Comments on: Looking at banking in Switzerland

By: Felix Salmon

Felix Salmon — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 20:11:17 +0000

Cezmi, sorry, not in Zurich this time around.

ab and Dave, you’re both right. We need radical reform along the lines that Goldhill suggests. But, as you must know in your heart of hearts, we’re not going to get it.

By: Curmudgeon

Curmudgeon — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:02:50 +0000

Two things:

First, re: you versus Cohan. You\’re both right.

Second, >> healthcare is path-dependent, and we’re far too far down one path to be able to switch over onto a completely different one.

That is the most cogent reason I have yet heard as to why health care reform is so difficult.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:15:06 +0000

Felix, I 2nd ab’s comment and would like to read your response.

By: ab

ab — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:01:00 +0000

That’s a great piece Felix. Thanks for pointing it out.

I agree that his proposed solution would be very difficult to implement, but what’s the alternative (especially if you agree with his diagnosis)? At some point, we NEED a radical solution. Health care costs can’t continue to grow at the current rate without bankrupting the country.

By: Cezmi Dispinar

Cezmi Dispinar — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:29:35 +0000

ad) Switzerland
Hey Felix, when you come to Zurich,
just give a call for a drink or lunch in downtown.

By: Unsympathetic

Unsympathetic — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 16:02:41 +0000

Dogma,

Banks caused this disaster, not peasants. $1.2 trillion dollars was spent on the bailout by Bush before the current president took office – with zero effect. This disaster is on the heads of BOTH parties. Rush is wrong.

Banks knew they were making bad loans – they fired all the underwriters. Banks knew they were selling bad securities. Banks knew they were taking on way too much leverage.

All of the above were enabled by Washington, most notably during the Bush administration’s deliberate removal of all regulation of those banks.

By: step21

step21 — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:32:27 +0000

@Dogma I don’t think anybody is saying that people couldn’t have been more responsible too. However it is also undisputable I think that the banks and their employees due to their education should have known better, unlike all those people with the mortgages, who have vastly less if any financial knowledge.

By: Dogma

Dogma — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:26:32 +0000

People defaulting on their debt obligations brought the national economy down, along with the election of the current president. Felix brings to light the largess of his propensity for smut financial “journalism,” and shows his lack of integrity and proclaiming the banks as the bogey man as always. People caused this disaster not banks, peasant.

By: Unsympathetic

Unsympathetic — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:58:18 +0000

Felix, it doesn’t matter whether banks “operate outside the realm” of politics.. fact of the matter is that Washington is completely controlled by Wall Street. If banks actually operated outside the realm of politics, all the “too big to fail” banks would have failed long ago.

BB&T took a 37% writedown on Colonial’s assets.. without political interference, ALL loans at ALL banks would have to be marked down that amount. Bankers did not “FLUB” anything, Felix – they are continuing to take government paychecks whereas if they actually operated “outside” the realm of politics, they’d be out of a job!

There is less opportunity for bankers to make enormous profits.. only when the government is NOT involved.