Last week we had to guests on shabbat lunch - a wholesale distributor (wh) and a financial analyst (fa).
B'H, no one was allergic to the first course, the salads also went with moderate success, and even cholent didn't disappoint.
Naturally, the conversation drifted to the economy. And all the money flushed down the toilet (the process euphemistically called 'the bailout'). I think I mentioned that some of these companies should file for bankruptcy. FA agreed, WH started to protest saying that it would be unfair to millions of people who'd become unemployed if a company like GM would go bankrupt.
FA politely tried to explain the process of how a corporation files for bankruptcy. WH again expressed his concern for the working class. FA politely pointed out that a big corporation like GM should not be confused with a local bakery. Local bakery goes out of business - people lose jobs; GM files for bankruptcy - restructuring happens, most people keep their jobs.
WH: But CNN says that if GM would go bankrupt millions of people would lose their jobs.
Here even I couldn't take it and politely pointed out to WH that just because CNN reports something, that something does not become absolute or even vague truth.
The conversation became a bit heated ( and unshabosdik) after that. Neither FA, a subject matter expert, nor I, an observer who pointed out that just because a story is reported doesn't make the story true, can stand in a way of a CNN chasid's economics.
In the end we agreed to disagree. And five days later I still wonder why anyone still perceives CNN as a source of useful information.
Zooey update: Two years
5 days ago