Derivative Dangers (How Wall Street Solved The “Cr*p” Shortage)

NPR ^ | Frank Partnoy

[parsifal]

It was hard to believe, but the bankers were running low on risky assets. After low-rated bonds and loans had been pooled once, they were gone, and therefore no longer available to be pooled again. It was truly incredible, but there simply wasn't enough crap on Wall Street. This is where derivatives entered the picture.

[parsifal]

Since BO has promised to regulate the financial markets, this is germane information for those Freepers who are still playing Candy Land over in the Galt's Gulch Romper Room. (The anarcho-capiitalists)

These are not short reads, but both the above article and this one are by Wall Street insiders. Partnoy wrote F.I.A.S.C.O, and Michael Lewis, below, wrote Liar's Poker.

The second link, is nine pages, but IMHO it would make a better movie than Atlas Shrugged. Absolutely unbelievable.

http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom/index.html

parsy, who says REGULATE!

[parsifal]

The second link, again:

http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom/

parsy, who must have messed up something

[staytrue]

The flip side of regulation is that Madoff scam was clearly against a couple of hundred regulations.

[staytrue]

The main faults in the financial blow up are fannie mae, freddie, the loose monetary policy of greenspan, the crooks, defined benefit pension plans.

I don’t think more regulation solves this.

You want more regulation from the government who runs medicare and social security which are two of the worst ticking time bombs ever.

[parsifal]

True, and Wall Street will look for ways around any rules. But how can you read these two articles and not realize Wall Street was out of control, and probably will be again. What did you think about Lewis’s meeting with his former boss?

parsy, who says playing with OPM is fun

[The Comedian]

As one of "Galt's Gulch Romper Room's" premiere students, could you explain to me how Federal adoption of what was private risk and the further monetizing of the debt resulting from that risk makes the anarcho-capitalist perspective somehow immature or incomplete?

This wasn't a private sector disaster. It was a Goldman Sachs/federal *jack*.

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[parsifal]

“This wasn’t a private sector disaster.”?????

Sorry, dude, but you’re still in the romper room. Just because a cop doesn’t do his job and stop a criminal, doesn’t make it a joint heist. Read the articles. (It is what Ayn Rand would want you to do.)

How can you reconcile what these two guys are telling you with it being anything but a private sector failure?

parsy, who says pick up all your toys when you are through playing

[parsifal]

Ooooops! I was so busy being sarcastic, I missed the first part of you question. The bailout may be a joint heist. I am not so sure it is avoidable. I would have no problem watching the Wall Street cons have to get real jobs. The question is “What caused the problem?” These two authors, insiders, are telling you about the theft.

parsy, who knows these are long reads, but they can be your first steps out of the Rand cult.