TRP-related (by me at least)..from a review

[Joseph Tracy]

You are right Robert, I was confusing the TARP money  requirement  
that banks had to be "bankholding companies" rather than" investment  
banks " with the issue of going public with stocks. The rules  
governing that transition from investment bank to bankholding company  
were broken for Goldman Sachs whose motives for the change were  
pretty obvious.  I'm not really a financial wiz, but I tried to  
follow the story.  Appreciate the correction.



On Mar 24, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Robert Mahnke wrote:

> Maybe I'm confused, but I think you're conflating (a) the i banks
> decisions to turn themselves into public companies (taking public
> investors' money in exchange for stock), with (b) their more recent
> decisions to take public "bailout" money.  FWIW.
>
> On 3/24/10, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 24, 2010, at 10:40 AM, Robert Mahnke wrote:
>>
>>> I was under the impression that Lewis had critical things to say
>>> specifically about the move that investment banks made recently  
>>> to go
>>> public, and the change in incentives for their management,
>>>
>>
>>  The incentive was to get public money , which was turned over  
>> without
>> oversight or guidelines.  This is capitalism? I could manage  
>> public money
>> more responsibly and with a mere 10% of the bonuses.
>>
>> I thought Matt Taibbi's articles in RS were more informative and  
>> detailed
>> than Lewis rather mealy mouthed critique, and did far more to show te
>> decision making processes of the players and the market mechanisms  
>> that are
>> rigged.
>>
>>
>>
>>> not about
>>> the general existence of public companies.
>>>
>>> On 3/24/10, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think the idea  that public companies can find ways to  
>>>> raise
>> capital
>>>> such as issuing shares is necessarily a bad thing. Proper  
>>>> oversight and
>>>> regulation is what is needed
>>>>
>>>> as much as anarchism is very attractive, all it really amounts to a
>>>> diversion for children with nothing to lose no matter how  
>>>> Pynchon exalts
>>>> them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>    The Big Short by Michael Lewis is "an indictment of shareholder
>> driven
>>>>>
>>>> capitalism". As soon as partnership was replaced by investor  
>>>> money, it
>>>> became a casino.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would argue that one of the meanings of the casino (and Vegas in
>> IV?) in
>>>>>
>>>> AtD is captured in the above....Pynchon satirizes society for  
>>>> losing its
>>>> human scale most.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>