The quants are going to go to town on this one. This bill gives the SEC authority to suspend the practice of marking to market. Bad idea. That makes this bill just a big money giveaway in practice. Transfer of wealth basically. Further, the FDIC is already running low on funds, we should be slow to make new promises when we are already uncertain with regard to meeting present obligations. Additionally, raising the li…
The SEC already had the authority to suspend mark-to-market accounting. This bill just re-affirms it. Furthermore, mark-to-market is an accounting technique.It may result in fraud but there is no "transfer of wealth" about it. Furthermore, if history is any indication, corporations can always cook their book if they really want to. The FDIC is indeed running low on funds and raising the limit at this point in time is…
"if history is any indication, corporations can always cook their book if they really want to"
Right. So why bother with accounting standards at all? They're just going to break the rules anyway....
The SEC already had the authority to suspend mark-to-market accounting. This bill just re-affirms it. Furthermore, mark-to-market is an accounting technique.It may result in fraud but there is no "transfer of wealth" about it. Furthermore, if history is any indication, corporations can always cook their book if they really want to. The FDIC is indeed running low on funds and raising the limit at this point in time is…
"if history is any indication, corporations can always cook their book if they really want to" Right. So why bother with accounting standards at all? They're just going to break the rules anyway....
Because accounting standards make financial reports readable by standardizing them for the audience (investors). Furthermore, accounting standards make it harder to cook the books, just never impossible.
This is a real low point for HN (comment wise), the subject matter is interesting but I would have expected some interesting comments.
Well, like you wouldn't want to read Paul Krugman's or Tyler Cowen's opinions on programming languages, most people here don't have much that's truly insightful to say about economics and finance, with the exception, perhaps, of economics as related to software. I guess there are a few people who work or have worked as quants and know more than a thing or two about finance, but how much insight does that give you int…
Thats my thoughts exactly. I feel like I know less everyone else, as everyone seems to have an opinion or something to say, yet as I don't understand the system as a whole, I would rather just shut the hell up and contribute in some positive way (thats all we can really do at the end of the day).
This plan is a disaster that will be remembered as one of the worst error in History ever. The US shot its last bullet, and it aimed at its feets. Buckle up, folks, cause the future is even more incertain now for the world.
I dunno, It will be hard to top Smoot-Hawley.
Ripped directly from Wikipedia: The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (sometimes known as the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act)[1] was an act signed into law on June 17, 1930, that raised U.S. tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods to record levels. In the United States 1,028 economists signed a petition against this legislation, and after it was passed, many countries retaliated with their own increased tariffs on U.S. goods, and American exports and imports plunged by more than half. In the opinion of most economists, the Smoot-Hawley act was partially responsible for the severity of the Great Depression.[2][3]
This is a real low point for HN (comment wise), the subject matter is interesting but I would have expected some interesting comments.
Well, like you wouldn't want to read Paul Krugman's or Tyler Cowen's opinions on programming languages, most people here don't have much that's truly insightful to say about economics and finance, with the exception, perhaps, of economics as related to software. I guess there are a few people who work or have worked as quants and know more than a thing or two about finance, but how much insight does that give you int…
I would love to read what pmarca has to say about all this. Too bad he stopped blogging just when things got really interesting :-/
This is a real low point for HN (comment wise), the subject matter is interesting but I would have expected some interesting comments.
I think the low quality of commentary (here & elsewhere) comes from (A) not understanding this relatively complicated & technical issue and (B) wanting to comment & discuss.
I'm not sure how I feel about it. I don't like to see discussions deteriorate like this. But on the other hand, I feel like participating in the discussion may be a good way of gaining an understanding ultimately bringing the level back up.
My $0.02 The Good: A non trivial part of the market freeze was due to the uncertainty about the bailout. Will it pass and if so at exactly what price will the Feds buy the toxic junk. Rather then sell, people were waiting. Perhaps now things can start moving again. So this may be better then doing nothing. The Bad: The may be worse then doing nothing. We may spend a whole lot of money and not make a profit on it. Ste…
I thought this bill was the worst idea ever, until I heard Warren Buffett speak up for it two days ago. Buffett has both integrity and economic skills, and he probably understands this proposal better than any of us. For instance, http://ph.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080924/tbs-buffett-bailout-7... The US government has a pretty poor track record for "emergency proposals" and other decisions these last 8 years, so I under…
Fuck Warren Buffet. Who died and elected him grand master of the universe anyways?
Note that I'm not asking whether he knows how to make money - clearly he does: witness putting $5.000.000.000 into Goldman Sachs and then lobbying like hell for the bailout of ....... ..... (guess who?)