<?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: Mark-to-Market — Should it Stay or Should it Go?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.onedaymba.org/blog/2009/02/09/mark-to-market-%e2%80%94-should-it-stay-or-should-it-go/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.onedaymba.org/blog/2009/02/09/mark-to-market-%e2%80%94-should-it-stay-or-should-it-go/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:53:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JohnnyStats</title>
		<link>http://www.onedaymba.org/blog/2009/02/09/mark-to-market-%e2%80%94-should-it-stay-or-should-it-go/comment-page-1/#comment-4232</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnnyStats</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 02:53:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.onedaymba.org/blog/?p=23#comment-4232</guid>
		<description>I think m2m finally is getting its day on the Capitol.  According to CNBC, the House Financial Services subcommittee plans a hearing on mark-to-market accounting rules.  This rule has been blamed for forcing banks to report billions of dollars in write-downs.  However, there are serious reprecussions to consider as well if m2m is taken away or suspended as it leaves open the door for manipulation by banks and other entities.  Any change in m2m should take away any loopholes which may entice financial institutions to take advantage of an m2m removal.

To read further about the CNBC report, go to http://www.cnbc.com/id/29513722 .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think m2m finally is getting its day on the Capitol.  According to CNBC, the House Financial Services subcommittee plans a hearing on mark-to-market accounting rules.  This rule has been blamed for forcing banks to report billions of dollars in write-downs.  However, there are serious reprecussions to consider as well if m2m is taken away or suspended as it leaves open the door for manipulation by banks and other entities.  Any change in m2m should take away any loopholes which may entice financial institutions to take advantage of an m2m removal.</p>
<p>To read further about the CNBC report, go to <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/29513722" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnbc.com/id/29513722</a> .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnnyStats</title>
		<link>http://www.onedaymba.org/blog/2009/02/09/mark-to-market-%e2%80%94-should-it-stay-or-should-it-go/comment-page-1/#comment-4224</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnnyStats</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.onedaymba.org/blog/?p=23#comment-4224</guid>
		<description>I do agree with you that m2m is one of the many tools available to battle the issue.  Just like any other tool, it has its negative side effects but yes, it should be used cautiously to make things better. That said, there has to be a mechanism to control m2m when thing are going well.  When m2m works for you in the good days, you were able to mark your assets higher and be able to borrow more and invest more, causing speculation to go out of control.  M2m should have been questioned when it was working.  It is being questioned when it is NOT working.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do agree with you that m2m is one of the many tools available to battle the issue.  Just like any other tool, it has its negative side effects but yes, it should be used cautiously to make things better. That said, there has to be a mechanism to control m2m when thing are going well.  When m2m works for you in the good days, you were able to mark your assets higher and be able to borrow more and invest more, causing speculation to go out of control.  M2m should have been questioned when it was working.  It is being questioned when it is NOT working.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

