RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceIn the wake of the Bush administration's announced $700 billion bailout of the banking industry - which has already enhanced the banking executives' personal stock portfolios by multiple millions - we must ask who got the bankers into the deep doo-doo ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
Actually, Prof. Reinhardt, I think you meant to say that the bankers' body temperature drops to "absolute zero." Kelvin is simply a unit, just like Celsius, meter, or Volt. But thanks for all of the econ. information that I could never hope to understand without your help!
Absolute zero is also -273 degrees Celsius, not Fahrenheit. It's also almost impossible to achieve and not biologically relevant, which takes away from the effectiveness of the metaphor.
i see no moral obligation to exempt the powerful, the wealthy, and the
heedlessly arrogant from the consequences of their stupidity. but i
think we damn well better regulate them closely and well enough,
starting the day before yesterday, so that they dont run the economy
into a brick wall. frankly, the people in the white house have zero
experience in restraining ANYONE at ANYTHING...and theyve very obviously
proven over and over again that theyre rather slow at picking up the pieces.
is this article sarcastic?
if so, this was an incredibly unclear opinion...
if it is sincere, and you think "we" have an obligation to bail out i-banks, i'm confused as to why?
How does a teen-ager learn not to go out in the cold unless they get the flu once?
isn't it typically the role of government to monitor negative externalities (an econ term) and create or support a system that allocates the true cost efficiently?
I don't want the toxic waste of a failed i-banking firm that was propagating a dangerous financial charade.
To "don't get it" and "celticfury," this article is satirizing how the bailout plan seems unfairly targeted at saving wall street from ruins, as opposed to, say, the people facing foreclosure.
But I agree that Reinhardt overdid the sarcasm.