You give a great example of what I just said. What's the evidence for your claim? And, how can a person with traditional American values even write something like that without even bothering to be specific?
Goldman Sachs Executives Gifted With Public Purpose
Open your eyes pal.
Well, I am asking for help. It would help a great deal if you stayed on course of the discussion. Someone claimed that "The problems with the economy go back to the incestuous relationships..." You give me a link to an article that lists Golmand Sacks alumni that worked in government. That article does not even try to link those people with economy. How do those people cause problems with the economy and which problems?
You don't say a word on that.
Like some other FReepers, you commit a logical fallacy called spurious correlation, wherein after seeing A and B together one concludes that A causes B.
That it is a fallacy is easy to see from the following example: 99.999% of all people that had an auto accident had also eaten cucumbers at least once in their lives. It would be silly, of course, to conclude that eating cucumbers makes you accident-prone.
A more close example to what we are discussing is the fact that throughout the history of our country, about 20% of all Supreme Court Justices are graduates of Harvard Law School. Is there an "incestuous relationship" between Harvard Law and the Supreme Court? Of course not, and nobody has ever alleged that silliness. Has Harvard Law, by supplying for centuries great many Supreme Court Justices created "problems" in this country? Of course not; it would be equally silly to say that: Harvard Law faculty have only recently become liberal loons.
So why are there so many Harvard Law alumni among the Supreme Court Justices? The answer is obvious: Harvard Law has for centuries been one of the best law schools, and it is unsurprising that the best rise to the top.
Guess what? Goldman is hated on Wall Street for attracting and keeping the best and the brightest. It is little wonder that, when president seek someone to serve them, they look for the best and the brightest, and often find them in Goldman Sacks.
It is really funny that the link you view as damning supports what I just said and speaks against your conspiracy theory: the article lists Goldman alumni who were conservative and worked for Bush as well as those that were liberal loons and worked for Clinton.
Believing in conspiracies is the easiest road to take. It's too cold today? This can be explained by physics and tons of atmospheric data, but that's a hard road to take. It's so much easier to conclude: Martians conspired to create that weather.
Take the high road, my friend.
Well, I am asking for help. It would help a great deal if you stayed on course of the discussion. Someone claimed that "The problems with the economy go back to the incestuous relationships..." You give me a link to an article that lists Golmand Sacks alumni that worked in government. That article does not even try to link those people with economy. How do those people cause problems with the economy and which problems?
You don't say a word on that.
Like some other FReepers, you commit a logical fallacy called spurious correlation, wherein after seeing A and B together one concludes that A causes B.
That it is a fallacy is easy to see from the following example: 99.999% of all people that had an auto accident had also eaten cucumbers at least once in their lives. It would be silly, of course, to conclude that eating cucumbers makes you accident-prone.
A more close example to what we are discussing is the fact that throughout the history of our country, about 20% of all Supreme Court Justices are graduates of Harvard Law School. Is there an "incestuous relationship" between Harvard Law and the Supreme Court? Of course not, and nobody has ever alleged that silliness. Has Harvard Law, by supplying for centuries great many Supreme Court Justices created "problems" in this country? Of course not; it would be equally silly to say that: Harvard Law faculty have only recently become liberal loons.
So why are there so many Harvard Law alumni among the Supreme Court Justices? The answer is obvious: Harvard Law has for centuries been one of the best law schools, and it is unsurprising that the best rise to the top.
Guess what? Goldman is hated on Wall Street for attracting and keeping the best and the brightest. It is little wonder that, when president seek someone to serve them, they look for the best and the brightest, and often find them in Goldman Sacks.
It is really funny that the link you view as damning supports what I just said and speaks against your conspiracy theory: the article lists Goldman alumni who were conservative and worked for Bush as well as those that were liberal loons and worked for Clinton.
Believing in conspiracies is the easiest road to take. It's too cold today? This can be explained by physics and tons of atmospheric data, but that's a hard road to take. It's so much easier to conclude: Martians conspired to create that weather.
Take the high road, my friend.