This is an interesting question: do they solve the moral hazard and adverse selection problem as well as banks do?
一个有意思的问题出现了,他们可以向银行那样,处理好道德风险以及逆向选择问题吗
I've got three main reasons, they're: adverse selection, moral hazard, and liquidity.
我总结出三个主要原因,分别是,逆向选择,道德风险,及流动性
If the doctor goes in and yanks the organs from the healthy patient who came in for a checkup to save five lives, there would be adverse effects in the long run.
如果那位医生,偷摘走那位来体检的,健康人的器官,去挽救另外五人,这事从长远来看,会有负面影响。
He was dealing also with the moral hazard and adverse selection problem.
他当时也视图解决道德风险,以及逆向选择的问题
You have to limit your exposure to risky asset classes to a level that allows you to sustain those positions even in the face of terribly adverse market conditions.
你必须把手中持有的风险资产,限制在一个合适的比例水平,并且即使到了最差的市场环境下,你依旧能够承受这些风险资产
As a result, people invest in banks -the stock of banks -because they understand that these people have a long-term relationship with business and they are immune from the adverse selection.
结果呢,人们就会投资于银行,即购买银行的股票,因为他们知道,银行家和企业界保持着长期的关系,他们可以免受逆向选择之害
The adverse selection problem, when it comes to borrowers--people who are trying to borrow money -is that if you become a lender -let's say, if you -not talking about becoming a lender.
逆向选择的问题,对于借款方,即希望借到钱的人而言,假如你是贷款方,比方说,如果你...,还是换个说法吧
What do I mean by adverse selection?
逆向选择是什么意思呢
I wanted to mention in this context, because I'm emphasizing how banks help solve the adverse selection and moral hazard problem -I wanted to mention briefly here also the rating agencies, which fulfill some of these functions.
我早就想在这段内容里讲讲这事了,因为我一直强调,银行是如何帮助解决逆向选择,以及道德风险问题的...,我还一直想在这里简要的提下,本应履行这些职能的那些信用评级机构
应用推荐