Why not? You let it slide in so many other threads. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 17:27:43 +0000 Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Kashkari goes rogue on Wall Street reform
Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [email protected] michaelperelman.wordpress.com From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert Naiman Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 6:47 AM To: Progressive Economics <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Kashkari goes rogue on Wall Street reform Oh, cool. I'm glad we're having an elevated debate. If you have an explanation for why reducing the size of the biggest banks so they are not "too big to fail" is not a solution to the problem of "too big to fail banks," why don't you tell us what that explanation is? Surely, if you are so smart, you are equal to this task. Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [email protected] (202) 448-2898 x1 On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Ian Murray <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 17, 2016, at 5:50 AM, Robert Naiman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Who said it was a "final solution"? You made that up. You're a fine one to > talk about arrogance. You should give workshops. > > > =========== You really want to hair split a dubious [non]difference regarding once-and-for-all and final solution. Banking is not a math problem. Oh and fuck you. We do not need that kind of aggression here. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
