"run away run away!"

[dubdobdee]

Awesome closing para to today's editorial in cityAM*: “It would be tempting to pin all our the blame on the City, just as our 14th century ancestors held witches, foreigner** or leppers responsible***. That would be a terrible mistake. Bankers behaved stupidly, but they were merely the conduit for flawed economic policies. As the anger builds, we mustn’t lose our faith in capitalism.”

*The financial freesheet -- it was left on the bus i caught home after swimmin with v!ck
**all typos in the original!
**ie for the BLACK DEATH, which is the not-at-all panicky comparison the editorial kicks off with

Comments

city am appears to using the following defence:

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

she saw me buying mixed derivates

it wasn't me

saw me leveraging my markets

it wasn't me

saw the debts getting larger

it wasn't me

she even caught me on camera

etcetcetc

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Fly all is unknown!

What economic policies precisely are City AM referring to, other than "letting us do anything we want"?

[boyofbadgers.livejournal.com]

That one, and that one alone. I think we are going to see quite a lot of this sort of 'It's not our fault, the government said it was OK' over the next few days and weeks.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

So the government are essentially the owners of a big house, the banks are their teenage offspring, the economic policy is to go away on an anniversary mini-break, and mixed derivatives are the open Facebook invite?

[the-roofdog.livejournal.com]

You forgot "letting us do anything we want in sekrit".

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

roughly speaking i think the editorial is deploring the greenspan bailout of the dotcom bubble-burst: which was of course at the time considered amazing foresightful genius and the essence of capitalism's self-management

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

I forget the details of this bailout - wasn't it the post-9/11 thing?

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

actually it cites the "ultra-expansionary policies" after the dotcom bust AND 9/11

Re: city am appears to using the following defence:

[ms-bracken.livejournal.com]

how could i expect that they would have to bail out AIG

etcetc

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Except the govt had become only nominally in charge - the City did a v good job of scaring the govt into OKing light-touch regulation with the threat that the UK's economic competitiveness would suffer if the industry wasn't allowed to do what it wanted.

maybe like the teenage child of divorced parents stamping her foot and shouting "but I will GO AND LIVE WITH DAD if you don't let me have my party and buy me a pony too"