Skip to main content

So How much Skin do the Troika have in the Game.

My question to myself this morning was this €85 Billion sure is a big number but how much of that is real? The Greek Islands and other hard assets supposed to be administered by a Bank in Which Dr Shoebel is a director are real enough but essentially what the Greek Government gets in return are a multiplication of Credits based on that collateral . Who is granting those credits and what is behind them , this is the measure of what skin do the givers of the credits have in the game?what do they have to lose. and if lose it they should who gets what and what was pledged in the first place by the ultimate beneficiary.

I am of course talking about Financial Skin, either property or assets bought and paid for and held ´´free and clear with tax paid´´, as an old client of mine would often stress when stressing the reality of his High Net worth ( he did mean just in financial terms I don't think he meant it gave him a higher worth as a human being.).

I was delighted to find a very interesting Interview with Nassim Taleb on the Library of Ecnomics and Liberty Web site which addresses some of my question and has a wonderful transcript to quote from.

I will not quote from the transcript except for this one mind boggling quote from toward the end of the Interview.

 ´´Hence, people overpay for financial options. Hence let's sell[?] remote probabilities in finance. Well, anybody who has a brain would realize that banks aren't engaged in the business of selling small probabilities in finance. And they lost $5 trillion in 2008. More money than they ever made in the history of banking. So therefore, that statement, that people overpay for protection in finance, is false. Russ: When you said the number $5 trillion, for a minute I just thought you meant a lot of money, like a zillion. But it actually is close to $5 trillion, right? Guest: Yeah. That's what they lost before the government bailed them out. But $5 trillion is a lot of money. So what I'm saying is that instead of doing a lot of experiments, look at the variables themselves. Insurance companies haven't really made money till recently. All it takes sometimes is one event. And insurance companies are involved in very complex fat-tailed things, typically. Except for reinsurance. So look at the banks: bets on small probability events by financial firms have proven disastrous in history. And wealth came from bets on open-ended remote-probability events, namely entrepreneurship.´´

So the Banks had losses of FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS in 2008, more than all the profits they had ever made before in the history of Banking. Think about that. So where is the money coming from for the Greek Bailout and what is Austerity paying for exactly and who is paying it. It seems to me that The Skin in  the game is being flailed from the backs of people who had no benefit in or part of the hubris leading up to 2008 and are being asked to continue to fund the same hubris and business as usual  by Politicians and Bankers who literally have no Skin in the Game anymore since 2008 at least if they ever have had. The thing about Banking is that we always assume banks have a lot more at stake than they actually do, if it were so we would not constantly be being thrown into the turmoil that characterises Economic life for most of us.

´´´Capitalism has a built-in asymmetry, in the sense that bankruptcy has a zero in it, there's no negative for a company. But you still can have skin in the game by forcing people to lose a little more money. It doesn't have to be unlimited. So, you have unlimited profits and limited losses, but still maintain skin in the game. And I think we are reaching that equilibrium in economic life, outside of course of government intervention, banking and bailouts. You have that equilibrium. In other words, the builder isn't put to death. There are financial penalties. When you go to a doctor, if the doctor amputates someone and he takes the wrong leg, you don't take the doctor and amputate his leg in return. But there is a penalty, you see. So, we're not worried about places in which this equilibrium has been discovered heuristically, bottom up. I am worried about modernity. I am worried about bureaucrats causing hyperinflation, affecting savers and citizens but not harming them at all. I'm worried about that kind of stuff. We're not worried about contracts between individuals that can find equilibrium in some way or another.´´

Taleb on Skin in the Game | EconTalk | Library of Economics and Liberty  photo taleb.jpg

Popular posts from this blog

Syria Cui Bono, Incitatus (Boris Johnson) Caligula (john Kerry) and the Curious case of the New Consul at the United Nations Security Council (Updated 7th April , Trump ordered attack On Syria)


Roger Lewis7 April 2017 at 12:56 Syria is all about Gas, not poison Sarin Gas but Gas Pipelines. It is also not about Hydro Carbons in themselves but the market for hydrocarbons and which currency contracts of supply are settled in otherwise known  as,  US petrodollar hegemony.
Legitimate question. Does Jared Kushner have any interests in the Leviathan Gas field or any of the Israeli-backed Pipeline projects? #MAGA#Drain The Swamp. Starting to dig around will report back.

THE BROTHERHOOD OF THE GAS RING. QATARI GAS, OR SAUDI HEGENOMY, TRUMP BACKS THE SAUDIS? TANGLED WEB INDEED Tangled Web,  Syria and Gas. Trump meets Egyptian President, that is a rejection of the Moslem Brotherhood, siding against Qatar in Syria and With Saudi broadly and therefore the ISIL Wahabbist and Saud…

Meet The Fuggers, Brexit, The Euro and Clueless Elites.

Meet the Fuggers or, its the Money Power stupid. Brexit, The Euro and clueless Elites.

The Eastern Roman empire under Justinian saw the seeds of its final fall to The Ottomans when Abd El Melik started paying tribute in Gold coinage under his own Political Branding you might say.

With all the talk of Brexit being the removal of a final obstacle to the deeper federation of a European State transcending tiresome nationalism, perhaps a little review of History, particularly Monetary history, might not be such a bad thing.

In the review of European competences carried out as a consultation by the foreign office regarding Brexit and or reform requirements of the Eu, two of the papers need to be considered in the context of the Money power argument.

The first paper considered is the Subsidiarity and proportionality aspects of the Lisbon treaty and the competences of the EU institutions vis National and regional democratic institutions. This is a trade-off between Centralised Efficiency and …

Turn Out Is Key. Election 2017. High Turnout and Labour Wins!!! #VoteLabour #DriveAfreindtothePollingPlace

Link To Lord Ashcroft Polling.

This Graph Explains the Importance of Turnout to the outcome of the Election Tomorrow.

If Turnout is the 72.2% of the Brexit Referendum last year you can see that the Light Blue line shows That the middle third of the probability distribution curve on Ashcroft's polling numbers has a Tory Majority of between 20 and 60 seats.
The 2015 turnout was 66.1 % overall. around the same as 1997 general election less than the 77% for the 92 vote. Historically the 1950 and 51 elections had over 80% turnouts.

1.Main points
The total number of UK parliamentary electors in 2015 was 44,722,000, a fall of 1.3% from 2014. The total number of UK local government electors in 2015 was 46,204,700, a fall of 1.3% from 2014. Between 2014 and 2015, the total number of both parliamentary and local government electors fell in England, Wales and Scotland, but increased in Northern Ireland. The number of parliamentary electors fell in all regions of England between 2014 and 2015.…