Pentagon report on economic warfare.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by bhunter

... a system as complex as international finance can become quite unpredictable in its behavior without any nefarious action by rational actors.

Are you saying that there were no nefarious actions on Wall St. that were, at least in part, responsible for this debacle? If so, I have a bridge for you.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bhunter

The writing was on the wall for quite a while before the 2008 debacle. I do not see a need for economic bogeymen to explain the economic downturn. The thought of having someone or a group to blame is comforting, but a system as complex as international finance can become quite unpredictable in its behavior without any nefarious action by rational actors.

You're correct that the problems were know about in advance of 2008, and steps that could have been taken to avoid the crisis weren't. considering that money moves on a global scale, I'm not sure that any steps taken in the US would have been enough to totally avert the crisis.

Whether the financial meltdown is a result of a system that is rotten, or a result of parties taking advantage of the weaknesses therein to attack the stability of the US, or simply enrich themselves, is a topic open for discussion.

I suspect it's a combination of all of the above, the percentages involved is where I'm at a loss.

Reinstalling some controls on the system make sense to me, along with hiring some people who are knowledgeable enough to enforce them. Your average flatfoot ain't gonna cut it.

Now simply because I don't know about it doesn't mean it's not happening, but has anyone else noticed any actions on regulatory reform or enforcement?

Chas

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Charles

You're correct that the problems were know about in advance of 2008, and steps that could have been taken to avoid the crisis weren't. considering that money moves on a global scale, I'm not sure that any steps taken in the US would have been enough to totally avert the crisis.

Whether the financial meltdown is a result of a system that is rotten, or a result of parties taking advantage of the weaknesses therein to attack the stability of the US, or simply enrich themselves, is a topic open for discussion.

I suspect it's a combination of all of the above, the percentages involved is where I'm at a loss.

Reinstalling some controls on the system make sense to me, along with hiring some people who are knowledgeable enough to enforce them. Your average flatfoot ain't gonna cut it.

Now simply because I don't know about it doesn't mean it's not happening, but has anyone else noticed any actions on regulatory reform or enforcement?

Chas

If Bonehead and McConnell don't block her Elizabeth Warren is the best bet for someone to jerk a knot in their tails.

But in accordance with their master's orders the Goopers are trying to gut regulation.

On the subject of whether these things can be regulated, they can. Canada was not required to bailout a single bank simply because if you tried to peddle Derivatives and CDOs in the GWN you would wind up in Kingston Penitentary. They are suffering somewhat because of the whole fiasco just like every other country, but bribery is illegal there.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Are you saying that there were no nefarious actions on Wall St. that were, at least in part, responsible for this debacle? If so, I have a bridge for you.

No, I'm proposing that there is no way that one can legislate optimum outcomes for a complex system like international finance due to a lack of understanding. Ideally, the market would keep everyone acting rationally, but individual rational actions can still bring about instability in the system. Dealing with a myriad of regulations and political folly simply makes the system more complex; thus, even more difficult to determine outcomes beforehand. If a system of regulation can be gamed, then someone will find the means.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by bhunter

No, I'm proposing that there is no way that one can legislate optimum outcomes for a complex system like international finance due to a lack of understanding. Ideally, the market would keep everyone acting rationally, but individual rational actions can still bring about instability in the system. Dealing with a myriad of regulations and political folly simply makes the system more complex; thus, even more difficult to determine outcomes beforehand. If a system of regulation can be gamed, then someone will find the means.

But see post # 13.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by merrylander

If Bonehead and McConnell don't block her Elizabeth Warren is the best bet for someone to jerk a knot in their tails.

But in accordance with their master's orders the Goopers are trying to gut regulation.

Yeah, right! Dodd-Frank have such a pristine record of knowing what the hell they are doing.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by merrylander

But see post # 13.

Does Canada have Fannie and Freddie?

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by bhunter

Does Canada have Fannie and Freddie?

Why on earth would they need them? Home ownership in Canada is slightly higher than here. Very simply mortgage system, you want a mortgage you go to your bank, tell them where the house is and what the price is. They do all the title search - no extra charge. They check your credit worthiess - no extra charge. If they agree they offer a 5/25 mortgage usually although you could ask for shorter terms. What 5/25 means is that the mortgage is good for 25 years but the interest rate is re-negotiated every 5 years. Normally this is a benefit to both sides since the bank does not need a crystal ball and can offer good rates.

My mortgage in Ottawa had $600 total costs and was going along fine until Volker decided to fix the economy. Was told that the final 5 years would be 20% - ouch. I approached my bank and said I will pay off the balance but I need time to cash an insurance policy. Bank said OK, but the insurance company was flooded with similar requests.

Weeks pass and the bank phones and says "Mr. B if it would be possible to put some money down we would appreciate it." So I paid them what I could, about half. couple of weeks later when the check came from the insurance company I paid the balance and thanked the bank for their patience.

That was the same bank that when an error forced me to wire $200 up to cover a check I had already written, found their error, corrected my balance and put in another $100 as an apology. Can you see a big U.S. bank doing that?


So why would they ever need to have the taxpayer back loans made by crooked banks and agents out of sheer greed.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Weeks pass and the bank phones and says "Mr. B if it would be possible to put some money down we would appreciate it." So I paid them what I could, about half. couple of weeks later when the check came from the insurance company I paid the balance and thanked the bank for their patience.

That was the same bank that when an error forced me to wire $200 up to cover a check I had already written, found their error, corrected my balance and put in another $100 as an apology. Can you see a big U.S. bank doing that?


So why would they ever need to have the taxpayer back loans made by crooked banks and agents out of sheer greed.

I agree. Fannie and Freddie ought not exist.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by bhunter

I agree. Fannie and Freddie ought not exist.

Does three make a crowd?

Chas