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.

Technology Stocks : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (81892)	11/24/1998 1:17:00 AM
From: BGR	Respond to of 176387

CTC, Then your criticism is a socio-political one and not a financial one. I agree with the socio-political criticism but am distrubed when people want to use that to lend credence to unfounded allegations about S.E. Asian economies. The two are independent: tomorrow S.E. Asia can adopt Western banking prctises while leaving control in the same hands as before (which has happened to many IMF loan recipients in the past), or the political conditions may change while leaving business practises intact. I believe that the later option to be maximally beneficial to the S.E. Asian people, but not necessarily to the lenders. So I am not sure whether that would cause the lenders to withdraw allegations of crony capitalism. In short, nobody seemed to care about S.E. Asia's troubled political landscape in the solvent past. In hard times, lenders are calling for financial reforms using the call for political reforms as a front. I find this subterfuge disgusting. Aside, to better understand the basis of your negative criticism of currency arbitrage by S.E. Asian banks - based of your old-fashioned view that banks exist for the sole purpose of providing liquidity to legitimate businesses - I provided an example where the US Treasury had similarly deviated from that (extremely narrow, IMO) definition. It seems to me that you now feel that all deviations are not created equal and the contrast is in the purpose behind the action. I agree with that stance, but being a staunch non-believer in moral absolutes, I refuse to analyze purposes of actions in a social vacuum. This, perhaps, is where our philosophies ultimately diverge. -Apratim.