I found this a very disappointing book. It does contain a lot of interesting comments on the workings of economics, but in the end Greenspan's ideology simply leaves out anything that is inconvenient, and for me the overall effect was to undermine the credibility of the entire book.
For example, the chapter on Latin America actually made me laugh out loud when he attributed populism to European colonialism, having dismissed US involvement in a couple of paragraphs. Really, Alan? Hundreds of thousands of deaths at the hands of right-wing dictators supported by the US over all those years has NO effect on populism?
Cuba is mentioned once, I think, disparagingly - the fact that it has suffered an illegal economic embargo since 1959, been invaded by a neighbour many times its size, been subject to acts of terrorism and attempts to assassinate its president - none of these seem relevant to its economic position in Greenspan's view, though he was worried about the effect that the single act of 9/11 might have on a country the size of the US. Consistency would be useful.
Greenspan is simply dismissive of anything he doesn't like, which means that the reader does not get the full picture in any of his subject areas.
He comments on the Asian Crisis of the late 90s, mostly in a slightly patronising tone, but if you read Joe Stiglitz's book Globalisation and its Detractors, you get the detail filled in about the role of the IMF in destabalising one economy after another through the same ideology that Greenspan promotes. Greenspan, however, hardly mentions the IMF, preferring to blame it all on the countries themselves.
The Washington Consensus has by now been pretty much trashed as an ideology - it is within this context that this book should be read.