Well said.
The only problem (that I can see) with mark-to-market is that it forced a measure of truth into accounting. Forcing banks to adhere to it burst the bubble. But if the assets had been marked-to-market to begin with then at least one market distortion would never have formed.
I can’t see we’d be better off if all those toxic Tier 3 assets carried two values: a fraudulently high ‘accounting’ value, and the very low value people would actually pay for them.
Still, I’m a neophyte at this and could stand to be convinced otherwise.
No, you are exactly correct. The banks want it both ways, they liked the market when it overvalued their holdings so they could then leverage out of their minds, and now they want nothing to do with the market while it discounts their crappy, overvalued holdings now.
The Level 3 lie that is going on is a way for the banks to continue to BS about the value of something. The market has a value for their “assets” and they don’t like the answer. Steve Forbes should know better.
Basically, powerful people made bazillions on driving up real estate values through every form of fraud imaginable. Now they have been called on it: “If it’s so valuable, why don’t you sell it and raise cash?”
“We can’t in a down market,” is the reply, so we need to turn to Washington to change the rules so we can wait out this mess. Eat $#$% and die, the house is worth what smart money is willing to pay for it, %$%$%#&@%, no more, no less.