Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (361796)	4/28/2010 9:48:16 PM
From: skinowski	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793895

Maybe I misunderstood you, but I do not see taking a short speculative position in any market as buying fire insurance on someone else's house. As far as bubbles are concerned, they 1) always happen, and 2) there is always - afterward - a search for fall guys and guilty parties, and culprits always get discovered, and steps get taken which are intended to prevent the collapse which has already occurred. Booms and busts are part of life, and happened plenty of times over the centuries, way before they invented computers and derivatives. The problem with government regulation of markets is the same as with their interference in healthcare and anywhere else - no one can foresee all the unintended consequences. Not to mention that the regulators too often are clueless and do things for self serving reasons. I had some ups and downs over the years with the way some trading vehicles were structured, but I never blamed the issuer - it is my business and my responsibility to have enough knowledge about things before I put money at risk. The problem is not lack of regulation, but government interference. Their job is to maintain a legal structure, enforce contracts, etc. But - it pays them better to keep hands as deep in the cookie jar as they can get away with. They should have allowed insolvent companies to go under, and let their shareholders and investors pay the price. Other companies would buy up their assets that would be still worth something - and life would go on. Yesterday during the hearings some of the Senators clearly couldn't get through their heads that an outfit like GS can actually have divisions that act in very differing capacities - as underwriters, money managers - and market makers. Sen Levin, for example, was either clueless, or engaging in cheap populism and demagoguery. Our government is moving aggressively towards making itself "too big to fail"....