SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (41723)3/9/2010 12:24:42 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
After all that lengthy verbiage I still don't undersatnd what you are saying.

My point (as simple as possible): The 'accepted conclusion' of history, (or at least the majority OPINION that has been held for the greatest number of years), is that G-S was successful in reducing the occurrence of financial collapses, in *reducing* the rate of occurrence below what it had previously been, because it separated the riskiest of banking activities from the safest 'traditional banking' deposit-taking activities.

And that, if someone wants to argue the exact opposite side of the table they are free to....

But that will require facts and reasoning (not just emotions or suppositions) to bring a convincing argument that over-turns the weight of the evidence that seems to establish a clearly *lower* financial contagion rate and lower systemic risk rate during the G-S covered period of time.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News