Comments for Mark-to-Market Debate

Comment on Mark To Market Morals by admin

admin — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:26:26 +0000

This is a test comment submission by marcel media

Comment on Bank Write-Down by Wayne Fox

Wayne Fox — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:33:49 +0000

hmmm, the 10-1 ratio was created by the Fed Reserve. Abolish the Fed Reserve, go back to gold standard and -as a bank- lend what ya got and no more. The Fed’s job is to print money and set interest rates. The markets and the economy dictate rates and what the Fed does with rates…not the other way around. And I bet there are thousands upon thousands of bright people in the US who can print money to balance inflation/ deflation…

Comment on The Value of Fair Value by Wayne Fox

Wayne Fox — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:28:25 +0000

Well, I tell ya what…I bought 5000 shares of Bank of America at $19.00. The market tanked and the value of each share went to ~$2.53. If banks can just go to Mark-To-Model why cannot I sell my $2.53 shares for $19.00 or higher?? Maybe $43.00 where they were in early 2007??? Hmmm, why do banks get to do what I cannot. –a bit skewed…

Comment on The Banking System by Wayne Fox

Wayne Fox — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:17:54 +0000

Ever wonder if this crash was “by design”? Why change both “mark to market” AND “up-tick rule” in 2007 ….just before, hmmm, a crash?? Everything else just seems like a side show…

Comment on Defining Mark-to-Market by Wayne Fox

Wayne Fox — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:12:45 +0000

No, no, no…bring Mark-To-Market back BUT take out the rule of demanding more funds from homeowner if the value decreases. It should come back (the value). The banks have to pay to play, I mean they (just about all of them) take much much worse scary bets on other things all the time. The argument in the above video is ridiculous. -skewed, if you will.

Comment on Mark-to-Market Blogs by Alan Page

Alan Page — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:59:53 +0000

The current greed/debt based currency creation system has completely failed to deal with long term environmental assets that need to be either protected or managed to realize their full potential. Mark to market mechanisms will cause these assets to be forfeit before they can reach appropriate age – in the case of managed timber. Already the major timber companies have transferred major land assets to investment banks with fractional reserve currency creation capabilities, but this is not a long term solution. As we have seen recently the operators of these institutions care little for anything but short term bonuses that can be earned by whatever means.

We face very tough environmental choices and a fraud based global currency creation system will not facilitate the choices that we all must make. This system must change if life as we know it (or as our ancestors knew it – since it is not clear that most now can perceive life as a biological process) is to long continue on this small orbiting ball of rock.

Comment on Should we listen to these guys? by Cate Long

Cate Long — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 12:25:52 +0000

Here is what the Financial Times editorialized about M2M:

“Legislators and regulators fear that marking banks’ assets down to fair-value estimates will trigger automatic actions as capital ratios deteriorate.

But using accounting rules to mislead regulators with inaccurate information is a poor policy.

If capital calculations are based on inaccurate values of assets, the ratios are already lower than they appear.

Banks should provide regulators with the best information about their assets and liabilities and, separately, allow them the flexibility and discretion to adjust capital adequacy ratios based on the economic situation.

Regulators can lower capital ratios during downturns and raise them during good economic times.”

Financial Times, August 17, 2009

Transparency can be accompanied by flexibility… it’s truthfulness that creates confidence in markets….

http://freerisk.org/wiki/index.php/Mark-to-market_accounting

Comment on Why Go Back? by Brian

Brian — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:10:45 +0000

We cant let accounting rules be more important than economics, ever. Accounting should reflect the economics of investing, not drive it.
Lets keep MTM in its right place, as an accounting entry that shows real losses.

Comment on This Year’s Battle Over Mark-To-Market Versus Mark-To-Model Accounting Was Worth The Fight by Cate Long

Cate Long — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:27:10 +0000

This is a wonderful blog. Ditto for the RatingsDebate blog too.

Thank you for your willingness to contribute to the discussion in Congress related to these issues.

You might be interested in contributing to our open source wiki on financial markets regulation Riski.

Here is the page on M2M.

http://freerisk.org/wiki/index.php/Mark-to-market_accounting

Kind regards, Cate Long

Comment on Resource Center by David Messina

David Messina — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 21:28:13 +0000

Listened to Kurt Fritz this morning. Great presentation, high content!