----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
I was aware of the partially rather abstract formulation of the contribution from Sam
Bostaph. This is why I deliberately stated the potential conclusions from that formulation
- as far as Keynes was concerned -  in the subjunctive mood: "...it _would be unfair_
etc.". It was not my intention to attribute the potential conclusions one _could_ draw
from that reasoning as actual conclusions which anybody particular _did_ draw. I apologize
if unintentionally  I gave that impression with regard to Sam Bostaph. But since the
ongoing debate was about historical people -  Keynes in particular - I think one should
not just stick with abstract  possibilities but one should evaluate historical and
biographical facts. If the biographical facts which I related in my last posting
concerning Keynes are not in dispute, I see no reason to return  - as far as Keynes is
concerned - to unspecific reasoning. It will always be open to dispute which evidence is
considered  to be compelling but at  least one should take note of  evidence and wheigh
the known facts. I think it is not very iluminating to  state abstract possibilities
concerning negative motives when one notices Keynes' plain deeds of help and assistance.
On balance, _my_ conclusion is that Keynes was motivated by a sober sense of justice and
by humane compassion.
 
Best regards 
Michael Ambrosi 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]