Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by thisIsNotMikey on Friday February 13, 2015 @11:57AM
(#9045298)
Moral hazard. It is a simple concept.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by hueving on Friday February 13, 2015 @01:33PM
(#9046121)
Not simple enough for you to understand I suppose. For a bank to get FDIC insurance, it needs to follow a lot of regulations. Even during the financial crisis, look how many times the FDIC insurance was triggered. It worked exactly as intended and kept banks from messing with depositor money.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by thisIsNotMikey on Friday February 13, 2015 @01:41PM
(#9046190)
The moral hazard is the FDIC, which arguably helped perpetuate the crisis. Banks are insured by the fed, lender of last resort, and individual accounts are insured by FDIC. Insurance, or assurance in the case of the FDA, is the moral hazard which causes risky behavior.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by hueving on Saturday February 14, 2015 @07:03PM
(#9051226)
Nope. The FDIC made sure they didn't do the crap they did with depositor money. It's the reason the FDIC insurance wasnt massively triggered during the crisis. The accounts that got screwed were investment accounts which were not insured by the FDIC.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by thisIsNotMikey on Monday February 16, 2015 @02:23AM
(#9055753)
Moral hazard is an objective term. From the FDIC website, https://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/international/guidance...
All you have to do is read the first sentence. And "The FDIC made sure they didn't do the crap they did" is nonsensical. Not to mention, I never once referred to the economic crisis.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by hueving on Sunday February 22, 2015 @11:28PM
(#9092550)
Maybe you didn't follow the economic crisis then? One of the key differences between it and the great depression was the fact that depositor money was not at risk this time around thanks to the FDIC and the regulations surrounding it. There weren't wide spread bank runs wiping out savings accounts that are supposed to be risk free.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by bduerst on Friday February 13, 2015 @01:03PM
(#9045857)
So simple it doesn't apply. This isn't automobile insurance.
You're no less risky with your money because the FDIC backs your bank account - in fact, you're more likely to leave it there with less risk.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by thisIsNotMikey on Friday February 13, 2015 @01:37PM
(#9046157)
Banks are more risky. Your right, this isn't a simple concept for some.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by bduerst on Tuesday February 17, 2015 @02:49PM
(#9064524)
Banks are not more risky because there is corporate governance to curtail moral hazard.
I'm sorry for assuming you knew this, but as you say, it isn't simple for some.
Re:The FDA buries evidence of fraud in medical trials. My st...
by thisIsNotMikey on Tuesday February 17, 2015 @11:58PM
(#9067052)
The moral hazard is introduced by the insurance. So yes they are more risky. Corporate governance, as you said, helps curtail the moral hazard, but without the insurance, the moral hazard would not exist in the first place. Go troll somewhere else. Your just wrong!
How you extrapolate FDA regulations and faith in it to banking is a bit beyond me, because if you get diabetes the FDA is not insurance you can use to treat it.