Sunday, June 05, 2011

McCardle v. McCardle

May 15, 2011:
VELSHI: Megan, I think Matt wants to see somebody from Goldman arrested or charged with something. What do you think has to happen?

Because clearly whether or not you think Goldman broke any laws, any of us who followed this got the impression that they were perhaps not dealing in the best interests of some of their clients.

MCARDLE: I think they probably aren't, just like most vendors aren't always -- look to their own interests before the interests of their clients.

But here's the thing. I think there is a real desire to have a sense of closure on this, a desire to track down a villain, figure out who did this to us.

And I think that really underweight the power of human stupidity and poor system design. It can produce terrible results even without anyone doing --
October 22, 2009:
Restricting bonuses only at the companies in which we now have a gigantic stake is emotionally satisfying, but bankers aren't just talking their book when they complain that talent is getting poached from bonus-limited firms. I know it's fashionable to believe that traders are all a bunch of lucky, arrogant idiots, but there is some skill involved, and firms that lose their top people will probably underperform.
In other words, the banksters are too stupid to be held accountable for their actions, but two years ago were too smart to not get paid huge, taxpayer-backed bonuses.

I've been seriously, earnestly trying to back out of caring about politics so much (the lack of posts to this blog should prove that) but, good God! How does Megan McCardle get paid a dime for her B.S., partisan tap-dancing?