A story from the NYT — just last week.

And how they got into the mess that was WAYYYYY undercapitalized mortgages ….

And this writer thinks that is a very good thing, indeed.

What are “credit default swaps“????

Because people often ask, here is a simple explanation.

Here is a report from CNBC that makes this argument.  (With some help from the Washington Examiner’s supersleuth, Tim Carney.)

There are conflicting opinions on this one, so I will post articles that reflect those viewpoints, for this week’s discussion — and thereafter.

Notwithstanding the protracted nature of the NTP v. RIM litigation, the ungodly expense, the out-of-control jury verdicts and the (inevitable?) settlement, the patent wars proceed apace.  Here are some links to just a few of the ongoing disputes.

(If you don’t like the “Star Wars” reference, the size of the companies involved has inspired some to characterize these suits as “Clash of the Titans.”

Or maybe James Bond???

Pick your movie metaphor of choice.)

First, there are the “patent trolls,” following in the footsteps of NTP????

Then there are the suits involving Apple, which almost deserve a class of their own:

Apple sues Samsung for the “slide to unlock” feature (among others).  And wins.  (Note the quote here:  “”I don’t know if $1 billion is hugely significant to Apple or Samsung,” [investment banker Christopher] Marlett said. “But there is a social cost here. As a company, you don’t want to be known as someone who steals from someone else. I am sure Samsung wants to be known as an innovator, especially since a lot of Asian companies have become known for copying the designs of innovators.”)

Really?  Well, check out today’s headline: “Samsung patent lawsuit would have left blind iPhone users in the dark.”  Samsung holds a German patent on the text-to-voice technology that Apple puts in its iPhone.  Samsung requested an injunction in a German court, and didn’t get it.  And the headlines come out overwhelmingly against Samsung.  So, I guess it’s OK if Apple uses someone else’s patented technology, but not OK if another company does it?  Or does it just prove that Apple does a better job with p.r.?

Google suing Apple…

Apple countersuing Google …

But wait!  There’re more!  The other big players are also involved ….

Yahoo sues Facebook …

(settles…)

i4i sues Microsoft and wins …

Google (Motorola Mobile) sues Microsoft …

Oh, hell, let’s just show ’em all……

And then there are those who blame the system….

Breaking:  Could some of the “big boys” finally be tiring of the game????

This article describes recent efforts to impose state sales taxes on online retailers.  As you might imagine, “bricks-and-mortar” retailers are complaining that their having to pay state sales tax, while many online retailers remain effectively exempt, is unfair.  There is also strong opposition to the bill, not least because the complexity of complying with 50 different jurisdictions’ sales tax laws can be confusing and oppressive.

Would it make more sense to have one flat tax paid by online sellers that have no geographic presence?  Are there alternative ways to fairly allocate tax responsibilities between online retailers and those with a physical presence?  Should online retailers not have to pay taxes at all?

I read this article this evening, and wanted to include it for future discussion about proposed immigration reform.