2 ms·
It just proves that bankers are spectacularly bad at performing their primary job function- evaluating risk. They sucked at it in the run up of the lending bub
by waterlesscloud 15y ago
It just proves that bankers are spectacularly bad at performing their primary job function- evaluating risk.
They sucked at it in the run up of the lending bubble (which is why there even was a bubble), and they suck at it in the aftermath.
- muyuu 15y agoIt's more of a tragedy of the commons situation, except most of the bankers ran away with the loot. That's their benchmark and they seem to do very well by it. Now, if the government(s) stopped running a pump and dump scheme, banksters wouldn't screw us so routinely and predictably. Adapting to a sensible system would be painful short-term though, which is why it won't happen without a collapse.
- rhizome 15y agoWas it really that predictable?
- muyuu 15y agoI'm going to guess here that you're talking about the recent bubble. I think so, yes, it was very predictable. I wasn't being so specific though. It's a fact of life that expansion and contraction cycles must happen in most Western countries, given the generalised policy of having a (very) fractional reserve and resorting to "the printer" regularly to "stimulate" the economy. These cycles have been happening for many decades and will continue to happen as long as things work roughly the same way.