<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Highlights From the Barron&#8217;s Interview with Jeremy Grantham</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/10/11/highlights-from-the-barrons-interview-with-jeremy-grantham/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/10/11/highlights-from-the-barrons-interview-with-jeremy-grantham/</link>
	<description>A personal finance blog dedicated to discussing such topics as budgeting, asset allocation, 401K, IRA, cash flow, insurance, financial planning, portfolio management, and other areas in personal finance.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:32:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gail Vaz-Oxlade</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/10/11/highlights-from-the-barrons-interview-with-jeremy-grantham/comment-page-1/#comment-373133</link>
		<dc:creator>Gail Vaz-Oxlade</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:13:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/?p=2880#comment-373133</guid>
		<description>I gave a talk to a bunch of financial people earlier this year and during my presentation a lender asked me this question:
&quot;If a good client comes in, and wants to borrow money, and you know it&#039;s to pay off gambling debt, should you still lend the money?&quot;
I laughed first, and then I realized that this was a real dilemma ... at least for the lender who was trying to balance keeping the good customer with a sound lending decision. 
The reality is that sound business practices went out the window a while back in the name of &quot;making the quarter.&quot; Short term gains have now translated into long-term pain. 
Once upon a time, we had to prove we had a good reason to borrow money. Then we turned money into a commodity. Money IS NOT a commodity. It is a medium of exchange.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I gave a talk to a bunch of financial people earlier this year and during my presentation a lender asked me this question:<br />
&#8220;If a good client comes in, and wants to borrow money, and you know it&#8217;s to pay off gambling debt, should you still lend the money?&#8221;<br />
I laughed first, and then I realized that this was a real dilemma &#8230; at least for the lender who was trying to balance keeping the good customer with a sound lending decision.<br />
The reality is that sound business practices went out the window a while back in the name of &#8220;making the quarter.&#8221; Short term gains have now translated into long-term pain.<br />
Once upon a time, we had to prove we had a good reason to borrow money. Then we turned money into a commodity. Money IS NOT a commodity. It is a medium of exchange.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim</title>
		<link>http://allfinancialmatters.com/2008/10/11/highlights-from-the-barrons-interview-with-jeremy-grantham/comment-page-1/#comment-368722</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 21:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://allfinancialmatters.com/?p=2880#comment-368722</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think it was necessarily because they were too into making money.  I believe everyone saw it coming, however, when they noticed it was going to be untenable there was no way of pulling back on time.  The quickest and easiest way to solve the problem is for the govt to intervene.  The govt does not intervene unless there is a crisis, because it is reactionary rather than pre-emptive (well except in pre-emptive attack doctrine).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think it was necessarily because they were too into making money.  I believe everyone saw it coming, however, when they noticed it was going to be untenable there was no way of pulling back on time.  The quickest and easiest way to solve the problem is for the govt to intervene.  The govt does not intervene unless there is a crisis, because it is reactionary rather than pre-emptive (well except in pre-emptive attack doctrine).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

