Economists: Can you punch a hole in this dire scenario? Karl Denninger: Storm Clouds are Gathering!

[paramount]

Does the gov’t want to force investors into Treasuries?

Bond duration’s and other musings…

The 1st half of the video is on Obamacare, the economic part starts @ 19:00.

http://youtu.be/wWbYWawYem4

[Aecetia]

Interesting trend, but maybe these are not “suicides.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAChQIdXIKc Maybe it is a harbinger of another banking problem before another major downturn.

[paramount]

Bump…

[Zeitgeist]

[img_assist|nid=17905|title=
Gold In Sacks|desc=Stuart Carlson political cartoon|link=node|align=left|width=400|height=315]

political irony

[sjk]

I find myself moving to this camp…..

It’s not just that banks are no longer needed–they pose a needless and potentially catastrophic risk to the nation. To understand why, we need to understand the key characteristics of risk.

Why Banks Are Doomed: Technology and Risk

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/02/banks-doomed-technology-risk.html

Regards,

[Aecetia]

“One last happy thought: technology cannot be put back in the bottle.” I love happy endings.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/02/banks-doomed-technology-risk.html

[spdrun]

Article is based on two fallacies…
(1) Accounting can be automated
(2) Risk assessment can be automated

With (1), future revenue projections, projections of risks to business model, risks from disruptive technologies are very fuzzy and not easily automated. Bookkeeping can be somewhat automated. Accounting … not so fast there, Speedy.

With (2), Gustavo Fring’s profile may look very similar to that of the CEO of Angelo’s Burgers. Guess which one is the lower loan risk in real life.

A computer model based on a finite amount of factors can only go so far in determining risk. There’s a place for manually underwriting people who don’t qualify (say, low income on paper, high assets) and for checking up on people who do qualify. (Say the person who’s had a high-paying job for the past 10 years, but may lose it tomorrow due to a publicized scandal.)

[sjk]

[quote=spdrun]Article is based on two fallacies…
(1) Accounting can be automated
(2) Risk assessment can be automated

With (1), future revenue projections, projections of risks to business model, risks from disruptive technologies are very fuzzy and not easily automated. Bookkeeping can be somewhat automated. Accounting … not so fast there, Speedy.

With (2), Gustavo Fring’s profile may look very similar to that of the CEO of Angelo’s Burgers. Guess which one is the lower loan risk in real life.

A computer model based on a finite amount of factors can only go so far in determining risk. There’s a place for manually underwriting people who don’t qualify (say, low income on paper, high assets) and for checking up on people who do qualify. (Say the person who’s had a high-paying job for the past 10 years, but may lose it tomorrow due to a publicized scandal.)[/quote]

I believe you need look at the bigger issue…..

http://www.oftwominds.com/blogfeb14/banks-obsolete2-14.html

[Author]

Posts