5 ms·

I think since the GFC he has taken a bit of a turn in that he sees the traditional economy/financial markets/players as rigged against the little guy.. and take

I think since the GFC he has taken a bit of a turn in that he sees the traditional economy/financial markets/players as rigged against the little guy.. and taken a sort of oppositional defiance disorder approach to the whole thing. So any Don Quixote will look like Robin Hood to him. Flash Boys was just taking sides in a dispute with no real good guys, but the upstart/little guy to him was default "good guy". He took some more explicitly political positions in some of his other books. And now his SBF/FTX fanboyism falls under the same category that "the little guy" has to be the good guy. The Big Short is probably his last great book / and film.

tomjakubowski 3y ago
> the same category that "the little guy" has to be the good guy. Definitely present in Moneyball where the A's are the good guys - they play a similar role as Burry, exploiting inefficiencies in the market created by the big, bad guys (e.g. the Yankees, or housing lenders), for profit.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Yes that's a fair assessment. Through line of his books seem to be "little guy is good". In many of the stories the little guy he valorizes is just another neutral actor in a zero sum game. The Big Short it just so happens that the "little guy" who was right got to make money off fairly bad actors! I wouldn't say they were themselves "good", rather more neutral players in a financial market. He now seems to have chosen a little guy (SBF/FTX) who were explicitly bad actors. Also interesting questions in the whole Blind Side story now.