Ginny asks whether she is neoliberal?
Briefly: Neoliberalism revives the nineteenth century laissez-faire ideals of markets unfettered by government regulation. See Daniel Yergin & Joseiph Stanislaw, The Commanding Heights 14-16 (1998) (discussing the "return toward traditional liberalism around the world" and distinguishing this "liberalism" from the common American usage of the term as the opposite of "conservativism"). The term "neoliberal" gained prominence in reference to policies led by the United States in response to the 1980s Latin American debt crisis. These policies typically include cutting federal spending (particularly funds for social welfare programs), raising consumption taxes, tightening credit, maintaining high interest rates, and promoting increased foreign trade and investment. (The term "neoliberal" is more often used outside of the United States.)
From Martha T. McCluskey, Subsidized Lives and the Ideology of Efficiency, 8 Am. U.J. Gender Soc. Pol'y & L. 115, 118 n.16 (2000).
Bob
ROBERT SPRAGUE
Associate Professor
University of Wyoming College of Business
Department of Management & Marketing
1000 E. University Avenue, Dept. 3275 . Laramie, Wyoming 82071
Phone: 307-766-5670 . E-mail: [log in to unmask] . Website: http://www.uwyo.edu/sprague
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Virginia Maurer
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 1:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: lost Mortgage notes
Someone had a note secured by a mortgage. Someone somewhere. Home Sellers do
not let buyers move into a house until the Seller has been paid for the
house, or at least taken back a note [in which case we know where the note
is, normally]. Lenders do not pay Sellers the purchase price for the house
until the Buyer signs a note and grants a mortgage (which, under the statute
of frauds, must be in writing). The mortgage is filed the moment it is
executed. So the note exists somewhere. No one lent money without taking
back to note, or if they did, they should lose the case. Presumably, banks
do not pay the mortgage broker for the loan without ascertaining that a note
exists and that it is secured by a mortgage (that has been filed).
So what happened to the note? Someone guaranteed that they were holding on
behalf of whoever bought it? Even all the way up through the derivative
instruments, there must have been some indication of who -- some financial
institution or fiduciary? --was holding the note. Surely, surely. Tell me
Harvard MBAs and their JD counsel are not that stupid.
Were the investment banks' agents as careless, irrational and foolish as the
home Buyers? Had they no clue where the note was? Did they know what a note
was? If not, as between two irrational, careless, foolish litigants,
shouldn't the risk fall on the party who cannot produce the note but seeks
to rely on it? And the institution that held the note as a fiduciary for the
downstream purchaser of the loan should bear the loss if it cannot produce
the note.
Am I hopelessly neoliberal? What does neoliberal mean?
Or is it sensible, in the new world order, that people can foreclose on
collateral without bothering to produce evidence of the underlying debt?
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hiller, Janine
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 3:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: lost Mortgage notes
Hi,
While I am in Sweden I have not followed the mortgage note problems closely,
so I hope this is on topic. BUT, before I left I believe that the problem
was an electronic one that was connected to the credit default swaps--or at
least with the vigorous trading of those notes. Those who ended up with the
underlying credit instruments were so far removed from the transaction that
the notes, signed electronically, were "lost" in electronic space.
Janine
________________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Virginia Maurer
[[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 9:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Half course in MBA Core WARNING: POLITICAL CONTENT & Somewhat
of a Change in Topic
I am astounded at the behavior of foreclosing banks who regard the absence
of a negotiable instrument as a "technicality". A technicality? They are
foreclosing on someone's home and, worse, selling it to an unsuspecting
buyer, and cannot produce evidence of the debt?
Can I run my business that way? Sue you on a note that I cannot produce, but
assure the judge that it must exist somewhere and says what I say it says?
Think of the possibilities! All the more reason why business students need
to know about good old fashioned negotiable instrument law. Who on earth
LOST the notes?
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert D. Sprague
Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 8:25 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Half course in MBA Core WARNING: POLITICAL CONTENT & Somewhat
of a Change in Topic
Along the lines of Keith's comments, I'm interested if anyone has any
favorite authors or articles on the subjects of corporatism and/or
neoliberalism?
Thanks (and you can e-mail me privately at the address below if you prefer).
Bob
Robert Sprague
Associate Professor
University of Wyoming College of Business
Department of Management & Marketing
1000 E. University Avenue, Dept. 3275 . Laramie, Wyoming 82071
Phone: 307-766-5670 . E-mail: [log in to unmask] . Website:
http://www.uwyo.edu/sprague
[cid:image001.jpg@01CB71CA.975343A0]<http://business.uwyo.edu/>
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Keith A Maxwell
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 11:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Half course in MBA Core WARNING: POLITICAL CONTENT
If the Congress changes hands, MBA's won't need to worry about what law
might have to say about their actions. And ethics...who thinks that is a
threat to them? Ask your deans.
Keith A. Maxwell, J.D.
Nat S. and Marian W. Rogers Professor (Emeritus)
Professor Emeritus Legal Studies and Ethics in Business
University of Puget Sound
Tacoma, WA
Adjunct Professor of Business Law
Dixie State College
Saint George, UT
________________________________
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James Highsmith
[[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 8:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Half course in MBA Core
WOW, this thread is scary. So many approaches to minimize law and achieve
very little. Our MBA program has a three-unit course called 'Ethical and
Regulatory Environment of Business.' Thus law and ethics are integrated in
one course..focused on public law, not private law topics (as contracts).
Frankly, I think MBA students need to gain this private law knowledge, if
they don't have it, through a 'remedial' course. James
________________________________
From: "Connie Bagley" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 7:19:53 PM
Subject: Re: Half course in MBA Core
So far we've avoided that fate at Yale. I teach a course "Law for
Executives" in our executive MBA program in healthcare. The students take
that in addition to the course State & Society. I think tailoring the law
class to the executives to make explicit its relevance is important. Our
non-law colleagues might still try to kill the course but having strong
support from the students can help. Best, Connie
Constance E. Bagley
Professor in the Practice of Law and Management
YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
135 Prospect Street
P.O. Box 208200
New Haven, CT 06520-8200
203.432.8398 (voice)
203.436.0630 (fax)
[log in to unmask]
Physical Office: 46 Hillhouse, Room 1
New Haven CT 06511
Assistant: Paula Blanchette
203.432.6018
[log in to unmask]
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael O'Hara
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 2:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Half course in MBA Core
ALSBTALK:
What is "fraud"? Not that that question is in any way related to this
thread, I just like to ponder that question on occasion.
At UNO we have an MBA and an Executive MBA. While we proudly tout the EMBA
as unlike the vast majority of EMBA programs since UNO's is a genuine
academic degree rather than merely extra hours of golf practice while
answering softball questions about the importance of discounting future
values. That said, very many UNO students (including some of the brighter
EMBA students) distinguish the two degree programs by identifying one as the
"real MBA".
The EMBA curriculum was redesigned and a core subject area was allocated
merely one-half of a single 3 credit hour course. Surely you understand
that one must be responsive to competitive pressures! Within a couple of
years the responsible faculty of that core area requested another curriculum
redesign that built upon the first by completely eliminating that truncated
core area from the EMBA program.
Wanna guess who went to zero? The answer is below my signature box so that
you can't cheat.
Michael
Professor Michael J. O'Hara, J.D., Ph.D.
Finance, Banking, & Law Department
College of Business Administration
Mammel Hall 228
University of Nebraska at Omaha
6708 Pine Street
Omaha NE 68182-0048
[log in to unmask]
(402) 554 - 2823 voice fax (402) 554 - 2680
http://cba.unomaha.edu/faculty/mohara/web/ohara.htm
Accounting.
Save yourself a pile of misery. Take one of two approaches. First, accept
magnanimously the reduction in cost allocation and revenue generation
implicit in this curriculum redesign decision but do not alter one iota the
quantum of material delivered (i.e., law becomes the weed out course).
Sometimes the real world differs markedly from the ideal world, so sometimes
you have to go 100% faster. Or, second, just opt out now. That is,
respectfully thank the decision makers for their efforts at preserving as
much as was viewed by them as feasible given other constraints they were
obligated to accommodate, but assert that professionalism precludes you from
accepting their offer in good conscious. Don't be surprised if they keep
the 1/2 law course and stuff it with overtly easy "A" part-timers. You will
be much happier watching the second option as compared with personally doing
the second option.
|
