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 (41646)3/5/2010 2:02:43 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
1) There is noting at all "bizarre" in asking you to try to EXPLAIN why you think that Glass Steagal did NOT have a beneficial impact and aided a 'reduction in the occurrence or severity of financial panics/failures/crashes.'

Especially since history clearly establishes that we had plenty, (& more frequent), financial panics and crashes PRIOR to G-S.

That mere fact doesn't "prove" anything, (could be a 'coincidence' after all...) but there is clearly noting at all bizarre in simply asking you WHY you think the exact opposite of what most financial historians do....

2) "2 - In direct terms its reasonable (but not certain) that a longer time between crashes (assuming the longer time doesn't result in a more severe crash)...." [Really BIG darn ASSUMPTION there!] "Yes a big assumption, but one made to be more favorable to your point. If you don't assume it, then a greater period of time between financial panics isn't necessarily favorable"

So what?

I never "assumed" either (although it might be merely logical to think that a longer time frame of relative stability might actually build-up imbalances long-term and all unawares... as folks get out of the habit of being cautious.... Then again there is always the 'butterfly effect' and 'criticality' to consider....)

But, no, I never stated either assumption... When you stated an assumption I merely pointed out that it was a damn BIG assumption. That's all I said.
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