Read some of the Report of the FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION. Make sure you read both the conclusions of the main report, and at least one of the DISSENTING opinions. Compare the conclusions with the dissenters, in the context of judgmental and other decision-making biases.http://www.fcic.gov/report/conclusions
1. a) The FCIC report concludes that this financial crisis was avoidable. It is felt by them that the regulators, who are the custodians of the US financial system, failed to protect the country from the risks in the system , the explosion in risky subprime lending, the rise in housing prices, the dramatic increases in household debts, the unregulated derivatives and so on.
b) The Dissenters are of the opinion that what the FCIC report outlines, is more the effects and not the causes of the crisis, the latter being the purpose of the report. The Dissenters while not negating the view that the regulatory mechanism was at fault, feel that the report focuses too narrowly on US regulatory policy, ignoring international parallels, thus making the report unbalanced in its conclusion about what caused the crisis.
2. a) The majority of the report concludes that widespread failures in financial regulation and supervision that proved devastating to the stability of the nation's financial markets. The Inquiry Commission feels that the 30 years of deregulation, as championed by Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman and others was a key reason for the catastrophe.
b) The Dissenters say that the "too little regulation" approach is too broad- brushed to explain the crisis. Also regulation cannot be just 'tightened'; it has to specifically address the problems in the financial system. Also, this conclusion ignores the global nature of the crisis. They refute the claim of the majority by asking how the deregulatory ideologies of Alan Greenspan precipitate bank failures in Europe.
3. a) The majority report ...
A study of the Report of the FINANCIAL CRISIS INQUIRY COMMISSION along with the opinion of the dissenters reveals that there are diverse arguments about the reasons for the crisis in 2007 and 2008. while the report primarily blames the regulatory mechanism in the country, the fall in standards of the financial institutions and the credit rating agencies for the problem, the dissenters believe that the problem is much more diffuse. They argue that the credit bubble, the housing bubble, the leverage and liquidity risks and the shock and panic contributed to the crisis, and not the broad brushed version of the Inquiry Commission.
Fair Value Accounting and the Global Financial Crisis 2007
The recent financial crisis has turned the spotlight on fair-value accounting (FVA) and led to a major policy debate involving among others the US Congress, the European Commission as well as banking and accounting regulators around the world. Critics argue that FVA, often also called mark-to-market accounting (MTM), has significantly contributed to the financial crisis and exacerbated its severity for financial institutions in the US and around the worldView Full Posting Details