?The didn?t know what they were doing? line is a con because it allows for good faith on the part of the actors. They were just ignorant, incompetent, or mistaken. What it covers over is the criminality of those involved. As I wrote here yesterday, during this time we had the biggest frauds in history going on. Cons on cons on cons. Yet in this case, although it had the same effect of separating the marks from their money, and indeed magnified that effect, it was just people in over their heads, not knowing what they were doing. This is my perennial criticism of Das. He was part of a criminal enterprise. Once you look at it from this perspective, what happened becomes easy to understand and predictable. More than this, it becomes apparent why, even after the meltdown showed how destructive they are, the industry continues to defend and sell these instruments. But instead we are invited to believe the story that an industry filled with the best and most brilliant mathematicians money could buy and yet somehow they all missed, and continue to miss, the fatal flaws in these products that even simple arithmetic would reveal. It has become a fixture of our age that lies, even obvious ones, repeated often enough will be treated more seriously than the truth. So it is that we can see the victims of great crimes in their tens of millions, but no criminals, so we are told, who committed them.
Source: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/12/satyajit-das-on-what-went-wrong-with-finance.html
louis ck michelle duggar heisman cp3 lakers news rachel crow rachel crow
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.