Worth the money but giving Paulson an objective "grade" on his book is not easy when you do not believe in "too big to fail ".

An interesting insight as to how government works at the height of an emergency. A good read.

Paulson doesn't waste the reader's time with politically-correct posturing, nor does he play the blame-game and president-bashing so popular among the less mature. He states the facts as he sees them from his unique, hands-on perspective, and presents his analysis therefrom. This is an instructional read, not fluff. It holds the reader's interest.

Many of my readers know that I am: (a) Reading every single book that comes out on the economic crisis of 2008, and (b) Reviewing every single credible book that comes out about the crisis of 2008, and (c) Writing my own book about the economic crisis of 2008 - one that I want to be a truly thoughtful and credible synopsis of what really, intrinsically, fundamentally caused the crisis. I have read so many books at this point that many go in one ear and out the other. However, a handful of books, whether I agreed with all of their prescriptions or not, have been so descriptively valuable I can not imagine what my project would look like without them. Hank Paulson's new 453-page On the Brink is all of that, and then some.

As a participant in and observer of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, one of the things I yearn for is more color behind what specifically and mechanically caused the events of September 2008. I believe a worldview is required that can make heads or tails of the TARP, specifically, and overall government response, generally. I am still fine-tuning my beliefs about what exactly should have been the proper response. As is often the case, there is an abundance of simplicity being applied to this mess that is neither intelligible nor useful in this dialogue. There is also an abundance of wicked ideology being applied that is dangerous and at the heart of why I feel this project is so important. It is easy for those of my market-driven, conservative ideology to dismiss everything Hank Paulson did as "statist". It is easy for a vulgar writer of a rock n' roll magazine to determine that Paulson was a tool of a vast Goldman Sachs conspiracy to take over the solar system. I do not know which one of the two mind-numbingly retarded conclusions are more ridiculous, but I do know that readers of this review hoping that I will paint Paulson as the major antagonist of this drama will be very disappointed. And as for the Oliver Stone-nutters, well, let's face it - you probably don't read me anyways. Not for long.

The vast majority of the first few chapters are loaded with ammunition for what has long been a major thesis of mine about the crisis: We are being naive to minimize the role Fannie and Freddie played in causing it. I learned more from Paulson's book about the specific mechancis behind Fannie and Freddie's dreadful role in our financial crisis, and I actually mean a lot more here than merely the abysmal social policy the two institutions represented. I also mean what the real connection was behind the placement of those two parasite organizations into government conservatorship in early September and the subsequent failure of Lehman Brothers and AIG in mid-September. I really do not know where to start. If Fannie and Freddie had never existed, ever, I very much doubt that any housing bubble would have ever taken place, and therefore no housing implosion would have taken place. And once these two disastrous entities were allowed to exist, if they had not been continually built up by the powerful Congressmen who were being paid off by them, I do not believe the crisis would have ever taken place. And if once these powerful institutions had achieved their sweetheart status in our nation's capital they had then been forced to compete with private institutions for capital (apart from the insidious "implicit" guarantee of government money), I am certain that the crisis would have been averted. And if once they had functioned with total monopoly status for decades, governmental oversight had reined them in, muting the sociopathic forces in Congress that called for them to expand their lending practices more and more, I am sure the disaster would not have taken place. But by September of 2008, we were so deep into this pile of you-know-what, that it is hard to see what the options were. The placement of Fannie and Freddie into conservatorship in September of 2008 is hardly controversial. What I am offended by is that these beasts were ever given the right to life. And what I am unbelievably offended by is that now, eighteen months after the initial action to seize these companies (which already existed by government charter and had already indebted themselves to the tune of trillions of dollars with an "implicit government guarantee"), policymakers continue to prop up these dysfunctional entities, adding more funds (unlimited funds, to be exact), rather than selling them off bit by bit and setting the stage for fully-privatized models to assume control. It can be done, and it must be done, but to do so means letting go of one of the most religious tenets of government policy of my lifetime: the role of government in setting social policy through manipulation of the housing market. Anyone who reads Paulson's early chapters on Fannie and Freddie will come away disgusted, not by what happened in July and then September of 2008, but by the entire Fannie/Freddie fiasco.

I told my wife when reading Paulson's book that I was waiting to read one of these many books that feature a play-by play of the week of September 12, 2008 without feeling physically ill. Paulson's book kept the tradition alive, for indeed, that horrfic nightmare of a week was told in passionate detail by Paulson, and my visceral reaction remains one of genuine physical discomfort. I have to wait until my own expanded commentary of the crisis to elaborate, but I truly believe that the obsession many of us have in criticizing the TARP is incredibly misguided. Some of the more cartoonish commentaries on the crisis that have said, "there wasn't really a crisis; we all would have been okay; the whole thing was made up" - reflect an incredible ignorance about the global financial system. I want to believe somewhere deep down inside of me that Paulson and his crew calculated that some company was going to have to die, and that the financial system's medicine would need to begin. But I don't really believe that. I think they let Lehman die because they actually believed the damage would be contained, and when they saw what was happening to the worldwide financial system when it did, the panic bells began ringing without a break. We are never going to know what would have happened had no version of TARP been passed. I do not believe that the motivation of the Treasury Secretary was to expand the role of government in our lives; I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that he believed (and still believes) that there was no choice at all if we were to avoid financial armageddon. I do not believe him that at the time he argued before Congress for the imperative need of TARP, his intention was for it to be used to purchase toxic assets, and then within a week or two of its passing realized that capital injections into the financial firms was the more prudent way to go. The reality is that I think they knew all along that this is what the TARP was going to be. The chapter in which Paulson tells us of McCain calling the emergency meeting in D.C. to discuss TARP makes me almost glad that he was not elected President (and amused at how badly his political strategists were out-maneuvered). The attempt by lawmakers to add on their particular agenda item to the bill paints the political process at its worst possible light. And most of all, the mere history of the passage of TARP leaves a breathing, thinking human being absolutely mystified at the political environment we are in today. The Democrats do not let a day go by without villainizing the horrors of the Wall Street bailouts, yet the reality is that this was a bill fervently supported by Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, Barney Frank, Charles Schumer, Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, and basically every single Demoractic lawmaker of consequence from top to bottom. Somehow, some way, the Democrats have managed to sponsor, rally behind, and pass the infamous bill known as TARP, and simultaneously condemn it, lambast it, and rhetorically crush it, all with the media as a willing accomplice to their crime.

99% of what I intend to say about TARP has to do with why it never should have been necessary to begin with (because yes, government created this crisis), and why it should never be allowed to create the aftermath it is creating (things of the "do not let a crisis go to waste" variety). Only 1% of my thoughts on TARP have to do with how Congressmen and women voted that day. I believe that the attempts by leftist progressives to use this bill as an excuse to further the role of government in the nation's financial systems is hardly a surprising consequence. And as Jonah Goldberg has said, perhaps this "crap sandwich" should have caused some lawmakers to vote differently. But it is rather short-sighted to leave it there. Had the credit markets broken altogether, the country's financial system would today be fully and completely nationalized. The efforts of conservatives who value individual liberty need to be focused on never, ever again allowing the perfect storm of government policy to create such a crisis. It can be done. The paradigm that Paulson and his men imperfectly navigated through in the fall of 2008 was not the paradigm we want to live in. Let's change that paradigm, and more intelligently understand the financial crisis we went through.

Ultimately, the idea that TARP was a bailout of Wall Street is pure, unadulterated nonsense. But that rhetoric is set in stone, and nothing is going to change the national perception at this point. The nation's financial companies could have been allowed to go into bankruptcy, as many surely would have (deservedly so). Depositors with over $100,000 of cash would have lost their funds, but depositor losses would look like a walk in the park compared to the losses of bondholders. And that, my friends, is what the bailouts of 2008 were about - a bailout of the debtholders of the world's financial system. Why this was the case, and what it means, will be explained in my ongoing commentary. Why Paulson and others were willing to let TARP be branded as a bailout of Wall Street firms when, in fact, the common equity of those firms was decimated, is a true mystery. The vast majority of Wall Street executives actually involved in running their firms into the ground were long gone by September of 2008. The largest bailouts had nothing to do with Wall Street firms at all, but were in fact an insurer (AIG) and two mortgage companies (Fannie and Freddie). Every one of the nine firms that took the initial draft of TARP money have paid it back at huge, huge profits to the taxpayers. What TARP did in hindsight was not to bailout Wall Street but actually allow it to be far more villainized in the American conscience than it ever needed to be. The farming industry which has been pillaging the American taxpayer in ways that would make Wall Street blush for three decades is actually considered a force of heroism. The automakers may be scoffed at, but they are hardly hated. TARP made all this possible. And I suppose what I would suggest to my readers is that TARP was the worst thing that ever happened to Wall Street, not the best. But as for the vote that took place in September of 2008 (and again a few days later in early October), I will not condemn the lawmakers who voted for the legislation that their Treasury Secretary told them would be necessary to save the system from collapse. The situation warrants more nuance than many are capable of granting it.

Paulson's book is shocking in the extent it goes to at portraying George W. Bush as engaged, thoughtful, and courageous. Paulson surely knows Bush would have made an easy sacrifical lamb, and he went the exact opposite direction. With no benefit to Paulson whatsoever, I find that intriguing. The book is anything but defensive, and in fact, he makes it very clear in the book's powerful concluding chapters that he does not apologize for how he formulated the government response to the crisis. I believe Secretary Paulson and I would have vast ideological differences if I were ever allowed to dialogue with him directly about this crisis. But I hold him in high regard as a man and as a patriot. I do not question his intentions. You will not either if you give his book a fair read. I commend it to you wholeheartedly.

Great job in explaining the complexities and the crisis nature of the near collapse of the world financial system. Great understanding of Hank Paulson and the near impossible job of working with congress to avert the collapse. Our congressional leaders do not have a clue except for their own personal self serving personal political agendas. One gains a greater respect for the team that Paulson assembled to deal with the crisis.

Paulson's view on the events are surely the best insight to what actually took place. The other accounts (journalists) out there in books are only a second hand account of the story. Paulson was a principle in the unfolding of the economic blow up and even if jaded would be best told by him. Very interesting and insightful from the number one player in this game.

Having read "Too Big to Fail" before reading "On the Brink", I was well aware that Paulson was the highest paid CEO on Wall Street in 2005 and that when he sold his Goldman stock to move to Treasury, his tax break on the sale was over $100 million. Paulson is a wealthy and extremely powerful man. I was unprepared for his attempts to portray himself as an oatmeal-eating "everyman", eating toast from an ancient toaster (because it still works)as he got up in the morning dressed in his boxers and t-shirt! Hank, you're never going to be like me! Don't try.
Paulson goes through the blow-by-blow account. I learned some new details that escaped me at the time but was left with the feeling that I never got close to understanding his true feelings or frustrations. He comes across and just too nice and the book is too superficial.

This book provides an excellent play by play of the financial crisis. Paulson provides a detailed account of his time as Treasury Secretary detailing the actions taken in regards to Bears Sterns, Lehman Brothers, AIG, and the rest. He does an excellent job in describing each situation in easy to understand language and in a very readable tone. This book serves as a great recap of the crisis.

As for Paulson commentary on the crisis, that is another matter all together. He continual insists that his actions were necessary to "save the system" but never goes any deeper. As each struggling financial institution is discussed, Paulson argues that the government must intervene or the system will collapse. He leaves unanswered question such as: How can an entire economy suddenly collapse? And how was the system somehow able to survive when Lehman did in fact fail? The phrase "save the system" is used so frequently throughout the book that Paulson comes off as a chicken little continually asserting that the sky is falling. In addition, Paulson asserts throughout the book that he is a believer in the free market. Yet all his actions show that he has very little faith in the free market. When confronted with each crisis, never does he rely on the market to overcome the problem, but instead looks to government intervention. It is always about what can be done by the Treasury, the FED, or the SEC. It is always about what powers each agency has and how they can get more. And it is not just in a crisis that Paulson believes in large government intervention. His final chapter discusses all the increased regulatory powers Paulson would like to see given to government. His often repeated faith in the market is at odds with every other statement in the book.

Hank Paulson pulls back some of the curtain that exposed his view of what took place mostly in 2008, as he battled through all manner of issues to help "save the system". This book does not explain fully how we got into the economic mess we find ourselves (it is not meant to); but this book reads like a "thriller" as Paulson writes, day by day, what happened, and the reasoning for his actions. I found the book well written, and hard to put down. Given I had read recently on Bear Sterns (Bear-Trap), and Lehman Brothers (A Colossal Failure of Common Sense), this was a nice additional book to further round out the view of what really happened. Of note, President Bush get's a lot of praise from Paulson for doing what was right, not what was expedient for his party. His interactions with John McCain and Barrack Obama, before and after the election, were illuminating. After watching last week's healthcare summit, where President Obama dressed McCain down "the election is over", some of Paulson stories seem very believable. Paulson makes very clear that Treasury, during the saving of Bear Sterns, would help protect exposed losses of any acquirer from the over valued assets. This helps make the deal for Bear Sterns doable. However, for Lehman, there is explicitly no such government support. Paulson says several times, "this deal [Lehman] is different as there was no buyer". Of course there was no buyer! When the Treasury says over and over again, "no support", what else would you expect? Paulson tried to encourage the market to save it's own competitor (privately funded pool), but that is very different to what was on offer during Bear Sterns collapse. Barclay's certainly came close to buying Lehman, but again, this came way too late in the process. If you read A Colossal Failure I get the feeling that Lehman's chairman and CEO, Dick Fauld, did not get on with Paulson. However, none of this seems reciprocated in Paulson's book. A Colossal Failure was written by an ex-employee of Lehman, so there is bound to be some sour grapes. But Dick Fauld's "they have to save me" persona seems to ring true. I get the feeling Paulson decided sometime, "We cant bail everyone out, so it might as well be Lehman that becomes the buck that breaks the cycle". The problem was no one could predict the impact. In the last chapter of Paulson's book he get's to talk about what he would do to protect the economy in the future; he talks about changes in policy, governance, and regulation. I would love to hear Paulson explore this list with Ron Paul: that should prove an interesting debate. Recommended 9 out of 10.

True, it is one man's account. And Hank Paulson is not an objective observer of the events of 2007-2008. But I certainly got the sense that the man was making a good faith attempt to be honest, transparent, and candid in his retelling of this vital story. Well-written with a mimimum of jargon. Highly recommended.

Fascinating account of the whirlwind of activity going on behind the scenes to avert one crisis after another. The pace and scope of efforts to keep the major banks and then the overall economy operating is staggering. While many are critical of the TARP program it is now apparent that the capital injections were the right remedy at the time.

I found Paulson's book very well-written and informative. First I read NY Times journalist Aaron Sorkin's "Too Big To Fail" for a journalist's perspective on part of the ongoing financial crisis. On The Brink offers Hank Paulson's inside view as a key government official. The two books complement each other nicely. The subject matter may be a bit dry, but its importance to our economy and future is vital.

Paulson's book is the latest and perhaps the best yet of a cascade of books on the financial crisis which brought the world to the precipice, and one can only conclude that Paulson is a great American hero who performed enormous service to his country -- service that perhaps he alone could provide in that moment of crisis. Nevertheless I was disappointed in that it is the book of an investment banker who keeps secrets and is always loyal to his client. While this loyalty to his president is laudable, I believe that he has a higher duty to the American people and to history to fully disclose what happened and I am not sure that he did.

It is the collapse of Lehman which is by far the most controversial element in the story, yet the "he said she said" narrative is sparse. For example, at the time Paulson was quoted in the papers as having opened the famous banker's meeting with the statement that "the political will does not exist to save Lehman" or words to that effect. Such a statement raises profound questions about the role that George Bush and Dick Cheney may have played in the decision not to bail out Lehman. Paulson's statement does not appear in the book nor is there discussion of Bush or Cheney's roles with respect to the decision not to bail out Lehman. If in fact such a policy decision had been made, then this misjudgment would relegate the handling of Katrina to a historical footnote.

Regarding the Lehman decision, Paulson hides behind the assertion, no doubt technically correct, that neither The Fed nor the regulatory agences had the requisite authority; yet as was amply demonstrated in this crisis, when there was political will, there was always a way.

Love him or hate him, Paulson is an interesting person. This book is not personel enough. To much time is spent re telling events already covered by others. Really getting his gut feelings and his story are the best part of the book. I would read Too Big To Fail by Sorkin over this. You can only read so many of these books and the double dip is still coming and will produce more books.

Our nation was extremely fortunate in its economic team in the fall of 2008. Hank Paulson's account of what happened reads like a cliff-hanger. No self-respecting author would put his hero through the sustained pressure that Hank and his team endured. I am not a politician or financier, but I found his account of what was at stake and the size of the disaster that hit us easy to follow.
He is quite open about what he feels were the failures that led our problems. He does not use this book to explore what we need to do to prevent its re-occurance. But he does allow us to see the difference between wishful thinking in some of the institutions that failed and the hard headed realism that brought other institutions to safety. We all need to be reminded of that. It is an account of the successes and failures of leadership.
The courage that President Bush showed, on occasions backing his Treasury Secretary against the united views of the political team in The White House was a side of the President I had not seen, and was pleased to learn about.
This is a compelling book that should not be missed by anybody who is interested in solutions to the problems in our financial systems.

This book was a well written account of the behind the scene decisions that helped save this country from another great depression. Whether you believe in all of the decisions made by Paulson, Bernanke, and Geitner it is hard to not appreciate the effort and reason that led to the decisions that were made. This book can be hard to understand for those not familiar with the nuts and bolts of financial products. For that reason, it is easy for a person to judge the decisions made based on what the media or politicians have told us. Hank Paulson is a truly great american who stepped up to the plate not for financial gain or power but because he knew that with his experience and financial expertise, the country needed him. None of us like the debt that the country and government is currently in but the result was not based on the decisions Bernanke and Paulson made but those that were made by the beurocrats in Washington.

Anyone who is involved in Finance or Business should read this book for the blow by blow accounting of the near collape of the US Financial System.
Unbelievable how close we all came to a Financial Doomsday.
Highly recomend this book!

"On the Brink" is a book that I am sure will be used as a classroom text and a reference book to one of the biggest calamities our country faced. The only difference between our economic turmoil and Perl Harbor is one was fought with words and the other fought with guns. The potential results of both were similar. Paulson's book is reporting from within the beltway and within our government staff that operates in cooperation but outside the political arena. His book depicts actions that are concise and to the point. The book is entertaining and gives us an insight of who this man was and how hard his staff worked to accomplish a defense to a potential collapse of our economic system. The book provides the reader a chance to see inside the massive machinery that our government works with each day. One gets a new perspective of what went on during these trying times. I was reminded again that the news media does not do a very good job reporting the events at hand and many times are only selling sensationalism and not the facts. Henry Paulson's final chapter gives his views on how to fix the problem. The problem still exists. Unless we take his lead and move in a fundamental positive manor, all that was prevented from collapsing could succeed in bringing down this free economy once more. This is a must read for all Americans.

I purchased and read this book to gain more background on how our financial system worked (or more accurately, fails to work). It took me forever to read this book. I couldn't read a single paragraph without first being flabbergasted, then disgusted, then reflective on what Paulson was saying ... and how he was saying it. It's like he thought his audience was a bunch of third graders who would believe anything they heard or read.

I rated the book high ... not because it's a good read, but because everyone should read this to see what these elitists are really like. As they (Bernanke, Geithner, and the rest) keep this up, tar and feathers look like an excellent investment. There should be a great shortage soon.

Henry Paulson's account of the financial near-collapse of 2008 is a welcome contribution to the blossoming library of books on this topic. Naturally, in this case it is necessary to consider the bias that could be present, as Paulson is obviously a key participant in these events. Yet this book is only slightly less entertaining, riveting and engaging than Sorkin's TOO BIG TO FAIL, and frequently better than some of the other books having to do with various aspects of the crisis.

Paulson plunges immediately into the frantic events of those pivotal months that began with the failure of institutions in the UK, the failure of a couple of Bear Stearns funds, Indy and Countrywide, and accelerated towards the failure of Lehman, the conseratorship of Fannie and Freddie, the near apocalypse of AIG, Merril, Citi, the major automakers.

Mr. Paulson has written a detailed, fast-moving, virtually hour-by-hour account of what he experienced and remembers. This may not be fascinating to everyone, but anybody who was following this crisis to any degree will find many fascinating details, thorough explanations and interesting "color" about what transpired during that period.

Paulson is a businessman and public servant, not an author, so one should not expect the literary finesse and excitement we get in books like TOO BIG TO FAIL, Lowenstein's WHEN GENIUS FAILED, or Kate Kelly's STREET FIGHTERS. But frankly ON THE BRINK is a lot better than I could hope for, especially considering the speed at which it must have been written.

Some high points of the book are learning about Paulson's background and how foreign it was to a life in politics; how he had to learn to get along in the partisan world of Washington; his account of his important discussions with key players like Ben Bernanke,Tim Geithner, Dick Fuld, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Jamie Dimon, John Mack, Sheila Bair; how John McCain injected himself into the passage of the TARP and threatened to defeat the entire thing, and how Paulson stopped him from doing so; the sheer logistics alone of the all-nighters and how so many decisions were made under such pressure by sleep-deprived individuals doing their best to avert calamity.

Henry Paulson's contribution to the literature of that dangerous crisis is very welcome and a solid memoir that is best considered in the context of so many other good books about that time, not only TOO BIG TO FAIL (by Andrew Sorkin), STREET FIGHTERS (by Kate Kelly), but also David Wessel's excellent IN FED WE TRUST, William Cohen's HOUSE OF CARDS, Lawrence McDonald's A COLLOSAL FAILURE OF COMMON SENSE and, to a far lesser extent, Gasparino's THE SELLOUT.

I'm delighted Paulson wrote his account and put real effort into doing so with this amount of care and detail. The concluding chapter outlines Paulson's ideas for what true regulatory reform could and should entail.

I hope one day to be able to read similar accounts by Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner.

Okay! Everyone step back a few feet because I'm wading deep water here! Economics and Global Financial Systems are not subjects I read about every day. Nor do I expect to have a front row seat on a financial roller coaster with a faulty breaking system. Picture me with my arms raised, screaming as I plunge off the first monstrous hill. That's what it felt like to follow Author Henry M. Paulson, Jr. through his book ON THE BRINK - Inside the Race to Stop the Collapse of the Global Financial System. This is not a work of fiction, but at times it reads like a really good 'End-Of-The-World-As-We-Know It' blockbuster.

One of the things that jumped of the pages for me was the idiotic political-posturing of some key players. I wanted to grab them by the ears and shout, 'The ship is going down, quit polishing the brass!' I enjoyed sitting in on all those high-level meetings with the author. I kept waiting for someone to throw me out because I lacked the right security clearance.

Even for a financial novice, like myself, I was surprised that I could follow most of what was going on. Some of the language and references went over my head, but all-in-all, the author's style makes it easy to read and comprehend a lot of the deeper material. Getting a first-hand glimpse behind the scenes of what we were all viewing on TV and newspapers is worth the read.

Getting a closeup view of the giants of 'Big Business and Finance' as some of them teetered, wobbled, and toppled, was nothing less than traumatic. When names like AIG, Fannie Mae, Merrill Lynch, and others like them are synonymous with instability, well... You'll just have to buy the ticket and take the ride yourself to understand what I mean.

Between The Pages Blog
[...]

What would you do, if you ran a business that paid you millions of dollars a year, your business became insolvent, investors upset because you are unable to fulfill your obligations, and the federal government put you in charge of the treasury and told you to do whatever it took fix the problem? Here's the answer. This is good example of the Agency problem.

besides the weak simplistic writing, the repetition of the same information over and over again, and the lack of thoughtful analysis, this book offers.... well... nothing else. its sad we dont have a better record of what went on from the person in the best place to see it all transpire. i learned more from the economist, ny times, american banker and wall st journal articles. save your money.

This book is an interesting and well written account of our economy in collapse, and the frantic efforts of people in both public and private positions nearest to the center of the unfolding debacle,to bring the deteriorating situation to an end .

The descriptions of actions of key players such as Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan, and the hapless CEO of Lehman Brothers Dick Fuld is eye opening.

Paulsons remembrances of his own efforts, and Fed Chief Ben Bernanke's, reveal just how close we were to a financial armageddon is frightening.

A fine read.

We all need money to survive. Some of us are better at managing it than others. The thing is, even if you do everything right, that doesn't necessarily mean that you will be in good financial standing. The current economy can make you or break you. Many American's have lost their jobs and are barely able to pay their bills.

That is what this book is all about. I've always had an interest when it comes to the money a country can make or spend. I found this book to be insightful but it was a little dry in some areas. Overall, I think this is a good read if you are interested in the stock market, economics, etc.

Reads like a complete chronological account of seemingly everything the author did during this disastrous financial crisis. His conclusion is that the actions taken by him and others, and government agencies, prevented a complete meltdown of the financial system. Mr. Paulson admits that he like many others did not see the housing bubble coming.
In the Afterword he provides an outline of lessons learned and key steps that should be taken to strengthen the financial system (that would strike a better balance between regulation and free market forces). But many of the more important steps (for example, power to wind down nonbank financial institutions) still have not been implemented. We could be scrambling to save the economy from another crisis (or from an aftershock from this one) sooner than you might think.

Overall I think it was a well written account of the crisis. It is interesting however that I went into the book thinking that he did a good job at confronting the crisis, but as he described the various episodes I came to realize that his decision making was often bone-headed and ended up feeding the crisis rather than calming it. But hey, I suppose it still could have been a lot worse with somebody else.

From page 44, August, 2006: "...our entitlement spending kept growing even as the budget deficits shrank. This odd situation was ultimately the result of global financial imbalances that had made policy makers nervous for years. To support unprecedented consumer spending and to make up for its low savings rate, the U.S. was borrowing too much from abroad, while export driven - notably China, other Asian nations, and the oil producers - were shipping capital to us and inadvertently fueling our spendthrift ways."

Everything that is so grotesquely wrong with this book can be summarized in those few lines. One the one hand, there is Henry Paulson the experienced banker telling the American people the truth - it's entitlement spending, stupid - and on the other he's blaming the country's debt woes on the consumer. Paulson loses himself in this sort of double-speak throughout his book, because Paulson, it seems is running for something. Better to anger an amorphous consumer than an identifiable AARP.

When was the last time you borrowed from abroad to buy anything? Well, indirectly, you probably have, as the investment banks have purchased your credit card, auto, and mortgage debt; repackaged it into bonds and sold it across the world. BUT, what Paulson does not tell you is that the total dollar amount of such asset-backed debt is dwarfed by the amount of outstanding U.S. Government debt (please take care to not confuse the national debt with the budget deficit), and that debt is the direct result of American politicians handing Americans every single thing they want in the way of government services without raising revenue (not necessarily the same thing as raising income taxes; see Richard Nixon's trenchant remarks on page 29). The price that you have paid for living in fiscal Disneyland has been the evisceration of the American industrial base - Asia needs your jobs to manufacture goods to sell to you and thereby have enough cash to buy your bonds. And as your corporations figure out the technology, you will see an increasingly higher percentage of your service jobs sent overseas. You cannot have failed to notice that when you call your credit card bank, someone with a Kiplingesque accent answers the phone. This is all, of course, To Better Serve You.

In between the many dramatic scenes in this heroic legend (I suggest a more appropriate title: "How An Aw-Shucks Farm Boy Named Hank Saved Western Civilization"), Paulson slips occasionally and reveals that he knows the underlying, politically inconvenient causes of the current financial mess. He knows the truth, and he is lying to you.

Paulson the man shines through as a greasy, cowardly, unctuous, hypocritical, dishonest, and politically wise (no compliment)operator. Paulson the writer presents you with a superficial apologia in a disgustingly folksy manner; constantly drags out his wife, Wendy, a woman so unprepossessing that she looks to all the world like Nancy Pelosi, his mother (in case you care), his wonderful kids, and I probably missed his chapter about apple pie.

Two stars because the author gives an accurate, if unintentional, character study into the sort of men who are destroying your country.

RV

From page 44, August, 2006: "...our entitlement spending kept growing even as the budget deficits shrank. This odd situation was ultimately the result of global financial imbalances that had made policy makers nervous for years. To support unprecedented consumer spending and to make up for its low savings rate, the U.S. was borrowing too much from abroad, while export driven - notably China, other Asian nations, and the oil producers - were shipping capital to us and inadvertently fueling our spendthrift ways."

Everything that is so grotesquely wrong with this book can be summarized in those few lines. One the one hand, there is Henry Paulson the experienced banker telling the American people the truth - it's entitlement spending, stupid - and on the other he's blaming the country's debt woes on the consumer. Paulson talks this sort of double-speak again and again throughout his book, because Paulson, it seems is running for something. Better to anger an amorphous consumer than an identifiable Aarp.

When was the last time you borrowed from abroad to buy anything? Well, indirectly, you probably have, as the investment banks have purchased your credit card, auto, and mortgage debt; repackaged it into bonds and sold it across the world. BUT, what Paulson does not tell you is that the total amount of all such consumer debt is dwarfed by the amount of outstanding U.S. Government debt (please take care to not confuse the national debt with the budget deficit), and that debt is the direct result of American politicians handing Americans every single thing they want in the way of government services without raising revenue (not necessarily the same thing as raising income taxes). The result of this has been the evisceration of the American industrial base and the also the reason that when you call your bank to check on something on your credit card statement, someone with a Kiplingesque accent answers the phone.

Paulson knows all of this. He knows the truth, and he is lying to you. This book is as odious as it is because Paulson is greasy, unctuous, hypocritical, dishonest, and politically wise (no compliment). He has written a superficial apologia in a disgustingly folksy manner; constantly drags out his wife Wendy, a woman so distressingly unprepossessing that she looks all the world like Nancy Pelosi, his mother (in case you care), his wonderful kids, and I probably missed his chapter about apple pie.

TWO stars because the author had the courtesy to write his book in English.

RV

Henry Paulson was Secretary of the Treasury during a once-in-a-lifetime economic nightmare. His book opens with a meeting with President Bush regarding Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. His plan is to move fast - replacing their leadership and bail each out with up to $100 billion before they can seek refuge in Congress or the courts. Both common and preferred stockholders will be wiped out. The two together owned or guaranteed $5+ trillion in mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, about half the total market. Combined, they had lost $5.5 billion that year, and both had been twice downgraded the prior month. Seemingly everyone owned their paper, and the stock of one had fallen almost 90%.

Paulson reveals that at least one bank CEO (Chuck Prince, Citigroup CEO) recognized the competitive pressures to follow profitable, but risky, practices and asked for more regulation. ("As long as the music is playing, you've got to get up and dance.") An interesting source and rationale for more regulation.

Readers also learn that despite public assurances to the contrary, G.E.'s Immelt on at least four occasions expressed worries about GE's short-term commercial-paper debt and eventually successfully lobbied for access to special government guarantees for such debt - eventually covering more than $70 billion in GE debt. At the time, GE was the largest U.S. issuer of such short-term debt.

As expected, Paulson strongly defends the government's massive bailout of Wall Street firms, including that of AIG, and thus indirectly, his old firm Goldman Sachs. He also takes pains to explain why he took the actions taken, despite being a 'free market' follower, and contradicts those who see Bush II as lazy and uninquisitive. Unexpectedly, Paulson also reports being put off by V.P. candidate Sarah Palin's attitude of familiarity and lack of familiarity with the issues. He was also unimpressed by candidate McCain and Minority Leader John Boehner.

Bottom-Line: "On the Brink" provides no bombshells - only another chronological accounting that has been covered too many times before.

It doesn't matter who you blame for the financial meltdown we experienced in 2008 or how much you agree or disagree with Mr. Paulson's actions(or lack off) while Secretary of the Treasury... you want to read this book because it will give you a glimpse that you seldom will get on the state of mind of someone in his position during a very scary time for many in our country.

I'm not submitting a review here because I read the book. I'm commenting here because I believe it's my patriotic duty to defend my nation and Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.

I believe that an important caveat needs to be stated here on behalf of public figures like Mr. Paulson.

Mr. Paulson's decisions in the financial crisis were not determined in the context of what's best for the United States and the American people. Paulson's aim, and the aim of the Bush Administration, was to save the global financial networks. Whether or not this is helpful to the US is a secondary consideration.

The financial institutions and culture that Paulson represents are not truly American, they are international. Their assets are spread around the globe and they will do whatever it takes to maintain these assets regardless of the consequences for the tax-payer. If that means running the United States into ruinous debt to pay for their mistakes then that's what they will do--and you and your children and grand-children will be stuck with a bill they will never be able to pay.

If saving the global economy means bankrupting America, or even of dismantling America and selling it off piece by piece then that is what these people will do. (And they've been doing it for over 20 years--slowly de-industrializing and bankrupting this country.)

Someday your children will be paying their rent to Chinese landlords and will work for Chinese owned companies. If this is what "Free Trade" dictates then this is where the future will lead. The greatest nation in history will go broke thanks to the ideology of a few fanatics who will line their own pockets while America sinks.

The truth that people like Paulson and Bush don't want you to see is that falsely so-called "Free Trade" has never been good for America. This policy has been implemented piece by piece since the 1960s and America's eceonomic stablilty and the value of the dollar has declined ever since.

Free trade has lead to the loss of our industries which were the orignal source of our wealth and greatness. But now everything that made us great, and wealthy, has been exported to other nations. With the de-regulation of international trade and finance, America is no longer economically viable. Free and unregulated trade is the fire in which America will burn.

The Founding Fathers of America never believed in Free Trade. The British were never simply allowed to dump cheap exports into America. Our government protected our industries and that's why America evolved into a world power. If America has money to feed the poor and to provide programs for poor people, it is because our nation is wealthy.

But today, America borrows money from everywhere in the world to maintain the facade of a reality that no longer exists. This is what people like Henry Paulson are doing for you. They are maintaining the international status quo which is allowing our nation to die a slow death while the Bushes and Obamas sign their "Free Trade" deals.

The collapse of the global economy is the best thing that could ever happen to us. America could prevent it's own decline by re-industrializing and creating a new economic boom that will save the future of this nation.

The solutions offered by Henry Paulson are unacceptable. They represent an easy fix which favors a small group of people who actually profit from our nation's disadvantage in world trade--which is improperly regulated and is falsely described as "Free Trade."

Having read several other books regarding the same time frame, I found Paulson's book essentially consistent with what appears to be a consensus regarding the crisis. But, throughout, my mind kept returning to a quote from his predecessor's book, "The Price of Loyalty," by Ron Suskind, written with Paul O'Neill, Bush's first Secretary of the Treasury:

"I think an ideology comes out of feelings and it tends to be non-thinking. A philosophy, on the other hand, can have a structured thought base. One would hope that a philosophy, which is always a work in progress, is influenced by facts. So there is a constant interplay between what do I think and why do I think it...Now, if you gather more facts and have more experience, especially with things that have gone wrong - those are especially good learning tools - then you reshape your philosophy, because the facts tell you you've got to. It doesn't change what you wish for. I mean, it's okay to wish for something that's, you know, outside of your fact realm. But it's not okay to confuse all that...Ideology is a lot easier, because you don't have to know anything or search for anything. You already know the answer to everything. It's not penetrable by facts. It's absoltutism."

We may all be thankful that Paulson (and Ben Bernanke) were "conservatives" philosophically and not merely ideolouges.

Of course, by the time Paulson took over at Treasury, the die had already been cast. It was interesting to learn that the first time he was contacted about taking the post, was in late May 2006, the same month that Ameriquest, a major subprime lender, whose founder and CEO was a major Bush fund raiser in 2004, began to go under, laying-off 4,000 people and closing their retail outlets. Certainly, Roland Arnall, who was a Bush appointee to the Netherlands in late 2005, must have given the Administration some clue as it what was coming. Yet, Paulson spends little time discussing his own immediate predecessor, Secretary of the Treasury John W. Snow, or discussion of the subprime meltdown in his apparently extensive discussions with the White House concerning his own appoitment, between May and August 2006. Indeed, there is no mention of the looming crisis until the winter of 2006.

To use an old Howard Baker Watergate phrase: What did he know and when did he know it?

My own theory is that Paulson was brought in to specifically deal with the housing crisis, which the Administration knew was coming. The subprime mortgage boom was between 2003 and 2006 and we have yet to hear from John W. Snow, who was Secretary of the Treasury during the period the boom was allowed to develop.

I cannot think of another President who cut taxes and then took the country to war (and there is ample evidence that the invasion of Iraq planning began prior to 9/11). But, looking ahead to a ten year projected surplus of $5.2 trillion, I believe the White House economic advisors thought, assuming the dot.com recession would not be significant, they could provide a $1.2 trillion tax cut, resolve social security (via the private accounts approach - a trillion dollar transition cost); provide a Medicare Prescription drug program (another trillion dollars); pay down some of the national debt; and fight a small war, originally estimated at $200 billion (Lawrence Lindsay lost his job over that number, but it had to come from somewhere).

Reaganomics told the White House people that the tax cut would spur growth, increase jobs and GDP and ultimately increase government revenue (which it initially did). But, with 9/11, additional costs had to be factored into the budget (Afghanistan, Homeland Security and reduced revenue). The answer was the housing bubble, which became more important as the wars dragged on. Had the wars (and the need for less revenue) gone as planned, perhaps the Administration would have acted on their own to deflate what everyone knew was a bubble; when the wars went longer than expected, the bubble blew up in their faces. Paulson was called upon to be "Mr. Fix It."

"On the Brink" is a truly remarkable account from the one person who was at the center of the greatest financial crisis ever faced by our country. Hank Paulson does not judge, promote, condemn or vilify; instead he tells a fascinating account of all the major players and their legitimate concerns and motivations. His ability to explain complex financial situations, which served him so well when dealing with Congress, makes his book highly readable for anyone with a basic understanding of our economic and political systems. "On the Brink" immediately captures your attention with the near demise of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac then doesn't let go as the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve commence their epic struggle to stop the rapidly falling dominoes from bringing down our entire way of life. Through Paulson's straight forward but intriguing narrative, not only do you gain a true appreciation for the stakes, but you have an insider's view of a complex game fraught with politics, conflicting interests and even international relations. While this book is anything but self serving, you come away knowing simply through the facts, that everything accomplished between September 2008 and January 2009 could never have been done unless this core team of players, guided by Paulson and Bernanke, were dedicated, trustworthy, and extremely competent. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand the economic situation that brought our country to the brink and the steps that were taken to keep it from toppling over the edge.

This Goldman Sachs thief and his cronies steal your childrens future ($25 trillion plus)and now your going to worship him by buying his book and READING it. COME ON PEOPLE!! HE SHOULD BE IN PRISON.

This reads like a self-serving excuse list for Paulsen. I was very disappointed in the lack of cogent reasons provided for what he did in the bailout, and the writing was no great shakes either. A big let-down.

Henry Paulson is a humble and genuine person who was working real hard to understand and remedy the economy's brush with collapse. If you're interested in what it was like on the inside, this book certainly gives the reader the feeling of being there. Also, one comes away with a sense that George W. Bush was, in contrast to his lethargic response to Katrina, fully engaged and scrambling along with the other players (both Republicans and Democrats) to stave off something much worse than what's occurred. These folks deserve credit for trying to lessen the impact of something that was unfolding quickly, all the while racing to understand it.

President-elect Obama consulted with Paulson fairly regularly until he took office. Then, as Paulson writes, all contact abruptly stopped. This is too bad as Paulson's understanding of the crisis and the events leading up to it would continue to add value and tamp down some of the insular arrogance that seems to have infected the administration in the course of it's first year.

Readers will come away with a real feeling for what it was like to have worked to wrestle the system back from the abyss.

Wake up people and stop giving your money to the oligarchs who wrecked our economy in the first place by rigging the laws and shifting the wealth of workers into their own pockets. The audacity of it all - one just gapes.

I was very skeptical of this book since I disagreed with Paulson's actions with letting Lehman Brother's fail. However I was excited to hear the book from Paulson's point of view and decided to read it.

The book far exceeded my imagination. Henry Paulson really gets personal, and he gives lots of details both before and after the collapse of TARP. Paulson reveals himself to be a shrewd politician throughout the book especially at the moments he put the GSEs in conservatorship and getting TARP passed.

I am a financial columnist for an investor website, I wrote a full review on the website. I can not write the full review here because I am a paid columnist and they have exlcusive rights to my articles. If you want to see my full review you can find it through my profile.

I loved the book, and read it in just a few days. While other books on the subject of last year's near economic implosion are out (Too Big to Fail), this one has a unique insiders take on the events.

Secretary Paulson was truly faced with such a series of bad events occurring at the speed of light that thinking on your feet and getting things done quickly became imperative.

The book was fast paced and interesting. I especially enjoyed reading about his interactions with the presidential nominees from both parties and his interactions with them.

The story, if it had not happened just recently would seem too far fetched for fiction.

I believe we were all quite fortunate that we had folks in place who responded quickly before it was too late.

Not enough attention has beem given to this book's revealing depictions the clash between politics and the credit markets. It is remarkable how little our lawmakers know about our credit market system. Don't miss the description of the bipartisian meeting at the White House that degenerates into "full fledged shouting". "Frankly I'd never seen anything like it before in politics or business--or in my fraternity days at Darthmouth for that matter".

If you will read the comments from Paulson on this Amazon page, you'll get a good feel for the defensive and self-serving quality of book.

While Paulson didn't lay the foundations for the credit crisis - the whole world did that - it's fair to say, I think, that his action in not supporting Lehman lead directly to the debacle. And Paulson was ambushed by the outcome.

The question is, why did he support Bear and not Lehman? My guess is he called Soros for advice and was told, "Hank, I think you should let them go." Wheels within wheels.

He should have known better. Many people did, and tried to warn him. It was his job to know better, but he apparently failed.

Maybe he did have a good idea of what would happen, and welcomed the consequences, but misjudged the severity.

When will people see the light ? This should be in fiction. Hank left out much info. These people are out for there very own interest, not the tax payer. He was part of the problem. I will not support crushing the economy, so the 1% get richer and richer, and the middle class move closer to poverty. We have crashes or close to the brink every 10 year's sometimes 2-3 in one decade. yet they continue to take our money , to bail out themselves and the rich friends who happen to own or work for the corporate companies. Your paycheck does not keep up with the inflation that has and will be created from this individual and the rest of the crowd who take our money. Why do we put up with these crooks. He should be in jail, as the rest of them should be. Vote all of them out starting with Congress and the Senate. The copy I read was at the library. Sorry Hank no royalty for you, from my pocket.

Paulson's book covers a fascinating subject with too little detail and with frustrating repetition. From pages 100-400 the story reverts over and over again to two repeating themes: 1. We had to save bank x to prevent a financial meltdown; and 2. We couldn't say how bad things were because we were afraid of the market's reaction. Paulson himself appears to base all his actions either on movements in the Dow or on the prices of Credit Default Swaps on big banks. He expresses concern for the broader economy and for taxpayers, but the book only mentions the unemployment rate twice and never mentions the cost to the government balance sheet in spending so much money on bailouts. Paulson's own Treasury staff tried to slow him down at times, but Paulson, at least in this book, was acting like a runaway train. As frustrating as this book was to read at times, nothing could be worse than working with Paulson at Treasury during 2007-08.

Thankfully, the book is not too political although executive and legislative figures do appear throughout. President Bush, for better or worse, seems to go along unhesitatingly with all of Paulson's decisions. Geithner, Bernanke, and Speaker Pelosi all get favorable treatment and some Congressional Republicans are criticized for slowing down passage of TARP. Paulson is also critical of FDIC head Sheila Bair at times, even though Bair seems extremely calm and reasonable compared to Paulson. More than once during "On the Brink" I wished I was reading a book by her instead.

Investment bankers don't do much second-guessing or soul searching. Paulson tells us, "I'm a straightforward person. I like to be direct with people." His first-person account of the gigantic financial collapse is straightforward and direct. While there are lots of unnamed sources, there is none the less a good deal of detail in this new book and I found it a fairly riveting read.

Paulson knew his move to his new position would be a challenge. He just wasn't sure how much of one.

He found himself at the center of the world's most horrendous financial crisis since the Great Depression. Major institutions including Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch, and Citigroup and others, were close to total collapse. Panic set in all round. The credit crisis spread to all parts of the U.S. economy and grew more ominous daily. It destroyed people, it stole jobs. It hurt stock owners. Few people were untouched.

Everyone turned to Hank Paulson for the solution.

"On the Brink" is Paulson's fast-paced first-hand account of the key decisions made with at warp speed. There was no time to think, to reconsider, to second guess. Decisions had to be made and made now!

The reader feels the tension. He feels like he's actually in the room with Paulson as these momentous decisions are made and the crisis grows daily. We also read about other players, including the CEOs of top Wall Street firms as well as Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, Sheila Bair, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain, and President George W. Bush.

A very exciting read.

- Susanna K. Hutcheson

First person history right after the fact. Straight forward history as it was being made; required reading for anyone who owns stocks or wants to better understand the present U.S. financial system. Offers few apologies, humanizes people in elected and government appointed positions currently and in the recent past. Reviews should quit psycho-analying the author's purposes for the book and accept it as a first person account of events in the 2006-2009 period in Washington, D.C.

Hank is an interesting character. If he is lying, or covering up, its hard to say. He claims to be candid, but it is what is often missing, that tells the story.

Basically his book is a case for TARP, you know, the trillion taxpayer dollars that went out to "save" the banking industry because stupid homeowners borrowed too much money to buy their homes. Funny how he, and the others on Wall Street blame middle America for all this mess. Of course, it had nothing to do with bringing back Credit Default Swaps (they used to be illegal), or Credit Default Obligations, or the CRA, or the kickbacks and payments to politicians that the investment banks made, or Option ARM mortgages, or other derivatives that we all know are risky, stupid, dangerous, and of course, Wall Street loves them. And why not? Because Wall Street executives get to pay themselves massive bonus checks every year when those highly leveraged derivatives make money, and hey, if the bank goes belly up because of them, you can get the taxpayer to bail you out. And of course, you still get your Christmas bonus even if the bank is finished. How much did you make as CEO of Goldman Sachs, Hank, was it like 600 million dollars? Don't think that America didn't keep track buddy. You created this mess. You told congress that if they didn't act, it would be tough on the American taxpayer. Have you read the paper lately? Forclosures, personal bankruptcies, and homeless families are at an all time high. Your TARP program didn't save America at all, just the fat bonuses for all those greedy executives on Wall Street. You have no shame. Your book is lame.

Frankley, his book I think was just a case for keeping himself out of prison. Ya know, maybe the Bolsheviks were right on this issue. They simply lined the bankers up against a wall and shot them dead. It certainly solved the issue of executive compensation and claw-backs.

Hank, I think there is a seat reserved for you in Hell. Don't be late mister.