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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (34018)	7/20/2010 4:52:47 AM
From: GROUND ZERO™	2 Recommendations Respond to of 103300

Why the financial reform bill won't prevent another crisis... By William K. Black, contributor July 19, 2010: 11:10 AM ET FORTUNE -- Financial regulators, white-collar criminologists, and economists all agree that perverse incentive structures cause crises and they agree that the finance industry's incentive structures have long been perverse. The Obama administration asserts that the financial reform bill the President will sign into law this week will prevent future crises. In fact, it will fail to do so because it does not effectively address those perverse incentives. Indeed, it increases the likelihood of the accounting scams that are the very reason why perverse incentives pay. Over time, crises have gotten more severe because many reform policies have the unintended consequence of encouraging these types of incentive structures. Executive and professional compensation create the motives, while deregulation, desupervison, and regulatory "black holes" create the opportunity. Accounting is the CEO's "weapon of choice" that transforms the perverse incentive into what economists, regulators, and criminologists agree is a "sure thing" in crises (means). That's the classic recipe for disaster: motive, means, and opportunity. The complete article: money.cnn.com GZ

To: Wayners who wrote (34018)	7/20/2010 3:22:00 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 103300

As I understand it there isn't a "single Tea Party". Rather, there are dozens, perhaps even hundreds of loosly affiliated local groups that call themselves "Tea Parties"... and they do not always agree with each other or espouse for exactly the same programs or the same candidates all the time. (As lately witnessed by that one national confederation of Tea Parties expelling the Tea Party Express group from it's membership yesterday because of the racially inflammatory remarks of his leader....) So... can't apply a 'label' that fits ALL GROUPS. :-)