Valid points, all... Just to get the digression out of the way, I want to assure you that my money is most certainly at risk since a lion's share of my compensation is reinvested (and is governed by a clawback). I think you misunderstood my statement. I was responding to Lucrum's suggestion that Mr Santelli is somehow the world's leading expert in all things economic. In fact, I have no issue with his political views and agree with some of what he says. My problem is solely with the idea that just because he's on TV and comes across as forceful, his views are somehow more informed and interesting than other people's. This is my general stance, which I practice, regardless of the person's political affiliations. For instance, there's many threads where I express similar sentiment towards Taleb (as well as others). As to why Mr Santelli's background matters. In my experience, a person's past record is a useful guide to whether they're actually a person of substance, knowledge and wisdom, rather than just appearing to be this way. As to a discussion of the political views expressed, if you would like me to, I would be happy to respond more specifically.
Martin, I think you would fit in very nicely down here. You have perfected the art of not answering the question well. That's how threads down here get 100 pages long when they really only need to be one page. You get 100 pages of guys not answering questions. I have a soft spot for Brits Martin. Albeit mostly British actresses which I assume you don't qualify. But I'll overlook that for the time being. LOL. I don't think Lucrum or anyone else down here agrees with someone just because they are loud and shouting. Chris Matthews seems to shout a lot. James Cramer shouts a lot. Hell our President shouts a lot. I have a funny feeling that those who agree with the Rickster are really agreeing to his point of view, not his inflection points. I could be wrong of course. So the shouting aside and the background aside, what exactly are you disagreeing with Rick about? Part of having a debate means both parties have to actually debate. LOL. Your argument about Rick's background is irrelevant because we don't know who you are and quite frankly, we don't really know Rick either. We can pretend we know him because he is on TV every day. And we can pretend to know him reading a one paragraph synopsis on his life. But we don't really "know" him. So that debate will never go anywhere because it will come down to subjective interpretation and built in prejudices that we have for such person. So let's debate the issue. Again I will ask, what "specifically" are you disagreeing with Rick about? And yes Martin, just pretend for the time being that I'm really big into details. I don't want to have to "guess" what you really think. I truly believe that three times is a charm. Don't disappoint me.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I attempted to engage the Ghoul in a similar discussion regarding monetary policy. I realized how pointless that effort was, and I hope you don't go through something similarly. It is quite obvious he has made a good deal of dough on easy monetary policy (good for him), and as a result, holds a special place in his heart for Keynesians the world over. I am very interested in the two of you discussing this topic. I think the ball is in your court, Martin. What, specifically, do you disagree with in Rick's argument in the original post video?
I am back... I am sorry that I disappeared, but I had family matters that required my attention. I am now back and happy to conclude our conversation, if you so desire.