> RoMunn wrote:
> I get your point, but I disagree. And so does the Obama Administration,
> apparently.
>

Yes but you disagree because, respectfully, you don't know what the
fuck you're talking about.

Obama disagrees because he sees 2 realistic choices:

(1.) Krugman-Stiglitz: "nationalize" meaning receivership.  The
downsides to this option are:

a.) that there's no going back and you've got to do them all: every
bank all at once.  No sequencing.  It's an atom bomb.

b.) Obama can't even get his Treasury staffed much less the 200,000
people it would take to bring these massive institutions into
receivership.

c.) Given CFMA, there's not clarity around the legality of this.

d.) AIG, for example, has thousands of offices across hundreds of
countries.  How the feck would you even begin to manage the logistics
of that not to mention the local politics.


(2.) Geithner-Summers: "nationalize" meaning invest, stabilize,
privatize.  In this model you basically throw money and accounting
tricks at the banks in the hopes that they can bring themselves back
and thus avoid all the downsides listed above.

The downside to this plan is that you don't change the structural
house of cards that caused the problem in the first place.

Which is why I and many others think O has a LOT of proclamations
coming down the pike: new regulations, enforcement of existing
regulations (essentially a change), management changes, and possibly
the busting up of banks in a non-receivership way that has the same
effect as receivership.

The reason the market is up is because thus far O seems very banker friendly.

The reason the market isn't WAY up is because that means either he's
totally in the pocket of Wall Street (or their policy men) OR he's
simply distracting with the left before he punches with the right.

And THAT'S why people are on the edge of seats over this stress test stuff.

In summary, nobody that understands what's going on would even
consider your "option" except for one reason: they're a banker hoping
to fool the public into thinking that's an option so they can legally
avoid reaping what they sowed.

In other words, you're mistaken notions are the banker's hedge: if
they can fool enough people like you into thinking that an option they
can politically hedge O's right hook assuming he plans to throw it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to 
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:295449
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to