"Congratulations, Bankers -- You're Rich Again"

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: sandmanwake
Anything being done so these banks don't get "too big to fail" again in the future?

Some folk suggest there is noting that can be done. Banks can't be allowed to fail even of medium size. Better regs and closer scrutiny is what some suggest.

Those folks are wrong IMO; every expert I've heard says it can be done. The question is whether there is the political will to do it.

Banks of medium size can fail; the FDIC has experience dealing with it, and their own director says she believes the 'too big to fail' issue needs to be changed by Congress.

 

[miniMUNCH]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: miniMUNCH

Originally posted by: bamacre
Ben acts like bankers run this country.

They don't?

A certain somebody very close to me worked as VP of foreign financial investment and banking for a big, big bank.

This person was involved in many deals at the highest levels to effectively run aspects of the countries this big, big bank was investing in. Yes... collusion, conspiracy, bribery, insider trading, intentional market manipulation ... all that shit.

This person also knows first hand that his employer (big, big bank) and other banks did the same thing in the US, to the US. There I said it.

This person, since leaving the bank on ethical grounds, has received death threats and was actually shot at on one occasion (although the actual attempt on this persons life may been related to a different issue).

Some people may remember who this person i speak of is.

lol.

Yeah, a VP is going to be running deals. Shit, I am a VP at an international "big" bank. Gawd you people crack me up.

If you are in fact the VP at international big bank then I, for sure, will not trust a thing you say regarding financial matters.

You certainly don't have to believe me, either.... as I'm sure don't.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Craig234
I've long been annoyed by Stein. He's long sided with the Republicans, Nixon and corporate interests, but talked with a faux-populist approach.

In early 2008, he gave a speech in which he not only attacked any supporters of the idea that the economy faced trouble, he basically ridiculed them.

He pretty much told people they were welcome to do whatever they want, but they'd be idiots passing up money to worry about any large crash.

he's shameless. Never seen a word of retraction or apology for his bad financial advice to anyone it hurt - but soon after the crash he was on Dr. Phil as an 'expert' with advice.

I read his articles a bit and he has expressed surprise at all this and I think he's essentially come out and said, basically in as many words, that this surprised him and is much worse than he thought it would be.

 

[StageLeft]

If you are in fact the VP at international big bank then I, for sure, will not trust a thing you say regarding financial matters.

He is a VP, not the VP. Unlike a country, banks have more than one VP.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

If you are in fact the VP at international big bank then I, for sure, will not trust a thing you say regarding financial matters.

He is a VP, not the VP. Unlike a country, banks have more than one VP.

Yep, like Walmart has Associates, banks have VPs for Customer Service, VPs for Document Reproduction, and VPs for ice machine maintenance. Makes the customers think the bank is sending a high ranking executive out to talk to them about their issues.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I read his articles a bit and he has expressed surprise at all this and I think he's essentially come out and said, basically in as many words, that this surprised him and is much worse than he thought it would be.

That's not nearly enough IMO - there's nothing wrong with having been surprised by this, but if you were out giving public speeches advising people it would not happen and basically ridiculing anyone who said there was risk, then he should be acknowleging that he said those things and they were wrong, not just saying he was surprised, as if he'd never made the predictions and ridicule he did. It's accountability. He liked the fame and fortune of making the predictions - so there's some accountability when he's wrong.

 

[IronWing]

I think the problem is fiat currency. Bankers can just print money anytime they want. We need to abolish fiat currency and use debit cards instead.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic
Ben Stein still has a career after last year?

He is funded by Murdoch unfortunately.

 

[chucky2]

Why can't they just make it so banks cannot do business in, say, more than 6 states? And, that banks cannot be bundled to one another through anything other than competitive transactions (wire transfers, check posting, etc).?

Seems to me that'd keep the banks only so big, but give them enough room to spread out so as to generate enough income and spread out Risk that they idea would be workable.

Chuck

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: Skoorb

If you are in fact the VP at international big bank then I, for sure, will not trust a thing you say regarding financial matters.

He is a VP, not the VP. Unlike a country, banks have more than one VP.

Yep, like Walmart has Associates, banks have VPs for Customer Service, VPs for Document Reproduction, and VPs for ice machine maintenance. Makes the customers think the bank is sending a high ranking executive out to talk to them about their issues.

I'll freely admit that a "VP" is nothing more than a title and a first-line of higher-level customer contact (unlike analysts and associates). However, Director and Managing Director are certainly a lot more impressive.

It's why I laughed at his "OMG, A VP SAID THIS", because a VP doesn't really work on the "big stuff", nor would they be privy to that kind of info.

Then you add in the conspiracy theory and it makes the tall tale even taller.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: ironwing
I think the problem is fiat currency. Bankers can just print money anytime they want. We need to abolish fiat currency and use debit cards instead.

?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: jackace
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/181560

Very interesting to see his opinion.

The jackass got fired from the NY Times

Ben Stein loses NY Times column over endorsement

:beer: :thumbsup:

They're going down in flames

First Beck, now Stein

Let's keep it going till Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage and the rest are gone :beer:

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jackace
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/181560

Very interesting to see his opinion.

The jackass got fired from the NY Times

Ben Stein loses NY Times column over endorsement

:beer: :thumbsup:

They're going down in flames

First Beck, now Stein

Let's keep it going till Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage and the rest are gone :beer:

Translation: Let's fire anyone who I don't agree with, pronto!

Great defense of free speech there, Dave. :roll:

It is like I always say: Liberals are very tolerant of free speech -- as long as they agree with it.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jackace
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/181560

Very interesting to see his opinion.

The jackass got fired from the NY Times

Ben Stein loses NY Times column over endorsement

:beer: :thumbsup:

They're going down in flames

First Beck, now Stein

Let's keep it going till Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage and the rest are gone :beer:

Translation: Let's fire anyone who I don't agree with, pronto!

Great defense of free speech there, Dave. :roll:

Calling these people on my American airwaves them free speech is as useful as Tits on a Nun.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jackace
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/181560

Very interesting to see his opinion.

The jackass got fired from the NY Times

Ben Stein loses NY Times column over endorsement

:beer: :thumbsup:

They're going down in flames

First Beck, now Stein

Let's keep it going till Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage and the rest are gone :beer:

Translation: Let's fire anyone who I don't agree with, pronto!

Great defense of free speech there, Dave. :roll:

It is like I always say: Liberals are very tolerant of free speech -- as long as they agree with it.

Free Speech isn't a guaranty to be able to say what you want in the public realm and not be tarred and feathered for it. It is a guaranty that the *GOVERNMENT* won't infringe upon your ability to speak.

I am getting more and more amazed that people think that you can say ANYTHING you want to ANYBODY and not be afraid of the consequences if they disagree with you. Then, people like you, flaunt "free speech" without even thinking that what you are defining is not free speech, as defined by the Constitution, but something wholly different.

You need to get your shit straight.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Calling these people on my American airwaves them free speech is as useful as Tits on a Nun.

Can you translate that to English please?

It doesn't matter if YOU agree with them and they are not YOUR airwaves. They belong to everyone and are just as entitled to their opinion as you are entitled to your anti-American opinions.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jackace
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/181560

Very interesting to see his opinion.

The jackass got fired from the NY Times

Ben Stein loses NY Times column over endorsement

:beer: :thumbsup:

They're going down in flames

First Beck, now Stein

Let's keep it going till Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage and the rest are gone :beer:

Translation: Let's fire anyone who I don't agree with, pronto!

Great defense of free speech there, Dave. :roll:

It is like I always say: Liberals are very tolerant of free speech -- as long as they agree with it.

Free Speech isn't a guaranty to be able to say what you want in the public realm and not be tarred and feathered for it. It is a guaranty that the *GOVERNMENT* won't infringe upon your ability to speak.

I am getting more and more amazed that people think that you can say ANYTHING you want to ANYBODY and not be afraid of the consequences if they disagree with you. Then, people like you, flaunt "free speech" without even thinking that what you are defining is not free speech, as defined by the Constitution, but something wholly different.

You need to get your shit straight.

HINT TO LEGENDKILLER: Context is everything. I agree with what you say above and did not imply otherwise -- you have to look at the context the remark above was stated in.

You are free to disagree with them and say whatever you want in response to them, the same as Dave and the same as I am. The difference here is that Dave would eliminate any and all media who disagree with him if he were in power and had the chance. The point being is that Dave is quick to paint anyone who disagrees with him as Anti-American, yet he is advocating we eliminate opposition views. That is VERY un-American and is very hypocritical, but then again, it is Dave we are talking about. He has called me, and several others (probably even you given your history in the banking industry) un-American, and you are damn right I will point out his hypocrisy when given the opportunity.

Nowhere did I say he was not entitled to his opinion.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: ironwing
I think the problem is fiat currency. Bankers can just print money anytime they want. We need to abolish fiat currency and use debit cards instead.

And whatare debit cards based on. currency.

What bank in the last 100 years in the US has printed currency that is valid except for the Federal Reserve which is authorized by congress.?

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: ironwing
I think the problem is fiat currency. Bankers can just print money anytime they want. We need to abolish fiat currency and use debit cards instead.

And whatare debit cards based on. currency.

What bank in the last 100 years in the US has printed currency that is valid except for the Federal Reserve which is authorized by congress.?

All of them. Fractional reserve banking.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: jackace
http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/yourlife/181560

Very interesting to see his opinion.

The jackass got fired from the NY Times

Ben Stein loses NY Times column over endorsement

:beer: :thumbsup:

They're going down in flames

First Beck, now Stein

Let's keep it going till Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Savage and the rest are gone :beer:

Translation: Let's fire anyone who I don't agree with, pronto!

Great defense of free speech there, Dave. :roll:

It is like I always say: Liberals are very tolerant of free speech -- as long as they agree with it.

Free Speech isn't a guaranty to be able to say what you want in the public realm and not be tarred and feathered for it. It is a guaranty that the *GOVERNMENT* won't infringe upon your ability to speak.

I am getting more and more amazed that people think that you can say ANYTHING you want to ANYBODY and not be afraid of the consequences if they disagree with you. Then, people like you, flaunt "free speech" without even thinking that what you are defining is not free speech, as defined by the Constitution, but something wholly different.

You need to get your shit straight.

HINT TO LEGENDKILLER: Context is everything. I agree with what you say above and did not imply otherwise -- you have to look at the context the remark above was stated in.

You are free to disagree with them and say whatever you want in response to them, the same as Dave and the same as I am. The difference here is that Dave would eliminate any and all media who disagree with him if he were in power and had the chance. The point being is that Dave is quick to paint anyone who disagrees with him as Anti-American, yet he is advocating we eliminate opposition views. That is VERY un-American and is very hypocritical, but then again, it is Dave we are talking about. He has called me, and several others (probably even you given your history in the banking industry) un-American, and you are damn right I will point out his hypocrisy when given the opportunity.

Nowhere did I say he was not entitled to his opinion.

Error 404: Context Not Found

What's the context here that Dave advocated the government shutting down Beck, Savage, or Stein?

Hint: There is none. He couldn't wait until the public shuts them down, or the media fires them. He did not advocate the government squashing free speech, which is the point behind free speech.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Hint: There is none. He couldn't wait until the public shuts them down, or the media fires them. He did not advocate the government squashing free speech, which is the point behind free speech.

Yep, you are correct. Maybe I read too much into what Dave said.

 

[ZeGermans]

One of the interesting things about this entire depression is the conservatives pretending to give a fuck about the common man to score political points while being just as much slaves to the oligarchy as democrats.