We Speak on BNN About Market Upheaval, Financial Reform

Posted on by

A Naked Capitalism double header on BNN today. Rob Parenteau preceded our segment and discussed the outlook for the Eurozone:

Picture 21

You can view the segment here.

We then discussed other aspects of the wild market action on Thursday as well as financial reform.
Picture 22

Our chat is here. Enjoy!

Print Friendly
Tweet about this on TwitterDigg thisShare on Reddit0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Facebook0Share on LinkedIn0Share on Google+0Buffer this pageEmail this to someone

10 comments

  1. DownSouth

    Your TV interviews, in my opinion, are getting much better.

    They don’t seem to be quite as stiff and sterile as before. In order to do what you do on a daily basis, there has to be a great deal of passion there, and that is beginning to filter through.

    Even though “scientists” are ostensibly disinterested observers, ensconced upon their lofty perches, looking down upon the emotional fray from above, we all know that is pure bunk.

    I suppose it’s a delicate balance, but I think your passion helps to humanize some of the highly technical aspects of your presentation, which makes your message more appealing to a much larger audience.

    1. readerOfTeaLeaves

      I agree that the interviews have become more animated, and that it’s extremely important for the public to get good, clear information that doesn’t eimply ’emote’, but that is based on data and patterns. (And I’m writing as a member of the ‘naive-ignorant public’ who really wants to try and gain some better understanding of what’s happening; it’s quite a high learning curve.)

      The conversation at the end of the clip — about ‘kamikaze capitalism’ (great term!) and the fact that incentives now align for third parties to intentionally profit by ‘taking out’ viable companies (in addition to the fact that it is as simpe as buying a mere 10% of the bonds, then insisting on bankruptcy) needs a great deal more public understanding.

      If the people that I know are any indication, many people still do not understand this dynamic. The few who are figuring it out – and who work for companies that would be vulnerable to this behavior – are outraged and verging toward being livid.

  2. fiscalliberal

    Yves – you talk about the need to study the collapse more. As a senior citizen, I would comment that we have been studying it for two years and I would ask – does it help to study it more. It simply gives the financial people time to obfuscate the issues.

    By way of example, a lot of pure fraud went on in the mortgage origination area and no one is going to jail. At least, in the Enron case some one went to jail.

    Our governmetn (Obama and the Democrats) seem to be stymied by the whole system. It probably is because of the political donations. So – could I suggest that a few things like fraud need to be addressed before any regulation changes can take effect. Rules withoug consequences have not meaning

  3. Greg

    LOVED IT!!

    The whole profiting off the collapse of someone else is what is ruining our society. Yes creative destruction is a force of capitalism that is natural and will often times lead to improvements. This, what so much is predicated on today, is not creative destruction but PREMEDITATED destruction!

    It would be interesting to find out how much money firms like AIG and Goldman have spent examinig the conditions for horrific collapses, trying as best they can to promote those conditions, placing all the bets on the right side of those conditions (with some downside hedging) and then stand back and watch the show.

  4. Sechel

    You have so much to say. Please don’t close your eyes to the camera. The visual communication is not good.

  5. Thingumbobesquire

    Principled Vampires Need More Blood
    The latest headline about Goldman Sachs perhaps reveals more than it would seem on the surface of things. Viz:”Blankfein Says Goldman Must Renew Core Principles” This reminds one of nothing so much as of the old gag about the literary difference between a shyster and a rooster who always clucks defiance.

Comments are closed.