Suchergebnisse

In this Article, I argue that there are significant gaps in the federal system for resolving financial distress in a financial firm even after passage of the Dodd-Frank bill. These gaps represent potential sources of systemic risk—that is, risk to the financial system as a whole. They must be fixed. But I should make clear at the outset that I do not argue that these gaps must be filled with the Bankruptcy Code. Rather, the point is that the various systems for resolving financial distress among financial firms must be integrated so that the result of financial distress is clear and predictable. Integrating all under the Bankruptcy Code is an option, but not the only way to achieve such clarity. The first Part of this Article sketches the several existing systems for resolving financial distress in financial firms, including the new resolution authority created by the Dodd-Frank Act. By my count, there are at least six systems at work here, not counting state-by-state variations. Part II examines the coverage of these systems and the uncertainty created by the interaction of the same. For example, under current law, a large hedge fund might be "resolved" under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, or it might not be. The decision rests with the systemic risk counsel. Therefore, the fund's counterparties will be unable to determine ahead of time which set of rules is incorporated into their contracts with the hedge fund. Undoubtedly, both will be priced with a further discount for the uncertainty. That is unlikely to be the optimal solution. Part III of the Article then considers the ways in which the divide between finance and bankruptcy could be narrowed, if not eliminated. Ultimately, I doubt the plausibility of solving these issues with some grand solution like drafting a unified bankruptcy law. The political realities involved in getting a major piece of legislation through Congress are so daunting nowadays that it is something of a wonder that even Dodd-Frank, with all its limitations, passed. A unified system ...

The emergence in the 1990s of a "new" institutionalism in historical writing on the early American republic built on the realization by a small cohort of mostly younger historians that the regnant social and cultural paradigm that had dominated history departments since the 1960s had become unduly confining—a relic, as it were, of a very different age. This shift in historical thinking was energized by a desire to make the history of the United States comprehensible for a generation for whom the passions of the 1960s had been supplanted by a new constellation of concerns. The media, public finance, and the military are but three of many topics that, though of obvious contemporary relevance, were largely ignored by historians of the early republic until quite recently. In turning to such topics, the new-institutional historians have sought to write a history of early America that is more realistic, less sentimental, and more open to international comparisons than the history they remember learning in school or encountered in most of the textbooks taught in introductory college survey courses.

Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- Sc.mil. 66 m

par Monsieur Le Baron De Bielfeld ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- Pol.g. 86-1

par Monsieur Le Baron De Bielfeld ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- Pol.g. 86-2

par Monsieur le Baron de Bielfeld ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- 4 Pol.g. 27-1

par Monsieur le Baron de Bielfeld ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- 4 Pol.g. 27 a-2

par Monsieur le Baron de Bielfeld ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- 4 Pol.g. 27 a-1

par Monsieur le Baron de Bielfeld ; Volltext // Exemplar mit der Signatur: München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek -- 4 Pol.g. 27-2

Books that matter. ; Includes bibliography. ; Mode of access: Internet.

This paper discusses the nature of entrepreneurship and its relation to innovation along a cycle in which exploration and exploration follow upon each other. We place the roles of entrepreneurship in innovation policy within this cycle of innovation. Different types of innovation along the cycle of innovation are realized with different forms of entrepreneurship, which are constrained or enabled by different legal institutions. One of the key roles of governments is to design, change or destruct institutions in order to improve societal welfare. The question is what governments should do in the context of innovation policy. Here, social scientists can make a contribution by providing insight into what entrepreneurship and innovation is (theories about these phenomena), and how institutions affect them in reality (empirical evidence about their effects). This requires social scientists to be engaged scholars and to provide new policy options as an honest broker between the academic world and the policy world. The key question of this paper is: How can policy best enable innovation based entrepreneurship? The answer is derived from looking at both theoretical tenets and empirical evidence using an institutional design perspective, which aims at providing arguments for the design, change and/or destruction of institutions, given the goals of the governments. We provide an overview of some (empirically tests of) institutions that enable or restrain particular types of entrepreneurship. Examples of these institutions are intellectual property rights and the Small Business Innovation Research program, employment protection, and non-compete covenants.

Institutions-organizations and institutions-rules (norms), levels of institutionalization and its influence on political development of political system, constitutions and constitutional interpretation, structural-functional characteristic of the main political institutions (parties, party and electoral systems, legislatures and executive power, public administration, interest groups, local governance, judicial and political communication institutions), variuos types, models of these institutions and activity, interaction between political institutions and their influence on real politics, institutional engineering, institutionalization of the political institutions, democratization and democratic consolidation processes – all these questions were discussed in this methodical book.

Institutions-organizations and institutions-rules (norms), levels of institutionalization and its influence on political development of political system, constitutions and constitutional interpretation, structural-functional characteristic of the main political institutions (parties, party and electoral systems, legislatures and executive power, public administration, interest groups, local governance, judicial and political communication institutions), variuos types, models of these institutions and activity, interaction between political institutions and their influence on real politics, institutional engineering, institutionalization of the political institutions, democratization and democratic consolidation processes – all these questions were discussed in this methodical book.

Institutions-organizations and institutions-rules (norms), levels of institutionalization and its influence on political development of political system, constitutions and constitutional interpretation, structural-functional characteristic of the main political institutions (parties, party and electoral systems, legislatures and executive power, public administration, interest groups, local governance, judicial and political communication institutions), variuos types, models of these institutions and activity, interaction between political institutions and their influence on real politics, institutional engineering, institutionalization of the political institutions, democratization and democratic consolidation processes – all these questions were discussed in this methodical book.

Includes bibliographical references. ; v. 1. Jusqu'en 1789 -- v. 2. Depuis 1789. ; Mode of access: Internet.