I would like to know if D isnt a bit too extreme - the logic begins from'loss of confidence' (presumably certain economic conditions) to banks lending less and then investors suffering --> it doesnt seem that it starts with the investors that D implies.
"When investors begin taking greater risks it is
enough to stimulate economic growth." -- if we put this in the context above - investors CANNOT take a risk because something else stops them (banks). It is not just dependent on them.
E
...
"When investors begin taking greater risks it is
enough to stimulate economic growth." -- if we put this in the context above - investors CANNOT take a risk because something else stops them (banks). It is not just dependent on them.
E
...
.jpg)
