Socialization of Risk, Privating Profit

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
SeekingAPolitic...
Socialization of Risk, Privating Profit

Socialization of Risk is in its fundamental state insurance for something the private sector finds no profit in, or too risky for the private to touch.

Privating Profit is the practice of the corporation that is used government funds for private investment and walks away with an accumulated profit when the business goes bad.  Private Sector walks ago accumulated profit and the state pick up debt form operations of the business, environment hazards turn state liability, or the practice of government buying worthless or failed asset, not at market value rather than book value (paragraph on this odiuos practice and very recent example dubious bailout by the current government.  A short description,  essentially failure of a business, let stress my these are maga projects will not be built with help government.  Any move let to owners grabs profits or under-invest in Capex essentially a corporation will self liquate into in the process where all production are stripped of value through the process of Depreciation.  When all asset stripped down then the owners walk away with a loot and state pick up all liability for the bond holder and social loss to the community.  2.  A simple one that corporations do need to plan future environmental cost, the govern while paying the cost of failure.   3.  I mention this briefly because I try to develop this into a full paragraph. The recent payout of the pipeline deal, lets a thought experiment would the government pay which I assume book value 4.5 with 7.3 billion being the final price since the value has not been through market value.  Try to sell it on the open market and see if there a buyer beyond the government. In mind accounting style until it catches a bid as it falls there no value in project.  Lets this paragraph up what was trans-mountain pipeline, Mr Finance Minister Bill Morneau hold to come up with final price for an incomplete pipeline.  There in no product going into pile line so nothing come coming out the pipeline.  So estinallty we have pipeline that not move no product.  Honestly you should have put the market I could I get privates investors help me to buy the pileline for scrap value:) Opportunty missed form me. But how did you a price pipeline does nothing but rusts.  That sir interesting questions.  

SeekingAPolitic...

Nuclear power plants, I believe the maximum liability to the owner is 2 billion. They cover 2 billion then the state liable for the result. So nuke explode like Fukushima Daiichi Accident near the great lakes, and clean up we more than 2 billion dollar.  Have you seen those commercials where are a touching moment then message pops up the world priceless. You should regulate this put those videos a mandatory video for license process. An creator type I suggest a picture of the power plant with people running for there lives and end with the word priceless will popup. I bet that will turn heads.  I know this is grim humor but its a grim subject.  If there some reading the on rabble, I they want to shut the industry down, I suggest leaving the power plant alone, it gets tasered or arrested.  The heart of this empire is government insurance, can lobby to 50 billion covered the plant.  I do not think I will find capitalist crazy enough to accept liability for that sum.  She instead has police dogs set on and gas your hire lawyer go after liability limit. Its probably more healthy for you get police baton in your guts.  We still have talk about bank and CHMC but is for later.

 

SeekingAPolitic...

Banks,  

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/big-banks-big-secret

And manually download the publication, If only read 40 pages of documents this year, read this the document is so very powerful, information is power read it.

Read this 2 two quotes and decide which talking the truth and who is telling who is fibbing.

“It is true, we have the only banks in the western world that are not looking at bailouts or anything like that...and we haven’t got any TARP money.” —Stephen Harper, Prime Minister10

“It was a good thing we didn’t press pause when we provided over $30 billion of liquidity to the Canadian banking system. It was a good thing the government of Canada didn’t press pause when it provided...very timely and effective term liquidity to the Canadian banking system.” —Mark Carney, Bank of Canada governor11

Below info everything qutoed to author of report.

thE OvErall picturE painted by this examination of Canadian banks’ use of government support programs during and after the global financial crisis of 2008–10 stands in stark contrast to both government and bank claims that Canada’s banks were somehow immune from the need for such extraordinary measures. It also raises more questions than answers, due to government secrecy. As this examination makes clear, some Canadian banks drew much more government aid than others during the financial crisis. It’s important for Canadians to know why some banks were more vulnerable than others. By keeping the details of this support secret, it is much harder for Canadians to evaluate what happened, why it happened and what can be done to prevent the need for such massive support in the future. It also casts a shadow upon the official line that Canada’s banking system is among the most robust in the world. Unfortunately, the veil of secrecy is also obscuring an obvious reality: Canada’s big banks are too big to fail. The Government of Canada, the Bank of Canada and the big banks themselves understand that Canada’s banks will be bailed out irrespective of the cost. The cEO of TD Bank Edmund Clark concluded as much at the height of the financial crisis, noting to investors:

“Maybe not explicitly, but what are the chances that TD Bank is not going to be bailed out if it did something stupid?

What’s clear from this examination of the government support programs is that the Bank of Canada and cMhc need to make public the details of their support to the country’s banks. A concerted effort should be made to understand why some banks required so much more support than others. The circumstances that allowed some Canadian banks to be less reliant upon government support should be replicated throughout Canada’s financial sector using strong government regulation. A healthy financial system cannot be based on massive government support for which the details remain secret. It is only through an honest and transparent examination of what occurred and how it can avoided in the future that a stronger financial system can be built, which is in everyone’s best interest

Remember Information is Power