Display:
Not only those, but all savings. Bankruptcies risk starting a run on banks, first from investors, then from the general public, with dire consequences for everybody, bankers and workers, rich or poor. They did allow Lehman go bankrupt right. They didn't dare repeat that feat with AIG. But bailouts this size should definitely bring the state into the capital and far stricter regulations and even pursuing those in charge. I for one argued that Greenspan & the likes should be drawn, quartered, beheaded and burnt in the Times Square, his ashes thrown over the ocean from the Statue of Liberty. A lawsuit would be too little for this kind of fault.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 08:21:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
ValentinD:
They did allow Lehman go bankrupt right.
A broker-dealer, not a bank. The other Broker-dealer at risk was Merrill-Lynch and they convinced a regular bank, Bank of America, to gobble it up which resulted in heavy indigestion.

The brainless should not be in banking. — Willem Buitler
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 09:09:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Bankruptcies risk starting a run on banks, first from investors,

That is not a problem. The investors only hold securities in the secondary markets. The stock can go all the way to zero without impairing the function of the company proper.

then from the general public,

Their deposits were and are guaranteed.

They did allow Lehman go bankrupt right.

The problem with that was that they failed to separate the important stuff from the shitpile. The important stuff (the overnight commercial paper, mainly) should have been preserved at the cost of wiping out every other creditor, if necessary. That's the whole point of doing a Good Bank/Bad Bank exercise: You get to decide which creditors are wiped out, so you can concentrate the losses in places where losses don't matter.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 09:10:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The issue is about confidence. And that's a contagious issue.

Deposits were are and will never be guaranteed - see my post above.

Sometimes you can't just do the separation. Not even the people in question cant. Welcome to the Derivatives world.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 12:35:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course you can do the separation.

Sometimes, the decision as to whether a particular instrument is one or the other will be a judgement call. But that does not mean that you cannot separate the two, any more than the existence of shades of grey mean that you cannot tell white from black.

It is indeed a matter of confidence. And the only people whose confidence matter are the ones operating the clearing system. That's why you want to protect the short-term secured commercial paper market.

But fuck the Dow, and fuck Wall Street. They are not system-critical.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 02:07:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You still didn't get it or refuse to accept it. You remind me of those bankers :) Jake, Wall St. IS The System.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 03:36:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bull. Shit.

Wall Street does not produce steel, it does not produce ball bearings, it does not build ships, it does not grow food, it does not manufacture chemicals, it does not mine copper, it does not smelt lead, and so on and so forth and etcetera.

Ergo, Wall Street is not the system that needs to be saved.

Now, Wall Street may hold hostage some part of the strategic infrastructure that we need in order to save the system. The solution to that problem is to shoot Wall Street in the back of the head, take the strategic infrastructure from its cold, dead hands and then dump it in a shallow grave.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Tue May 19th, 2009 at 05:41:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Since "on s'en passe" of Wall St., why not give up banks altogether. Or currencies, for that matter :) Alright, I'm being provocatory. But it's not that simple to avoid intermediaries, in general. I would just ban computers from this business.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Wed May 20th, 2009 at 04:58:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Huh? Methinks you're confusing me with ChrisCook. I never said that we should abolish credit intermediaries. I just said that the part of the system that has to work all the time, every time, has to be public. Because otherwise, private gangsters can and will hold the public ransom every few years.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed May 20th, 2009 at 05:28:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I never said we should abolish them either, Jake, merely that they are unnecessary in a Peer to Peer economy, and I would now add that they are well on the way to abolishing themselves.

And btw it's not a case of either Public = State or Private = Corporation. It's quite possible to bring both within a partnership framework. Glasgow now has four genuinely municipal partnerships with private sector partners.

"Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Wed May 20th, 2009 at 07:21:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series