News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Central banks are still testing the limits to how low int... by TheOtherHobbes on Thursday November 26, 2015 @08:43PM (#10635462)
I'd certainly consider a central bank that deliberately pumps and dumps the economy around it to be morally wrong. Do you think Greenspan - that Randian acolyte - had no idea what he was doing after 2000? If so, why was he in charge of the Fed?

The better alternative is democratic oversight of the entire financial "industry", an international clamp down on corporate and personal tax avoidance, checks and balances to minimise the manic depressive boom and bust cycle, an aggressive program of financial and social support for small-scale entrepreneurs with a proven record of originality, creativity, and inventiveness.

It would also be nice if Wall St could be retooled to provide finance to businesses with long term prospects, instead of being the crack casino it is now.

Re:Central banks are still testing the limits to how low int... by HiLo on Thursday November 26, 2015 @09:19PM (#10635528)
>I'd certainly consider a central bank that deliberately pumps and dumps the economy around it to be morally wrong.

OK, so it sounds like this isn't really a debate anymore. This has the same coordination problem that the climate scientists "making it up" would have. If you understand how the system works, there already are checks and balances on that.

We have democratic oversight of the financial industry, as it is regulated in the way an elected government has chosen to regulate it. You're throwing out a lot of buzzwords but nothing that actually points to a solution.

For example, "an international clampdown on corporate tax avoidance." Well, that's fine, but you seem to be suggesting implicitly that there is a very clear moral case that corporations should always pay domestic taxes on income earned abroad... which most countries actually don't do. So that's why some companies invert. But is there anything morally wrong about this? I don't actually know and you probably don't either.

Also, you seem to be suggesting that stable, long-term businesses are capital constrained, which just makes it incredibly clear to me you don't actually look at data and see what those companies are doing from a capital allocation perspective. Those are the types of businesses that literally have too much cash to know what to do with, other than, you know, shore up their balance sheets after this really bad balance sheet recession we just had.

Re:Central banks are still testing the limits to how low int... by TheOtherHobbes on Wednesday December 09, 2015 @02:11PM (#10705986)
There are regular criminal prosecutions of banks in the UK.

Regular. Criminal. Prosecutions.

The idea that there's effective regulation is bizarre. In reality the regulation consists of banks doing a lot of dodgy shit, and mostly not getting caught.

How long did it take regulators to realise that Madoff was running a Ponzi scheme?

I don't think stable, long-term businesses are capital constrained - I think democratically elected governments are.

And that's a serious problem for anyone claiming that that fact is compatible with effective regulatory oversight.