Banks Reopen Global Casino

[rjwjr]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Thanks for all of the responses and comments. As I read through them, I am struck by the fact that most of you that replied agree that it is the criminals that should be punished and that not all of "the rich" are criminals. But, then you go on to demonize "the rich" as one big like group again by defending your use of the term and, in one instance, getting mad at me for defending wealthy individuals.

Basically all I'm asking is to start calling these guys "the criminals" rather than "the rich" for it is their criminal acts that deserve our wrath, not the fact that they have a lot of wealth. I, too, feel tremendous hatred for these criminals and would not defend their actions regardless of their socioeconomic status. When you continue to erroneously characterize and call these criminals "the rich", you unfairly include many very upstanding, very wealthy citizens...like EJ I would imagine. Plus, you unnecessarily and/or inadvertently engage in class warfare.

[rjwjr]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

I'm not saying this will work. But it's the only thing I could come up with.

Step #1: Achieve financial security, absent a regular income, so that you have the time to devote to politics.

Step #2: Wait for the country to exhaust its ability to support the standard of living of the lower 90% through expansion of public and private credit. When we are no longer able to borrow a reasonable level of material comfort for the great majority of the population, and the contrast with the upper 10% (or whatever) becomes too great, the present ruling class will be discredited, and there will finally be room for political change.

Step #3: Do rhetorical battle with the extremist demogogues who also emerge, and win. Feed the populist anger some red meat to compete with the other demogogues, but avoid a violent expression of that anger, avoid public disorder, and avoid assaults on core institutions. (Think "ask not what your country can do for you..." rather than Mein Kampf.) If you aren't extreme enough, you'll be out-shouted by some other rabble-rowser; if you are too extreme, you'll alienate and frighten too many people. You need to give expression to the people's anger and validate their frustration without creating a conflagration that threatens the social order. Most importantly, you need to articulate a narrative for how things came to this, and what has to change to return them to "the way they should be."

Step #4: When you (or, generally, your party) achieves political power through demagoguery, don't be a douche. You will have achieved power through manipulation of widespread public anger, and once in power, you will need to wield that power to reform dysfunctional institutions. The hardest part is that the necessary reforms are those which weaken the ability of the incumbent to cling to power. Therefore, you have to be careful about selection of your party leaders. There really are many millions of patriots who would put their country before their personal ambitition... or at least those whose ambition it is to be thought well of through service to their country. Still, it is hard to find motivated and capable leaders who aren't also narcissistic, so it's unrealistic to try to recruit a party of saints. Instead, you need the type of narcissist who wants a very specific type of acclaim -- that which attends benevolence. You want to build your party from people whose greatest desire is to be thought well of for their service to their fellows, and who seek a place in history through participation in a great event rather than merely the length of their tenure and the routine exercise of political power.

Step #5: When reform has been accomplished, you need to manage the transition from being a demagogue to being the new political elite. You need to put the genie of public anger back in its bottle, and you need to be disciplined about keeping it there. It's important that you make your reforms difficult to reverse, because you won't be in power for long if you're honest. The hardest part will be letting go of the reigns, but let go you must, because otherwise you turn into the corruption which you sought to displace. I actually believe there are people who would do this; we need to find them and elect them.

Nice post, Ash. Would it be worth the exercise to try to determine if any existing Congressmen or Senators, or maybe Governors, fit this mold that you have so eloquently shared? If so, maybe we could get some grassroots groundswell of support started for a run at the Presidency. Ron Paul?

Other than that, I still think we could do A LOT of good by the simple act of getting term limits included as an amendment to the Constitution. Anyone on board if I try to research this action?

[metalman]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Thanks for all of the responses and comments. As I read through them, I am struck by the fact that most of you that replied agree that it is the criminals that should be punished and that not all of "the rich" are criminals. But, then you go on to demonize "the rich" as one big like group again by defending your use of the term and, in one instance, getting mad at me for defending wealthy individuals.

Basically all I'm asking is to start calling these guys "the criminals" rather than "the rich" for it is their criminal acts that deserve our wrath, not the fact that they have a lot of wealth. I, too, feel tremendous hatred for these criminals and would not defend their actions regardless of their socioeconomic status. When you continue to erroneously characterize and call these criminals "the rich", you unfairly include many very upstanding, very wealthy citizens...like EJ I would imagine. Plus, you unnecessarily and/or inadvertently engage in class warfare.

who let you in here with all this sanity coming out of you!

two ways to get rich...


The Real Great Depression

[bpr]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Thanks for all of the responses and comments. As I read through them, I am struck by the fact that most of you that replied agree that it is the criminals that should be punished and that not all of "the rich" are criminals. But, then you go on to demonize "the rich" as one big like group again by defending your use of the term and, in one instance, getting mad at me for defending wealthy individuals.

Basically all I'm asking is to start calling these guys "the criminals" rather than "the rich" for it is their criminal acts that deserve our wrath, not the fact that they have a lot of wealth. I, too, feel tremendous hatred for these criminals and would not defend their actions regardless of their socioeconomic status. When you continue to erroneously characterize and call these criminals "the rich", you unfairly include many very upstanding, very wealthy citizens...like EJ I would imagine. Plus, you unnecessarily and/or inadvertently engage in class warfare.

Excellent post, indeed. The problem is, that it's already started. People that I would consider wealthy are very angry at what they call The Rich.

Also, most of the world's wealthiest people can be implicated in some sort of transgression of ethical bounds (if not legal ones).

I believe it is the primary purpose of governments to pit poor people against each other to benefit monied interests. In American society, it may very well be that we are all far poorer (or richer) than we imagine. You can't blame the poor sot who was laid off from a $50k a year job for cursing "the rich," considering the post-bailout bonus figures coming out.

The trick is to convince him that his interests are aligned with the poor sot making $1 million a year who would've been making $2 million a year if his clients hadn't reduced their orders.

[Jim Nickerson]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

What we are witnessing today in the world is the total collapse of democracy. Just as communism collapsed as an untenable political institution, so too will this time be noted as the death of the belief that the people will select the leaders most wise for the time.

"you" is the operative word here. A demagogue, whether in the form of a dictator or a democratic political party, will not save us. A new political order must arise from this mess such than no specific clique or subculture is able to unduly influence the entirety of national policy.

Serge, that strikes me as a very valid point. Right now I think, perhaps incorrectly, our system is tied to some concept of voters either asking candidates what can you do for us, or candidates telling voters this is what I will do for you--this is most apparent in congressional and senatorial elections. The candidates I suppose are almost forced to focus on local or statewide concerns moreso that 1-national and 2-international concerns. It is a bit different with the presidential election.

In my opinion, a useful step forward would be for all candidates and voters to focus on what the political system can do for the nation rather than for large groups of donors or even those who in locales and states elect the congresspeople. Below may be an example of a group's influence winning out over what might be best for most people in the nation. From Robert Reich http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2009...ig-pharma.html

• Last week, after being reported in the Los Angeles Times, the White House confirmed it has promised Big Pharma that any healthcare legislation will bar the government from using its huge purchasing power to negotiate lower drug prices. That's basically the same deal George W. Bush struck in getting the Medicare drug benefit, and it's proven a bonanza for the drug industry. A continuation will be an even larger bonanza, given all the Boomers who will be enrolling in Medicare over the next decade. And it will be a gold mine if the deal extends to Medicaid, which will be expanded under most versions of the healthcare bills now emerging from Congress, and to any public option that might be included. (We don't know how far the deal extends beyond Medicare because its details haven't been made public.)

A national focus if ever achieved might do away with so-called pork-barrel politics, which would be a baby step forward.
Edit: I have the goddammed government's "Medicare drug benefit" which supposedly is an election to users, but if one chooses not to "elect" coverage there is an onerous penalty to be paid in premiums in subsequent years if one does not initially take the offer. I take two medications for high blood pressure. One is generic and is not covered, though it got some coverage before it became available in the generic form. The other medicine is not covered at all and ran $187/3months at its smallest dosage and then my doctor doubled the dosage and that price went to 232$/3months supply. I started getting the latter through a Canadian pharmacy for a generic form made in India that costs $89 for 100 tablets. Medicare drug plan will not pay for the Indian generic form of the drug.

[Godozo]

Re: Term Limits

Other than that, I still think we could do A LOT of good by the simple act of getting term limits included as an amendment to the Constitution. Anyone on board if I try to research this action?

Perhaps. Just make sure to check out where term limits are already in place for more than governors. Like Michigan and California. I'm sure both of those states would be shining examples of term limits in action.

On a more serious note, don't destroy the elected officials and end up empowering the "unelected officials" (i.e. the bureaucracy or lobbyists) even more than they already are.

[tsetsefly]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Looking for which party to blame is a fruitless activity. Blame applies when things might have worked out ok, except that one party did something they should not have done and could have done differently. In other words, to afix blame, you have to present an alternative scenario in which things work out ok, given only that the guilty (blamed) party acted in some other plausible but different manner.

When a complex system breaks down, as in this case, where several parties would have to acted quite differently and in ways quite unlikely given the usual limitations of us humans and their organizations, then looking for which single party to blame doesn't help understand the failure nor guide us to a remedy.

I disagree that it doesn't help understand the failure. It was government who basically created the FIRE economy, the FED poured out the money and the government took care of the favorable policy. The banks where just playing the game with how the rules where set up. They also hold a responsability because they where committing fraud by saying they selling AAA debt. But they where able to do that thanks to government policy aimed at propping up FIRE.

The problem with those quotes by Lincoln is that Lincoln never said them..

Summary of the eRumor: Alleged quotes from Abraham Lincoln about the poor, the weak, prosperity, workers, class hatred, and character.

The Truth: These words are often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, but according to the book They Never Said it: A Book of Fake Quotes, Misquotes, & Misleading Attributions, they are not from Lincoln. The quotes were published in 1942 by William J. H. Boetcker, a Presbyterian minister. He released a pamphlet titled Lincoln On Limitations, which did include a Lincoln quote, but also added 10 statements written by Boetcker himself.

I was curious about those quotes, Abraham LIncoln was a big government statist, if I am not wrong he was also in favor of creating a central bank. There was nothing government shouldn't do in his mind...

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

The banks where just playing the game with how the rules where set up.

But who setup (lobbied for and sometimes literally wrote) the rules -- the banks.

Who failed to enforce even the rules that were present -- the regulators.

Who spread disinformation and hid truth -- the media.

Who voted the corrupt legislators into office -- the voters.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Heck ... who created the Fed in the first place -- big bankers.

And for that matter what is the Fed? It is not part of the government as you suggest. It is a private consortium of banks, dominated by a few big banks in New York.

[tsetsefly]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

But who setup (lobbied for and sometimes literally wrote) the rules -- the banks.

Who failed to enforce even the rules that were present -- the regulators.

Who spread disinformation and hid truth -- the media.

Who voted the corrupt legislators into office -- the voters.

I see what your saying, but those in government dont have to accept the bribes to put the laws in place. But then again that is the moral hazard of giving government to much power. They can decide who the winners will be, and people recognize that so they try to bribe government into making laws in their favor.

I think it was Sheldon Richman who said (paraphrasing): "A bussinessman can't buy any favors from a beaurocrat who has no favors to sell"

The system has to changed, ill quote Federic Bastiat (required reading imo) on this:
The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.


It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.

That is what happens when government has to much power. But then again as you said, is the government to blame for this or the public that elects them?? I would say both but mostly government after they are entrusted(that's crazy in itself, that people actually trust them) with making "fair and just" decisions ...

[raja]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Thanks for all of the responses and comments. As I read through them, I am struck by the fact that most of you that replied agree that it is the criminals that should be punished and that not all of "the rich" are criminals. But, then you go on to demonize "the rich" as one big like group again by defending your use of the term and, in one instance, getting mad at me for defending wealthy individuals.

Basically all I'm asking is to start calling these guys "the criminals" rather than "the rich" for it is their criminal acts that deserve our wrath, not the fact that they have a lot of wealth. I, too, feel tremendous hatred for these criminals and would not defend their actions regardless of their socioeconomic status. When you continue to erroneously characterize and call these criminals "the rich", you unfairly include many very upstanding, very wealthy citizens...like EJ I would imagine. Plus, you unnecessarily and/or inadvertently engage in class warfare.

Yeah, nobody likes the criminals.
But what about . . . .

5% of the population controls almost 60% of the wealth and probably 95% of the power.
This IS class warfare.
Stop complaining about class warfare -- it's already happening.

It's time for the losing class -- the other 95% of the population -- to get off their asses and do something to defend themselves from the acts of economic class warfare that are being perpetrated upon them.

This 5% is who I call "the rich".
They a quite comfortable sucking up a pig's share size of the pie, and don't want to see their exalted state diminished. They need to be controlled, because they do not have the sense of fairness, justice or compassion required to reign in their greed. Ask these rich people to take a 1% income cut so that average Americans can have better health care . . . and they will squeal like a pig.

Unfortunately, the politicians have become the enablers of the rich, so they share in the blame.

The real test is going to come as the depression deepens.
Heads may roll . . . not literally, but though the polling booths, and legislation may be enacted to cut the rich down to size.

And, yes, let's do something about the more blatant criminals, too.

[0tr]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

the whole process of wealth transfer from the poor to the rich needs to be streamlined.

why go through the hassle of creating all these financial instruments and non enforced rules.
just have everyone send a monthly check to the fed that will then be pooled to pay banking bonuses.

no muss no fuss.
i've always felt this way about speeding tickets.
give police wifi credit processing terminals, you get pulled over. pay $100 bucks on the spot and go on with life.

I've been thinking that it's part of the 'add insult to injury' motive. Big time protection racket taking every dime, and rubbing poison in one's face to make sure the message gets through. That goes for both the financial system, and the tickets, and a few other things too.

[tsetsefly]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Yeah, nobody likes the criminals.
But what about . . . .

5% of the population controls almost 60% of the wealth and probably 95% of the power.
This IS class warfare.
Stop complaining about class warfare -- it's already happening.

It's time for the losing class -- the other 95% of the population -- to get off their asses and do something to defend themselves from the acts of economic class warfare that are being perpetrated upon them.

This 5% is who I call "the rich".
They a quite comfortable sucking up a pig's share size of the pie, and don't want to see their exalted state diminished. They need to be controlled, because they do not have the sense of fairness, justice or compassion required to reign in their greed. Ask these rich people to take a 1% income cut so that average Americans can have better health care . . . and they will squeal like a pig.

Unfortunately, the politicians have become the enablers of the rich, so they share in the blame.

The real test is going to come as the depression deepens.
Heads may roll . . . not literally, but though the polling booths, and legislation may be enacted to cut the rich down to size.

And, yes, let's do something about the more blatant criminals, too.

Really? I would say the overwhelming majority of those in the top 5% are not crooks, greedy, unfair and uncompassionate as you make them out to be. Even though I am sure you don't know many of them.

You carry a very resentful tone and seem to believe that those 5% are almost unhuman. But remember among those "scoundrels"you have many successful businessmen that earned their money. Most of those in tech for example (creators of google, yahoo, Bill gates and Co., Steve Jobs, Mark Cuban, Michael Dell, just to name some notables) This of course does not include many others in different industries that have become rich through honest work.

Now what gives you the right to proclaim to say they should pay more because they have more or label them as you did?

[cjppjc]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

Really? I would say the overwhelming majority of those in the top 5% are not crooks, greedy, unfair and uncompassionate as you make them out to be. Even though I am sure you don't know many of them.

You carry a very resentful tone and seem to believe that those 5% are almost unhuman. But remember among those "scoundrels"you have many successful businessmen that earned their money. Most of those in tech for example (creators of google, yahoo, Bill gates and Co., Steve Jobs, Mark Cuban, Michael Dell, just to name some notables) This of course does not include many others in different industries that have become rich through honest work.

Now what gives you the right to proclaim to say they should pay more because they have more or label them as you did?

Have you seen Mark Cuban at a Mavericks game.

The old boys club of MLB wanted nothing to do with him. No Cubs for you.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Banks Reopen Global Casino

I see what your saying, but those in government dont have to accept the bribes to put the laws in place.

For a far better explanation of what went wrong and who/what to blame than I can provide, take a look at the new iTulip thread More Bill Black.