4 ms·

No one say bad, they just say these people invoke turmoil and crisis for their own profit. Is it good or bad or neutral, it’s your own judgement.

oldcynic 9y ago
He hardly invoked turmoil. Joining the ERM invoked turmoil. It was a silly idea and the valuation being wrong wasn't exactly a minority view. We should be criticising and remembering the idiocy of Norman Lamont rather than of George Soros for profiting from that idiocy. Now I don't know enough about the rest of Soros' career to have a view of whether he's good or bad. The infamous ERM short is not a smoking gun here.
- abraae 9y ago
  Exactly. I was living in the UK at the time and it remains the only time I've ever made any money playing forex. It was obvious to increasingly.. everyone .. that the Bank was playing chicken with the markets. Soros was on the winning side.
dao- 9y ago
What are "these people" though? Successful investors? The "East Coast establishment"? Jewish investors? I believe the point your parent post was making is that these distinctions are bogus. The entire investment business (and not only that) is amoral. This is unfortunately inherent to Capitalism.
- Slansitartop 9y ago
  > The entire investment business (and not only that) is amoral. Guns are amoral too, but we still expect people to use them morally.
  - dao- 9y ago
    There are in fact laws for that. Soros' investments were perfectly legal from what I know. We could change this if we wanted to, Capitalism is a man-made system after all. Demonizing successful players is just pointless.
    - Slansitartop 9y ago
      You're making the mistake of equating the law with morality. Greatly simplified, the a law is just an attempt to roughly codify some moral principles and give them some teeth. We still expect people to act morally, even in the absence of laws to force them to do so.
      - dao- 9y ago
        > You're making the mistake of equating the law with morality. Greatly simplified, the a law is just an attempt to roughly codify some moral principles and give them some teeth. I didn't mean to equate them and I don't think I did. I was implicitly making the same connection that you just made explicitly. > We still expect people to act morally, even in the absence of laws force them to do so. Who really expects investors to act morally rather than doing whatever's legal? Heck, who expects Facebook to prioritize morals over profits? Don't people who have these expectations deeply misunderstand how today's economic system works?
        Slansitartop 9y ago
        > Who really expects investors to act morally rather than doing whatever's legal? Heck, who expects Facebook to prioritize morals over profits? Don't people who have these expectations deeply misunderstand how today's economic system works? I expect (as in bound in duty or obligated) them to. However, I expect (as in predict) they will not.
        marnett 9y ago
        Are you suggesting we stop 'hoping' (I don't hope investors act morally, I expect the regulatory apparatus to force them to, or penalize accordingly) altogether? Sure, I hope HSBC won't launder money for Mexican Cartels. And when they do, I hope that some world government decides to toss the executives in jail and fine the company out of existence. And yes, when the settlement is just a slap-on-the-wrist-fine, a low VP getting canned, and the execs sitting pretty I hope for a return in the guillotine. And they all hope that I get fed up with hoping and become hopeless. Is that what you hope as well?
linkmotif 9y ago
Turmoil and crisis is usually the result of above described idiocy and people who “take advantage” of turmoil and crisis are intelligent.

oldcynic 9y ago

He hardly invoked turmoil. Joining the ERM invoked turmoil. It was a silly idea and the valuation being wrong wasn't exactly a minority view. We should be criticising and remembering the idiocy of Norman Lamont rather than of George Soros for profiting from that idiocy. Now I don't know enough about the rest of Soros' career to have a view of whether he's good or bad. The infamous ERM short is not a smoking gun here.

abraae 9y ago
Exactly. I was living in the UK at the time and it remains the only time I've ever made any money playing forex. It was obvious to increasingly.. everyone .. that the Bank was playing chicken with the markets. Soros was on the winning side.

dao- 9y ago

What are "these people" though? Successful investors? The "East Coast establishment"? Jewish investors? I believe the point your parent post was making is that these distinctions are bogus. The entire investment business (and not only that) is amoral. This is unfortunately inherent to Capitalism.

Slansitartop 9y ago
> The entire investment business (and not only that) is amoral. Guns are amoral too, but we still expect people to use them morally.
- dao- 9y ago
  There are in fact laws for that. Soros' investments were perfectly legal from what I know. We could change this if we wanted to, Capitalism is a man-made system after all. Demonizing successful players is just pointless.
  - Slansitartop 9y ago
    You're making the mistake of equating the law with morality. Greatly simplified, the a law is just an attempt to roughly codify some moral principles and give them some teeth. We still expect people to act morally, even in the absence of laws to force them to do so.
    - dao- 9y ago
      > You're making the mistake of equating the law with morality. Greatly simplified, the a law is just an attempt to roughly codify some moral principles and give them some teeth. I didn't mean to equate them and I don't think I did. I was implicitly making the same connection that you just made explicitly. > We still expect people to act morally, even in the absence of laws force them to do so. Who really expects investors to act morally rather than doing whatever's legal? Heck, who expects Facebook to prioritize morals over profits? Don't people who have these expectations deeply misunderstand how today's economic system works?
      - Slansitartop 9y ago
        > Who really expects investors to act morally rather than doing whatever's legal? Heck, who expects Facebook to prioritize morals over profits? Don't people who have these expectations deeply misunderstand how today's economic system works? I expect (as in bound in duty or obligated) them to. However, I expect (as in predict) they will not.
      - marnett 9y ago
        Are you suggesting we stop 'hoping' (I don't hope investors act morally, I expect the regulatory apparatus to force them to, or penalize accordingly) altogether? Sure, I hope HSBC won't launder money for Mexican Cartels. And when they do, I hope that some world government decides to toss the executives in jail and fine the company out of existence. And yes, when the settlement is just a slap-on-the-wrist-fine, a low VP getting canned, and the execs sitting pretty I hope for a return in the guillotine. And they all hope that I get fed up with hoping and become hopeless. Is that what you hope as well?

linkmotif 9y ago

Turmoil and crisis is usually the result of above described idiocy and people who “take advantage” of turmoil and crisis are intelligent.