Category: Bailouts, Video

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

One Response to “We still live in Lehman’s shadow”

  1. Chief Tomahawk says:

    WTF?!? This is a bum piece authored by a lazy reporter!

    “Muddle through” has been a success?!?

    No, it was FASB 157. This ‘reporter’ needs to align the time discussion of FASB 157 became pronounced [I distinctly recall watching Larry Kudlow interview Brian Wesbury (on The Kudlow Report) during the depths of the crisis and Wesbury saying "We need to change the accounting of level 3 assets from mark-to-market to mark-to-model."] Once that accounting change arrived, a vicious short covering rally ensued.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhY4-arQAVc Here Wesbury connects the dots–if only Authers’ had internet access to watch this clip!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMFUY8DCn2Q (‘Held-til-maturity account’: see the closing scene of “Raiders of the Lost Ark”…)

    Here’s an interesting question: Why was mark-to-market accounting brought back in 2007 by the FASB? (Okay, my Newt clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFJJJQAOddc) says mark-to-market was brought back via the implementation of Sarbanes-Oxley) Did the big banks scheme to put it in place knowing it would precipitate a crisis (especially given the crazy lending going on at the time…) but confident they were ‘too big to fail’? Thereby such crisis would take out many smaller competitors and leave the big banks in an even more powerful position? What journalist or journalists is probing this question????