Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Chinese peasant boy blamed for Global Collapse
- This topic has 15 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 8 months ago by 34f3f3f.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 26, 2009 at 2:46 PM #15558April 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM #387597patientrenterParticipant
Most of the actuaries I know (not all) only used this method as one more reference point to determine the value of the annuities etc. I am a little amazed that the PhD physicists from MIT at JPM and their risk managers etc applied it blindly to bond default valuations. Of course, it led to much bigger paychecks, so maybe they didn’t think too hard… “It’s hard to get a man to understand something, if his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
Oh, and all that stuff about the shadow banking system being the cause of all our problems? BS… It’s just a mechanism that transmits the problems through from one company to another. The underlying problem is very, very simple – overpriced assets against which too much money was borrowed. All the rest is simply the various consequences of that bad fundamental. And, yes, I understand how these derivatives were abused to help responsibility for prudent lending to go from front-line decisionmakers to very dispersed, to nothing. But they were only one piece of that. FNMA, the Fed, China, dumb investors, and others were at least as important.
April 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM #387867patientrenterParticipantMost of the actuaries I know (not all) only used this method as one more reference point to determine the value of the annuities etc. I am a little amazed that the PhD physicists from MIT at JPM and their risk managers etc applied it blindly to bond default valuations. Of course, it led to much bigger paychecks, so maybe they didn’t think too hard… “It’s hard to get a man to understand something, if his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
Oh, and all that stuff about the shadow banking system being the cause of all our problems? BS… It’s just a mechanism that transmits the problems through from one company to another. The underlying problem is very, very simple – overpriced assets against which too much money was borrowed. All the rest is simply the various consequences of that bad fundamental. And, yes, I understand how these derivatives were abused to help responsibility for prudent lending to go from front-line decisionmakers to very dispersed, to nothing. But they were only one piece of that. FNMA, the Fed, China, dumb investors, and others were at least as important.
April 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM #388067patientrenterParticipantMost of the actuaries I know (not all) only used this method as one more reference point to determine the value of the annuities etc. I am a little amazed that the PhD physicists from MIT at JPM and their risk managers etc applied it blindly to bond default valuations. Of course, it led to much bigger paychecks, so maybe they didn’t think too hard… “It’s hard to get a man to understand something, if his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
Oh, and all that stuff about the shadow banking system being the cause of all our problems? BS… It’s just a mechanism that transmits the problems through from one company to another. The underlying problem is very, very simple – overpriced assets against which too much money was borrowed. All the rest is simply the various consequences of that bad fundamental. And, yes, I understand how these derivatives were abused to help responsibility for prudent lending to go from front-line decisionmakers to very dispersed, to nothing. But they were only one piece of that. FNMA, the Fed, China, dumb investors, and others were at least as important.
April 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM #388121patientrenterParticipantMost of the actuaries I know (not all) only used this method as one more reference point to determine the value of the annuities etc. I am a little amazed that the PhD physicists from MIT at JPM and their risk managers etc applied it blindly to bond default valuations. Of course, it led to much bigger paychecks, so maybe they didn’t think too hard… “It’s hard to get a man to understand something, if his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
Oh, and all that stuff about the shadow banking system being the cause of all our problems? BS… It’s just a mechanism that transmits the problems through from one company to another. The underlying problem is very, very simple – overpriced assets against which too much money was borrowed. All the rest is simply the various consequences of that bad fundamental. And, yes, I understand how these derivatives were abused to help responsibility for prudent lending to go from front-line decisionmakers to very dispersed, to nothing. But they were only one piece of that. FNMA, the Fed, China, dumb investors, and others were at least as important.
April 26, 2009 at 3:15 PM #388260patientrenterParticipantMost of the actuaries I know (not all) only used this method as one more reference point to determine the value of the annuities etc. I am a little amazed that the PhD physicists from MIT at JPM and their risk managers etc applied it blindly to bond default valuations. Of course, it led to much bigger paychecks, so maybe they didn’t think too hard… “It’s hard to get a man to understand something, if his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
Oh, and all that stuff about the shadow banking system being the cause of all our problems? BS… It’s just a mechanism that transmits the problems through from one company to another. The underlying problem is very, very simple – overpriced assets against which too much money was borrowed. All the rest is simply the various consequences of that bad fundamental. And, yes, I understand how these derivatives were abused to help responsibility for prudent lending to go from front-line decisionmakers to very dispersed, to nothing. But they were only one piece of that. FNMA, the Fed, China, dumb investors, and others were at least as important.
April 26, 2009 at 8:04 PM #387746bsrsharmaParticipantMy Manhattan Project
How I helped build the bomb that blew up Wall Street.
By Michael Osinski
I have been called the devil by strangers and “the Facilitator” by friends. It’s not uncommon for people, when I tell them what I used to do, to ask if I feel guilty. I do, somewhat, and it nags at me. When I put it out of mind, it inevitably resurfaces, like a shipwreck at low tide. It’s been eight years since I compiled a program, but the last one lived on, becoming the industry standard that seeded itself into every investment bank in the world….
April 26, 2009 at 8:04 PM #388014bsrsharmaParticipantMy Manhattan Project
How I helped build the bomb that blew up Wall Street.
By Michael Osinski
I have been called the devil by strangers and “the Facilitator” by friends. It’s not uncommon for people, when I tell them what I used to do, to ask if I feel guilty. I do, somewhat, and it nags at me. When I put it out of mind, it inevitably resurfaces, like a shipwreck at low tide. It’s been eight years since I compiled a program, but the last one lived on, becoming the industry standard that seeded itself into every investment bank in the world….
April 26, 2009 at 8:04 PM #388213bsrsharmaParticipantMy Manhattan Project
How I helped build the bomb that blew up Wall Street.
By Michael Osinski
I have been called the devil by strangers and “the Facilitator” by friends. It’s not uncommon for people, when I tell them what I used to do, to ask if I feel guilty. I do, somewhat, and it nags at me. When I put it out of mind, it inevitably resurfaces, like a shipwreck at low tide. It’s been eight years since I compiled a program, but the last one lived on, becoming the industry standard that seeded itself into every investment bank in the world….
April 26, 2009 at 8:04 PM #388267bsrsharmaParticipantMy Manhattan Project
How I helped build the bomb that blew up Wall Street.
By Michael Osinski
I have been called the devil by strangers and “the Facilitator” by friends. It’s not uncommon for people, when I tell them what I used to do, to ask if I feel guilty. I do, somewhat, and it nags at me. When I put it out of mind, it inevitably resurfaces, like a shipwreck at low tide. It’s been eight years since I compiled a program, but the last one lived on, becoming the industry standard that seeded itself into every investment bank in the world….
April 26, 2009 at 8:04 PM #388405bsrsharmaParticipantMy Manhattan Project
How I helped build the bomb that blew up Wall Street.
By Michael Osinski
I have been called the devil by strangers and “the Facilitator” by friends. It’s not uncommon for people, when I tell them what I used to do, to ask if I feel guilty. I do, somewhat, and it nags at me. When I put it out of mind, it inevitably resurfaces, like a shipwreck at low tide. It’s been eight years since I compiled a program, but the last one lived on, becoming the industry standard that seeded itself into every investment bank in the world….
April 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM #38804234f3f3fParticipantThe article was featured in the Style section of the FT so if that’s any measure of it’s editorial importance, then we can apply “It makes a nice story.” Of course there was more to it than just one man and his dog, but the question really is how much risk were banks prepared to write on the back of advanced maths?
April 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM #38830934f3f3fParticipantThe article was featured in the Style section of the FT so if that’s any measure of it’s editorial importance, then we can apply “It makes a nice story.” Of course there was more to it than just one man and his dog, but the question really is how much risk were banks prepared to write on the back of advanced maths?
April 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM #38850634f3f3fParticipantThe article was featured in the Style section of the FT so if that’s any measure of it’s editorial importance, then we can apply “It makes a nice story.” Of course there was more to it than just one man and his dog, but the question really is how much risk were banks prepared to write on the back of advanced maths?
April 27, 2009 at 7:41 AM #38856034f3f3fParticipantThe article was featured in the Style section of the FT so if that’s any measure of it’s editorial importance, then we can apply “It makes a nice story.” Of course there was more to it than just one man and his dog, but the question really is how much risk were banks prepared to write on the back of advanced maths?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.