"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
I understand about the desire for multinational companies to maximize their return on capital, but, remember that the calculation requires game theory.
All companies want a reduction in regulation on their particular company but no companies want across the board regulation cuts. Generalized reductions in regulations produce a much larger beta. When things are good, safety nets are unnecessary but, the unregulated companies stockpile less for the bad times.
Investing in countries with reasonable regulations actually provides a safer investment for those that do not reap direct rewards from the risks permitted in the weak regulatory environments. Compared to much of the rest of the world, we have had relatively few major chemical and biological disasters. This record of believing in and achieving safety is what has established our "brand". As my friend in the internet advertising world says, you can only whore out your brand once. Once the U.S. is no longer considered a safe place to do business because of demolished regulations, the U.S brand will suffer and we will lose a lot of the competitive advantage that we currently have in the world. Talent does not immigrate to the 3rd world and talented foreigners will no longer come here if we permit a regulations reboot.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
Cash is just a proxy for what is still, fundamentally, a barter system.
What I'm saying is that with a trade deficit, the U.S. is exchanging revenue generating notes (bonds) for imported goods. If, at any time, our capacity for repaying our bonds is cast into doubt, or the dollar inflates so quickly that bonds produce a negative real ROI, our trade deficit will disappear because no country will accept our bonds for their exports.
We cannot maintain a trade deficit indefinitely because, at some point, people are going to want to use their dollars to buy something.
I wish I could recall the source, I think it was actually SA, but I was reading an article about how the Chinese have been using all of their stockpiled dollars to purchase dollar-denominated assets like precious metals and oil. This could be the reason that Japan is becoming our number one bondholder. Not because they have been buying more, but because China is executing a shift out of dollars without trading directly with the central banks.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
Your argument here is getting a bit esoteric.
Value, perceived value, and expected value all play a role in capital flow.
Case in point, during the housing market collapse, Citi and other American firms were still selling stock and crappy products to the Arab countries, because the Arab countries believed that the value that was being presented was accurate. The perceived returns were extremely high, even though the actual returns were much lower. They could not determine a true expected value because they were not given all of the information.
And, to get back to the point, when I advocate and adversarial relationship, I mean the relationship between the referees and the players in sporting events. Refs do not permit holding because it helps the offensive player out...they penalize the player whenever they force undue risk upon other players (like clipping or facemask penalties). That is the role of government, to set reasonable, enforceable rules to permit rigorous competition but prevent the players from, intentionally or unintentionally, causing undue harm against other players.
No one likes the refs unless they're calling an unfair game for your side. The same goes for government officials.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
You forget that U.S. bonds can also be classified as exports. They have value and they are a form of capital.
Obviously, markets are more complicated than having any that are pure importers or pure exporters because any one-sided relationship like that will fall apart in a reasonable amount of time.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
Sort of...as long as there are customers here, multinational businesses will continue to do business here. There are instances of regulatory overreaches and those need to be addressed but as long as the expected revenue exceeds expected cost, companies will continue to do business here.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
That is true but it requires significant domestic production to sell to domestic consumers.
Basically, we could have a fairly robust domestic economy without significant external trade if we all ate at each other restaurants or cut each other's hair. But, a service-based economy makes export very difficult. This would cause international demand for our currency to be reduced because the currency could not be exchanged for an exported good or service. Being used as a reserve currency will help but, again, if the only value of the dollar is as a currency standard, it would not be very difficult to establish a new currency standard.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
I think that it's healthy for business and government to be adversaries. Our country was built on adversarial relationships. We were one of the first countries to have true checks and balances and it's those adversarial relationships that forced us to be great.
If someone from the left and someone on the right can agree to a structural solution (ideally not pork-laden) then the solution is typically better than either side would have produced on their own.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
You can't sustain an economy on paper. At the lowest level of economics the paper is only a proxy for purchasable goods. If we cease to manufacture anything (and in this, I am including creative goods (art) and grown goods (crops)), then our currency will cease to have any value.
A lot of the reduction of employment has to do with the development of more efficient manufacturing techniques. And yes, you are correct that high union wages helped support technology development budgets because saved man-hours equated to more money. In fact, some might argue that increased safety and regulatory guidelines spurred development as well.
I'm becoming a fan of Joseph Stiglitz because I think he has a strong grasp on the a lot of behavioral economic theories.
Meet the new math, same as the old math: In an upcoming meeting, the SEC will look at bringing back fractional stock prices - 1/8 and 1/16 ticks, instead of penny pricing. At heart is the power of market makers who used to be accused of improperly raising trading costs. Proponents of going back argue that higher bank profitability from bigger tick sizes will make the environment more welcoming for small companies in their IPOs. [View news story]
I think it's a fair trade, we move back to fractions and stocks have a minimum 60 second hold time. That will get rid of front-running advantages and market makers will still be able to make money.
Why We Can't Simplify Bank Regulation [View article]
There is no doubt that commercial banking has had some dramatic value-added advances over the last 20 years. Online banking, ATM check deposits, and automated systems have advanced commerical banking dramatically.
Investment banking is a bit different though. I'm sure there are many value-added functions that I banks perform, but, honestly, I am concerned that there are just as many illusory value-added activities as real value-added ones.
Repackaging risk is one of the most dubious "value-added" activities that you could engage in because if someone is purchasing expensive risk assets because the statistical risk is hidden (or the crank has been winding without the jack coming out of the box) then you are not creating value, you are making money by duping investors.
Central bankers are nothing more than “counterfeit money printers,” says perma-bear Marc Faber, and Ben Bernanke should resign for messing up the U.S. economy so badly. He's been one of the chief proponents of an ultra-expansionist economic monetary policy, Faber says, which was to blame for the financial crisis in the first place. The Fed has no mandate to boost asset prices and create wealth, it doesn’t work that way. It just winds up being a temporary boost - always followed by a crash. [View news story]
There are a lot of different kinds of engineers and, to be honest, I am not involved with environmental regulations. I have just heard too many people proposing abolishing the EPA and the very thought of that sends chills down my spine. Here is one fact I believe: Unless legally mandated, few companies would spend money on proper chemical disposal or wastewater management.
I was being loose in my language when I used the word "screwed". I didn't imply that all banks would fail but I did mean that all banks would have faced challenging times. It's scary that, if you believe the reports from that time, all of the big banks brought their soup bowls to the discount window. From what we've seen through the robo-signing scandal, if one of the big banks failed, there would be scrambling to figure out who actually owned the mortgages on what properties.
Balance is always the key when you're talking about industry and the environment. I am an industrialist environmentalist (new term, I'm trying it out). The mantra we need to live by is "sustainability". If some want to regulate industrial waste less than the Chinese, I will fight that tooth and nail. But, I support smarter rule making. I think tightening CAFE standards is a good thing because, if people can stomach less powerful cars, they will end up saving money on gas and reducing our trade deficit.
I agree that EPA rules should have to pass the reasonability test but, I have no idea who I would trust to make that judgement. I'm sure you'd say congress but, last I saw, hippies and environmentalists are light on lobbying dollars.
Target date funds, which are supposed to limit portfolio risk as their end date approaches, have been singled out by the SEC's Mary Schapiro as not sufficiently warning investors about possible downside risks. In 2008, funds dated "2010" lost 24% on average, despite investor assumptions the funds would be heavily invested in bonds so close to their end date. [View news story]
I personally saw investment houses use leveraged bond funds as "safe alternatives" and the fact is that, if there are any failures in repaying bonds, leveraging the bonds can turn out just as catastrophically as levered stocks.
I think this may account for some of the problems in the target-date funds.
Why We Can't Simplify Bank Regulation [View article]
What has happened over the past few decades is that big banks shifted their focus to investment banking. If you ask an investment bank how interested it is in commercial banking, it will say "not at all". Commercial banking is boring, the classic structure of the 6/3/3 banker (Lend at 6, borrow at 3, be on the golf course by 3) is unattractive to investors but, still, very profitable for private banks.
Problem: There is no excitement, there are no superstars.
I think that there need to be amendments to Glass-Steagall to bring it up to today's standards that were assumed in 1933 because there was no efficient way to break a 50k loan into 100k parts. I think that there should be a mandate that all mortgage originators should maintain at least 51% of all mortgages that they originate.
Something people forget every decade or so is that...if there is no value created by a mechanism, you are just burying risk. It is more exciting and profitable to package mortgages and sell them off to unsuspecting Saudis than to fully evaluate them and put them on your own books.
Bundlers capitalized on executives' fear of looking stupid. No one wants to admit that they can't estimate the risk on a fourth-order bundle but, if ANY information is omitted, the task is impossible. Even so, ratings agencies didn't want to look stupid so they agreed with the assessment of the sellers, and, because ratings agencies rubber stamped them, it gave investment houses the greenlight to under-evaluate the assets they were purchasing.
And, in response to your mention of leverage, my position is that, it is far less risky for a commercial bank to lever 10 to 1, but, investment banks have much more complexity in their risk. Commercial banks can and do use private insurance (PMI) on their investments to manage it, but investment banks require insurance from not only significant known risks but 2nd and 3rd order risks from companies affiliated with their investments and companies affiliated with them. I do not know why investment banks are allowed to lever their clients' money.
Central bankers are nothing more than “counterfeit money printers,” says perma-bear Marc Faber, and Ben Bernanke should resign for messing up the U.S. economy so badly. He's been one of the chief proponents of an ultra-expansionist economic monetary policy, Faber says, which was to blame for the financial crisis in the first place. The Fed has no mandate to boost asset prices and create wealth, it doesn’t work that way. It just winds up being a temporary boost - always followed by a crash. [View news story]
Point 1) It's a math issue, if you have large outstanding loans (which all banks do) and the collateral that you are using to backstop those loans plummet in value, you are screwed.
2) you called me partisan and accused me of blaming Bush when I was saying that Greenspan screwed up.
I will take this moment to be partisan...I have listened to Hannity, I have listened to Limbaugh, and I have observed them both doing the same thing...when a point is brought across that contradicts their talking points, they accuse the other side of being partisan. That is bullshit.
EPA standards can be daunting but, I'm pretty sure that you have no chemistry in your background or you would realize that, if your process produces poisonous byproducts, they don't disappear if you put them in your backyard. We're always learning more about what is and is not harmful. If you do not believe in the EPA, then please repaint your house with lead paint, start smoking indoors around your children, and store your gasoline cans inside your house so you can enjoy the future that you want for our children.
Why We Can't Simplify Bank Regulation [View article]
I don't agree with your assertion that the repeal of Glass-Steagall had NOTHING to do with the crisis. When the trading floors got access to huge amounts of FDIC insured capital, the risk/reward ratios got warped. Do you really think an old school investment bank (i.e. one in the 1950s) would lever 50:1 on their own money?
The reason that there is no definitive cause is because the answer is d) all of the above.
Somehow a little cheating in the mortgage market was turned into sound business principle and when the SEC was away, the traders will play.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
All companies want a reduction in regulation on their particular company but no companies want across the board regulation cuts. Generalized reductions in regulations produce a much larger beta. When things are good, safety nets are unnecessary but, the unregulated companies stockpile less for the bad times.
Investing in countries with reasonable regulations actually provides a safer investment for those that do not reap direct rewards from the risks permitted in the weak regulatory environments. Compared to much of the rest of the world, we have had relatively few major chemical and biological disasters. This record of believing in and achieving safety is what has established our "brand". As my friend in the internet advertising world says, you can only whore out your brand once. Once the U.S. is no longer considered a safe place to do business because of demolished regulations, the U.S brand will suffer and we will lose a lot of the competitive advantage that we currently have in the world. Talent does not immigrate to the 3rd world and talented foreigners will no longer come here if we permit a regulations reboot.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
What I'm saying is that with a trade deficit, the U.S. is exchanging revenue generating notes (bonds) for imported goods. If, at any time, our capacity for repaying our bonds is cast into doubt, or the dollar inflates so quickly that bonds produce a negative real ROI, our trade deficit will disappear because no country will accept our bonds for their exports.
We cannot maintain a trade deficit indefinitely because, at some point, people are going to want to use their dollars to buy something.
I wish I could recall the source, I think it was actually SA, but I was reading an article about how the Chinese have been using all of their stockpiled dollars to purchase dollar-denominated assets like precious metals and oil. This could be the reason that Japan is becoming our number one bondholder. Not because they have been buying more, but because China is executing a shift out of dollars without trading directly with the central banks.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
Value, perceived value, and expected value all play a role in capital flow.
Case in point, during the housing market collapse, Citi and other American firms were still selling stock and crappy products to the Arab countries, because the Arab countries believed that the value that was being presented was accurate. The perceived returns were extremely high, even though the actual returns were much lower. They could not determine a true expected value because they were not given all of the information.
And, to get back to the point, when I advocate and adversarial relationship, I mean the relationship between the referees and the players in sporting events. Refs do not permit holding because it helps the offensive player out...they penalize the player whenever they force undue risk upon other players (like clipping or facemask penalties). That is the role of government, to set reasonable, enforceable rules to permit rigorous competition but prevent the players from, intentionally or unintentionally, causing undue harm against other players.
No one likes the refs unless they're calling an unfair game for your side. The same goes for government officials.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
Obviously, markets are more complicated than having any that are pure importers or pure exporters because any one-sided relationship like that will fall apart in a reasonable amount of time.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
Basically, we could have a fairly robust domestic economy without significant external trade if we all ate at each other restaurants or cut each other's hair. But, a service-based economy makes export very difficult.
This would cause international demand for our currency to be reduced because the currency could not be exchanged for an exported good or service. Being used as a reserve currency will help but, again, if the only value of the dollar is as a currency standard, it would not be very difficult to establish a new currency standard.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
If someone from the left and someone on the right can agree to a structural solution (ideally not pork-laden) then the solution is typically better than either side would have produced on their own.
"Cliffs are in fashion this fall," economist Ed Yardeni writes. Not only is there the fiscal cliff, there's the political cliff and the revenue cliff. “If they fall off of it,” says Yardeni, "so will the profit margin." Which makes for an earnings cliff too. Then there's the "capital strike," described by Barclays' Barry Knapp as industry's reluctance to invest until we know the election result and whether the fiscal cliff will be averted. [View news story]
A lot of the reduction of employment has to do with the development of more efficient manufacturing techniques. And yes, you are correct that high union wages helped support technology development budgets because saved man-hours equated to more money. In fact, some might argue that increased safety and regulatory guidelines spurred development as well.
I'm becoming a fan of Joseph Stiglitz because I think he has a strong grasp on the a lot of behavioral economic theories.
Meet the new math, same as the old math: In an upcoming meeting, the SEC will look at bringing back fractional stock prices - 1/8 and 1/16 ticks, instead of penny pricing. At heart is the power of market makers who used to be accused of improperly raising trading costs. Proponents of going back argue that higher bank profitability from bigger tick sizes will make the environment more welcoming for small companies in their IPOs. [View news story]
Why We Can't Simplify Bank Regulation [View article]
Investment banking is a bit different though. I'm sure there are many value-added functions that I banks perform, but, honestly, I am concerned that there are just as many illusory value-added activities as real value-added ones.
Repackaging risk is one of the most dubious "value-added" activities that you could engage in because if someone is purchasing expensive risk assets because the statistical risk is hidden (or the crank has been winding without the jack coming out of the box) then you are not creating value, you are making money by duping investors.
Central bankers are nothing more than “counterfeit money printers,” says perma-bear Marc Faber, and Ben Bernanke should resign for messing up the U.S. economy so badly. He's been one of the chief proponents of an ultra-expansionist economic monetary policy, Faber says, which was to blame for the financial crisis in the first place. The Fed has no mandate to boost asset prices and create wealth, it doesn’t work that way. It just winds up being a temporary boost - always followed by a crash. [View news story]
I was being loose in my language when I used the word "screwed". I didn't imply that all banks would fail but I did mean that all banks would have faced challenging times. It's scary that, if you believe the reports from that time, all of the big banks brought their soup bowls to the discount window. From what we've seen through the robo-signing scandal, if one of the big banks failed, there would be scrambling to figure out who actually owned the mortgages on what properties.
Balance is always the key when you're talking about industry and the environment. I am an industrialist environmentalist (new term, I'm trying it out). The mantra we need to live by is "sustainability". If some want to regulate industrial waste less than the Chinese, I will fight that tooth and nail. But, I support smarter rule making. I think tightening CAFE standards is a good thing because, if people can stomach less powerful cars, they will end up saving money on gas and reducing our trade deficit.
I agree that EPA rules should have to pass the reasonability test but, I have no idea who I would trust to make that judgement. I'm sure you'd say congress but, last I saw, hippies and environmentalists are light on lobbying dollars.
I think we're a bit stuck on this one.
Target date funds, which are supposed to limit portfolio risk as their end date approaches, have been singled out by the SEC's Mary Schapiro as not sufficiently warning investors about possible downside risks. In 2008, funds dated "2010" lost 24% on average, despite investor assumptions the funds would be heavily invested in bonds so close to their end date. [View news story]
I think this may account for some of the problems in the target-date funds.
Why We Can't Simplify Bank Regulation [View article]
Problem: There is no excitement, there are no superstars.
I think that there need to be amendments to Glass-Steagall to bring it up to today's standards that were assumed in 1933 because there was no efficient way to break a 50k loan into 100k parts. I think that there should be a mandate that all mortgage originators should maintain at least 51% of all mortgages that they originate.
Something people forget every decade or so is that...if there is no value created by a mechanism, you are just burying risk. It is more exciting and profitable to package mortgages and sell them off to unsuspecting Saudis than to fully evaluate them and put them on your own books.
Bundlers capitalized on executives' fear of looking stupid. No one wants to admit that they can't estimate the risk on a fourth-order bundle but, if ANY information is omitted, the task is impossible. Even so, ratings agencies didn't want to look stupid so they agreed with the assessment of the sellers, and, because ratings agencies rubber stamped them, it gave investment houses the greenlight to under-evaluate the assets they were purchasing.
And, in response to your mention of leverage, my position is that, it is far less risky for a commercial bank to lever 10 to 1, but, investment banks have much more complexity in their risk. Commercial banks can and do use private insurance (PMI) on their investments to manage it, but investment banks require insurance from not only significant known risks but 2nd and 3rd order risks from companies affiliated with their investments and companies affiliated with them. I do not know why investment banks are allowed to lever their clients' money.
Central bankers are nothing more than “counterfeit money printers,” says perma-bear Marc Faber, and Ben Bernanke should resign for messing up the U.S. economy so badly. He's been one of the chief proponents of an ultra-expansionist economic monetary policy, Faber says, which was to blame for the financial crisis in the first place. The Fed has no mandate to boost asset prices and create wealth, it doesn’t work that way. It just winds up being a temporary boost - always followed by a crash. [View news story]
2) you called me partisan and accused me of blaming Bush when I was saying that Greenspan screwed up.
I will take this moment to be partisan...I have listened to Hannity, I have listened to Limbaugh, and I have observed them both doing the same thing...when a point is brought across that contradicts their talking points, they accuse the other side of being partisan. That is bullshit.
EPA standards can be daunting but, I'm pretty sure that you have no chemistry in your background or you would realize that, if your process produces poisonous byproducts, they don't disappear if you put them in your backyard. We're always learning more about what is and is not harmful. If you do not believe in the EPA, then please repaint your house with lead paint, start smoking indoors around your children, and store your gasoline cans inside your house so you can enjoy the future that you want for our children.
Why We Can't Simplify Bank Regulation [View article]
The reason that there is no definitive cause is because the answer is
d) all of the above.
Somehow a little cheating in the mortgage market was turned into sound business principle and when the SEC was away, the traders will play.