See my knol on the "Holistic Theorem"
This editorial makes a painfully & tragically poor traditional liberal argument for derivatives regulation even though the ultimate goal of regulating all derivatives trades is what is needed. It merely re-hashes the March 29,09 editorial piece. See:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/opinion/29sun1.html
They conclude by saying:
"Senator Tom Harkin has introduced legislation that would require exchange trading for derivatives. Representative Collin Peterson has introduced a bill that would tighten the regulation of derivatives’ clearinghouses. He acknowledges that his bill is not as strong as he would like but that Congressional politics left him no choice, telling The Times, “The banks run the place.”"
and I say: "duh"
In this specific instance, they fail to see that their is a unity of purpose between derivatives trading institutions and advocates of centralized clearing, and that is the most effective argument to be made in order to effect CENTRALIZED CLEARING OF ALL DERIVATIVES TRADES.
Why set yourself up for a fight against a party where the odds of winning are against you when you can simply & persuasively explain to the other party that it is in their best interest to switch to your side of the argument?
See:http://knol.google.com/k/phil-kongtcheu/the-holistic-theorem/24v2kgtuvzk2v/16
Note also that regulated BICs exchanges on different types of underlyings, by creating exchanges that most efficiently trade instruments that all customized derivatives merely combine would eliminate the loopholes of the proposed legislation
No comments:
Post a Comment