Home › Forums › Other › OT: is long form jounalism getting it right on AIG, Bank of America, and Merril Lynch?
- This topic has 55 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 8 months ago by Zeitgeist.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 15, 2009 at 10:27 AM #445660August 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM #444899patientrenterParticipant
I had some idea of BoA’s exposures. Not as much as I’d like, but enough to satisfy me based on the limited time I had for research (a few hours) and the dollar amount.
I do not think it’s a good idea for the leadership of public companies in general, and the biggest publicly traded financial institutions in particular, to have divided loyalties. And I am unsatisfied that our system for regulating companies allows egregious examples of divided loyalty. If the only way that you could trust company management of a publicly traded company not to rip you off was sheer trust, then the entire public company route for allocating capital efficiently across the economy would be terribly, and unnecessarily inefficient.
So sure, I bear responsibility for choosing BoA stock, and I am not blaming anyone else for my own choice. But that doesn’t take Ken Lewis or his board of the hook for very bad choices, and for putting themselves ahead of their shareholders improperly. To the extent that the SEC or other regulatory bodies are charged with ensuring we have the most efficient system for allocating capital across our economy, then they also failed when they permitted such behavior.
August 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM #445092patientrenterParticipantI had some idea of BoA’s exposures. Not as much as I’d like, but enough to satisfy me based on the limited time I had for research (a few hours) and the dollar amount.
I do not think it’s a good idea for the leadership of public companies in general, and the biggest publicly traded financial institutions in particular, to have divided loyalties. And I am unsatisfied that our system for regulating companies allows egregious examples of divided loyalty. If the only way that you could trust company management of a publicly traded company not to rip you off was sheer trust, then the entire public company route for allocating capital efficiently across the economy would be terribly, and unnecessarily inefficient.
So sure, I bear responsibility for choosing BoA stock, and I am not blaming anyone else for my own choice. But that doesn’t take Ken Lewis or his board of the hook for very bad choices, and for putting themselves ahead of their shareholders improperly. To the extent that the SEC or other regulatory bodies are charged with ensuring we have the most efficient system for allocating capital across our economy, then they also failed when they permitted such behavior.
August 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM #445429patientrenterParticipantI had some idea of BoA’s exposures. Not as much as I’d like, but enough to satisfy me based on the limited time I had for research (a few hours) and the dollar amount.
I do not think it’s a good idea for the leadership of public companies in general, and the biggest publicly traded financial institutions in particular, to have divided loyalties. And I am unsatisfied that our system for regulating companies allows egregious examples of divided loyalty. If the only way that you could trust company management of a publicly traded company not to rip you off was sheer trust, then the entire public company route for allocating capital efficiently across the economy would be terribly, and unnecessarily inefficient.
So sure, I bear responsibility for choosing BoA stock, and I am not blaming anyone else for my own choice. But that doesn’t take Ken Lewis or his board of the hook for very bad choices, and for putting themselves ahead of their shareholders improperly. To the extent that the SEC or other regulatory bodies are charged with ensuring we have the most efficient system for allocating capital across our economy, then they also failed when they permitted such behavior.
August 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM #445500patientrenterParticipantI had some idea of BoA’s exposures. Not as much as I’d like, but enough to satisfy me based on the limited time I had for research (a few hours) and the dollar amount.
I do not think it’s a good idea for the leadership of public companies in general, and the biggest publicly traded financial institutions in particular, to have divided loyalties. And I am unsatisfied that our system for regulating companies allows egregious examples of divided loyalty. If the only way that you could trust company management of a publicly traded company not to rip you off was sheer trust, then the entire public company route for allocating capital efficiently across the economy would be terribly, and unnecessarily inefficient.
So sure, I bear responsibility for choosing BoA stock, and I am not blaming anyone else for my own choice. But that doesn’t take Ken Lewis or his board of the hook for very bad choices, and for putting themselves ahead of their shareholders improperly. To the extent that the SEC or other regulatory bodies are charged with ensuring we have the most efficient system for allocating capital across our economy, then they also failed when they permitted such behavior.
August 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM #445681patientrenterParticipantI had some idea of BoA’s exposures. Not as much as I’d like, but enough to satisfy me based on the limited time I had for research (a few hours) and the dollar amount.
I do not think it’s a good idea for the leadership of public companies in general, and the biggest publicly traded financial institutions in particular, to have divided loyalties. And I am unsatisfied that our system for regulating companies allows egregious examples of divided loyalty. If the only way that you could trust company management of a publicly traded company not to rip you off was sheer trust, then the entire public company route for allocating capital efficiently across the economy would be terribly, and unnecessarily inefficient.
So sure, I bear responsibility for choosing BoA stock, and I am not blaming anyone else for my own choice. But that doesn’t take Ken Lewis or his board of the hook for very bad choices, and for putting themselves ahead of their shareholders improperly. To the extent that the SEC or other regulatory bodies are charged with ensuring we have the most efficient system for allocating capital across our economy, then they also failed when they permitted such behavior.
August 15, 2009 at 11:48 AM #444924michaelParticipantLong form journalism and the media in general are getting it wrong. Their populist bias is unmistakable. Wall Street is bad, main street is the victim. As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury.
$1.5 TRILLION – The Treasury and the Federal Reserve have begun buying debt and mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae.
$400 BILLION – The companies were put into conservatorship and the Treasury initally pledged up to $200 billion to cover their losses. Freddie Mac has now received almost $45 billion and Fannie Mae $15 billion
Does anyone else see the bias here?
August 15, 2009 at 11:48 AM #445117michaelParticipantLong form journalism and the media in general are getting it wrong. Their populist bias is unmistakable. Wall Street is bad, main street is the victim. As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury.
$1.5 TRILLION – The Treasury and the Federal Reserve have begun buying debt and mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae.
$400 BILLION – The companies were put into conservatorship and the Treasury initally pledged up to $200 billion to cover their losses. Freddie Mac has now received almost $45 billion and Fannie Mae $15 billion
Does anyone else see the bias here?
August 15, 2009 at 11:48 AM #445454michaelParticipantLong form journalism and the media in general are getting it wrong. Their populist bias is unmistakable. Wall Street is bad, main street is the victim. As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury.
$1.5 TRILLION – The Treasury and the Federal Reserve have begun buying debt and mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae.
$400 BILLION – The companies were put into conservatorship and the Treasury initally pledged up to $200 billion to cover their losses. Freddie Mac has now received almost $45 billion and Fannie Mae $15 billion
Does anyone else see the bias here?
August 15, 2009 at 11:48 AM #445525michaelParticipantLong form journalism and the media in general are getting it wrong. Their populist bias is unmistakable. Wall Street is bad, main street is the victim. As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury.
$1.5 TRILLION – The Treasury and the Federal Reserve have begun buying debt and mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae.
$400 BILLION – The companies were put into conservatorship and the Treasury initally pledged up to $200 billion to cover their losses. Freddie Mac has now received almost $45 billion and Fannie Mae $15 billion
Does anyone else see the bias here?
August 15, 2009 at 11:48 AM #445706michaelParticipantLong form journalism and the media in general are getting it wrong. Their populist bias is unmistakable. Wall Street is bad, main street is the victim. As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury.
$1.5 TRILLION – The Treasury and the Federal Reserve have begun buying debt and mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae.
$400 BILLION – The companies were put into conservatorship and the Treasury initally pledged up to $200 billion to cover their losses. Freddie Mac has now received almost $45 billion and Fannie Mae $15 billion
Does anyone else see the bias here?
August 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM #444934patientrenterParticipant[quote=michael]…As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury….
Does anyone else see the bias here?[/quote]Yes.
August 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM #445127patientrenterParticipant[quote=michael]…As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury….
Does anyone else see the bias here?[/quote]Yes.
August 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM #445464patientrenterParticipant[quote=michael]…As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury….
Does anyone else see the bias here?[/quote]Yes.
August 15, 2009 at 12:06 PM #445535patientrenterParticipant[quote=michael]…As a tax payer, I’m more angry that Fannie, Freddie, and Ginnie are being propped up by the Fed and Treasury….
Does anyone else see the bias here?[/quote]Yes.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.