Well at least you can feel self-righteous.
edit: compare and contrast your violent protests with the gay marriage movement. Gay marriage wasn't even on the radar 15 years ago and now it is legal in several states, the president supports it, the general public seems to be coming around to supporting it, and the opposition is running scared passing state amendment after state amendment. And yet you don't see mobs of gay rights protestors smashing storefronts or blocking traffic. (Yes they have parades and rallies, but its all very orderly and everyone goes home at the end of the day). Instead the movement is focusing on communication, education, and logic to get people to see the rightness of their cause. And it's starting to succeed and I believe it will eventually be fully successful. Meanwhile OWS won't change shit.
Last edited by TomAz; 05-29-2012 at 01:31 PM.
I'm not even a neo-liberal and I agree that at this point OWS is a sideshow at best and counterproductive at worst. Really wish the activists on my side would try to influence the policymakers on my side (via lobbying, campaign contributions, primary challenges, etc.), rather than turning the message into a circular debate over their First Amendment right to annoy municipal officials who have fuck-all-nothing to do with the policies that have led to massive income inequality in the first place. The problem is, perhaps, that too many of the OWS crowd harbor illusions that electoral politics and the two-party system are some symptom of a corrupt, ailing body politic rather than an institutional reality.
Wait. Why can't they be both corrupt and reality?
Sure, they can be.
I'm just stating that they are a necessary result of the constitutional system that the United States operates under. The "system" for lack of a better term, can be corrupt or it can be virtuous. The trick is to eliminate the corrupt, ailing parts of the system while also recognizing that system is a fact. I would much rather see a grassroots movement try to pass a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United or clarifying the fifty-vote rule in the US Senate.
I am unfamiliar with 'primary' as a verb.
I agree re a Citizens United amendment.
Jack and Fax with all due respect I think both of you are arguing semantics too much. Lets get back on track with some solid arguments.
FYF Fest 8/27 - 8/28
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...1-million.htmlBy 2006, the bank was buying mortgages from outside lenders with doctored tax forms, phony appraisals and missing signatures, she says. It was Hunt’s job to identify these defects, and she did, in regular reports to her bosses.
Executives buried her findings, Hunt says, before, during and after the financial crisis, and even into 2012.
In March 2011, more than two years after Citigroup took $45 billion in bailouts from the U.S. government and billions more from the Federal Reserve -- more in total than any other U.S. bank -- Jeffery Polkinghorne, an O’Fallon executive in charge of loan quality, asked Hunt and a colleague to stay in a conference room after a meeting.
The encounter with Polkinghorne was brief and tense, Hunt says. The number of loans classified as defective would have to fall, he told them, or it would be “your asses on the line.”
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...-world-history60 percent of prime adjustable rate mortgages, and nearly 100 percent of subprime ones, were indexed to LIBOR.
That means that when LIBOR rises, so do the prices ordinary consumers pay to, say, get a mortgage.
So how did the manipulations by Barclay’s affect this rate? First, from 2005 and 2007, the bank allegedly varied the rates it reported to the BBA and Thomson Reuters so as to improve its margins on internal trades. For example, it could have placed bets that the LIBOR rate would increase, and then reported artificially high rates which in turn artificially increased the LIBOR averages, so that the bets were likelier to pay off. This ... bumped up mortgage rates – however infinitesimally – for consumers even when the risk of the loans hadn’t changed at all.
Nothing to see here. Move along.
mega scandal of all mega scandals
Wes knows better! Banks are honest actors!
WHY DO YOU HATE CORPORATIONS, POT?
1/13: Fantastic Negrito @ The New Parish
1/14: Silent Servant, Volvox @ Monarch
1/17: Marching Church @ Rickshaw Stop
1/19: Woods @ Sweetwater Music Hall
1/23: No Age @ Starline Social Club
1/26: The She's, Terry Malts @ The Independent
1/27: Heron Oblivian @ The Chapel
1/27: Christopher Rau, Jordan @ f8
1/29: Silver Shadows, CCR Headcleaner @ Hemlock Tavern
02/02: Lily's @ The Chapel
Pot, I'm sorry you were too late to ride the LIBOR bubble to prosperity.
It's all about envy, naturally. I just want all their sweet moist monies. There's simply no proof that we're being fucking robbed with impunity. No proof whatsoever.
EDIT: I wrote this before Wes' latest post. You really are a predictable little guttertwat Wes.
Maybe if you spent a single second of your life without your nose up some banker's dickchute you'd be less of a snivelling turd. Maybe.
Banks did something dishonest, story at 11.
And later in the hour, "George Washington" writes an intellectually dishonest blog post.
did you hear that folks? It affects an $800T market. By how much? no idea. but this definitely AFFECTED it, let me tell you. Everyone was affected. Nobody's clean here. Anything and everything is tied to LIBOR. You're all affected.Indeed, the scandal effects an $800 trillion dollar market - 10 times the size of the real world economy.
Care to explain what's dishonest about that?And later in the hour, "George Washington" writes an intellectually dishonest blog post. did you hear that folks? It affects an $800T market. By how much? no idea. but this definitely AFFECTED it, let me tell you. Everyone was affected. Nobody's clean here. Anything and everything is tied to LIBOR. You're all affected.
But yes, it's a huge fucking deal, we already know this, but the article does absolutely nothing to educate anybody.
There is zero substance in this blog post. zero. It's a non-story.
Meet jackstraw. He'll say something ambiguous and then lash out once you ask him to expound.
Jack is spot on with the sensationalism. Had your cute blog post included some of the other notorious qualifiers found throughout the stories on Zerohedge like “Maybe there is something we're missing”, “But who really knows all the details”, “On the surface, we can conclude”, or my favorite “At this point it is all just speculation”, and less along the lines of “the biggest financial scam in world history”, “the largest rigging of prices in the history of the world”, “mega scandal of all mega scandals”, “the entire world has been impacted”, “every single local government in the United States has been scalped”, it’d hold about 1% more credibility.The financial world came to a standstill today as a story that originally broke years ago by the WSJ and examined at that time in great deail by a Tim Geithner led NY Fed was brought into light again as Barclays has agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fines in an attempt to single handedly manipulate the market in way that may or may not have helped or hurt consumers.
Keep flailing Wes.
Do you even know what LIBOR is? It's an indisputable fact that it affects markets all over the world you poncing ninny.
Last edited by PlayaDelWes; 07-10-2012 at 03:34 PM.