EU now wants to ban ratings agencies from warning that countries may be in financial trouble
EU now wants to ban ratings agencies from warning that countries ma...
techdirt.com
Ratings agencies, who rate the risk and financial viability of all sorts of debt products, were one of the major scapegoats of the financial crisis. A lot of people pointed the blame finger at them, noting that they rated all sorts of incredibly risky and often highly questionable financial instruments as being incredibly safe. And, it's absolutely true that they did a dreadful job. But, it's kind of ridiculous to blame companies for stating an opinion. On top of that, it's a basic free speech issue. You can't tell a company that it can't express an opinion on the financial soundness of something. To me, the real problem with the ratings agencies was that the government built them into the law. That is, the government required certain institutions to maintain specific percentages of "highly rated" bonds in order to engage in certain activities. That not only legitimatized the opinions of ratings agencies like Moody's and S&P, but it also gave those "opinions" much more of a feeling of fact, rather than opinion. Could you imagine if the government said movies could only be shown in theaters if the NYTimes and the Washington Post movie reviewers gave them positive reviews? That's what the law is basically like with ratings agencies.
And while I think that the big ratings agencies can make big mistakes, that doesn't mean the answer is to shut them up. However, some regulators in Europe disagree. They're discussing a plan to require agencies to not give out ratings, specifically on sovereign debt, which is where many of the key concerns are right now. With many countries in Europe facing serious debt problems (Greece, Portugal, possibly Spain and Italy among them), it seems like Europe has decided the best way to deal with the problem... is to stop people from talking about the problem.
It's difficult to think of a worse plan.
The defenders of the plan complain that S&P, Moody's and Fitch represent an oligopoly over ratings. And that may be true, but that's no excuse for stifling speech. The way to deal with an oligopoly is to add more competition to the market, rather than limiting what those companies can do... especially when it comes to things like expressing an opinion.
techdirt.com
Ratings agencies, who rate the risk and financial viability of all sorts of debt products, were one of the major scapegoats of the financial crisis. A lot of people pointed the blame finger at them, noting that they rated all sorts of incredibly risky and often highly questionable financial instruments as being incredibly safe. And, it's absolutely true that they did a dreadful job. But, it's kind of ridiculous to blame companies for stating an opinion. On top of that, it's a basic free speech issue. You can't tell a company that it can't express an opinion on the financial soundness of something. To me, the real problem with the ratings agencies was that the government built them into the law. That is, the government required certain institutions to maintain specific percentages of "highly rated" bonds in order to engage in certain activities. That not only legitimatized the opinions of ratings agencies like Moody's and S&P, but it also gave those "opinions" much more of a feeling of fact, rather than opinion. Could you imagine if the government said movies could only be shown in theaters if the NYTimes and the Washington Post movie reviewers gave them positive reviews? That's what the law is basically like with ratings agencies.
And while I think that the big ratings agencies can make big mistakes, that doesn't mean the answer is to shut them up. However, some regulators in Europe disagree. They're discussing a plan to require agencies to not give out ratings, specifically on sovereign debt, which is where many of the key concerns are right now. With many countries in Europe facing serious debt problems (Greece, Portugal, possibly Spain and Italy among them), it seems like Europe has decided the best way to deal with the problem... is to stop people from talking about the problem.
It's difficult to think of a worse plan.
The defenders of the plan complain that S&P, Moody's and Fitch represent an oligopoly over ratings. And that may be true, but that's no excuse for stifling speech. The way to deal with an oligopoly is to add more competition to the market, rather than limiting what those companies can do... especially when it comes to things like expressing an opinion.
"Destroying the New World Order"
THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
In Memory of Those Who Served
Bullets flew and ricochetedI was on that hill todayMy Company commander got blown awayI was on…See More
"cheeki kea I was wrong Emperor Penguins are big and powerful but still alive but this,
A size…"
"Cheeki kea here's another that they say there have been modern sightings of!
The name of…"
"cheeki kea, did you ever hear of the giant Imperial Penguins? They were about 6 feet tall and could…"
"cheeki kea I do not think these giant two legged birds would need to have a bad attitude as long as…"
“What’s His Motive?” - Inside The Mind of George Soros
"Trump calls for George Soros and son to face federal…"
Mossad, Terrifying CIA Technology, Blackwater & The Most Secret CIA Unit | John Kiriakou
John Kiriakou served 15 years in the CIA as a Case Officer (Spy) and as CIA's Head of Counterterrorism Operations in Pakistan where he lead the raid that cap...
A Critique of the Tavistock Institute - The Mother Of All Conspiracy Theories
An examination of the Tavistock Institute, a theory which seeks to explain how Western societies have been brainwashed by a cabal of social scientists and th...
“What’s His Motive?” - Inside The Mind of George Soros
In this short clip, Patrick Bet-David, Sebastian Gorka Adam Sosnick, and Tom Ellsworth George Soros and what motivates him to do the things he does. FaceTime...
© 2025 Created by truth.
Powered by
