Comments on: Yellow Kid Weil: Autobiography of the greatest con man in American history

By: pginna

pginna — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:19:00 +0000

There’s good stuff on Yellow Kid Weil & what made him a successful con in BOZO SAPIENS: Why to Err Is Human by Michael & Ellen Kaplan: http://www.bloomsburypress.com/books/catalog/bozo_sapiens_pb_911

By: Michael_J_Walsh

Michael_J_Walsh — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 16:44:00 +0000

Don’t like Amazon? Want to support the folks who reprinted this? Buy direct from the publisher … they earn more that way.

By: flosofl

flosofl — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 22:59:00 +0000

Via Wikipedia it appears we are both wrong (and right).

According to the Chicago Manual of Style, there is no common agreement about the phrase "turn of the ____th century." For instance, if a statement describes an event as taking place "at the turn of the 18th century", it could refer to a period around the year 1700 or one around the year 1800. As such, they recommend using only "turn of the century," and only in a context that makes clear which transition is meant.

By: John Smith

John Smith — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:55:00 +0000

I like when people correct authors over minor, insignificant errors.

By: Dave H

Dave H — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:44:00 +0000

They say there is a book that is given to all junior congressmen on how to conduct them selves in washington, now we know what book it is

By: gilgar13

gilgar13 — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 23:26:00 +0000

Great book, but why not read it for free at the online library here, http://www.archive.org/details/yellowkidweilaut00weil instead of buying at Amazon?

By: GregS

GregS — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 22:01:00 +0000

If he were alive today, we’d probably be referring to him as “Senator Weil”.

By: jimh

jimh — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:12:00 +0000

Ain’t no golden age like the current one. I’m sure the Kid would have enjoyed hearing about fleecing millions of people at once, getting caught, and then having the Fed cool out the marks (and kick in an extra $700B).

By: ackpht

ackpht — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 20:17:00 +0000

I think that’s true- to be a really fluent liar, you have to in some way believe in the lie yourself. Whatever lie/reality alert mechanism that would cause conflict in a “normal” brain is turned off so that the conflict cannot impair the delivery of the lie.

And then some people believe that if they have an opportunity to cheat someone, they’d be foolish to pass it up, and any fault lies with the person dumb/conceited/greedy/dishonest enough to be cheated.

By: efergus3

efergus3 — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 19:48:00 +0000

Wait – “the greatest conman in American history”? Wasn’t that George W.?

By: Brainspore

Brainspore — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:08:00 +0000

The Yellow Kid operated in the gold age of the American con…

Joke’s on you, Cory. It was just a “fool’s gold” age.

By: Andrew Forrest

Andrew Forrest — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:03:00 +0000

Pretty sure you’re wrong! Turn of the 20th C was 1901; turn of the 19th C was 1801.

By: Pavlo

Pavlo — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:55:00 +0000

It is really a wash-wash. It’s full of good old con artists anecdotes, albeit Mr. Weil takes credit for all of them. Would be OK book if it were under 50 pages, instead he goes on repeating himself for 200 pages! It’s not comparable to Big Con, nor to The Man Who Sold Eiffel Tower.

By: Wordguy

Wordguy — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:53:00 +0000

Wow, that’s an old necklace.

By: flosofl

flosofl — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 16:08:00 +0000

Pretty sure “turn of the 19th” is correct, indicating 1899->1900 (or 1900->1901 for pendants).

By: paul beard

paul beard — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:30:00 +0000

Isn’t a lack of self-awareness a feature for con-men, rather than a bug? It’s all about projecting a false reality: why not start with yourself?

By: Paul R

Paul R — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:00:00 +0000

“from the turn of the 19th century up to WWII” You don’t see as many 140-year careers these days. Today’s conpersons have gotten soft.