How did banks bring us to the edge? (in less than 100 words)
the paper-economy banks bankrupted (ironically) the public and the real economies.
Then they took loans and got cheap government insurance to cover their losses.
That means banks get the profits, and the public gets the losses.
Then they continued foreclosing on houses.
then they got back to immoral derivative trading, like nothing just happened.
NOW, they want to pocket their profits,
while YEARS from now,
they will have yet to pay off their debts
to government (in lieu of taxes).
so, here's my salute to bankers' supreme ballsy-ness:
Gold (man) Sachs of Sh*t
-the paper chase.
Intro
Trading Boys have found a way to bend laws of economics by pushing paper around and somehow making profits out of it. So bad is the problem that many people have
rejected manufacturing and gone trading.
Problem!
they're chucking out basic economic theory and common sense
(trading shares which they don't own),
and they've neutralised all effective legal/regulatory oversight, and because they're piggy-backed on the real economy,
when they f&%%&*ck up,
we, the little worker ants, all pay the price. And the rich call it
survival of the fittest.
Pork pies (lies) and prevarication.
If the following problems are solved, then maybe we'll be able to return to normality.
Don't bet on it happening, though.
Chapter 1: Externalisation
According to "The Corporation" documentary,
one purpose of businesses is to externalise problems.
That means to make others pay for their problems.
If a factory has polluted an area, they expect the public to clean it up.
If banks have the risk of gambling losses, they want the public to insure them against it and
when it fails, for the public to pay up lots of money.
NO RISK! ONLY PROFIT!
PERFECTION! not.
all they need is corrupt politicians to do the monkey.
see no evil...
Chapter 2: Philosophy of me-me-me
Ayn Rand, the grandiloquent, dead fiction writer, tried to show
how capitalists (re-baptised as the makers of all things useful) are
the bestest because they follow their own self-interest.
Her (anti-) Objectivist theory tried to say that
the more that government tries to solve problems, the worse it gets.
That's true, but only when capitalists
(admittedly aided by corrupt politicians)
screw things up totally,
through perfecting externalisation.
We, the idiots, trust government to keep this kind of bullsh*t from happening.
Still, governments are not willing to return to the post-1929-Crash antitrust laws and other regulations because politics is still corrupt.
So corrupt politicians threw money at the capitalists.
The capitalists were so convinced of their superiority that they expected it to happen,
and said 'thank you, do you have any more?'
So, it's not government that's to blame, it's corrupt government, full of pseudo-political capitalists that is screwing up.
So, when right-wing pundits are calling the pay-outs to their friends, and government support of failing manufacturers as 'big government', they're doing it with a big smile on their faces. Why? Those very same right-wingers get to party like it's 1999
on public money, when they don't pay taxes, and then they get to look like wise guys, smirking at fair-minded people while they criticise the largesse they themselves are benefitting from.
Since the media and governments are largely corrupt,
they get to prove Ayn Rand right:
Self-interest is the only thing that would work all the time,
but only when there's no government or law
to stop corporations from victimising people in the name of profit.
Looks like brutal survival of the fittest (but it isn't-you'll see).
some examples:
Health insurance (US), heating fuel (UK), Energy trading (US), banking and derivative trading (every-f^**$^&^ckin-where), etc.
Chapter 3: Survival of the fattest
When right-wingers trot out the theory of survival of the fittest, to explain the success of rich people, they're talking out their arses.
they got plenty of free protection and benefits from society, the ungrateful bastards.
If you look at the ever-popular wilderness documentaries
(how else are we going to witness nature?),
you see how brutal survival really is.
It's eat and be eaten.
So, what IS the difference with human society,
Sprachen-mit-arses?
Because of our evolved sense of fairness, we provide police officers to protect fat, rich guys' stuff from the coniving, starving, wretched bastards who would try to take it away.
(why are they starving? because of laws favouring the rich- what irony!)
why do the courts and expensive lawyers exist?
So that, when fat Richie, or his company is doing something illegal or immoral, Richie gets to avoid legal (and moral) justice.
Why do rich folk surround themselves with locks, guards, walls, and fast cars?
to avoid moral justice.
Nobody can get near enough to them to give them a piece of their minds.
So, we've established that fat, rich people are cunning and Chicken-sh*t.
Didn't at least some of the rich get benefits from state-sponsored education, healthcare or anything else public, like the use of a library, or a playing field? I guess not. They're self-made. Nobody helped them. Not even their parents (where are they? check the poorest, moneyless bastards in the old-folks homes. That's where they are because they begat heathen-beast humanoids).
So, if we were to have survival of the fittest, then Richie would lose his protection.* By the way, if things keep going as they are, some day, the public will take "survival" seriously and exact revenge. Not quite yet. The middle-class (white-collar workers) is not yet starving in sufficient numbers. It's the pissed-off middle class that you should be worrying about when you support survival of the fittest. They'll take it literally and then it's Night of the Living Dead
[pic- "Brains!"]
for rich folk.
Now, watch those animal videos and imagine yourself being killed and/or eaten.
You like?
Chapter 4: territorialism
It's funny to hear rich people, who've got more rights and more access than the rest of us, talking about fairness, ownership and privacy.
It's funny how rich folk manage to get the right to rape the land, as if it's theirs.
Politicians are just so thrilled to have fresh bribes and a few jobs for the voters that they'll let coal, oil, gas, trees, fish(es) go to the fittest businessman.
Since when does it belong to those guys? How can oil-rich countries like Nigeria be so poor? It's not that their politicians are super-corrupt, it's that the whole business is corrupt.
If any economist wanted to get shot, all he would have to do is to prove
how oil companies should be paying about $40 a barrel to the government
(for the right and to cover public expenses like roads, pollution control, etc. that co.s now get for free) just to get the oil out of the ground, and then more taxes on profits (with money going to schools, hospitals and good stuff.). They'd still make a killing, but now oil companies are also killing people; they get the US/UK to knock off governments, because oil barons have BEEN ALLOWED to become too powerful.
Well! In the 1930s, Rockefeller's Standard Oil was cut to pieces for the same reason. Now, the oil companies are in charge.
_____
[Buenos Aires- chic next to shabby shanty]
Richie keeps his land only if he can fend for himself. That means fighting off other competitors for the land, the riches it contains, his spouse (for procreation),
[best 3 outta 5 for your wife.]
So, 'fair', humanitarian society has made it possible for the rich to avoid anything to do with survival of the fittest. They are the antithesis of survival of the fittest.
Chapter 5: Religion and charity
This matters more in the US, where politicians get elected simply because they claim to be religious or because they believe in traditional values and where rich people go to church and keep a straight face when they hear about the selflessness of Jesus. They can carry on being greedy and claim to be at God's side.** Horsesh*t! all of it.
If they read the important chapters of , say, Christian writing,
they would feel obliged to give away most of what they've
amassed. So, they're not Christian or whatever. I don't care what they SAY.
give it all away, first, then I'll listen.
Jesus chucked the money-traders out of the temple. Is there a Christian stock-broker willing to chuck himself out work? if not, they're not Christian or whatever.
If politicians have caused the death of innocent people, especially by deception, then they are not supposed to profess subjugation to God, because they're lying. Tony Blair and Bush43 have caused the unnecessary deaths of thousands of people, yet they publically declare themselves to be Christians. Crock of feces!
I suppose they feel that they can get the 'get out of hell' card by asking for forgiveness at some point before they die. That might work for the occasional gambler or adulter, but not for a mass-murderer. If there were visible Christian justice, they'd be damned by God into a living hell on Earth right now.
In the US, some religious groups will help the poor and uninsured get medical care, but in some cases, the sick have to feign Christian belief. If those religious groups were something more than a tax-write-off machine, they would go looking to save people from their own miserable fate. If they did, there would be more Christians. They would take Jesus as their example, and show what Christianity is supposed to be. Even so, they wouldn't have to give up anything serious other than their time (the house and car are safe). f#%%^cking suburban religious morons.
And don't get me started on the Pope, but I did write about him a few stories ago. In the end, there's no such thing as true religious charity in this world. So, religions should just piss off and stop lying. Also, you can't be super-rich and religious.
So, if anybody's interested, rich people are neither lions in the wild nor the fittest people, just the most morally-corrupt, cunning, chicken-sh*t hoarders. They would not survive without the peaceful society that we provide for them. We allow them to rape the land and keep some of it for their gargantuan houses. Also, they haven't got a moral leg to stand on because they help no one but themselves, and inflict pain on others (the very definition of externalisation). So, they should stop reaching out to God in order to feel better. They should just be happy with who they are:
They're just miserable, sociopathic sacks of sh*t. Thank you.
the paper-economy banks bankrupted (ironically) the public and the real economies.
Then they took loans and got cheap government insurance to cover their losses.
That means banks get the profits, and the public gets the losses.
Then they continued foreclosing on houses.
then they got back to immoral derivative trading, like nothing just happened.
NOW, they want to pocket their profits,
while YEARS from now,
they will have yet to pay off their debts
to government (in lieu of taxes).
so, here's my salute to bankers' supreme ballsy-ness:
Gold (man) Sachs of Sh*t
-the paper chase.
Intro
Trading Boys have found a way to bend laws of economics by pushing paper around and somehow making profits out of it. So bad is the problem that many people have
rejected manufacturing and gone trading.
Problem!
they're chucking out basic economic theory and common sense
(trading shares which they don't own),
and they've neutralised all effective legal/regulatory oversight, and because they're piggy-backed on the real economy,
when they f&%%&*ck up,
we, the little worker ants, all pay the price. And the rich call it
survival of the fittest.
Pork pies (lies) and prevarication.
If the following problems are solved, then maybe we'll be able to return to normality.
Don't bet on it happening, though.
Chapter 1: Externalisation
According to "The Corporation" documentary,
one purpose of businesses is to externalise problems.
That means to make others pay for their problems.
If a factory has polluted an area, they expect the public to clean it up.
If banks have the risk of gambling losses, they want the public to insure them against it and
when it fails, for the public to pay up lots of money.
NO RISK! ONLY PROFIT!
PERFECTION! not.
all they need is corrupt politicians to do the monkey.
see no evil...
Chapter 2: Philosophy of me-me-me
Ayn Rand, the grandiloquent, dead fiction writer, tried to show
how capitalists (re-baptised as the makers of all things useful) are
the bestest because they follow their own self-interest.
Her (anti-) Objectivist theory tried to say that
the more that government tries to solve problems, the worse it gets.
That's true, but only when capitalists
(admittedly aided by corrupt politicians)
screw things up totally,
through perfecting externalisation.
We, the idiots, trust government to keep this kind of bullsh*t from happening.
Still, governments are not willing to return to the post-1929-Crash antitrust laws and other regulations because politics is still corrupt.
So corrupt politicians threw money at the capitalists.
The capitalists were so convinced of their superiority that they expected it to happen,
and said 'thank you, do you have any more?'
So, it's not government that's to blame, it's corrupt government, full of pseudo-political capitalists that is screwing up.
So, when right-wing pundits are calling the pay-outs to their friends, and government support of failing manufacturers as 'big government', they're doing it with a big smile on their faces. Why? Those very same right-wingers get to party like it's 1999
on public money, when they don't pay taxes, and then they get to look like wise guys, smirking at fair-minded people while they criticise the largesse they themselves are benefitting from.
Since the media and governments are largely corrupt,
they get to prove Ayn Rand right:
Self-interest is the only thing that would work all the time,
but only when there's no government or law
to stop corporations from victimising people in the name of profit.
Looks like brutal survival of the fittest (but it isn't-you'll see).
some examples:
Health insurance (US), heating fuel (UK), Energy trading (US), banking and derivative trading (every-f^**$^&^ckin-where), etc.
Chapter 3: Survival of the fattest
When right-wingers trot out the theory of survival of the fittest, to explain the success of rich people, they're talking out their arses.
they got plenty of free protection and benefits from society, the ungrateful bastards.
If you look at the ever-popular wilderness documentaries
(how else are we going to witness nature?),
you see how brutal survival really is.
It's eat and be eaten.
So, what IS the difference with human society,
Sprachen-mit-arses?
Because of our evolved sense of fairness, we provide police officers to protect fat, rich guys' stuff from the coniving, starving, wretched bastards who would try to take it away.
(why are they starving? because of laws favouring the rich- what irony!)
why do the courts and expensive lawyers exist?
So that, when fat Richie, or his company is doing something illegal or immoral, Richie gets to avoid legal (and moral) justice.
Why do rich folk surround themselves with locks, guards, walls, and fast cars?
to avoid moral justice.
Nobody can get near enough to them to give them a piece of their minds.
So, we've established that fat, rich people are cunning and Chicken-sh*t.
Didn't at least some of the rich get benefits from state-sponsored education, healthcare or anything else public, like the use of a library, or a playing field? I guess not. They're self-made. Nobody helped them. Not even their parents (where are they? check the poorest, moneyless bastards in the old-folks homes. That's where they are because they begat heathen-beast humanoids).
So, if we were to have survival of the fittest, then Richie would lose his protection.* By the way, if things keep going as they are, some day, the public will take "survival" seriously and exact revenge. Not quite yet. The middle-class (white-collar workers) is not yet starving in sufficient numbers. It's the pissed-off middle class that you should be worrying about when you support survival of the fittest. They'll take it literally and then it's Night of the Living Dead
[pic- "Brains!"]for rich folk.
Now, watch those animal videos and imagine yourself being killed and/or eaten.
You like?
Chapter 4: territorialism
It's funny to hear rich people, who've got more rights and more access than the rest of us, talking about fairness, ownership and privacy.
It's funny how rich folk manage to get the right to rape the land, as if it's theirs.
Politicians are just so thrilled to have fresh bribes and a few jobs for the voters that they'll let coal, oil, gas, trees, fish(es) go to the fittest businessman.
Since when does it belong to those guys? How can oil-rich countries like Nigeria be so poor? It's not that their politicians are super-corrupt, it's that the whole business is corrupt.
If any economist wanted to get shot, all he would have to do is to prove
how oil companies should be paying about $40 a barrel to the government
(for the right and to cover public expenses like roads, pollution control, etc. that co.s now get for free) just to get the oil out of the ground, and then more taxes on profits (with money going to schools, hospitals and good stuff.). They'd still make a killing, but now oil companies are also killing people; they get the US/UK to knock off governments, because oil barons have BEEN ALLOWED to become too powerful.
Well! In the 1930s, Rockefeller's Standard Oil was cut to pieces for the same reason. Now, the oil companies are in charge.
_____
UPDATE: (at alternet.org, Michael Moore said we must 'declare that all the energy resources above and beneath the ground are owned collectively by all of us', in "Michael Moore's action plan: 15 things every American can do right now")
For survival of the fittest to apply to humans, there has to be an open natural environment. Ownership and fences make no sense to animals._____
[Buenos Aires- chic next to shabby shanty]
[best 3 outta 5 for your wife.]and kids (for food).
As it is, the rich've stolen exclusive access to land and underground resources. So, that's why Richie is rich. Wonderful, so he builds a house with a big fence to keep out the competition. That would not happen in the wild. So, men would tend to be killed around the age of 40 because they'd be unable to fend for themselves against younger bucks.So, 'fair', humanitarian society has made it possible for the rich to avoid anything to do with survival of the fittest. They are the antithesis of survival of the fittest.
Chapter 5: Religion and charity
This matters more in the US, where politicians get elected simply because they claim to be religious or because they believe in traditional values and where rich people go to church and keep a straight face when they hear about the selflessness of Jesus. They can carry on being greedy and claim to be at God's side.** Horsesh*t! all of it.
If they read the important chapters of , say, Christian writing,
they would feel obliged to give away most of what they've
amassed. So, they're not Christian or whatever. I don't care what they SAY.
give it all away, first, then I'll listen.
Jesus chucked the money-traders out of the temple. Is there a Christian stock-broker willing to chuck himself out work? if not, they're not Christian or whatever.
If politicians have caused the death of innocent people, especially by deception, then they are not supposed to profess subjugation to God, because they're lying. Tony Blair and Bush43 have caused the unnecessary deaths of thousands of people, yet they publically declare themselves to be Christians. Crock of feces!
I suppose they feel that they can get the 'get out of hell' card by asking for forgiveness at some point before they die. That might work for the occasional gambler or adulter, but not for a mass-murderer. If there were visible Christian justice, they'd be damned by God into a living hell on Earth right now.
In the US, some religious groups will help the poor and uninsured get medical care, but in some cases, the sick have to feign Christian belief. If those religious groups were something more than a tax-write-off machine, they would go looking to save people from their own miserable fate. If they did, there would be more Christians. They would take Jesus as their example, and show what Christianity is supposed to be. Even so, they wouldn't have to give up anything serious other than their time (the house and car are safe). f#%%^cking suburban religious morons.
And don't get me started on the Pope, but I did write about him a few stories ago. In the end, there's no such thing as true religious charity in this world. So, religions should just piss off and stop lying. Also, you can't be super-rich and religious.
So, if anybody's interested, rich people are neither lions in the wild nor the fittest people, just the most morally-corrupt, cunning, chicken-sh*t hoarders. They would not survive without the peaceful society that we provide for them. We allow them to rape the land and keep some of it for their gargantuan houses. Also, they haven't got a moral leg to stand on because they help no one but themselves, and inflict pain on others (the very definition of externalisation). So, they should stop reaching out to God in order to feel better. They should just be happy with who they are:
They're just miserable, sociopathic sacks of sh*t. Thank you.
-Costick67 (8^P
pics from fotosearch.com
* check Ames' story where parts of Alabama have been so bankrupted by Wall Street that they can no longer afford police, necessitating the use of the army to quel rioting and complaining. Many people in that relatively warm state cannot afford heating, if they want water service as well.
checkitout: http://www.alternet.org/workplace/143485/after_the_billionaires_plundered_alabama_town%2C_troops_were_called_in_..._illegally/
** (from Ames' story) "Bo Pilgrim, the head of Pilgrim's Pride, once told his Texas church that he was worth over $1 billion before the market crash, and he's still worth hundreds of millions. His rapacity was boundless..."
pics from fotosearch.com
* check Ames' story where parts of Alabama have been so bankrupted by Wall Street that they can no longer afford police, necessitating the use of the army to quel rioting and complaining. Many people in that relatively warm state cannot afford heating, if they want water service as well.
checkitout: http://www.alternet.org/workplace/143485/after_the_billionaires_plundered_alabama_town%2C_troops_were_called_in_..._illegally/
** (from Ames' story) "Bo Pilgrim, the head of Pilgrim's Pride, once told his Texas church that he was worth over $1 billion before the market crash, and he's still worth hundreds of millions. His rapacity was boundless..."
