<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Credit Crisis Only Begins With Mortgages</title>
	<atom:link href="http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages</link>
	<description>National News in Context</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:46:59 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: crmorris</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/comment-page-1#comment-4589</link>
		<dc:creator>crmorris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:10:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2340#comment-4589</guid>
		<description>Writedowns  &quot;And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Many bonds were sold backed by, eg, risky home mortgages, but with credit ratings that suggested that default rates would be near-zero.  They paid interest only slightly higher than a risk-free Treasury bond.  Now that we know that actual default rates are much higher, traders require much higher yields (= lower prices) to purchase those bonds.  The lower price incorporates the information that the $50 payment is very much in doubt, even tho it&#039;s still being paid.  Almost all the writedowns are based on some sort of a market test.  There is a fair amount of evidence that banks haven&#039;t been writing down enough, altho that may now be changing because of criticisms from accounting standards bodies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Writedowns  &quot;And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place&quot;</p>
<p>Many bonds were sold backed by, eg, risky home mortgages, but with credit ratings that suggested that default rates would be near-zero.  They paid interest only slightly higher than a risk-free Treasury bond.  Now that we know that actual default rates are much higher, traders require much higher yields (= lower prices) to purchase those bonds.  The lower price incorporates the information that the $50 payment is very much in doubt, even tho it&#39;s still being paid.  Almost all the writedowns are based on some sort of a market test.  There is a fair amount of evidence that banks haven&#39;t been writing down enough, altho that may now be changing because of criticisms from accounting standards bodies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: warrenmetzler</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/comment-page-1#comment-4588</link>
		<dc:creator>warrenmetzler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:33:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2340#comment-4588</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t get the write down example. If you say that a bond becomes risky, doesn&#039;t that mean the originally promised $50.00 per year is now suspect? So how can you tell what is the value of this bond? I do get that claiming its value is now $720 means it has lost 28% of its value, but what is the basis for that claim? And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place, other than an expected $50.00 annual payment didn&#039;t arrive? And if an expected annual payment didn&#039;t arrive, whose to say the bond has any worth at all?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Sounds like most write downs are more smoke and mirrors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#39;t get the write down example. If you say that a bond becomes risky, doesn&#39;t that mean the originally promised $50.00 per year is now suspect? So how can you tell what is the value of this bond? I do get that claiming its value is now $720 means it has lost 28% of its value, but what is the basis for that claim? And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place, other than an expected $50.00 annual payment didn&#39;t arrive? And if an expected annual payment didn&#39;t arrive, whose to say the bond has any worth at all?</p>
<p>Sounds like most write downs are more smoke and mirrors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: messels</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/comment-page-1#comment-4587</link>
		<dc:creator>messels</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2340#comment-4587</guid>
		<description>any chance you can address the possiblity of a soft-landing?  i&#039;ve been thinking the goal from the massive rate cuts [and the stimulus plan] is merely to soften the blow to what is/will be a recession.  perhaps our economy stays at zero growth for a while.  i&#039;d rather see a flat-line than one going down, down, down.  i also think that we are still in the midst of what is going to be a major period of development as the success of previous developed nations (US, germany, japan, etc) gains momentum and transforms the rest of the world.  that belief is what helps foster my belief that we&#039;re looking at a soft-landing scenario rather than a death spiral.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;i&#039;m looking forward to reading more from you.  thanks, mr. morris.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.positionmakers.com&quot;&gt;http://www.positionmakers.com&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>any chance you can address the possiblity of a soft-landing?  i&#39;ve been thinking the goal from the massive rate cuts [and the stimulus plan] is merely to soften the blow to what is/will be a recession.  perhaps our economy stays at zero growth for a while.  i&#39;d rather see a flat-line than one going down, down, down.  i also think that we are still in the midst of what is going to be a major period of development as the success of previous developed nations (US, germany, japan, etc) gains momentum and transforms the rest of the world.  that belief is what helps foster my belief that we&#39;re looking at a soft-landing scenario rather than a death spiral.</p>
<p>i&#39;m looking forward to reading more from you.  thanks, mr. morris.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.positionmakers.com">http://www.positionmakers.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: crmorris</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/comment-page-1#comment-2048</link>
		<dc:creator>crmorris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2340#comment-2048</guid>
		<description>Writedowns  &quot;And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place&quot;

Many bonds were sold backed by, eg, risky home mortgages, but with credit ratings that suggested that default rates would be near-zero.  They paid interest only slightly higher than a risk-free Treasury bond.  Now that we know that actual default rates are much higher, traders require much higher yields (= lower prices) to purchase those bonds.  The lower price incorporates the information that the $50 payment is very much in doubt, even tho it&#039;s still being paid.  Almost all the writedowns are based on some sort of a market test.  There is a fair amount of evidence that banks haven&#039;t been writing down enough, altho that may now be changing because of criticisms from accounting standards bodies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Writedowns  &quot;And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place&quot;</p>
<p>Many bonds were sold backed by, eg, risky home mortgages, but with credit ratings that suggested that default rates would be near-zero.  They paid interest only slightly higher than a risk-free Treasury bond.  Now that we know that actual default rates are much higher, traders require much higher yields (= lower prices) to purchase those bonds.  The lower price incorporates the information that the $50 payment is very much in doubt, even tho it&#8217;s still being paid.  Almost all the writedowns are based on some sort of a market test.  There is a fair amount of evidence that banks haven&#8217;t been writing down enough, altho that may now be changing because of criticisms from accounting standards bodies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: warrenmetzler</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/comment-page-1#comment-2049</link>
		<dc:creator>warrenmetzler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2340#comment-2049</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t get the write down example. If you say that a bond becomes risky, doesn&#039;t that mean the originally promised $50.00 per year is now suspect? So how can you tell what is the value of this bond? I do get that claiming its value is now $720 means it has lost 28% of its value, but what is the basis for that claim? And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place, other than an expected $50.00 annual payment didn&#039;t arrive? And if an expected annual payment didn&#039;t arrive, whose to say the bond has any worth at all?

Sounds like most write downs are more smoke and mirrors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t get the write down example. If you say that a bond becomes risky, doesn&#8217;t that mean the originally promised $50.00 per year is now suspect? So how can you tell what is the value of this bond? I do get that claiming its value is now $720 means it has lost 28% of its value, but what is the basis for that claim? And what caused the assumption the bond is risky in the first place, other than an expected $50.00 annual payment didn&#8217;t arrive? And if an expected annual payment didn&#8217;t arrive, whose to say the bond has any worth at all?</p>
<p>Sounds like most write downs are more smoke and mirrors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: messels</title>
		<link>http://washingtonindependent.com/2340/credit-crisis-only-begins-with-mortgages/comment-page-1#comment-2050</link>
		<dc:creator>messels</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtonindependent.com.php5-9.websitetestlink.com/?p=2340#comment-2050</guid>
		<description>any chance you can address the possiblity of a soft-landing?  i&#039;ve been thinking the goal from the massive rate cuts [and the stimulus plan] is merely to soften the blow to what is/will be a recession.  perhaps our economy stays at zero growth for a while.  i&#039;d rather see a flat-line than one going down, down, down.  i also think that we are still in the midst of what is going to be a major period of development as the success of previous developed nations (US, germany, japan, etc) gains momentum and transforms the rest of the world.  that belief is what helps foster my belief that we&#039;re looking at a soft-landing scenario rather than a death spiral.

i&#039;m looking forward to reading more from you.  thanks, mr. morris.

http://www.positionmakers.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>any chance you can address the possiblity of a soft-landing?  i&#8217;ve been thinking the goal from the massive rate cuts [and the stimulus plan] is merely to soften the blow to what is/will be a recession.  perhaps our economy stays at zero growth for a while.  i&#8217;d rather see a flat-line than one going down, down, down.  i also think that we are still in the midst of what is going to be a major period of development as the success of previous developed nations (US, germany, japan, etc) gains momentum and transforms the rest of the world.  that belief is what helps foster my belief that we&#8217;re looking at a soft-landing scenario rather than a death spiral.</p>
<p>i&#8217;m looking forward to reading more from you.  thanks, mr. morris.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.positionmakers.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.positionmakers.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
