Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Charles Rangel (D) New York

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 16:13:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '
')I think I'll trust Wikipedia....


And I'll trust the panel of world-class economists the Wall Street Journal put together to investigate the cause of the economic problem over the latest anonymous Wikipedia teenager who wrote whatever page it is you are putting your trust in......

CHEERS!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby Carlhole » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 16:25:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '
')I think I'll trust Wikipedia....


And I'll trust the panel of world-class economists the Wall Street Journal put together to investigate the cause of the economic problem over the latest anonymous Wikipedia teenager who wrote whatever page it is you are putting your trust in......

CHEERS!


Well then supply a link, Bozo. Come on!

The Wikipedia articles The Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisisand The Sarbanes-Oxley Actare straight forward pieces which contain many references so that the reader may verify the content.

This happens every single time I catch you lying - which is quite frequently. You immediately drop your false pretense of knowledgeable commentary and you begin making snarking comments to weazle out of being caught in your lies.

If you are making an economic argument, supply a link! Or else everybody else reading this can easily see that you ARE truly a liar.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'L')ook, if Sarbanes-Oxley were important to the current financial meltdown, why is it not even mentioned in The Sub-Prime Crisis piece on Wikipedia? And when you look up Sarbanes-Oxley on Wikipedia, The Sub-Prime Mortgage Crisis is not mentioned there either.

You just flat don't know WTF you're talking about.

Sarbanes-Oxley has to do with accounting rules for corporations and overseeing auditors of corporate books. It was enacted to fix accounting loopholes that allowed Enron to play that complex holding company shell game with corporate liabilities.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wiki', 'T')he Act establishes a new quasi-public agency, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, which is charged with overseeing, regulating, inspecting, and disciplining accounting firms in their roles as auditors of public companies. The Act also covers issues such as auditor independence, corporate governance, internal control assessment, and enhanced financial disclosure.


Sarbanes-Oxley has absolutely nothing to do with the Fed's cheap money policy that deliberately created a long-term housing bubble, nor the deregulation environment that allowed the GSE's to guarantee questionable mortgages, nor the complete lack of oversight of derivatives creation and proliferation that the repeal of Glass-Steagal helped along tremendously.

All this has led to the $1 trillion socialization of the US financial industry. What a great career result for right wing Republican, Phil "It's only a mental recession" Gramm, chief campaign advisor to that old fart you love so much, John McCain - both old farts BIG champions of deregulation.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 16:53:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', ' ')Bozo.....


Your clown hat looks nice, Blobbo-Wobbo.

Now, if we are done calling names, can we please discuss the issues?

I think you were about to explain how increasing regulations was actually deregulation...?

CHEERS!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Top

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby Carlhole » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 17:03:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '.')..And I'll trust the panel of world-class economists the Wall Street Journal put together to investigate the cause of the economic problem over the latest anonymous Wikipedia teenager who wrote whatever page it is you are putting your trust in......


You were about to supply a link.
Last edited by Carlhole on Sun 21 Sep 2008, 17:06:59, edited 1 time in total.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 17:04:17

The Wall Street Journal has a public site and a subscription site. You can't access links to the subscription site if you aren't a subscriber. However, I'll copy a bit of one of the discussions of the effect of Sarbanes-Oxley on the current economic disaster:

"The crisis on Wall Street has, of course, become a political football. Cries of "moral hazard" and "socialism" on one side are drowned out by charges that the current mess is the result of deregulation, and too cozy a relationship between "Wall Street fat cats" and the current administration in Washington. If only reality were that simple. The blame game will continue, but it won't do much to fix what's broken.

Let's get a few canards out of the way: First, yes, stupidity and cupidity and complacency and hubris are involved, and yes, there is gambling in Casablanca. Second, the idea that there is this thing called "the free market" that governments tame or muck up with regulation is a fiction. Governments create the legal conditions for markets; markets shape what governments can do or are willing to do. Regulation versus free-market is a false dichotomy. Maybe in some theoretical universe, if we could start with a blank slate and construct society anew, it wouldn't be. But we exist in a web of markets and regulations, and the challenge is to respond to problems in such a way so that we decrease the odds of future crises.

And that is where AIG becomes instructive. Even good regulations can't prevent all future crises, especially ones that are the result of new technologies and changes that result from them. The capital flows, derivatives contracts and nearly frictionless interlinking of global markets today are the direct result of the information technologies of the 1990s. The implications weren't known until very recently, so it would have been nearly impossible for regulations to have prevented what is happening. But if good regulation can't prevent crises, bad regulations can cause them.

The current meltdown isn't the result of too much regulation or too little. The root cause is bad regulation.

Call it the revenge of Enron. The collapse of Enron in 2002 triggered a wave of regulations, most notably Sarbanes-Oxley. Less noticed but ultimately more consequential for today were accounting rules that forced financial service companies to change the way they report the value of their assets (or liabilities). Enron valued future contracts in such a way as to vastly inflate its reported profits. In response, accounting standards were shifted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board and validated by the SEC. The new standards force companies to value or "mark" their assets according to a different set of standards and levels.

The rules are complicated and arcane; the result isn't. Beginning last year, financial companies exposed to the mortgage market began to mark down their assets, quickly and steeply. That created a chain reaction, as losses that were reported on balance sheets led to declining stock prices and lower credit ratings, forcing these companies to put aside ever larger reserves (also dictated by banking regulations) to cover those losses."
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby Carlhole » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 17:49:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'C')all it the revenge of Enron. The collapse of Enron in 2002 triggered a wave of regulations, most notably Sarbanes-Oxley. Less noticed but ultimately more consequential for today were accounting rules that forced financial service companies to change the way they report the value of their assets (or liabilities).


I think virtually everybody agrees that the present crisis has been caused by the bursting of a huge housing bubble followed by a sudden credit contraction, falling home prices, defaulted mortgages which, in turn, affect the value of securities based upon mortgages.

The bubble was created through (1) the Fed's policy of extremely low interest rates, (2) by a lack of GSE oversight into the qualifications of buyers, (3) and by a lack of oversight into the creation of derivatives based upon mortgages.

This latest bailout is going to cost the taxpayer $700 billion+ and you say this is due to accounting rules? Nowhere else has anyone mentioned Sarbanes-Oxley in relation to this deadly serious financial catastrophe. Henry Paulson was on Meet The Press today and did not mention Sarbanes-Oxley.

You chose the ONLY article to relate arcane accounting rules to the present financial catastrophe. And, even then, your article restricted itself to AIG and not the larger disaster. In fact, today on Meet The Press, Henry Paulson described AIG as a "hedge fund holding company sitting on top of a bunch of insurance companies with no oversight". Well, the whole POINT of Sarbanes-Oxley is governing how accounting firms in an oversight capacity report. So there CANNOT have been any significant contribution to the disaster by accounting rules adopted in 2002.

Paulson went on to recommend regulatory actions once the market stabilized.

Ron Paul could see this bubble and its eventual collapse many years ago. He wrote this piece in 2003 forecasting the bursting of the housing bubble:

Fannie and Freddie

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ron Paul', 'O')ne of the major government privileges granted to GSEs is a line of credit with the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps the GSEs attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the government to engage in a huge unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he connection between the GSEs and the government helps isolate the GSE management from market discipline. This isolation from market discipline is the root cause of the recent reports of mismanagement occurring at Fannie and Freddie. After all, if Fannie and Freddie were not underwritten by the federal government, investors would demand Fannie and Freddie provide assurance that they follow accepted management and accounting practices.

Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges granted to Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.

Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government's interference in the housing market, the government's policy of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.


So it has been a combination of the Federal Reserve flooding the economy with easy money while the GSE's allowed a free-for-all buying binge. Investors in the GSE's did not demand market discipline from Fannie and Freddie because they knew the government would step in and rescue them.

Ron Paul doesn't mention Sarbanes-Oxley anywhere in his piece either - because it isn't the least bit relevant.
Last edited by Carlhole on Sun 21 Sep 2008, 18:25:19, edited 4 times in total.
Carlhole
 
Top

Re: Charles Rangel (D) New York

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Sun 21 Sep 2008, 17:56:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'W')e can debate the details all we wish, but the overall pattern is clear enough: we chopped down all the trees to haul the big statues from the quarry down to overlook the lonesome vast blue ocean.

Image


Wrong again, PMS.

In fact, not only are you completely wrong, you are WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!

Those statues, in fact, face inwards and look over the denuded island's interior.
OK, so wouldn't they be looking, like, uphill or something?
Turn those Machines back On! - Don Ameche in Trading Places
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There
Top

Previous

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron