Comments on: Links 1/10/08 and a Scary Tidbit http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:30:27 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: E Cartman http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2950 E Cartman Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:21:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2950 According to the blog Mahalanobis, hose housing futures markets are _extremely_ illiquid. <br/><br/>It's simultaneously hilarious and sad when academics like Summers (or Mankiw) pull some barely existing market out of thin air as a crucial prop in whatever "brilliant" argument they happen to be making. According to the blog Mahalanobis, hose housing futures markets are _extremely_ illiquid.

It’s simultaneously hilarious and sad when academics like Summers (or Mankiw) pull some barely existing market out of thin air as a crucial prop in whatever “brilliant” argument they happen to be making.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2949 Anonymous Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:43:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2949 I second your point on mr. blair; I guess I old school at heart.<br/><br/>It would be a sight to see the US G as an equity partner together with say China's gov or ADIA. I am not sure that it would be politically possible to write down "politically-connected" equity before a de facto nationalization. <br/><br/>In any case, my sense is that the US is quietly encouraging a SWF recapitalization b/c the political costs of the alternatives -- whether balance sheet constrained banks or US G led recapitalization -- are perceived as too high. The problems come when other countries think that they are investing to do the US G a favor. that blurs a lot of lines that shouldn't be blurred, in my (old-school) view.<br/><br/>bsetser I second your point on mr. blair; I guess I old school at heart.

It would be a sight to see the US G as an equity partner together with say China’s gov or ADIA. I am not sure that it would be politically possible to write down “politically-connected” equity before a de facto nationalization.

In any case, my sense is that the US is quietly encouraging a SWF recapitalization b/c the political costs of the alternatives — whether balance sheet constrained banks or US G led recapitalization — are perceived as too high. The problems come when other countries think that they are investing to do the US G a favor. that blurs a lot of lines that shouldn’t be blurred, in my (old-school) view.

bsetser

]]> By: PureGuesswork http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2948 PureGuesswork Thu, 10 Jan 2008 20:19:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2948 What bothers me about "It will be like Japan in 1989," or "It will be like 1929-32," is that it never is. And it seems to me that someone as perceptive as you, Yves, should be just the fellow to figure out exactly how it might be different. So get to work. And lay off the sauce. What bothers me about “It will be like Japan in 1989,” or “It will be like 1929-32,” is that it never is. And it seems to me that someone as perceptive as you, Yves, should be just the fellow to figure out exactly how it might be different. So get to work. And lay off the sauce.

]]> By: dearieme http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2946 dearieme Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:04:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2946 Mr Blair is a stranger to propriety. Mr Blair is a stranger to propriety.

]]> By: Greg http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2943 Greg Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:25:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2943 Yves, you tease, you must follow-up<br/>on this banking bail-out scenario.<br/><br/>Don't you mean ARE technically <br/>bankrupt, but kept breathing by Big<br/>Brother via quasi-nationalization? Yves, you tease, you must follow-up
on this banking bail-out scenario.

Don’t you mean ARE technically
bankrupt, but kept breathing by Big
Brother via quasi-nationalization?

]]> By: David http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2942 David Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:19:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2942 There are so many executive orders in the Federal Register for "economic emergencies" that it does not surprise me that they might be planning for this, if only in a scenario sense. I.e., if this happens, then we will do that...<br/><br/>Still, the odds of them making the situation better are low. Perhaps the odds are better than Japan, though. We're more willing to force liquidations, even if they have to come slowly. There are so many executive orders in the Federal Register for “economic emergencies” that it does not surprise me that they might be planning for this, if only in a scenario sense. I.e., if this happens, then we will do that…

Still, the odds of them making the situation better are low. Perhaps the odds are better than Japan, though. We’re more willing to force liquidations, even if they have to come slowly.

]]> By: RK http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-scary-tidbit.html#comment-2941 RK Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:57:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/01/links-11008-and-a-scary-tidbit/#comment-2941 With Tony at J.P. Morgan, and Jeb Bush at Lehman,<br/>the question is, where will W go. To be "fair and balanced" it would probably have to be Goldman. With Tony at J.P. Morgan, and Jeb Bush at Lehman,
the question is, where will W go. To be “fair and balanced” it would probably have to be Goldman.

]]>