Scan barcode
henkka's review against another edition
Felt too repetitive in the beginning and the information was delivered in a way that was not very captivating to a person who is casually interested in the topic.
bloodyfool0's review against another edition
3.0
This is an interesting read. It couples financial historic data and marries it with geopolitical views, in particular the China US relationship.
I changed my rating from 4* (because 3.5* isn't available), because like many global financial investors who look to China as a continuing rising star, they always look at it through rose tinted lenses because of pure greed. Because we know what happens when you talk down to China (meaning the CCP), they will shut you down in no time. Whilst there are agreed cultural differences, one can in no way condone the repressive regime much like this book almost does.
Other than the China US views, I like the fact that the book looks at key elements to determine the cyclical nature of economics which mirror political situations of countries. This along with a small number of factors influence economic cycles. This does provide one with a macro economic view of how to look at where we are in an economic cycle and is very useful as a gauge. I suppose it is most important when you want to know whether we are at the apogee or the nadir.
It is a long book and requires attention to fully appreciate the context.
I changed my rating from 4* (because 3.5* isn't available), because like many global financial investors who look to China as a continuing rising star, they always look at it through rose tinted lenses because of pure greed. Because we know what happens when you talk down to China (meaning the CCP), they will shut you down in no time. Whilst there are agreed cultural differences, one can in no way condone the repressive regime much like this book almost does.
Other than the China US views, I like the fact that the book looks at key elements to determine the cyclical nature of economics which mirror political situations of countries. This along with a small number of factors influence economic cycles. This does provide one with a macro economic view of how to look at where we are in an economic cycle and is very useful as a gauge. I suppose it is most important when you want to know whether we are at the apogee or the nadir.
It is a long book and requires attention to fully appreciate the context.
lenzen's review against another edition
4.0
In this book, Dalio presents his model of the rise and fall of "empires". The closer it gets to the present day the more interesting the book is. The last three chapters of the book which deal with the rise of China, the current tensions between China and the US, the United States's current decline and Dalio's conjectures regarding the future are five stars. The build up to the final three chapters is decent, although only occasionally riveting: The book is only three stars before the strong close.
It is hard to evaluate the merits of Dalio's historical model given that he is only presenting it at moderate depths so as to introduce it all in one volume. The model says that empires rise and fall, no surprise, and talks about the interplay of economic, internal, and external factors that take an empire through the cycle. Dalio also mentions that inside the Big Cycle there are other cycles, and inside those cycles other cycles. He does not, however, go into much detail regarding the sub-cycles. This sounds reminiscent of Robert Prechter's Elliot Waves or perhaps, even, pre-Copernican astrology. Is this a model so loose, like Elliot Waves, that it can be found to fit anything that could happen? Is it falsifiable? Along the way was the validity tested by approaching an empire that there was little prior knowledge of to make "forward predictions" regarding what would happen? Has Dalio merely cherry picked the three examples which best seem to demonstrate the soundness of the model while omitting more problematic cases? There is not enough in this book to do a rigorous analysis.
The United States Civil War is a good example of something I had trouble thinking about in terms of the model. According to the model the final stage in an empire's breakdown is civil war or revolution. In the case of the United States, however, the Civil War occurred while the United States was still ascendant: in stage 2 out of 6 with stage 3 being the peak. Certainly there was no debt crisis which caused the Civil War and the United States had little going on in terms of external conflict at the time. So perhaps that could have been taken as a "prediction" that the United States would almost certainly have survived the Civil War in tact? The truth, however, is that the South came very close to winning the Civil War, in the sense of being recognized as independent, according to McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom.
Another thing that I am not sure how to evaluate using the model is the United States after the Civil War and after the Revolution. Although these were periods of rebuilding they do not seem to fit well into Dalio's model. After victory in these conflicts Americans were very magnanimous (as it was later after World War II). Far from being purged those who were on the wrong side of history ended up facing rather little in the way of consequences. So how does this fit into the model? Obviously, there will be some "rebuilding" after a Revolution or Civil War so is the model just saying there will be something which could not not happen? Indeed although the United States was vibrant after the Revolution, the period after the Civil War as described in Richard White's The Republic for Which it Stands seems in decline compared to the Antebellum period. According to Dalio's model, however, the United States was stage 2 rising into stage 3 during this period.
Regardless of the merits of the model, which would probably require many in depth books to evaluate fully, there is definitely some good high level overviews of Chinese, European, and American history. There are many interesting charts and statistics thrown in.
As mentioned, the close of the book is far and away the best part of it. Dalio describes the cultural differences between Americans and Chinese people and their different outlooks toward governing. Dalio does not seem to be pushing any political agenda, at least not too hard, but rather what he has carefully measured to be objectively true. Although clearly an admirer of much about China, he is also willing to criticize some aspects of China. At the same time, his criticism omits its surveillance state.
Looking forward Dalio presents some very interesting charts and statistics regarding America's growing internal conflicts. He even has a graph to show how bad it is now compared to early points in history. Dalio is willing to stick his neck out and quantify what his model is predicting as the probability of civil war in the United States and the probability of military war with China in the next decade.
Although very thought provoking overall, one particularly persistent problem throughout the book is that many of the charts are very hard to read. There are graphs with eight different lines with some of the colors very hard to distinguish between. The book also almost never references its sources. Indeed, given how much history Dalio has obviously studied, a bibliography, or at least a list of recommendations, would be very nice.
Dalio is very repetitive regarding the inevitable death of fiat currencies through money printing. At the same time he also does provide concrete advise of how to prepare. He gives some definite timelines and the dates are very close. To qualify this, somewhat, however, his company Bridgewater Associates has basically had a "lost decade" using his models to generate any kinds of returns since his departure around 2012. Nevertheless it is interesting to think about whether or the US is on the verge of multiple simultaneous crises.
It is hard to evaluate the merits of Dalio's historical model given that he is only presenting it at moderate depths so as to introduce it all in one volume. The model says that empires rise and fall, no surprise, and talks about the interplay of economic, internal, and external factors that take an empire through the cycle. Dalio also mentions that inside the Big Cycle there are other cycles, and inside those cycles other cycles. He does not, however, go into much detail regarding the sub-cycles. This sounds reminiscent of Robert Prechter's Elliot Waves or perhaps, even, pre-Copernican astrology. Is this a model so loose, like Elliot Waves, that it can be found to fit anything that could happen? Is it falsifiable? Along the way was the validity tested by approaching an empire that there was little prior knowledge of to make "forward predictions" regarding what would happen? Has Dalio merely cherry picked the three examples which best seem to demonstrate the soundness of the model while omitting more problematic cases? There is not enough in this book to do a rigorous analysis.
The United States Civil War is a good example of something I had trouble thinking about in terms of the model. According to the model the final stage in an empire's breakdown is civil war or revolution. In the case of the United States, however, the Civil War occurred while the United States was still ascendant: in stage 2 out of 6 with stage 3 being the peak. Certainly there was no debt crisis which caused the Civil War and the United States had little going on in terms of external conflict at the time. So perhaps that could have been taken as a "prediction" that the United States would almost certainly have survived the Civil War in tact? The truth, however, is that the South came very close to winning the Civil War, in the sense of being recognized as independent, according to McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom.
Another thing that I am not sure how to evaluate using the model is the United States after the Civil War and after the Revolution. Although these were periods of rebuilding they do not seem to fit well into Dalio's model. After victory in these conflicts Americans were very magnanimous (as it was later after World War II). Far from being purged those who were on the wrong side of history ended up facing rather little in the way of consequences. So how does this fit into the model? Obviously, there will be some "rebuilding" after a Revolution or Civil War so is the model just saying there will be something which could not not happen? Indeed although the United States was vibrant after the Revolution, the period after the Civil War as described in Richard White's The Republic for Which it Stands seems in decline compared to the Antebellum period. According to Dalio's model, however, the United States was stage 2 rising into stage 3 during this period.
Regardless of the merits of the model, which would probably require many in depth books to evaluate fully, there is definitely some good high level overviews of Chinese, European, and American history. There are many interesting charts and statistics thrown in.
As mentioned, the close of the book is far and away the best part of it. Dalio describes the cultural differences between Americans and Chinese people and their different outlooks toward governing. Dalio does not seem to be pushing any political agenda, at least not too hard, but rather what he has carefully measured to be objectively true. Although clearly an admirer of much about China, he is also willing to criticize some aspects of China. At the same time, his criticism omits its surveillance state.
Looking forward Dalio presents some very interesting charts and statistics regarding America's growing internal conflicts. He even has a graph to show how bad it is now compared to early points in history. Dalio is willing to stick his neck out and quantify what his model is predicting as the probability of civil war in the United States and the probability of military war with China in the next decade.
Although very thought provoking overall, one particularly persistent problem throughout the book is that many of the charts are very hard to read. There are graphs with eight different lines with some of the colors very hard to distinguish between. The book also almost never references its sources. Indeed, given how much history Dalio has obviously studied, a bibliography, or at least a list of recommendations, would be very nice.
Dalio is very repetitive regarding the inevitable death of fiat currencies through money printing. At the same time he also does provide concrete advise of how to prepare. He gives some definite timelines and the dates are very close. To qualify this, somewhat, however, his company Bridgewater Associates has basically had a "lost decade" using his models to generate any kinds of returns since his departure around 2012. Nevertheless it is interesting to think about whether or the US is on the verge of multiple simultaneous crises.
clay1st's review against another edition
2.0
There is really only one idea in this book and that is that nations go through stages of rise and decline that lead from one to another. He also explains a little about happens during each stage that can either prolong it or lead to the next stage, mostly in terms of long-term debt cycle... stuff... but it doesn't feel very intellectually rigorous, he spends little time looking for exceptions or analysing causal links.
He also uses appeal to the fact he has consulted many "friends" and "experts" as a backing for assertions wayyy too often. It's actual cringe.
Ray's "keep it simple, stupid" style is very approachable and it's also clear that Ray also thinks it's charming to repeat himself in order to 'hammer the point home' but it's really not, this book should have been much much shorter or maybe just a blog post.
Overall I'd just say, read a summary online of which there are many and you will not miss out on anything.
He also uses appeal to the fact he has consulted many "friends" and "experts" as a backing for assertions wayyy too often. It's actual cringe.
Ray's "keep it simple, stupid" style is very approachable and it's also clear that Ray also thinks it's charming to repeat himself in order to 'hammer the point home' but it's really not, this book should have been much much shorter or maybe just a blog post.
Overall I'd just say, read a summary online of which there are many and you will not miss out on anything.
ronb's review against another edition
3.0
The thesis seems correct, yet the points seem obvious. The book overstates the amount of rigor and also seemingly doesn't cover a long period of time. It's not bad, but I didn't walk away as satisfied as I'd hoped
mikegray6's review against another edition
5.0
One of those books that makes me realize how little I know about anything, in particular about the broad topic of how nations become superpowers and why they fail. It was one of those history books that makes you think: how the F did I not know all of this before? I was shocked at how many similarities there were between global superpowers in the past. I think Dalio does an appropriate amount of caveating while sticking to his guns that these patterns are recognizable, similar, and likely to repeat. It really just makes sense and makes me wonder where the US and China are on this trajectory. I also learned a good bit about Chinese culture from their perspective, which is only going to become more important to understand in the coming decades.