his explanations of unrelated phenomena. But for all that, reflexivity is a wonderful tool that has been both undeservedly dismissed and undeservedly unremarked upon.

The term reflexivity is derived from Romance languages’ transitive and self-referential verbs. Effectively it is derived...more

like · see review

Oct 10, 2008 Eric rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: economics

Picked up this book three weeks ago as it seemed timely. Just finished it last night, not quite so timely!

Soros wants to be a philosopher, but he should just stop with that and read some more. He has the Theory of Reflexivity - that real people and their thoughts are a part of market dynamics, and thus markets don't behave according to the dominant equilibrium analysis. There is feedback between facts and thoughts, and between thoughts and thoughts. He spends way to much time on this without pro...more Picked up this book three weeks ago as it seemed timely. Just finished it last night, not quite so timely!

Soros wants to be a philosopher, but he should just stop with that and read some more. He has the Theory of Reflexivity - that real people and their thoughts are a part of market dynamics, and thus markets don't behave according to the dominant equilibrium analysis. There is feedback between facts and thoughts, and between thoughts and thoughts. He spends way to much time on this without progressing the concept. He seems unaware that there are sciences that incorporate uncertainties. Thermodynamics, of resurgent importance in this day and age, has has done so for like 150 years.

Soros also does not take care to isolate the issue of unstable positive feedback loops from that of uncertainty. Brains in the loop - impossible to analyze. Positive feedback though, is another matter.

I was also disappointed that in the end, he discloses that his investment strategy for 2008 included shorting US stocks. I personally have believed for a long time that shorting is a dangerous practice, and unnecessary for liquidity as is so often argued. Shorting makes it possible for individuals to make money in a downward drafting market. That is why it is done. If a company is doing poorly, there will be plenty of sellers. And the price will drop. We need that to be accelerated by shorting?

Anyway, to get to the point, shorting is an amplifying positive feedback.

A. I see a stock going down and think it will go further.
B. Even though I don't own it, I sell it.
C. It goes down.

If shorting is done on a big enough scale, it drives the price down even faster than it would otherwise. That's the positive feedback.

Buying stock is also a positive feedback loop, in that large enough purchases will cause the stock to rise, leading to more purchases. This can lead to bubbles, perhaps you can think of a few of those in the recent past.

But buying is at least a bet on a positive outcome. Why allow people to place self-fulfilling bets on negative outcomes? Is the liquidity value worth the damage?

So I was hugely disappointed when after Soros' analysis of the market problems, his so-called super-bubble, he then invokes a strategy of shorting without acknowledging its role in the problems.(less)

like · see review

Aug 26, 2008 Max Stone rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I have the more-or-less standard criticism of this book, I assume. The author is a great and famous investor, and a not-so-great and not-so-famous philosopher, and again he has written a book that is 85% about his philosophy and added just enough stuff about current financial markets that people will buy it to read his investing opinion. on the positive side, he is very upfront that that is what he is trying to do.

the problems with his philosophy (which very briefly, is that markets are inheren...more I have the more-or-less standard criticism of this book, I assume. The author is a great and famous investor, and a not-so-great and not-so-famous philosopher, and again he has written a book that is 85% about his philosophy and added just enough stuff about current financial markets that people will buy it to read his investing opinion. on the positive side, he is very upfront that that is what he is trying to do.

the problems with his philosophy (which very briefly, is that markets are inherently unstable because there is a feedback loop between markets and people's opinions on markets, which leads to chaotic price action, in the sense that it is impossible to create rules to predict what will happen, because those very rules will alter the process, etc) are:

1. it isn't as original or as important as he seems to think. sure, I buy that no investing rule is guaranteed to work because the very knowledge of it working will make it not work so well any more. and I get that there are all sorts of feedback loops there. but not sure I need his whole philosophical framework around that.

2. i think his fundamental message about the credit crash is somewhat misguided. briefly, it is that since markets are subject to feedback loops which take prices far from equilibrium prices, we need more regulations to prevent stuff from getting too out of control. but it the leap from "sometimes stuff moves far beyond equilibrium or fair pricing" to "therefore we need to regulate" that I think is a stretch. sometimes intervention is the right thing, but he presents no evidence about how far is too far from equilibrium, and the costs and consequences of waiting for markets to returns in the direction of equilibrium of their own accord (which they will; I assume even Soros wouldn't say they will move infinitely far away). I'm not a market fundamentalist who believes everything is best off left solely to markets, but I didn't think his reasoning here was very convincing.

of course he is a kajillion times more successful investor than I will ever be, so what do I know? I'm sure he'd give any book I wrote negative 3 stars....(less)

like · see review

Mar 03, 2009 Greg rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Soros turns philosopher and develops his "theory of reflexivity". The way he does this is by repeating it about three dozens times. Repeating oneself does not equal profundity. Throwing in a plethora of anecdotes about how one made or lost money doesn't do it either. I kept waiting for this amazing theory to be developed. Then I hit the end of the book.

The "theory," he admits, is not really a theory, but a rejection of the idea of market equilibrium. One reason is that equilibrium theory assumes...more Soros turns philosopher and develops his "theory of reflexivity". The way he does this is by repeating it about three dozens times. Repeating oneself does not equal profundity. Throwing in a plethora of anecdotes about how one made or lost money doesn't do it either. I kept waiting for this amazing theory to be developed. Then I hit the end of the book.

The "theory," he admits, is not really a theory, but a rejection of the idea of market equilibrium. One reason is that equilibrium theory assumes perfect knowledge, and human knowledge is limited and fallible. More importantly, he reasons that the interplay between human analysis and manipulation is too intertwined. In other words, we cannot study markets like we do physics, because the humans studying are also participating. It's a good point as far as it goes. I always view it as a good sign when we humans step back from our pretense of objectivity and realize the limitations of our our knowledge.

I did appreciate this book for explaining the current mortgage crisis, something I knew little about. The crisis is an example of his theory. Lenders after the tech bubble burst (and after 9/11) began to lend more with the extremely low fed rates. Housing prices rose. Then the lenders looked at their "objective" fundamentals and found they had high principle-to-loan ratios. So they lent more, often to folks with bad credit. And they packaged the credit into all sorts of innovative unregulated instruments, and sold them to other "objective" humans. More people buying and refinancing homes meant housing prices continued to rise. Everything went up - expectations and the so-called fundamentals. And so the "reflexive" cycle went.

Soros is no socialist - he believes the free market can be very efficient and in most cases, is the most beneficial system of economics for everyone. It just needs some level of judicious regulation. How much and what kind is the real question. He proposes some such regulations. For example, he proposes some ideas for how to regulate these new innovative credit instruments that are out of control. But he does so at a very high, almost sound-bite, level. I would have liked more there.

I don't know enough to evaluate his idea that we are in a dangerous "super-bubble," extending far beyond the housing market. He predicts its going to burst in a big way. Maybe so. Hope not.

POST-REVIEW NOTE: It did burst. I wrote the review above in July 2008. It's now March 2009 and the Dow is below 7000 - still diving since the mortgage crisis last fall. Wow. He was right.(less)

like · see review

Feb 01, 2009 Sally rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: history-current, economics, philosophy-personal

That markets and other social institutions are filled with human uncertainty rather than being subject to description and prediction using strict scientific laws would seem obvious. However, recent economic thought has held the opposite, fancying itself in the realm of the physical sciences. This book puts forward the author's alternative theory of how the market works and his analysis of events over the last decades that have led to the present financial crisis. Worth reading.

like · see review

Mar 25, 2011 ^ rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, business, books-with-101-to-1000-ratings

Soros tells what it is to be human. The description and quantification of risk urgently needs to be improved (pg 74). Politics is more concerned with the oursuit of power rather than the pursuit of truth (pg. 44). But HOW, given the spread of intelligence in the population, are we to achieve, "an electorate that insists on certain standards of truth and honesty"? But how can even that solve the problem, in a world where the very, very, rich operate statelessly?

like · see review

Jul 29, 2011 Laila Kassis rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

A good overview of how we got to the current financial crisis and some recommendations for going forward. While not overly technical, knowledge of financial terminology is required to understand the book. Soros aspires to be a philosopher. As such, he spends too much time on his theory of reflexivity and perhaps leaves the reader wanting more perscriptions going forward.

like · see review

Feb 21, 2009 Marc rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Excellent analysis and review of the credit "crash" of '08, as well as other bubbles throughout financial history. The sections that related to his theory on reflexivity were very confusing - I don't see how a man as brilliant in finance and arbitrage as this can't do a better job explaining a theory he "developed"! I personally feel he extends the efficient market hypothesis a bit too far into realms it was not meant to be applied. Still, worth the read for the few chapters cover the financial...more

like · see review

Jun 16, 2008 Scott rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: Those with a strong thirst for financial market knowledge and current affairs.

For those of you who don't quite understand why the economy is not doing so hot and the causal factors that have led to the housing bubble as well as the "super-bubble" as Soros puts it, this is the book for you. Soros combines both philosophy and financial/economic expertises in relaying his message that the causal factors of the aforementioned "bubbles" can be tied to a term "reflexivity." In a nutshell reflexivity has two main parts, a cognitive function (what we know) and the manipulation fu...more

like · see review

title link	preview: The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means
avg rating	preview: The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means Goodreads rating: 3.28 (539 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4933240-the-new-paradigm-for-financial-markets?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1328013913l/4933240.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4933240-the-new-paradigm-for-financial-markets?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means by George Soros[/url]

The New Paradigm for Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What It Means

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (18)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About George Soros

Books by George Soros

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About The New Paradigm ...