I've read a lot of under-informed politicized nonsense about the finance industry over the years but this piece from Michael Hiltzik at the LA Times could very well take the cake. Risk management is my business, and as an expert in the industry with a long and successful track record, I can say without a moment's hesitation Michael Hiltzik couldn't find his... hat... with both hands and a map.
It's not just that he's ignorant on the topic. It's as if he's gone out of his way to be as horribly misinformed as possible, and has then done all he could to spread that misinformation to others like some kind of contagious disease. Not only us he wrong the basic principles of managing market risk, but without even a fragile base to build upon he's still managed to get all the subtleties wrong as well. He is like a man bent at the waist with his head in a bucket, demanding to know why no one is saving him from drowning. To paraphrase an old wives tale, "ask a stupid man a question, you will certainly get a stupid answer." As it turns out, Michael Hiltzik is that stupid man.
I'd address the specifics of his piece but there really isn't much point. I think it suffices to say that on this topic he is a imbecile. And even worse, he's a imbecile who doesn't realize he's an imbecile, and is hoping that his audience is at least as imbecilic as he is. If anyone remembers his useless diatribe tomorrow, it should only be as an example of how silly a piece of baseless anti-capitalist propaganda can make it's author look to those better informed than he is. In this case, that's very nearly everyone.
I think it's tragic that the LA Times holds its own credibility in such low regard, that they allow him to publish such utter nonsense.