Posted on 10/14/2009 8:26:21 AM PDT by parsifal
….the finance sector is worse than parasitic. In the title of his recent book, The Predator State, James Galbraith aptly names the problem. The financial sector functions as the sharp canines that the predator state uses to rend the nation. In addition to siphoning off capital for its own benefit, the finance sector misallocates the remaining capital in ways that harm the real economy…:
(Excerpt) Read more at nakedcapitalism.com ...
parsy, who thinks it is a good thing
Are these cranks still at it? Socialism failed everywhere it was tried in the last century. Freedom in economics works, government control does not.
The banks were doing well when they were making solid loans, rather than being forced to loan to bad risks. They should go back to that, if the Federal government would stop interfering.
I wonder if the author thinks Soros is a predator who misallocates capital?
The banks weren’t forced to make bad loans. They chose to make these loans because the fees were high and they could resell them and they could also sell CDO’s on them.
parsy, who says the banks are guilty as sin
Quite possibly. Doesn’t Soros run a hedge fund?
parsy, who don’t follow Soros
Well Butch & Sundance sure thought so and so did old Bonnie Parker & Clyde Barrow.
Wall Street makes them all look like pikers.
parsy, who says if Bonnie and Clyde had it to do over, thet would have offices on Wall Street
In addition, as I had a chance to tell you earlier, "regulating Wall Street" is a religion: you believe that such regulation exists. It does not. To regulate, one has to have information about the objects being regulated (firms, products, consumers, etc.) Governments ALWAYS know less than the actors in the economy. There is no regulation that would be able to prevent cycles. And, in fact, it was regulation that turned a regular recession of 1929 into a prolonged Depression.
So you are acting out a religious belief, parsy, and rely on absolutely empty articles such as this one to support it.
Thank you for bringing sanity to this forum.
This “cycle’ didn’t just happen. Did I ever send you the crashopedia link?
It wasn’t just bind happenstance that kept most derivatives from going on exchanges. It wasn’t just a stroke of bad luck that got Glass-Steagall replaced.
parsy, who wonders what you thought about the details in the article
And another thing...Do you think Karl Denninger over at Market Ticker is nuts, too? Or a socialist? I’m not saying anything worse than what has been been said by people who work on Wall Street, or are a lot smarter than I am about some of this stuff.
parsy, who tries in his own humble way. . .
The problem is “who regulates the regulators”?
Thank you, Parsy. I went through such an exercise the last time. I could repeat it again to prove my point: the article is just an unsuccessful exercise in ideology. Sorry I don't have sufficient time to do that today.
Hopefully, the voters. But before we voters can regulate the regulators, we the voters, including the durn GOP, have to understand that some stuff needs regulating and that “regulating” is not necessarily a bad thing. Unless of course you are one of those who thinks Wall Street just didn’t do anything wrong and we ought to let them just do whatever they want however they want.
parsy, who hopes you’ve learned better than that
I understand. If you do get a chance, check out that link within the article about the five failures of finance, too.
parsy, who says thanks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.