New Governor of the Bank of England

[Simon]

[QUOTE=amateur51;229057]

you betcha!

Thank you amateur. Just so that we all know, what in particular do you think that the G/Sachs connection might involve that could lead some to have the reservations that I mentioned?

Helpful hint: there is a clear two-part answer to this, that everyone aware of the circumstances would expect to see enumerated.

[amateur51]

[QUOTE=Simon;229213]

Thank you amateur. Just so that we all know, what in particular do you think that the G/Sachs connection might involve that could lead some to have the reservations that I mentioned?

Helpful hint: there is a clear two-part answer to this, that everyone aware of the circumstances would expect to see enumerated.

Sorry Simon I refuse to play this game with you until you expose yourself to the same rigour from others

[Simon]

[QUOTE=amateur51;229341]

Sorry Simon I refuse to play this game with you until you expose yourself to the same rigour from others

Not a game. You implied, with your clever "you betcha" that you knew what ts, and by extension what I, was referring to as regards the G/S connection.

I was a bit surprised that you would know about this, so I merely wondered if you would enlighten us.

I'm happy to give you a little longer, in case you need to, er, check a few facts first.

[french frank]

Why don't we just leave it by assuming that we're not in the banking industry ourselves but we've all read the Wiki Controversies paragraphs on Goldman Sachs?

[Chris Watson]

I would have thought (or at least hoped!) that as both Osborne and Balls think it's a good appointment maybe it actually is....

[teamsaint]

I would have thought (or at least hoped!) that as both Osborne and Balls think it's a good appointment maybe it actually is....

Suggests to me that the Labour front benches are well and truly in the pockets of the banks and the big money.
Check out the revolutionary credentials of one of their newbies....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Reeves

(Bank of England, HBOS etc ).

[amateur51]

[QUOTE=Simon;229367]

Not a game. You implied, with your clever "you betcha" that you knew what ts, and by extension what I, was referring to as regards the G/S connection.

I was a bit surprised that you would know about this, so I merely wondered if you would enlighten us.

I'm happy to give you a little longer, in case you need to, er, check a few facts first.

Whenever I challenge you similarly Simon you run & hide.

At least i'm telling you that I'm not playing but a reference to wiki or google should provide you with plenty of reasons for looking askiance at high-level Goldman Sachs employees

Edit: in msg #18 french frank has provided an excellent link

[Simon]

[QUOTE=amateur51;229535]

Whenever I challenge you similarly Simon you run & hide.

Me hide from anything you say? I think not.

[ahinton]

Suggests to me that the Labour front benches are well and truly in the pockets of the banks and the big money.
Check out the revolutionary credentials of one of their newbies....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Reeves

(Bank of England, HBOS etc ).

Sure, but isn't almost everyone into (and at almost the same time out of) the pockets of almost everyone else? That's how it all fails to work, n'est-ce pas?...

[ahinton]

[QUOTE=Simon;229568]

Me hide from anything you say? I think not.

But would you kindly care at least to try to answer the question?...

[amateur51]

[QUOTE=Simon;229568]

Me hide from anything you say? I think not.

Harsh I think, Simon

[Simon]

Suggests to me that the Labour front benches are well and truly in the pockets of the banks and the big money.
Check out the revolutionary credentials of one of their newbies....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Reeves

(Bank of England, HBOS etc ).

... as I said earlier this month on another thread when I made a similar point, ts. Integrity seems to disappear out of the window when power comes in at the door! You got it in one.

[Simon]

[QUOTE=ahinton;229570]

But would you kindly care at least to try to answer the question?...

What on earth are you talking about? It was me who asked the question!

[teamsaint]

Sure, but isn't almost everyone into (and at almost the same time out of) the pockets of almost everyone else? That's how it all fails to work, n'est-ce pas?...

probably, yes. But I think it's true to say that an awful lot of people are still labouring under the misapprehension that labour somehow represent "The people", and stand against the power of big finance.It would be good for us all if we at least realised that all the big parties are playing the same game.

[ahinton]

probably, yes. But I think it's true to say that an awful lot of people are still labouring under the misapprehension that labour somehow represent "The people", and stand against the power of big finance.It would be good for us all if we at least realised that all the big parties are playing the same game.

Indeed - though not only the big parties but also the small parties and everyone else happen to be playing the same game, even if the smaller parties and people are being made by the larger ones to play it as though someone else's puppets; standing against the power of big finance can sometimes actually work as far as it can go, but those who contrive to do it successfully are usually already in the same kind of boat as those large financial organisations themselves only on an obviously smaller scale, so one might well question what material difference it could possibly make to anything in the greater scheme of things.