Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:04 AM
Original message |
Why not just declare all credit default swaps that were essentially Bets by outside 3rd parties null |
|
It was all imaginary fantasy money anyway and there's not enough money in the world to cover all the bets. So why not sweep them all off the table?
I am talking about the default swaps purchased by those who didn't even own the underlying asset in the first place. That should be illegal, obviously, since it turned worldwide financial markets into Monte Carlo and Vegas and Atlantic City combined.
|
RUMMYisFROSTED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:12 AM
Response to Original message |
1. You want to send $42T down the shitter? |
Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. 42 T in imaginary gains backed by Monopoly dollars |
|
I don't know what percentage of the swaps are in the hands of third party gamblers, betting on outcomes that really have nothing to do with them except a large gain if they bet right and a smaller loss, due to leveraging, if they bet wrong.
If company x paid out 1 million in swaps to company y, hoping for a 40 million gain, if it is possible, I say refund them the 1 million back minus some reasonable fee for company y. I don't see either company being seriously harmed and it take some of the lunacy off the table.
|
Jim__
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:19 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Suppose your bank is holding some of these credit default swaps. |
|
Suppose when we flush them down the toilet, we simultaneously declare your bank account null and void - no FDIC compensation. Even if you don't have a bank account, does that sound fair to you?
|
Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. see my response #4 above. nt. |
mike_c
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:27 AM
Response to Original message |
3. because, one way or another, your congress person would suffer.... |
trudyco
(975 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-15-08 11:50 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Sounds reasonable as long as all pension funds, retirement funds |
|
are reimbursed and FDIC insurance is still in effect. Not sure about foreign entities that are equivalent to our pension funds. Basically hit the rich and speculative but not the little guy who trusted their financial institutions and fund managers to not be blockheads.
We should outlaw CDS, derivatives, hedge funds, usury rates, predatory lending and naked shorting immediately. Sad that we haven't. We should also renegotiate mortgages that have predatory lending, unusually high interest rates or are failing (primary residences and small business buildings owned by the business owner only).
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:42 AM
Response to Original message |