主题：【原创】新年政治经济展望之四：金融资本（一） -- 井底望天

美国已经沦落到如此毫无章法的地步，虽然俺很希望如此。

跟踪这笔基础资产的流通，并对针对每次基础资产流通所增发的CDS都试图成为买方。因为基础资产一经转让，高盛就丧失了对该基础资产的所有权与控制权，所以不存在对该笔基础资产的合同买来买去。

法德玩实业，英美玩金融。

鲜花已经成功送出，可通过工具取消

提示：此次送花为此次送花为【有效送花赞扬，涨乐善、声望】。

天下的事都是一样一样的

本人接触到的几件美国对中国的反倾销案,实际操盘手都是拿绿卡的中国人,而且基本上是土生土长的中国人,他们非常了解国内经济生态环境,甚至于案件的取证都是他们伙同国内一些商家干的。

高盛先向德国银行买cds

后来为什么将这个cds卖给希腊国家银行？

cds打包发行债券时怎么回事？

既然他05年把cds转卖出去了，又怎么再次卷入cds打包后的债券？

如果高盛一直在cds市场里，当希腊政府破产时，国家银行破产，他不也得不到任何回报么？

纯外行，一点看不明白，多谢指教

的极权”吗？

Turkey recalls Ambassador after US vote on Armenia 'genocide'

看看井大的描述，这段表示高盛贷款15亿，买了个CDS对冲。

这段里的合同是指15亿贷款的合同，而不是CDS的合同；希腊国家银行债券化的也是买进来15亿的贷款。

结合我前面2个的回复，我想比较好理解了吧。

终于等到认证申请的这一天，请各位支持。典韦。

支持您成认证会员~

谢谢：作者意外获得【通宝】一枚

鲜花已经成功送出，可通过工具取消

提示：此次送花为此次送花为【有效送花赞扬，涨乐善、声望

RATE出来的。

新的再差不会把金融衍生物垃圾RATE成好东西吧。

所以再差也不会比现在差了。

我嚼的是因为火鸡国不支持制裁伊朗，美帝出手恶心火鸡国的吧。

上次看一个新闻，说现在就中国，土耳其，巴西和叙利亚不支持制裁。

let me put some facts here.

1. First, the bubble was not created by rating agencies per se. One of the main contributor is actually Federal Reserve with its easy monetary policies.

USD/Euro is global reserve currency and Fed/ECB low rates actually create a low-rate environment for all nations. China is one victim too.

Therefore, the real estate bubble of 2002-2008 is global--in US, UK, Canada, Spain, Italy, all Eastern Europe... esp., in China.

You can not blame China bubble on raters, because there is none.

2.Rating agencies mainly provide three ratings: corporate ratings, sovereignty bond rating, structural finance product ratings.

During this crisis, corporate ratings proved to be reliable--because rating agencies already have 100 years and at least 10 business cycle experience to improve its models.

For structural finance products, rating agencies have only 20 years of data (two small recessions) to rely on. And the housing price fluctuated most dramatically during this 1997-2007 cycle--the volatility has never been so high before. Please google Case Schiller housing index.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1115323

This article also gives very good insights.

Rating agencies should be shy away from structural products for which their expertise is not great enough. I do not think raters intentionally created this bubble--lack of competence, model problem, lack of historical data are main reasons.

If you live in Europe or North America, you will know that credit ratings have been used in all kinds of gov. regulations, fed/state law, fund bylaws, private contracts, bank loan contracts...

If you totally eliminate credit rating industry, then who can provide independent service to investors in the fixed-income securities? FI market is actually 2 times the size of stock market! How to regulate all those pension/mutual funds/banks? The whole Basel II regulations were built on rating-based capital charge.

Keep in mind: it is easier to destroy an old imperfect world, but it is difficult to build a better new world without imperfection. At this stage, Congress really have no idea how to deal with those rating agencies. The debate has been going on ever since 2001 and nobody knows what is the best solution at all.

新的再差不会把金融衍生物垃圾RATE成好东西吧。

所以再差也不会比现在差了。

--you never know. It is an empirical question. Obama promised "change" before 2009. One year passed, I saw no positive change at all.