主题：【原创】再战江湖（3）没头脑和不高兴，还有鲍莫尔的病 -- 万里风中虎
He warned in 2005.
你以为格林斯潘，萨默斯，鲍威尔，巴菲特，还有高盛的那帮老家伙们不知道
Greenspan recent said (not word-by-word): I did notice there is fundamental risk mispricing in 2005-2006, we will need a big adjustment to correct the risk mispricing.
Hank/Tim: warned President G.W.Bush on the risk of OTC derivatives in 2006 as soon as Hank sweared in as the Treasury Secretary.
Wall Street bet on risk shifting through the insurance industry. And the insurance industry (esp., monoline insurance firms as well as other financial insurance firms) mispriced risk BY A HUGE margin in 2003-2006.
Big investment banks downplayed the risk mispricing issue for years, even between late 2006 and summer 2007.
Fund.
Former USSR was converted from an industrial might into a third-world raw material exporter... Thumbs up.
IMF seems to give a blind eye to the fundamental fiscal unbalance in America and PIIGs for years...
They are part of the game so they are the first to know. They also have the most sophiscated tools and brightest guys. Could you please recommend some sources that do "preview" works?
How about IMF papers/ Fed papers/ World Bank papers? How about investment bank reports?
它们也许知道，但它们绝对不是first to know，而且它们没法get out， get out对于它们来说就是关门。
没法get out我同意，但是可以通过风险分散来对冲，好比高盛一边大卖Acubas一边自己和别人做空这些玩意，两边赚钱。问题在于他们创造出来衍生品并不是自己窝着赚利息，而是卖给投资者，不光这里赚一笔，同时做空又能赚一笔。高盛借给希腊银子也是个例子，赚了高利息，然后做空又能赚一笔。
比如说你从某藤校金融工程毕业了，去了花街，发明一种耍傻瓜的东西，但这个玩意如果只是小规模的运用，其实根本没有什么问题。CDO这类东西的危害，不是说它本身多有毒，而是它们太多了。也就是说，在这个东西被做出来的时候，很可能没有人意识到问题。
第一个知道这件事本身也没什么意义。我们需要的是在正好的时间知道。我们早就知道medicare肯定破产，我们不要说第一个，连第一千万个都算不上。问题是直到现在也没有人能从这件事上获利。
问题是Big Bank能第一个在正好的时间知道么？
我不认为发明CDO的人第一个知道，他们只是科学家和工程师，真正贪婪的是使用者。而且我认为作为场上的玩家来说，他们能够敏锐的感觉到市场的风向。当然你真要追究是不是第一个知道，那么也许某些宏观的研究者知道得更早。medicare这个事情我不清楚，但是CDO之类的肯定有人获利。换句话说，只要是对赌就一定有获利方。
好奇的问下谢国忠在老虎眼里算不算经济学家，算的话是几流？
像国际祸害基金组织这种散养的美国杂毛，自然得给美国干事儿。它从不给美国捣乱，这点比美联储还靠谱。
银行
地产
其实从事实体的人都有感受
银行不会亏，空手生意，靠别人赚钱，靠担保平衡风险
地产是唯一不垄断的暴利行业，慢慢也要垄断了
只是要依赖大环境
大环境还很难看清
blame.
CDO/securitiziation does not make sense if those insurance firms price their CDS product more conservatively.
I know that even in 2007, some insurance firms still priced insurance contracts on MBS with a simple 3% cut, the historical rate from their municipal bond business.
AIG FP failure is just another example: you look at the credentials of their FP heads. Those are just ass-kisser idiots and many of them do not understand their products at all. The fact that those idiots got promoted to key growth division just told you how incompetent the whole AIG management team were.
The only lucky thing was that AIG dramatically cut those CDS product sale after 2005. Otherwise, American taxpayers would have experienced a bigger shock.
BTW, Ace Greenberg was literatally a financial criminal--he was lucky that he did not end up in jail. AIG developed lots of toxic insurance products that were used to manipulate public companies' earnings numbers.
He lost billions after AIG's demise and he deserved that.
银行总体算下来还是不亏
华为等几个企业仗着高技术劳力密集和真的努力，上国际上一样被拍的东倒西歪，那些发理论文章的，和你们经济学不一样，不能有实用价值。
你从经济学的角度看怎么提高科技能力？
“你们这样做不好的，我需要你们全身心的投入，同时自己不允许操作，你问我为什么？你一操作，做分析时主观意向会作怪，做不好的”
当局者迷的道理谁都懂，但是真正轮到自己的时候谁又能醒悟过来？