銀行不能在這階段承認自己錯誤，因為一認錯，法律責任就攬了上身，賠到甩褲時，銀行股價大倒退，盈利大倒退，根本擔當不起。
政府不能用公帑去救雷曼苦主，救得他們，樓宇負資產苦主又會上街求救，買股票蝕錢的又會要求政府賠。這個先例對負責任的政府而言絕不能開。
雷曼苦主的情況目前真正「慘過梁天來，苦過金葉菊」，美國財長保爾森救晒所有而獨不救雷曼(雖然雷曼自己錯晒)的決定，藤連瓜，瓜連藤，令千里外的香港市民也無辜失去一生他們以為極穩陣的投資。嚴格上銀行叫職員向客戶推銷迷債，犯了道義上的錯誤，君不見英美澳紐小市民舉牌向銀行追雷曼債，因為雷曼或其他迷債，在這些先進國家銀行內部被視為禁止向市民推銷的產品，因為這些產品複雜及風險高。但在香港，銀行職員為要交Quota或賺佣金，能不落嘴頭推銷嗎？管他是甚麼產品呢。
目前真正如粵語長片般，是社會的錯，除非在法律上能舉證銀行誤導市民，否則部分銀行攬了道義上的回購責任(不過不可能賠足本金)，已可能是最好的方法，但卻不是解決整個問題的一步。
You are absolutely correct. By supporting a lot (as much as possible)
One can ascertain that one will achieve some kind of relative response depending on how co incidental the responsive data is to the attention. If the optimal supportive motivation is relative to the foundation (wether valid or not) a supportive return will follow.
Accuracy is the issue. This is an hypothetical deduction (not quite as comprehensive as educational requirements are about here in North America) but by any of the individuals motive intelligence. Linguistics and vocabulary play the most important part of communication. Gaps of data in verbal communication only provide confusion.
To express anything at all one must work untill one can say what one means in its entirety otherwise one will express a peer groups distrust and desire to avoid the issue. The bottom line is to study practical, basic, fundemental, primary, ground level technicalities of domestic level to know for sure one is known for sure and this aspect goes far and beyond the experience of the
marriage relationship which is considered by most the most complete education for the poor. From your good friend Bruce K. Paxton
