<?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: &#8220;Empty Creditors&#8221; Decouple Economic Interests From Legal Control</title>
	<atom:link href="http://renohayek.com/2009/04/empty-creditors-decouple-economic-interests-from-legal-control/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://renohayek.com/2009/04/empty-creditors-decouple-economic-interests-from-legal-control/</link>
	<description>Articulating conservative solutions to current issues &#38; supporting their intelligent champions</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:25:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: First Empty Creditor Claim made public illustrates how using CDS incentivizes bankrupting a company at fancy logo catchy tagline</title>
		<link>http://renohayek.com/2009/04/empty-creditors-decouple-economic-interests-from-legal-control/comment-page-1/#comment-4532</link>
		<dc:creator>First Empty Creditor Claim made public illustrates how using CDS incentivizes bankrupting a company at fancy logo catchy tagline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 17:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://renohayek.com/?p=202#comment-4532</guid>
		<description>[...] Explained further: As Hu points out in the 4/10/2009 edition of the Wall Street Journal, there is nothing wrong with this risk hedging, this insurance; it is the exercise of freedom of contract. It does point up a change in the alignment of interests (economic and legal) which form the basis of our legal, financial and regulatory systems. Apparently, the suretyship doctrine of subrogation, where the guarantor “stands in the shoes of” and succeeds to the rights of the guarantee, does not apply to CDS. If subrogation did apply to CDS, the economic and legal interests would be properly aligned. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Explained further: As Hu points out in the 4/10/2009 edition of the Wall Street Journal, there is nothing wrong with this risk hedging, this insurance; it is the exercise of freedom of contract. It does point up a change in the alignment of interests (economic and legal) which form the basis of our legal, financial and regulatory systems. Apparently, the suretyship doctrine of subrogation, where the guarantor “stands in the shoes of” and succeeds to the rights of the guarantee, does not apply to CDS. If subrogation did apply to CDS, the economic and legal interests would be properly aligned. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jmbcqiccnhk</title>
		<link>http://renohayek.com/2009/04/empty-creditors-decouple-economic-interests-from-legal-control/comment-page-1/#comment-2977</link>
		<dc:creator>jmbcqiccnhk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:37:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://renohayek.com/?p=202#comment-2977</guid>
		<description>yRAhbb  &lt;a href=&quot;http://uxpakoopmqnb.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;uxpakoopmqnb&lt;/a&gt;, [url=http://hqhulwjipqmn.com/]hqhulwjipqmn[/url], [link=http://hjhrmsbpeqis.com/]hjhrmsbpeqis[/link], http://fniynnkjijmb.com/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yRAhbb  <a href="http://uxpakoopmqnb.com/" rel="nofollow">uxpakoopmqnb</a>, [url=http://hqhulwjipqmn.com/]hqhulwjipqmn[/url], [link=http://hjhrmsbpeqis.com/]hjhrmsbpeqis[/link], <a href="http://fniynnkjijmb.com/" rel="nofollow">http://fniynnkjijmb.com/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

