Earlier I wrote:
> Wow, what reductionism. Japan's financial problems explained so neatly. It
> all makes sense. Let's go with it. Chip, what do you think? You are the
one
> always cautioning against such simplistic explanations. Just replace
yakuza
> with jews and you've got it.
>
> Yes, we are all doomed, doomed, doomed I tell you. Well I hope Carlyle
and
> Ripplewood come in and put the yakuza out of business. Yes, that is our
last
> best hope, no doubt.
>
> Charles Jannuzi
I want to make sure I'm not saying too much more (or less) than I intended. Hakki certainly didn't post the Stokholm piece claiming it was credible analysis. The question was what did I think of the analysis (which in short is, not a whole lot).
I wasn't addressing Hakki when I critiqued the article. Just wanted to make that clear so as to avoid any unnecessary dramatics from anyone trying to make the claim Hakki is 'overly reductionist' (I certainly don't think so).
Charles Jannuzi