yes, definitions matter, as when one calls torture "emphatic interrogation" or "suboptimal prisoner maintenance" or whatever term the Bushwackers can come up with. But this is not one of those cases. There's no ideological content in calling -- or not calling -- GMAC a "bank."
of course, as far as the FDIC is concerned, GMAC isn't a bank. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Sabri Oncu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim: > >> the debate about whether GMAC can be called a bank or not is only >> about definitions. > > True! But, some times, definitions matter, don't they? I used to say > "names and labels are not important, facts are" back in my days of > teaching calculus, but learned the hard way after I became a product > manager of some financial software that some times "names and labels" > are important. > > Sabri > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Jim Devine / "Nobody told me there'd be days like these / Strange days indeed -- most peculiar, mama." -- JL. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
