dianagangan's review against another edition
5.0
Love him or hate him, Yanis Varoufakis very masterfully pokes massive holes in the 'we the ants and them the grasshoppers' discourse blatantly repeated by so many in the Northern Europe with pitiful condescendence towards the Southern European.
Anyone looking for inflationary Euroscepticism in this needs to understand that Varoufakis has the idea of Europe at the very heart of this book and his philosophy - one wouldn't get so worked up over something they innately reject. But this book is a massive wake-up call for immediate changes to Europe and the eurozone, and we can't ignore it any longer.
Anyone looking for inflationary Euroscepticism in this needs to understand that Varoufakis has the idea of Europe at the very heart of this book and his philosophy - one wouldn't get so worked up over something they innately reject. But this book is a massive wake-up call for immediate changes to Europe and the eurozone, and we can't ignore it any longer.
frafeeccino's review against another edition
challenging
informative
medium-paced
3.5
Interesting but hard to follow at times
worldlibraries's review against another edition
4.0
I had never heard of the author, or the book, or had any desire to read about European monetary policy before reading this book. The author looked intimidating and scary on the cover. I read this because my book club was reading it. Book clubs get you to read books you wouldn't read otherwise. So, I started this book with dread.
This man can teach, that's for sure. He was a superb explainer of decision-making that has given us the global financial systems we are living with now. Even better, he used Greek mythology in his metaphors, which I found to be quite entertaining. As an author, he was very good at explaining decisions from multiple points-of-view (I kept wondering if he had been in Model UN, so good was he at seeing the decisions to be made from the cards in each hand).
Two things that went unexplained, that I would have liked to have heard explained. The author said the USA came up with a system to finance their imbalance of trade and deficits, which involved 'degrading the economy' so that Americans earned less, enabling better Wall Street profits, thereby attracting foreign money to Wall Street. But he didn't explain why the USA didn't make the choice of just making imports more expensive so that the USA wouldn't need to attract foreign money. That's what Trump is doing. I would have loved to read an outsider's perspective on taking the road of lessening imports and deficit spending. Does that mean tariffs are the right thing to maintain wages at home?
Another thing that went unexplained is Greek national finances. He did a great job explaining how current EU systems will turn Europeans against each other, but he had to go into those EU finance meetings defending Greek spending. I want to hear his opinion about Greek national spending, as all of Europe's is that it wasn't defensible. I even had an American friend who lost his job teaching at a Greek university due to their finances defend the Greeks by saying, 'all Europeans knew that Greece had cooked books when they entered the EU.' Really? Is that true? If so, how is that defensible? I wanted to hear him explain that.
Reading this book made me grateful for my nation's problems in the United States. Having a European Union without democracy seems like a train wreck waiting to happen. And it doesn't sound like anyone at the top is interested in a democracy either. I wish the Europeans Godspeed on getting to a real continent-wide democracy without ending up resenting each other or worse. Best of luck!
This man can teach, that's for sure. He was a superb explainer of decision-making that has given us the global financial systems we are living with now. Even better, he used Greek mythology in his metaphors, which I found to be quite entertaining. As an author, he was very good at explaining decisions from multiple points-of-view (I kept wondering if he had been in Model UN, so good was he at seeing the decisions to be made from the cards in each hand).
Two things that went unexplained, that I would have liked to have heard explained. The author said the USA came up with a system to finance their imbalance of trade and deficits, which involved 'degrading the economy' so that Americans earned less, enabling better Wall Street profits, thereby attracting foreign money to Wall Street. But he didn't explain why the USA didn't make the choice of just making imports more expensive so that the USA wouldn't need to attract foreign money. That's what Trump is doing. I would have loved to read an outsider's perspective on taking the road of lessening imports and deficit spending. Does that mean tariffs are the right thing to maintain wages at home?
Another thing that went unexplained is Greek national finances. He did a great job explaining how current EU systems will turn Europeans against each other, but he had to go into those EU finance meetings defending Greek spending. I want to hear his opinion about Greek national spending, as all of Europe's is that it wasn't defensible. I even had an American friend who lost his job teaching at a Greek university due to their finances defend the Greeks by saying, 'all Europeans knew that Greece had cooked books when they entered the EU.' Really? Is that true? If so, how is that defensible? I wanted to hear him explain that.
Reading this book made me grateful for my nation's problems in the United States. Having a European Union without democracy seems like a train wreck waiting to happen. And it doesn't sound like anyone at the top is interested in a democracy either. I wish the Europeans Godspeed on getting to a real continent-wide democracy without ending up resenting each other or worse. Best of luck!
annagunstone's review against another edition
4.0
Interesting and informative but at points a little confused (although perhaps this is my own ignorance).