"Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate Itself"

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
It's lookin' like the ($ucce$$ful) high-rollers AGREE with Al Greenspan!!!

“Are you kidding me?” That’s the yelp we’re hearing around the country as some of the wise elders of finance reveal their real identities: hard-core $upporter$ of more government regulation of bu$ine$$.

The New York Times reports that George Soros, Nicholas F. Brady, John S. Reed, William H. Donaldson, and John C. Bogle are some of the more notable Wall Street leaders who favor increased oversight of the very industries that made them wealthy and powerful.

Is this a brazen act of hypocrisy driven by guilt pangs that these older gentlemen are feeling as they look back on their sometimes controversial careers? I’ll leave the psychoanalysis to those with expertise in this area. But whatever the psychological motivation may be, the fact is that increased regulation for business in general and finance in particular isn’t just ethically appropriate. It’s ethically required.

Former CEO and BusinessWeek.com contributor Jack Welch was right to implore, “Control your destiny or someone else will.” Since businesses have done a poor job of regulating themselves, someone else must, and that someone is the federal government. Business leaders have no one to blame but themselves for this.

The failures that led to the need for increased regulation were ethical failures. Businesses’ fetishistic obsession with short-term gain, coupled with a pathological unwillingness to consider any long-term implications, gave rise to the economic crisis in which we’re still mired, and there is only way to describe such a management strategy: absolutely, positively, and indisputably wrong."

Gee.....try to imagine such dialogue during THE BUSH YEARS!!!!! :rolleyes:

GOOOOBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:)
 
Werbung:
"We could set up a system where food was cheaper than it is right now if we just eliminated meat inspectors, and we eliminated any regulations on how food is distributed and how it's stored. I'll bet in terms of drug prices we would definitely reduce prescription drug prices if we didn't have a drug administration that makes sure that we test the drugs so that they don't kill us, but we don't do that."
Don't hurt yourself, thnkin'-about-it....

eric.cantor.gi.jpg


.....ERIC!!
 
Why do we need bigger-government?

'Cause the Vulture Capitalists have reached maximum-density!!!

:mad:

"One of the things we have somehow lost over the years, starting with Reagan and continuing on to the present, is that government exists in no small part to ensure that corporations and business interests act in the best interests of society as a whole.....because there's no way in hell they'll act that way unless they're forced to.

Abuses in the name of profit abound through our history - slavery, child labor, unsafe working conditions, the company store, sweatshops.....we have proven time and time again that we will ruin lives for a quarter of a percentage point."
 
The "Free Market' has always begged for regulation, usually regulation of their competitors, but sometimes regulation of their customers. If they don't want to buy what you sell? Use a hard sell technique. Get the government to force them to buy.
 
Privatizing Social Security...whatta great (i.e. "conservative") concept!!

After all....who knows BETTER how to manage your retirement-buck$, than the Pros on WALL $TREET??!!!!

"If you had to pick someone to write the autopsy report on the Wall Street financial collapse 18 months ago, you couldn't do any better than Michael Lewis. He is one of the country's preeminent non-fiction writers with a knack for turning complicated, mind numbing material into fascinating yarns.

He wrote his first bestseller, "Liar's Poker," about his experiences as a young Wall Street bond trader when he was still in his 20s and has since followed up with seven more bestsellers on subjects ranging from Silicon Valley in "The New New Thing" to big time sports in "Money Ball" and "The Blind Side."

His new book, called "The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine," comes out later this week and it explains how some of Wall Street's finest minds managed to destroy $1.75 trillion of wealth in the subprime mortgage markets.

"The incentive$ for people on Wall Street got so screwed up, that the people who worked there became blinded to their own long term interests. And because the short term interests were so overpowering. And so they behaved in ways that were antithetical to their own long term interests."

"I'm afraid that our culture will come to the conclusion, 'cause it's always the easy conclusion, that everybody was just a bunch of criminals. I think the story is much more interesting than that. I think it's a story of mass delusion," Lewis said.

Asked how many people he thinks were in the world who understood what was going on, Lewis told Kroft, "Between 10 and 20 investors at most and this is from the universe of tens of thousands of people who could have conceivably made that bet."

"Do you think that the executives at the big investment houses who were issuing these bonds had read them? Or understood them?" Kroft asked.

"No, they didn't read them," Burry replied. "I think that there were probably junior analysts that were given the tasks of reviewing these documents. However, I think that this was a profit center. It was a profit center. It was something the organization wanted to do."

Burry figured out that these mortgage-backed securities would become worthless if just a small percentage of the dicey loans went bad and he wanted to bet against the worst of them. He decided that the best way to do it would be to get Wall Street to sell him inexpensive insurance contracts on the securities that would pay off big time if they failed. The contracts were called "credit default swaps."

"How can they not look at the numbers? I mean, how can Wall Street be buying all of these mortgages and repackaging them, and not realizing that they're not very good mortgages?" Kroft asked.

"Wall Street is able to delude itself because it's paid to delude itself. I mean one of the lessons of this story is that people see what they're incentivized to see. If you pay someone not to see the truth, they will not see the truth. And, Wall Street organized itself so people were paid to see something other than the truth. And that's one of the central messages of this story. You have to be very careful how you incentivize people, 'cause they will respond to the incentives," Lewis explained.

And all of the incentives in Wall $treet's largely UNREGULATED bond market were geared toward keeping the subprime money machine humming."
 
How is it a free market when government mandates how much insurance carriers must sell you? Is it a free market when government instructs banks to lower their qualifications to make home loans to achieve social engineering?
 
Is it a free market when government instructs banks to lower their qualifications to make home loans to achieve social engineering?
Correction, Skippy....it was the mortgage-companie$ who'd gotten creative with peoples' qualifications (while they paid MEGA-bonu$e$ to their agents, for record-number Qualifiers)....and, you'd know that, if you weren't a (typically, racist) FAUX Noise fan.

:rolleyes:

*

 
How is it a free market when government mandates how much insurance carriers must sell you? Is it a free market when government instructs banks to lower their qualifications to make home loans to achieve social engineering?



Regulation caused toxic loans and their derivatives. It's no wonder the likes of Soros love regulation, it makes them loads of money.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top