more lawless bankers. tis the season

5 minutes ago, JohnAskew wrote

*snip*

It is equally sophomoric to assume that a Principle such as "free market" can solve myriad economic problems across every culture on the planet, which you seem to want to declare.

Not everyone looks at a horse as a vehicle.

Actually, it can. It can also choose not to fix these problems. It's entirely up to the people.

In a free market, people are not forced into things. So a government can not force a solution. The people are free to implement their own solutions to their own problems.

So they can participate in something like an NHS, if they want to. They have the option to say no.

You are free to form any kind of special interest organisation and to solve problems how you see fit for your members.

So if you want to see the horse as a vehicle you can, you can also view it as something else, everyone can have their cake and eat it.

I know it sounds like a weird concept, but forcing solutions onto people only works like a boomerang. For a government to give, it first has to take. So if you change that formula to, in order to give it first has to receive, you get a much more healthy and durable society.

No, it cannot.

Government regulation can equally solve our current corrupt culture in banking and investment banking. "It's entirely up to the people".

With such an open philosophy over freedom, what would you do with those who break laws, assuming you allow law. Do you force criminals into jail? That breaks your model right there. You're guilty of over simplifying reality to fit your pet talking point. It is disingenuous.

I will state again, Platitudes and Principles are not solutions, regardless how compelling the words "free market" feel on the tongue. In fact, the anti-government principles Maddus is espousing, imho, are dangerous. Yes, Maddus promotes anti-government principles, because he really believes that government causes more problems than it solves. He is very silly. Every court case would re-establish an entire legal system per case - ridiculous.

The worst of this self-deception is just how well these misguided conservative talking points feed directly into the hands of those who continually try to loot the government and treasuries of the world. How foolish to be their pawns.

@Maddus Mattus: What you're talking about is a true free market, which is about as real as the magical invisible unicorn. Good luck with that.

@JohnAskew: People who cannot handle the freedom and use force to get what they want, do not deserve the freedom they are entrusted with and should go to jail.

By all means, continue to develop your socialist society, see where it will take you. Deeper into debt and into poverty when the bank comes to collect it's next bailout.

I'll be right here when you are left with no freedom, offering you a way out.

Also, I'm not anti government, I'm anti socialism. The more equality you strive for, the less you get.

Nothing wrong with government, as long as it does not make policy that benefit some at the expense of others.

I'll look forward to your next thread about bankers pulling yet another rabbit (cash) out of a hat (your wallet).

By all means, continue to develop your socialist society, see where it will take you. Deeper into debt and into poverty when the bank comes to collect it's next bailout.

Funny how the most capitalist societies on the planet are the west, and those are the ones with the biggest pile of debt.

And the more socialist ones like China? Buckets of cash.

Nothing wrong with government, as long as it does not make policy that benefit some at the expense of others.

All policies benefit some at the expense of others. For example, theft laws benefit most people at the expense of thieves. Fraud laws benefit most people at the expense of fraudsters. Banking reform laws benefit most people at the expense of bankers who are fleecing the economy.

Out comes the red herring "socialism".

Socialism is not a dirty word. Sorry.

"as long as it does not make policy that benefit some at the expense of others"

Perfect example of over-simplification and banner waving of principles and platitudes. Exactly how are policies to be vetted so that they never favor any person or coroporation? It is not color-coded. There is no red/green signal to reference for absolutely egalitarian policy. No policy can be codified that benefits all equally - name one. Speed limits? No, being slowed in my commute comes at the expense of quality of life, so I reject speed limits as the benefit only those who live closer to work than me. See the problem?

"Expense of others" is not reality, it is a platitude which shows the superficiality of your entire philosophy.

Not all patients who go to a hospital are cured. Platitudes are not solutions.

23 minutes ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

*snip*

I'll be right here when you are left with no freedom, offering you a way out.

*snip*

You mean right there in Fantasyland?

@JohnAskew:

"Expense of others" is not reality

Oh it is,.. it is,..

That's the whole point of this thread.

You are fed up with bankers that get rich at your expense, yet you applaud the same system in a different form.

10 minutes ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

@JohnAskew:

*snip*

Oh it is,.. it is,..

That's the whole point of this thread.

You are fed up with bankers that get rich at your expense, yet you applaud the same system in a different form.

"Expense of others" is an undifferentiated ideal. It cannot be implemented. Therefore your notion of correct government cannot be implemented. Which leads back to the "no government at all" notion which you also do not condone. Platitudes are worthless here. We need real solutions.

If my body is broken I get it fixed, I don't move into another body. Bankers looted the Treasury and continue to loot investment funds on Wall Street. At the expense of others. So government regulation is warranted even by your standards. We don't get to pretend we can wholesale change the "system", regardless if you hear applause. We can fix the body/system we actually inhabit - in reality - through law and regulation. We can not jump into another body or hold our breath while a fantasy system magically replaces reality overnight.

I will applaud our current system with the caveat that we can and will fix problems that arise, just as we each maintain our own physical health. I am not contradicting myself whatsoever.

Capitalism only works when the interests of private profit are aligned with the interests of greater economic and technological advancement.

15 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

Funny how the most capitalist societies on the planet are the west, and those are the ones with the biggest pile of debt.

And the more socialist ones like China? Buckets of cash.

Actually, we are the most socialistic countries around at the moment. We've turned our back on capitalism some forty years ago, started living on the money of the next generations and now we can't borrow any more.

The only solution is to get rid of socialism and give the citizens their freedom back and pay off our debt.

Good luck with getting that message across,..

All policies benefit some at the expense of others. For example, theft laws benefit most people at the expense of thieves. Fraud laws benefit most people at the expense of fraudsters. Banking reform laws benefit most people at the expense of bankers who are fleecing the economy.

No, laws against stealing prevent the thief from taking things from a citizen at the citizens expense. Laws against fraud prevent the fraudster from taking things from the citizens at the citizens expense. So, they prevent at the expense of no one.

These are the laws we need, not laws that take money from the upper working class and gives them to the lower class. Those are at the expense of the upper working class in favor of the lower working class and this way you set out to fight inequality but you actually gain it.

@JohnAskew:

I will applaud our current system with the caveat that we can and will fix problems that arise, just as we each maintain our own physical health. I am not contradicting myself whatsoever.

You have to solve the problem in the domain where they manifest itself.

Banks and bankers are just a symptom of the problems that plague our system.

The core problem is that government is spending too much.

Why are they spending too much?

Because we demand of them that they give us at the expense of others.

Strike these laws, fire the pencil pushers that force these laws, get government spending under control. Show how to manage your cash responsibly. Lead by example, not by exemption.

Then, and only then, will you solve the core problem.

11 hours ago, Bass wrote

Capitalism only works when the interests of private profit are aligned with the interests of greater economic and technological advancement.

No, capitalism always works.

Consumers get to vote with their money. Think of it as micro voting.

It's the ultimate democracy, every penny is a vote.

5 hours ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

@JohnAskew:

*snip*

You have to solve the problem in the domain where they manifest itself.

Banks and bankers are just a symptom of the problems that plague our system.

The core problem is that government is spending too much.

Why are they spending too much?

Because we demand of them that they give us at the expense of others.

Strike these laws, fire the pencil pushers that force these laws, get government spending under control. Show how to manage your cash responsibly. Lead by example, not by exemption.

Then, and only then, will you solve the core problem.

The banking failures, crimes, and deceptions have nothing whatsoever to do with government spending. Your model of cause and effect is seriously subjective, Maddus.

So you think deviant bankers and traders were only willing to steal if there was a victim compensation plan guarantee (aka bailout)? That would require you believe these criminals have an innate respect for their victims' investment capital. I disagree. You suggest their crimes are akin to throwing one's cell phone into the ocean in order to get a new one through an insurance claim. It is not. It is not their phone to start with. Why do they care about your phone? They don't. They must profit, regardless of how, and that's the 'why' part of the equation, not the silly notion that the victims were not going to suffer from the theft.

They break the law and cheat because Capitalism guarantees ever-growing profits from investments - and that message is chanted by our government leaders who write tax code to shoe-horn our savings into Wall Street investment houses.

The addiction to an always growing economy - a ponzi scheme if you ask me - is what compels normal investment bankers into theivery. Capitalist profiteering must be achieved or you are fired. That is where the system fails. It is not physically healthy to have boom-bust cycles, which Capitalism foments by essence. But the reaction to bust cycles is to deficit spend and that we all can condemn. Western economics needs to be comfortable with a flat number in the growth department without the house of cards collapsing. Have our leaders provided for that? Not really, we're leveraged on Wall Street for endless growth in a pyramid scheme.

But that's not the worst part - the worst part is that the investment capital itself is being siphoned of real value and replaced with garbage derivatives. It is this garbage hidden on bank ledgers that has the economy stalled -- banks do not trust each other to trade like they did in the recent past.

I'm going to repeat that last sentence to restate to point of this thread:

Banks do not trust each other to trade like they did in the recent past -- they've poisoned the well.

Where's the criminal prosecutions?

6 hours ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

*snip*

No, capitalism always works.

Consumers get to vote with their money. Think of it as micro voting.

It's the ultimate democracy, every penny is a vote.

So, in this democracy, if you don't get more votes than your opponent, are you out of business for a 4 year term before you can run again? No?

Then it's not a democracy, let alone an "ultimate" democracy. Your analogy doesn't work.

It's bad enough we have oligopolies forming now. Imagine a system in which EVERYBODY would copy from each other. No company would be able to differentiate its products from another's. Instead of competing on features, quality, or price, companies would be competing solely on marketing.

@JohnAskew:

The banking failures, crimes, and deceptions have nothing whatsoever to do with government spending. Your model of cause and effect is seriously subjective, Maddus.

If the government gives off a signal that it's OK to live on debt and that it's OK as long as someone else pays (we've seen that on numerous occasions in our history) people will follow that example.

How can you prohibit somebody else, luxuries you permit yourself. It's the same with children. If you put your knife in your mouth, odds are your toddlers will pick up on that habit, regardless of the rules.

So you think deviant bankers and traders were only willing to steal if there was a victim compensation plan guarantee (aka bailout)?

No, I think they will steal nonetheless. But, I think they will steal a whole lot less if they feel the consequence. And I do not mean a fine of $300 billion, I mean out of a job in the streets bankruptcy. And currently, we do not make them feel pain, so they will continue.

The addiction to an always growing economy

It has it's ups and downs, but the overall trend is up. To prevent the downs by bailouts, only creates a bigger down and a smaller up.I don't think going for growth is a bad thing.

But that's not the worst part - the worst part is that the investment capital itself is being siphoned of real value and replaced with garbage derivatives. It is this garbage hidden on bank ledgers that has the economy stalled -- banks do not trust each other to trade like they did in the recent past.

Oh I agree,..

But I don't agree with your pick of the prime suspect.

@cbae: Where does it say in a democracy that it is based on four year terms?

Imagine a system in which EVERYBODY would copy from each other.

They already do, that's why we have this court cases. Only difference is, is that you can build on each other's ideas, instead of constantly reinventing the wheel.

No company would be able to differentiate its products from another's.

Yes they would, they do it now, despite copying from each other. You can differentiate with price, added value, etc. etc.

Instead of competing on features, quality, or price, companies would be competing solely on marketing.

No, they can compete on whichever facet they want.

Moved to the other thread.

5 hours ago, Maddus Mattus wrote

@JohnAskew:

*snip*

If the government gives off a signal that it's OK to live on debt and that it's OK as long as someone else pays (we've seen that on numerous occasions in our history) people will follow that example.

How can you prohibit somebody else, luxuries you permit yourself. It's the same with children. If you put your knife in your mouth, odds are your toddlers will pick up on that habit, regardless of the rules.

I agree that deficit spending is a terrible example and aids in overall corruption in economics -- the 5mph over the speed limit variety -- which is wholly debilitating to the correct respectful and honorable attitude individuals owe to the community.

It is unfortunate that the stiff-arm delivered to Lehman Bros and ended them caused so much turmoil in the world economy that the Treasury and players ALL lost faith in austerity and opened the doors of the Treasury. It is shameful. Exemplifies cowardice and lack of salient leadership. One might go dark and muse the premediation required to "fake out" the world audience from a route of austerity and into the path of looting the Treasury.

Some banks have repaid their forced loans, others have not finished, and entities like AIG and the mortgage dumping ground we call Sallie Mae and Freddie Mac will never even begin to repay the interest much less priniciple loaned to keep them from collapse.

No, I think they will steal nonetheless. But, I think they will steal a whole lot less if they feel the consequence. And I do not mean a fine of $300 billion, I mean out of a job in the streets bankruptcy. And currently, we do not make them feel pain, so they will continue.

I would love if the market actually COULD punish the bad players, which is the objective of austerity, but these criminals have all of our savings in the form of investments stuffed in their shorts. So they would ruin everyone, not just go broke individually. It is extortion, very clearly. Jail them! Jail them! Make them feel the pain but do not let their pain be passed to their customers!!!

It has it's ups and downs, but the overall trend is up. To prevent the downs by bailouts, only creates a bigger down and a smaller up.I don't think going for growth is a bad thing.

"overall the trend is up" ... and you say you don't have a problem with money... you sound like an addict to me.

Growth is not bad, but profiteering at the expense of others is immoral (Wal Mart pushing all middle class jobs to China for lower prices).

Greed is NOT always pulling us forward. Would that it were that easy!