So ethics play no role in your view of the business world? Also, do not talk in a condescending tone to me. I have provided sources, I have tried my best to teach you as much as I can about unethical derivatives trading. You have not done ****. I am only trying to ask questions so I can figure out exactly what your viewpoint is since you have done an absolutely terrible job in describing it and backing it up with reason.
That's your problem, not mine.
I did you a favor and answered your question. It was you who came back condescending, and I explained why.
The problem here with a few of the more liberal posters, as I see it, is that you approach this as "one size fits all blame", and then hone in on that aspect you want to demonize, and blame them for the big picture.
Ethics, good or bad, are a part of business. Where we have laws, we try to prevent, or prosecute, ethics which cross those lines. But like it or not, it does not matter with the housing bubble. Inflation in the housing market created a whole lot of winners,
and virtually no losers, for a long time. Ethics was not going to change that fact. When the bubble finally burst, those left holding the bag now represented a whole lot of losers, and very few winners. Regardless of ethics, there was going to be a loser for every prior winner. Remember, for everyone in an upside-down mortgage, a prior owner did real well for themselves.
If your argument is that the banks should not have bought derivatives, I am not arguing that. Again, those were free choices in a capitalist market, and for every loser, there was already a winner. Heck, they looked great on paper until the bubble burst. Those that lost the most gambled the most. It might suck, but that is how it works.
If the argument is for banking reform, I have not voiced against it. I was in favor of TARP, for while I understand the concept of letting companies, and even an industry, fail, sometimes certain failures will be too costly in their ripple effect. Banks are like the oil in the engine. It fails, and the entire economy blows up. TARP was a big success IMMHO.
If you want to look to MBS's (Mortgage backed securities) and derivatives, that die was cast by Robert Ruben, Clinton's Sec of Treasury. Folks want to blame the repeal of Glass Steagle, and note that Phil Gramm helped co-sponsor it. Let there be no doubt. The reason for the repeal was the enable the merger of Citibank and Traveler's, the pet-project of Ruben. He nurtured it along right to when Bill Clinton signed the repeal. And CitiGroup now was born. And Ruben eventually served on their board.
Back to the Recession. Banks had to fail when a housing bubble that big bursts. Winners and losers.
