Watergate is not a scandal: this is- what must be said at all cost, for this is what everyone is concerned to conceal, this dissimulation masking a strengthening of morality, a moral panic as we approach the primal (mise-en-)scene of capital: its instantaneous cruelty; its incomprehensible ferocity; its fundamental immorality - these are what are scandalous, unaccountable for in that system of moral and economic equivalence which remains the axiom of leftist thought, from Enlightenment theory to communism. Capital doesn't give a damn about the idea of the contract which is imputed to it: it is a monstrous unprincipled undertaking, nothing more. Rather, it is "enlightened" thought which seeks to control capital by imposing rules on it. And all that recrimination which replaced revolutionary thought today comes down to reproaching capital for not following the rules of the game. "Power is unjust; its justice is a class justice; capital exploits us; etc." - as if capital were linked by a contract to the society it rules. It is the left which holds out the mirror of equivalence, hoping that capital will fall for this phantasmagoria of the social contract and fulfill its obligation towards the whole of society (at the same time, no need for revolution: it is enough that capital accept the rational formula of exchange).
all of which is besides the point. Let's get to this week's linkdump:
Who really failed? Biology Professor fails half of his class, is fired. And you thought Intro to Finance was hard.
The Secret of the Banks’ Success. Krugman. "Gross stupidity has been placed on hold." I don't think it was secret that the solution that was decided on after September 2008 was that financial institutions wouldn't be allowed to fail and, rather than further capital injections to make up for the rotten assets on their books, they would be allowed to earn away their bad books. This is, in fact, directly relates to the problems with mortgage writedowns. Someone, somewhere needs to take the loss if the principle on a mortgage is reduced. If it is going to be the bank, then they need more capital to offset the loss. That can come either from the benevolent coffers of the government à la TARP, or we can smack enough guarantees on the banks that they can earn those writedowns away. I don't know if anyone in January 09 was willing to give the bank's another check after the hullabaloo over paying their employees after TARP round one.
James Kwak talks about about Magnetar. The Baseline Scenario.
Deep Truth about the Markets and Investing. CWS. A great collection of simple rules for investors.
The Chinese late Qing dynasty approach to banking regulation. Marginal Revolution. Short but sweet.
Theories of the Crisis. Marginal Revolution. I need to hunt down the original papers, but I think that the demand for Long Dated High Return Assets is downplayed as a cause of the crisis versus "evil bankers." I'm not going to say caveat emptor but we were giving them what they wanted, and giving it to them good and hard.
Come on! You don't give the same discount rate to insurance as stock, and that includes global warming insurance! A good simple explanation on what discount rate one should use when calculating the effects of global warming.
Visualizing Public Pension Plan's Problems. Paul Kedrosky. I think he should have chosen the word "Picturing", but that's just my desire for alliteration.
CalPERS Responds to Stanford Policy Brief on Public Pension Funds. Friends don't let Friends go to Stanfurd (though I love Stanford Alumni, especially if they're hiring interns).
Economic Growth with Bubbles. NBER.
Off to class.