re: #39 Dark_Falcon

That is assumption, not evidence. Your point is not supported unless you can provide an example of a new type or issue of securities that carries inordinate risks.

They have increased exposure to derivatives during many quarters since the meltdown.

occ.gov

If you’re asking for the name of a particular new security, I can’t tell you, that. I’ll happily modify my statement to “They have not reduced their exposure to credit default swaps by nearly enough in the wake of the meltdown.”

No, and don’t scribe the entire “right-wing” to me. Unless I clearly say otherwise, I’m speaking for myself.

Okay. So how does Europe get out if its woes, then? What has to happen?

Let me ask you, Obdicut: Would you loan out money aggressively in a time of such risk?

Yes. But it’s a facile question; I don’t have the money, so I can say whatever I want.

However, I know that if I keep the money, I’m going to ‘lose’ it slowly to inflation. A lot of people are trying to invest in bonds, to the extent that those are getting a little risky as well. There’s no safe place for investment to hide.

To me, the purpose of investment is not to hide, or get a garunteed return, but to do something cool and interesting with my money that I thin is an actually cool thing. So if I had money to lend, I believe I would, to industries, companies, and groups I believed in.

I do not understand the new paradigm whereby finance is a shrinking violet away from risk, when they just, during the meltdown, proved themselves massively reckless. Are you saying that the financial industry is now gun-shy after fucking up so hideously?