Talk:Toxic asset

Distinction from high-yield debt
Please do not redirect this back to high-yield debt. There is a major distinction between the two. High-yield debt can be legitimate and profitable investment. By definition, toxic assets cannot be, otherwise they wouldn't be called "toxic". Similarly, there is no discussion of the market freeze in the high-yield debt article, since the market freeze is not particularly relevant to a discussion of high-yield debt, but it is included here, since the freeze is central to the concept of toxic assets. 81.152.62.71 (talk) 08:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Good job, and very well explained. I noticed a few weeks ago that this title redirected to High-yield debt but didn't know enough about the subject to fix it. Thanks for taking on this task. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 02:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * yeah thanks for moving it back. it should not be redirected. however, the standard term for 'high yield debt' is 'junk bonds'. and some toxic assets were profitable. so perhaps there is more affinity there. Decora (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

History
I'm surprised the article only traces back the origin of 'toxic' to 2006. I read Richard Thomson's Apocalypse Roulette (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Apocalypse-Roulette-Richard-Thomson/dp/0330367595) a long time ago, and it mentions toxic assets and toxic waste in various places. Especially in chapter 4 about stripping CMO's into OTC derivates, the last strip, the Z strip was often described as toxic or a biohazard. It describes how the interest rate drop in 1991 changed the interest strips into toxic waste, as less interest income meant only the higher level strips got paid and the last few strips lost their value entirely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.72.40 (talk) 16:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)