Banks and the economy
Offline People are afraid of "the economy".
But there is no reason for that. There will always be an economy - as long as there are people who want to live. You'll just have to find new ways to deal with the day-to-day routine of trading goods and services.
What might fail, however, is the monetary system... and if it does it will be because the credit system went all haywire. Whenever a currency fails it is because of epic mismanagment at the political level. Say for intance if they at some point thought that the finance markets was going to manage themselves and therefore need no rules and regulations. Free market, yes? There are no words for how idiotic that idea is. WTF is a financial market operator anyway, if not somebody who's found a way to tap into the system and extract monetary profits with little or no actual work? It doesn't take an Einsteinian brain to figure out that f you make life simpler for the parasites, there will be more parasites. Ever heard of evolution?
Just get your calculator out and see how it is impossible to get rich from working. The year only have 8,760 hours. You'd have to work all of those, all around the clock, all the time, for only just above 100 dollars an hour to make a million in a year. But... there are people in the banking "industry" who extract 15-20 million a year in bonuses? Swell. It shows that the system works! Praise the Lord! Spend money. Buy stuff. Work harder. Bust your ass! And rmember to keep that happy smiling face on at all times, whil you give thanks for this fabulous opportunity to be fucked up the ass without any lubricant.
"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)
- Login to post comments
the monetary system will break down due to the fed just creating money and credit out of thin air
i dont know how you connect that with free markets, its about as anti-free market as you could get
the banks make a shit ton of money and get all these bonuses due to our monetary system
what really needs to be regulated is govt, the fed
the govt is what caused the mess in our economy, not the lack of regulations (which there are thousands upon thousands of pages of)
its the govt that creates the moral hazard, that distort the markets, and create the malinvestment
People are also afraid of the dark. So what?
How can not believing in something that is backed up with no empirical evidence be less scientific than believing in something that not only has no empirical evidence but actually goes against the laws of the universe and in many cases actually contradicts itself? - Ricky Gervais
Don't hand me that crap, the banking industry, wall street and big business lobby congress to get them the laws to make pick pocketing legal. If you want to blame government, you should blame them for being bought off by people who could give a shit less about the middle class and poor.
If pay wages matched the cost of living, if heath care didn't bankrupt someone, if everyone had health care, if people didn't have to work a billion hours a week and two jobs on top of that. Who the fuck do you think is causing this? Not the workers, not small business.
DO YOU REALLY think 5 chicken nuggets JUST FIVE! Is worth a dollar? Have you seen a potato chip bag? Do you know what you are paying for when you buy that bullshit? Not the product. You are paying some dipshit marketer to sit in a boardroom to concoct ways to convince you to buy such a little amount. You are paying for the pretty colors on the package and the bombardment of add time with cute comericals and mascots.
You are NOT paying for quality or amount . The trend is not quality or qantity, the trend is to sell an idea and an image. The keep shrinking the amount and raising the price. It has nothing to do with caring about wiether it is a competitive market, it has to do with getting away with whatever you can.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
well, the fed is more or less a private company. it might be nominally under government control but it doesn't operate that way.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
ridiculous
the fed is about as intertwined with the govt as something could get
well you made my point for me, congress is a bunch of sheisters basically taking money from lobbyists and passing legislation that favors the company that lobbied, if congress followed the constitution we wouldnt be having that problem
so its the GOVT that is the problem
but as far as the banking industry goes, with bullshit like derivatives and all that shit that went on in housing for example, its was govt interventions in the market (specifically the feds artificially low interest rates, the govt guarentees, and govt legislation that forced banks to lower their lending standards) that led to our downfall
if you say so, hoss.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
i do, thanks
anyone who thinks different is either a credulous fool or something far more sinister
the govt appoints the head of the fed for christ sake
oh, like that ever fuckin' meant anything. the government does what it's damn well told to do by the big boys with the deep pockets.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
which proves that the fed is all sorts of intertwined with govt then yes?
which was my whole point
Presuming that by "problem" you mean "source of the trouble", definitionally the "problem", is the lobbyist not the Government. You mention the constitution as potentially able to counter the problems created by companies to shore up their bottom line by blocking them at the lobby phase. By definition, although granted not so smoothly in the real world, the constitution is the government, so your statement contradicts itself in definition by calling the Govt the problem and the solution at once.
Maybe what you mean is that the Government fails to be a solution to the problem?
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
the constitution isnt the govt, it defines and restrains the govt, its the supreme law of the land, the contract with the people
and the problem isnt the lobbyists, its the govt, if the people in the govt werent such sheisters (with a couple exceptions), lobbyists wouldnt be a problem
treat the disease not the symptoms, the lobbyists only become a problem because of the govt allows them to be
so no, i dont mean the govt fails to be the solution to the problem, it IS the problem
el (can i call you el? it's so deliciously canaanite), you definitely get the "figuring out the shit behind the shit" prize.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
You're thus implying that if we take away the government, no more problem. Can you not see how that implication contradicts your claim?
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
what?
im not implying anything of the sort
im saying if the govt followed the rules set out in the constitution, none of this would be going on
the problem is govt overstretching its bounds, beyond its original intent
LOL! I'd be honoured
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
You're not?
Could you please define "IS" as you are employing it here, cause you're making no sense.
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
i think my point has been pretty clear and its not difficult to understand
the govt is overreaching in its power (an undeniable fact) and that if the govt adhered to its constitutional duties and powers we'd be much better off and much freer
makes perfect sense
and define what "is" is, okay bill clinton
I think my point is pretty clear too atomicdogg, you're misusing words. You said clearly, "the government IS the problem". I gave you the opportunity to correct it earlier and you affirmed it instead, it's a bit late now to be backpedalling, don't you think.
Oh! so you mean the Government fails to be a solution to the problem?
Yeah, it would have made sense for you to agree when you had the chance instead.
Well, if "is the problem" means "is not the problem" when you say it , whatever or whoever you call me after, won't matter because you have defeated all possibility of actual communication between us.
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
this is absolute twaddle
so what you're saying is the govt should be the solution to itself?
what exactly is the problem, in your mind, that the govt should be the solution to
the problem with our communication is i have no clue as to what you're trying to get at, my position is clear, yours, not so much
No, atomicdogg, that is what your words mean. I am simply trying to show it to you.
It's quite clear in the first reply I sent you - according to what you originally wrote, definitionally (ie by the definition of problem being the source of the trouble), the problem is the lobbyists.
You say the trouble is the legislation put through in favour of companies rather than the constitution and the source of that legislation is the lobbyists. So the "source of the trouble" or "problem" is unscrupulous lobbying.
And note well, this is all according to you. You may not have intended to say any of this but nevertheless, you said it. Maybe you are just having a little trouble with the language you're using, no worries, that's not a crime but you must understand that it is what it is.
"The Problem", definitionally, is the thing you want to "get rid of".
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
--I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Ugh, well I thought a retorsive stance would get the point across quickly but what to do when even that flies over the other person's head? It was all I could think of.
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
Don't be daft. The credit system - that which we think of as "money" - is created and managed by the state, which in turn is managed by the (more or less) elected government; by whichever means they see fit, such as, in this case, a private corporation handling the actual issuing of currency. The only political tool the state (which is represented by the government) has got for keeping the credit system under control is strictly enforced regulations. Taking regulations away essentially equals taking control away, something which, unsurprisingly, has a tendency to create uncontrolled situations - such as market competition in the financial sector leading ambitious and creative people to dream up ever more fanciful "assets" that they can trade with - way out of any reasonable comparison to the actual equity of said "assets".
But there is more to the picture. Neither the government nor the financial sharks are solely to be blamed for this mess. The American people have to own up to their insane idea of how "rich" they are - when in fact the entire country is mortgaged up to the hilt, so much so that (if I remember correctly) each and every living American man, woman and child now owes a little above 200,000 dollars in foreign debt. It's going to take many generations to sort that out. Right now it's a big enough challenge to balance the accounts to a reasonable degree, something which will be necessary very soon, as I don't see that America's credit ratings - on a state level - are too impressive at the moment. What are you going to do when China stops lending you money?
"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)
http://www.kinkspace.com
this makes no sense
dont tell me what my words mean, i think i know what they mean better then you, i typed them
i dont see how anything i said could be construed into saying the govt should be the solution, quite the contrary actually, the only solution is for the people to force the govt to follow its own rules, by voting the sheisters out and replacing them with people who actually give a damn and arent worried about keeping their seat but in doing whats right
the source of the legislation is the lobbies? who writes the legislation? who votes on the legislation? the congress, and even if the lobbyists wrote it they still have no power to force the congress to vote for it, so again, the problem lies within the govt, on the people actually crafting and voting on the legislation
THATS the problem, if the govt followed the constitution it wouldnt matter what the lobbyists did
again, treating the symptom and not the disease, which is the people who actually have the power to make the laws
again, where have i ever said to "get rid of" the govt, my point was that the govt should follow the rules, thats hardly getting rid of the govt, i want to change the govt, to make all officials who hold office live up to their oaths
for any market work to there has to be competing forces, one which is greed
people want to make as much money as possible, they work harder and find new ways in which to do business
but the other force is fear, the fear of losing your money by making risky bets
that was totally taken out of the picture because of govt guarentees, there was no longer any incentive to manage risk because the fear of losing is entirely destroyed, the govt intervenes in the market and creates the moral hazard, add on top of it legislation that forced banks to make loans to people who were credit risks, and the Fed having artifically low interest rates to begin with which distorted the market
theres nothing wrong with investing in something thats leveraged up 40-1, as long as its in the market and you know your making a risky bet and might not get your money backwe can debate whether the Fed is a private company or not all day, but i think the facts show that its about as intertwined with govt as you could possibly be
your first few sentences are entirely wrong, The Fed creates and manages new money and credit, not "the state" (your clearly differentiating between "the state" and the govt, im not sure what you mean by "the state" )
regulations wouldnt and couldnt have saved us from this mess, since they wouldnt even have been regulating the right things, like the Fed or freddy and fannie
No, see there's your mistake in a nutshell, atomicdogg, words mean what they mean no matter who is typing them. You might know what it is you intend to say, better than I even, but clearly you do not have respect enough for the english language to know, better, WHAT WORDS MEAN.
I agree with you ... up til here, I wouldn't say lobby groups have no powers of coercion at their disposal, exactly.
And I still don't see how what you're saying doesn't mean that the Government is failing at being a solution to the problem of unscrupulous interests, nor how it can possibly mean, instead, that Government, itself, IS the problem, as you originally said.
It seems to me that the problem is and will always be unscrupulous interests, not government - because Government can change in order to not contribute to trouble, unscrupulous interests cannot.
Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist
www.mathematicianspictures.com
i still dont know what words you have a problem with
and if you think that govt can be the solution then maybe youd like to propose how they do it, i dont think the govt can, thats not the way it works, the politicians only care about their own power and staying in power, its we the people that need to be the solution, by not allowing these charlatans to get away with it
if govt is the thing that caves into special interests than yes it is the problem
just because govt can change doesnt mean its not the problem, if govt does what it is supposed to do than the unscrupulous interests can do whatever they like and it wont make a lick of difference
the reason people lobby is because it works, because the govt facilitates it, they stop answering to special interests and special interests will play less and less of a role
there will always be lobbyists, and there should be, lobbying the govt is a right we should all be able to accept, its freedom of speech and expression, what is unacceptable is the govt falling prey to special interests and caving to them
take away the lobbyists and the govt will still do things its not supposed to, they do it all the time, but make the govt follow its own rules and we take care of both the issues
the root problem is govt and the way it works, the expansion of its powers to do whatever it pleases
and if you cant see that it is the govt thats the issue, the people that work in govt and how they run it than we'll never solve this problem
Yesterday news announced, that U. S. government will change it's symbol from eagle to condom, because it much better represents the state policy.
Condom is inflatable, just like speculative economy.
It hinders productivity and destroys future generations.
It protects dicks.
And it gives you a feeling of safety, when they fuck you.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
I heard that too.
The new national anthem will be called "El Condom Pasa" ...
which is essentially just new lyrics to that old Simon & Garfunkel song.
"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)
http://www.kinkspace.com
well said. basically a reflection of marx's single, unalterable law of capitalism: capital that does not continuously strive to increase its production of surplus value ultimately dies. neither the government nor the capitalist himself can change the nature of interests. it is entirely out of their hands.
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
Two of the nation's largest banks said Wednesday that loan losses generally have stopped increasing but that relatively few customers are seeking new loans, reports that are in broad agreement with other indicators showing that the economy remains weak.Banks are claiming that these are just accidents. But suppose that while absent-mindedly paying a bill, you wrote a check from a bank account that you had already closed. No one would have much sympathy with excuses that you were in a hurry and didn’t mean to do it, and it really was just a technicality.