Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJon Schwarz: I Was Wrong: Big Banks Actually Were Exactly Like Counterfeiters
by Jon Schwarz
(The Intercept) In a recent post about the new movie The Big Short, I argued that its not actually necessary to decipher the abstruse jargon of the 2008 financial crisis i.e., credit default swaps, mezzanine tranches, synthetic collateralized debt obligations, etc. in order to understand what happened. What the big banks did during the housing bubble of the mid-2000s was in essence straightforward counterfeiting. The difference between what they did and regular counterfeiting was simply the kind of fake paper; regular counterfeiters print fake, valueless cash, while the banks were printing fake, valueless bonds.
However, I then made a very serious mistake I claimed there was a small difference between regular counterfeiters and the ones on Wall Street:
Regular counterfeiters generally want to spend all their bad paper themselves, whereas Wall Street just took a percentage for running the presses. Then they often, though not always, passed their bad paper along to others.
If in 2005 a bank packaged worthless mortgages together into a bond with a face value of, say, $100 million, it would generally collect fees of about 1.5 percent, or $1.5 million. The $100 million face value wasnt real, but the fees definitely were.
What I didnt understand, and commenter Larry Headlund pointed out, is that counterfeiting cash actually does work the same way. That is, counterfeiters would not print up $100 million in cash and then spend it all themselves. Instead, they sell their fake cash to others for a percentage of the face value. ..................(more)
https://theintercept.com/2016/01/02/i-was-wrong-big-banks-actually-were-exactly-like-counterfeiters/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 804 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (17)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Jon Schwarz: I Was Wrong: Big Banks Actually Were Exactly Like Counterfeiters (Original Post)
marmar
Jan 2016
OP
They not only sold paper they knew was worthless, then demanded payment in full
hobbit709
Jan 2016
#1
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)1. They not only sold paper they knew was worthless, then demanded payment in full
on the paper.
For that alone they should have been shortened.
longship
(40,416 posts)2. However, the CDSs and synthetic CDOs were the raw material.
What's important is how they did it, not just that they did it. Therein lies any chance for regulation.
As Steve Eisman is quoted in The Big Short,
"They weren't satisfied getting lots of unqualified borrowers to borrow money to buy a house they couldn't afford," said Eisman. "They were creating them out of whole cloth. One hundred times over! That's why the losses in the financial system are so much greater than just the subprime loans. That's when I realized they needed us to keep the machine running. I was like, This is allowed?"
R&K