Oh, you mean allowing unregulated investment funds the opportunity to LEVERAGE themselves up to 33:1 to purchase OTC mortgage securities wasn't a "bad" thing? Get real. Let's face it . . . It's time to pay the "piper" as yet another President has been asleep at the wheel . . . How else can you explain an Administration that continually talks about a "strong" dollar policy, but has simply stood by and watched the dollar lose half its value over the past 7 years of Bush & Company. This isn't ON Bernanke or Paulson. This is ALL about George Bush and his highly incompetent cronies that he has surrounded himself with over the past 7 years . . . History will ultimately paint him as the "worst" U.S. President in recent history. So if you want to bitch and moan about newer, tougher, regulation in the financial markets . . . simply look at one MORON to blame: George Dumbya Bush
NO - PPT is ONLY there when the global power brokers are LONG (to protect their assets/positions). The global manipulative players had already transitioned to the sell side prior to January - they sold into strength. Later they will come in and pick through the rubble once all the financial damage has played itself out. Only at this point will it be safe to play the LONG side again, and the PPT will go back to work for them as directed. This financial blowout was by design - consolidation of power through the chaos.
The market needs less regulation - not more. Scant regulation requires Feds to let institutions fail when bad decisions are made. Obviously, they own the system and will not allow that to happen. Hedge funds going under is not my concern. Leverage is not the problem. Poorly managed risk is. Further, if you want to talk leverage, it was the Federal Reserve dumping rates to ~0% that made that insane gearing possible. Frankly, the only one I see bitching around here is you. You're the sole cheerleader for Federal economic control and endless bailouts. Derivatives exposure was the only salient point you made. And I'm not sure you even made it. Just repeated the "the too big to fail" mantra about a hundred times.
I agree with you. 33:1 leverage is not good, so those funds should go bust. Bad investment get bad results and those who invest well get good results. What is the problem with it? it is the same for speculators. We are responsible of our trades!!!!! god traders do well and bad traders do not..... I guess you are an interventionist, so I invite you to come to Spain to enjoy our regulated economy and the rhetoric of our business friendly (lol) socialist presindent mr Zapatero. You can even go to Zimbabwe and you will get all the regulation you look for. There you will be able to manage 100.000.000 local dolars and be rich Landis you should learn a bit of history, first start for the US one, and read what the founders of your nation wrote down......find out what they thought about regulation and artificial money (near 0% interst rates)...then I suggest you to study european history:a history of rulers (regulation) and serves.... "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" Benjamin Franklin Liberty and God save great América!
Hey Tacky- Take a hard look at the digital drivers license. A cursory glance from behind the counter at the liquor store doesn't count. From today's Washington Post: States Maneuver to Avoid Penalties of New Federal ID Program The law, which overhauls how state ID cards and driver's licenses must be awarded, is meant to combat forgery and fraud by standardizing license data to be shared across government databases. It requires, for example, that states verify applicants' citizenship status, check identity documents such as birth certificates, and cross-check information with other states and the federal government. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/29/AR2008032902034.html Just, My2cents
So what is wrong with states having to check the citizenship status of applicants? And why do you feel so inclined to try and insult me? My post was not aggressive, just pointing out my observations of 8 years of law enforcement...not a liquor store.
My suggestion to you is that you need to take a class in "Reading Comprehension". I stated one example ( that you even AGREED with ) where the market place has mistakenly been given a dangerous "free-pass" and you then extrapolated that into claiming that I am some sort of "interventionist" and supporter of regulation. I never claimed anything of the sort.
Once again, you find yourself talking in hypocritical "circles" with "twisted" logic that boggles the mind. First off, it's pretty funny how you claim that leverage isn't the issue, yet you provide no example whatsoever of a "regulated" market place that allows 33:1 leverage and has gotten itself into trouble. Moreover, you ironically talk about how leverage isn't the issue, but that the Fed was to blame for the kind of leverage that has been used. So how can the Fed be blamed for the use of leverage, when ( according to you ) . . . "leverage isn't the problem" and does not create any "danger" in the marketplace? Furthermore, are you trying to tell everyone here that all of this leverage was created by the Fed because they drove rates to zero??? When were all of these strategies employed? When were rates last at zero? I look forward to your answer to the above 3 points that I just made. Please enlighten all of us by being specific in your response. Thank You.
Wow, someone from ET that actually supports more government intervention and regulation of its citizens . . . Imagine that?