libertango: (Default)
Hal ([personal profile] libertango) wrote2009-05-07 08:55 am

Deep thought

Doesn't "too big to fail" mean, "The Dept. of Justice Antitrust Division should break these guys up -- stat."?



{and isn't it cute they've decided to use the typeface from Law & Order?}

[identity profile] jonathankorman.livejournal.com 2009-05-07 04:18 pm (UTC)(link)
I've been thinking much the same thing lately.

[identity profile] n6tqs.livejournal.com 2009-05-07 05:00 pm (UTC)(link)
I've been saying this for a while.

[identity profile] browngirl.livejournal.com 2009-05-07 05:32 pm (UTC)(link)
Surfing by... you're about the hundredth person I've seen express this sentiment, and for saying it so clearly and succinctly I award you Internet Chocolate.

[identity profile] holyoutlaw.livejournal.com 2009-05-07 06:02 pm (UTC)(link)
I'll admit to this not having occurred to me before.

"We're all Keynesians now"

[identity profile] farmgirl1146.livejournal.com 2009-05-07 07:03 pm (UTC)(link)
I have been saying this for a while (mostly in my own living room). A return to the Trust Busters is needed before we need to call the Ghost Busters for our economy. All this emphasis on banking and stocks is pure Milton Friedman and The Chicago School of Economics. (To clarify what I just said, I clipped this from Wikipedia: "The school rejected Keynesianism in favor of monetarism until the 1980s, when it turned to rational expectations. It has affected the field of finance by the development of the efficient market hypothesis. In terms of methodology the stress is on "positive economics" – that is, empirically based studies using statistics to prove theory.")

[identity profile] kateyule.livejournal.com 2009-05-08 03:40 pm (UTC)(link)
Yup. Too big to fail is-- too big.