3 ms·
It is probably best to avoid political commentary on HN but since you provided (one possible) political interpretation of these events which I am convinced is a
by wfn 7y ago
It is probably best to avoid political commentary on HN but since you provided (one possible) political interpretation of these events which I am convinced is absolutely incorrect, I feel compelled to (merely - nothing more) note for others that it is just one possible interpretation; and that calling it the "consensus" is quite a stretch; even when one's scope is restricted to employees (past and present) within BoL. (I grant that yours is one possible narrative, of course). I will add a couple of notes here and will then suggest not to pursue the matter further, since its nature is both speculative and political. :)
I will only ask you to consider --
> Next month there is going to happen the elections for the parliament of the EU, and a few weeks after a presidential election. In 2020 MP elections are going to happen.
Consider observing how investigations will continue after the elections above (need to wait for that). (2020 elections... may as well say that everything is done as a function of the four year election cycle in that case, but that would be a bit moot, I would think). Also consider that the recession / VILIBOR etc. investigation conclusion dates were pushed ahead past the target May 2019 election dates (which had been agreed by a parliamentary vote back in 2018, voted for by opposition as well, including their main presidential candidate (she hadn't decided to go ahead with her candidacy back then), by the way) - and this push-ahead was an idea suggested and advocated by the chairman of the commission. P.S. besides VSD there is also FNTT, and FNTT has a pretty different (and rather bleak) outlook on these matters.
- tasubotadas 7y agoWhy should one avoid political commentary on HN? It's FULL of it. >"consensus" is quite a stretch Well, for everybody that's not related to LŽVS. >which I am convinced is absolutely incorrect You forgot to share the things why do you think that's incorrect.
- wfn 7y ago> Well, for everybody that's not related to LŽVS. That is not true: there are people in BoL who do not share your view at all. How do you think the internal VILBOR report came about and resurfaced initially (BoL was later forced to publish it)? Unfortunately, we will have to be patient until the names and views of the people become public, if it comes to that. I hope it does, but there is also backlash and retribution for them awaiting from within BoL. I know this all sounds speculative, so the only thing I can ask is some patience. > You forgot to share the things why do you think that's incorrect. I can expand, but I do not think this is the place to do so. I also do not think I am capable of currently convincing you otherwise; I hope in time we shall see. I'll consider adding more details later. But my purpose in replying to you was to merely communicate that there is no definite consensus at all.
- wfn 7y agoFollowing up on your prompt: people and documents are resurfacing (and will continue to do so in the future), but for starters (these are internal LB reports and people, calling VILIBOR a cartel (possibly too strong a word)): https://www.15min.lt/verslas/naujiena/finansai/viena-nuomone-lietuvos-bankas-slepe-vilibor-vadino-iteisintu-karteliu-662-1136402 https://www.15min.lt/verslas/naujiena/finansai/viena-nuomone...