http://www.group30.org/pubs/pub_0901.htm
“The report was commissioned in the 1990s just as the use derivatives grew and began to move into the mainstream of finance, with these new products fundamentally changing financial management by providing new tools to manage risk. It was based on wide ranging survey of the industry.

At the time many, both inside and outside of the financial industry, were uncomfortable with derivatives activity. They saw it as complex and obscure, potentially subject to abuse that might lead to the failure of individual firms or even to a crisis in the financial system. ”

http://seekingalpha.com/article/74435-the-subprime-three-rubin-summers-greenspan
“Greenspan, Summers and Rubin all acted — or failed to act — to enable Wall Street’s quest for higher profits via the opaque OTC market structure model and did so at the expense of the public interest.”

The SOB took a dependent-care deductions for his kid’s “sleep-away camps”. You see, paying taxes is a patriotic duty for the rest of us, but apparently not for your new Treasury Secretary. Change we can believe in.

To be completely regulated from above will mean nothing but a race to the bottom of a lowest-common-denominator regulatory scheme, with Congress making the final call.

I thought so.

The problem I have with document and most of the posts I read here is it’s all rearview thinking. It’s also based on a the belief that the economy is a machine, which can be designed, run, and fixed by a politicians, economists, and bureaucrats:
http://tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=011309A

And because of the current focus on rearview thinking, nobody’s asking where the next economic crisis is going to come from e.g. What impact will result from trillions of bailouts, stimulus spending, government “investments”? Will the belief that more government (as a percent of GDP) will result in a higher standard of living? “Fairness”? And what is fair anyway?

Essential the people are dependent upon educating the Supply Side. If the Supply
Side cannot be convinced that a bigger pie means “a lot more” for them we will be screwed. You cannot enjoy the manna of Supply Side without drinking the kool aid — A lot of them really believe that giving themselves more is for the greater good. If they don’t have $ the problem is systemic. If you don’t have $ it’s cyclical. You know like the “natural rate” of employment. All of it is so reasonable: Of course if everybody that wants to work has a job we got big problems. Tough Love.

I, too, have come to the conclusion that this is a depression. Good luck to us all.

You probably are good at marketing…trying to sell ice cream in a blizzard type of stuff. But your economic analysis is quite shallow. Do you really believe Obama’s oratory and a potentially not horrible LEI report are going to cause a bull run?