This part strikes me as either naive or disingenuous. Didn't the "exotica" help fuel the bubble without which there would have been a prolonged period of stagnation? How would the "real economy" have fared sans bubble? It would seem to me that this real economy thing would not be something that Americans would be politically disposed to put up with.
On 4/11/08, Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The New York Times/April 11, 2008 > > Op-Ed Contributor > > The Fed's Money Well Spent > By ALICE M. RIVLIN > exotic derivatives seem mainly to reflect the efforts of traders to > outsmart each other. Their opaqueness may entail more systemic risk > than social value. > > The folks who devise these exotica are talented enough to create > something useful. We would all be better off if they were productively > employed in the "real" economy — or pursued wealth in Las Vegas, where > the risks the smartest gamblers pose to the house are carefully > controlled. -- Sandwichman _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
