I'm not sure why any of you would attempt to explain your position to Dmytri. His position is the one that needs full explanation. There is a near consensus among people in the field that this or some type of bailout is needed. One can argue which type would better which segment of the population all day. If Dymtri believes no bailout is needed the onus is on him to provide concrete reasoning why he feels this way. The explanations for why a bailout is necessary are available to anyone who isn't too lazy to do their own research. Dymtri apparently wants others to do this work for him. The reasonings behind opposition to the bailout are, as far as I have seen, all nonsense. It is up to Dymtri to argue why a bailout isn't needed, in explicit and concrete terms, not the nonsense about nutrition and retirement accounts being abstract data points and nothing else. His answers to date have been of the quality one would expect of a 14 year old. Or as someone else pointed out, a performance artist.
John Thornton