decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Don't come to us | 200 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Don't come to us
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 29 2012 @ 05:00 PM EDT
The Federal Reserve did buy up large chunks of mortgage debt, but not at fair
market prices. If they had, the financial institutions mark to market problems
would have been fully exposed. Since market confidence was held of more esteem
than market fundamentals, who pressed for accountability?

What interests me is some in 2003 were pointing out the dangerous confluence of
mortgages and derivatives, enabled by Greenspan's deregulation and driving
interest rates to 40 year artificial lows, and pointed out how a 1/2% interest
rate increase blew up a much smaller MBS market in 1994. Then in 2004, we
removed restrictions on subprimes and asset holdings nearly doubled in three
years, and most of the growth was even more toxic than what had been decried in
2003. A large $ stood on a hill just beyond the horizon, and the disaster
myopics charged off a cliff.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Don't come to us
Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Tuesday, May 29 2012 @ 07:25 PM EDT
I think the UK Government should have let the banks fail, liquidated their
assets and put the depositors at the head of the queue, before even the
liquidators. Especially as the liquidators would likely be the same accountancy
firms that signed off the Accounts in the previous years Audit.

If liquidating the bank failed to cover the depositors funds then the Government
should cover the deficit.

Any funds left after paying the depositors can be distributed as follows.

Basic wages.
Liquidators fees if liquidator did not sign off on any of the previous 5 years
accounts.
Creditors.
The first 10% of all bonuses
Liquidators fees if the liquidator did sign off on any of the previous 5 years
accounts.
The rest of the bonus pot.
Share holders.

---
Beware of him who would deny you access to information for in his heart he
considers himself your master.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )