Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (41833)	3/9/2010 5:51:32 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

The 'accepted conclusion' of history Hardly. (or at least the majority OPINION that has been held for the greatest number of years) Possibly but not certainly, and in any case truth is not determined by who's in the majority. "The majority thinks X", is not much reason to think X. because it separated the riskiest of banking activities from the safest 'traditional banking' deposit-taking activities. Thus making both types of banks more concentrated and possibly increasing their risk. Also note that Europe has mostly been without the wealthier more stable European countries have not had more problems with their banks than the US has had. if someone wants to argue the exact opposite side of the table they are free to.... Which is not what I was doing. But that will require facts and reasoning To establish an opinion as truth or likely truth, requires facts and reasoning. To establish the position is false or likely false (the exact opposite) would also require facts and reasoning. To point out that there isn't any good reason to think that G-S has been significant in reducing bank problems, isn't arguing the the position is false, it isn't arguing "the exact opposite", its pointing out one fact, and that fact is not about G-S's success or failure, but rather about the evidence for G-S success or failure.