Rašyti komentarą...
Nuoroda nukopijuota
× Pranešti klaidą
Aš nesuprantu, kam AK rašinėja?
Nori sulaukti patarimų, pasiūlymų....
Negali būti.
-------------------------------
1.Šiame pažangaus politiko Andriaus Kubiliaus straipsnyje nerasite sąvokos INOVACIJOS. Apie ANTREPRENERĮ ir kalbos būi negali. Tai, ką aiškina lietuvių autorius-būsimas premjeras, yra pasaulio ekonominės išminties viršūnė? Lietuva - pasaulio bamba?...
--------------------
2. Bet yra ir kitokių nuomonių. Pvz, amerikonas 2006 Nobelistas Ed. Felpsas (Phelps). Jis, priešingai, nei Europa (ES), nemano, kad atėjo "kapitalizmo pabaiga".
Jis truputėlį kitaip aiškina*, kaip reikia globaliam pasauliui išeiti iš ... (Amerikos suorganizuotos finansinės...: {rašo lietuviai}) krizės.
--------
3. Tas Amerikos lietuvis rašo tik apie Walmartrą. Kas jis yra? Būtų įdomu paskaityti jo laišką būsimajam premjerui Kubiliui ANGLIŠKAI. Ir tada sulyginti tuos pamokslus su Nobelio premijų laureatais ekonomikoje EDMUND S. PHELPS, Joseph E. Stiglitz, Paul A. Samuelson, Robert E. Lucas, Reinhard Selten (vokiečių Der Spiegel iniciatyva)
pasisakymais.
4. Lietuva be inovacijų Lietuva be ateities. Šiandien tai būtų teisingas iššūkis.
-----------------------
*)" 11/12/2008: SPIEGEL on-line:
EDMUND S. PHELPS
"What Has Gone Wrong up until Now"
Edmund S. Phelps, 75:
It is preposterous to speak, as some Europeans have, of the "end of capitalism." A good life requires a rewarding workplace -- one of change and challenge -- and that requires some sort of well-functioning capitalism.
There is no question that the banking industry in the United States has gone awry . In buying mortgages for packaging in mortgage-backed securities, the banks exported to the rest of the world a profusion perteklius of assets that were overvalued by the financial companies that purchased them.
The ratings agencies, which made their calculations based only on rosy scenarios, and never on a worst-case basis, were complicit in this overvaluation.
In selling derivatives , such as default insurance and other collateralized debt obligations, the banks were selling assets that were too complex for a great many investors to understand.
Finally, the banks were their own worst enemies. The level of their loans and their borrowings to make those loans reached so high a level in relation to their capital, or equity, that any serious disturbance to asset prices -- a default shock or a shock to liquidity premia -- could have devastating effects on the equity of any bank and thus on its ability to function and to survive. At some banks, measured leverage was not extraordinarily high but the opacity of the assets and the resulting uncertainty over their future returns was very high.
That the banks chose to take on ever-greater levels of risk, with no end in sight until the collapse, was an effect of employee compensation: Fortunes could be made for each additional day that the bank could operate. There was no claw-back provision that would pay bonuses only for performance over the long term.
Is regulation required here?
Undoubtedly some new regulations are required here and there.
Yet, many observers have argued the lack of restraints on the banking industry was more a failure of the regulatory authorities to exercise their powers than it was an absence of regulatory authority to act. A new mindset is required, above all.
A fundamental issue that regulatory discussions must confront, however, is what function society needs the banking industry to perform. Increasingly over the past two decades, the banks have tried to make money with mortgages, residential and commercial. As this has proved difficult, the banks will either have to shrink their supply of credit to the economy as a whole or else redirect some their credit to the business sector.
Unfortunately, the banks for the most part appear to have lost the expertise to make business loans and investments, which they once had in the fabulous legendinis years of investment banks such as Deutsche Bank and J.P. Morgan.
Wíll the big banks in the US be able to regain atgauti such expertise?
It seems likely that highly regulated banks are not the ideal sources of finance for business investment, particularly for INNOVATIVE business investments. A natural source of finance for new startup firms are the rich uncles, called "angel investors," who know more about the startup ENTREPRENAUR than a banker would be in a position to know. Another natural source of finance is the venture capitalists, who also have the ENTREPRENEURIAL background to be able to mentor as well as finance the young firms. Some of the hedge funds are also doing creative work in financing various innovative projects.
Clearly it is not in society's interests to regulate rich uncles, venture capitalists and hedge funds investing or lending to small or new businesses. If society makes the mistake of doing so, INNOVATION will suffer.
So will the rewards of work.
And the supply of jobs."
-----------------------
Nori sulaukti patarimų, pasiūlymų....
Negali būti.
-------------------------------
1.Šiame pažangaus politiko Andriaus Kubiliaus straipsnyje nerasite sąvokos INOVACIJOS. Apie ANTREPRENERĮ ir kalbos būi negali. Tai, ką aiškina lietuvių autorius-būsimas premjeras, yra pasaulio ekonominės išminties viršūnė? Lietuva - pasaulio bamba?...
--------------------
2. Bet yra ir kitokių nuomonių. Pvz, amerikonas 2006 Nobelistas Ed. Felpsas (Phelps). Jis, priešingai, nei Europa (ES), nemano, kad atėjo "kapitalizmo pabaiga".
Jis truputėlį kitaip aiškina*, kaip reikia globaliam pasauliui išeiti iš ... (Amerikos suorganizuotos finansinės...: {rašo lietuviai}) krizės.
--------
3. Tas Amerikos lietuvis rašo tik apie Walmartrą. Kas jis yra? Būtų įdomu paskaityti jo laišką būsimajam premjerui Kubiliui ANGLIŠKAI. Ir tada sulyginti tuos pamokslus su Nobelio premijų laureatais ekonomikoje EDMUND S. PHELPS, Joseph E. Stiglitz, Paul A. Samuelson, Robert E. Lucas, Reinhard Selten (vokiečių Der Spiegel iniciatyva)
pasisakymais.
4. Lietuva be inovacijų Lietuva be ateities. Šiandien tai būtų teisingas iššūkis.
-----------------------
*)" 11/12/2008: SPIEGEL on-line:
EDMUND S. PHELPS
"What Has Gone Wrong up until Now"
Edmund S. Phelps, 75:
It is preposterous to speak, as some Europeans have, of the "end of capitalism." A good life requires a rewarding workplace -- one of change and challenge -- and that requires some sort of well-functioning capitalism.
There is no question that the banking industry in the United States has gone awry . In buying mortgages for packaging in mortgage-backed securities, the banks exported to the rest of the world a profusion perteklius of assets that were overvalued by the financial companies that purchased them.
The ratings agencies, which made their calculations based only on rosy scenarios, and never on a worst-case basis, were complicit in this overvaluation.
In selling derivatives , such as default insurance and other collateralized debt obligations, the banks were selling assets that were too complex for a great many investors to understand.
Finally, the banks were their own worst enemies. The level of their loans and their borrowings to make those loans reached so high a level in relation to their capital, or equity, that any serious disturbance to asset prices -- a default shock or a shock to liquidity premia -- could have devastating effects on the equity of any bank and thus on its ability to function and to survive. At some banks, measured leverage was not extraordinarily high but the opacity of the assets and the resulting uncertainty over their future returns was very high.
That the banks chose to take on ever-greater levels of risk, with no end in sight until the collapse, was an effect of employee compensation: Fortunes could be made for each additional day that the bank could operate. There was no claw-back provision that would pay bonuses only for performance over the long term.
Is regulation required here?
Undoubtedly some new regulations are required here and there.
Yet, many observers have argued the lack of restraints on the banking industry was more a failure of the regulatory authorities to exercise their powers than it was an absence of regulatory authority to act. A new mindset is required, above all.
A fundamental issue that regulatory discussions must confront, however, is what function society needs the banking industry to perform. Increasingly over the past two decades, the banks have tried to make money with mortgages, residential and commercial. As this has proved difficult, the banks will either have to shrink their supply of credit to the economy as a whole or else redirect some their credit to the business sector.
Unfortunately, the banks for the most part appear to have lost the expertise to make business loans and investments, which they once had in the fabulous legendinis years of investment banks such as Deutsche Bank and J.P. Morgan.
Wíll the big banks in the US be able to regain atgauti such expertise?
It seems likely that highly regulated banks are not the ideal sources of finance for business investment, particularly for INNOVATIVE business investments. A natural source of finance for new startup firms are the rich uncles, called "angel investors," who know more about the startup ENTREPRENAUR than a banker would be in a position to know. Another natural source of finance is the venture capitalists, who also have the ENTREPRENEURIAL background to be able to mentor as well as finance the young firms. Some of the hedge funds are also doing creative work in financing various innovative projects.
Clearly it is not in society's interests to regulate rich uncles, venture capitalists and hedge funds investing or lending to small or new businesses. If society makes the mistake of doing so, INNOVATION will suffer.
So will the rewards of work.
And the supply of jobs."
-----------------------
Krizes iveikimo plano reikia visai Lietuvai, bet tokio plano reikia tik pertvarku koalicijai. Del ko jie taip biudzetu rupinasi? nes jie valdantieji ir biudzetas arciausiai ju paciu kiseniu. Jei biudzetas neskyletas tai ir valdanciuju kisenes ne tuscios.
Kam reikia sitokio krizes iveikimo plano?
As manau kad liga reikia gydyti nuo jos priezasciu, nuo ten kur ji prasidejo - nuo banku prieziuros! O cia mat susirinko keli frakuoti bankininkai ir pateike krizes iveikimo plana. Juokinga.
As manau kad liga reikia gydyti nuo jos priezasciu, nuo ten kur ji prasidejo - nuo banku prieziuros! O cia mat susirinko keli frakuoti bankininkai ir pateike krizes iveikimo plana. Juokinga.
jau ir dabar zmones bijo eiti i maisto parduotuves. Greit bijos valgyti. Darzoviu kaina jau dabar kosmine. Maksima jau nebenurodo kilogramo kainos, bet vieneto. Sitaip apgaudineja pirkejus. Sitaip pirkau mazutes cukinijas, apsidziauges, kad kaina tik trys litai. Paaiskejo, kad tai vieneto kaina. Gal greit ir bulves bei morkos bus pardavinejamos vienetais? Po PVM padidinimo? :)
Tas Undriaus ne krizės įveikimo planas ,o geros pradžios vyriausybės darbo imitacijos popiergalis. Reikia pradėti nuo savęs t.y. klanų- partijų,kurios neatsiklausė mokesčių mokėtojo ir juos ėmė finansuoti valstybė.Kodėl atimama iš ubago lazda? Kodėl nesurengiama gyventojų apklausa nepaklausiama mokslininkų ir ekspertų nuomonės.? Prezidentūra irgi miega...
Toks cia ir planas. Eilini karta pasipinigauti pilieciu saskaita? Tai moka kiekvienas. Jokiu reformu. Jokios banku prieziuros, jokios atsakomybes krizes kelianciams bankams. Visa atsakomybe ir mokama kaina niekuo nekaltiems atpirkimo oziams - Lietuvos zmonems, eilini karta dar labiau padidinant atotruki tarp turtingu ir vargsu.
Andriaus draugui: "Pasakyk kas tavo draugai ir as pasakysiu kas tu".
Andrius Kubilius: Kam reikia Krizės įveikimo plano?
Atsakymas: Andriaus Kubiliaus parengto krizės įveikimo plano reikia jam pačiam ir grupelei jo draugų.
Atsakymas: Andriaus Kubiliaus parengto krizės įveikimo plano reikia jam pačiam ir grupelei jo draugų.
Toks skubus : trūko- lūžo planas reikalingas gero vyriausybės darbo pradžios imitacijai.Tą valdymą,jo būtiną lankstumą ar biurokratizmą ir korupciją LR piliečiai tuojau pamatys,patirs savo kailiu.
Galimas atvejis ,kad tas planas vėliau pritiks nuogam užpakaliui pridengti...
Galimas atvejis ,kad tas planas vėliau pritiks nuogam užpakaliui pridengti...
Matosi, kad žmogus eina savo kojomis per žemę ir neskraido padebesiais. Pagarba.
REKLAMA
REKLAMA
Andrius Kubilius: kam reikia Krizės įveikimo plano?