I don't KNOW what's happening... I've said that a few times... no least in my FIRST post in this thread. I don't know... I never claimed to know. All I said is that it's not what we're being told cos what we're being told makes zero sense by any standard. As to what IS happening... it could be anything... but I said in my first post that we probably won't know til hindsight.
Jeez... stop acting like some kinda victim and read the posts :?
That's classic, you're one of a kind... "I don't know what's happening, I just know that you're wrong." And I'm the one with the vendetta?
Huh??? When did I say 'I just know that you're wrong'? And when did I say you have some kinda vendetta???? :? :roll:
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
I don't understand your constant refusal to acknowledge catastrophic failure as a possibility.
It may or may not be, but all systems have their limits, and there is no reason to believe that the US economic system is any different.
There are certain tolerances that are going to be allowable, and pushing beyond any of them could lead to a systemic breakdown.
I honestly sometimes wonder if people around here watch or read ANY intelligent news reports.
This is not lone chicken little any more.
OBAMA HAS ACKNOWLEDGED OUTRIGHT THAT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM COULD COLLAPSE.
He said it in a speech only just this week.
This kind of problem should not be taken lightly.
If there are any "solutions", the "experts" certainly have come NO WHERE NEAR a consensus on what that solution would be, and THAT has me (and a great many others) very worried!
I think you and I have different definitions of apocalyptic. I think the system and the market collapsing would be a good thing. We're due for a shake up. But I don't see this as an apocalypse, just a huge paradigm shift in world economics. Yes, it will be rough and painful. But I don't view the market collapsing as the end of the world, so I'm not completely disturbed by the thought. I see it as an opportunity to try something new.
You do under stand that your abstract "market collapse" entails the outright implosion of every level of our economy, right? A collapse in the banking sector would mean a literally catastrophic chain of counterparty disasters, and an outright armageddon in the credit markets. With business absolutely unable to retain short term credit, EVERYTHING falls apart -- i'm talking about Food Lion can't stock the shelves with food because they can't get the money to buy the shipments, the trucking company can't get the money for gas or to pay employees, and the produce manufacturers can't get the funds necessary to operate.
When you speak of "market collapse" being a "good thing", i can't help but think that MAYBE you are underestimating the gravity of the situation.
TO BE HONEST, i somewhat share your inherently optomistic "subvert the dominant paradigm" mentality, but i think that in defense of your moral position (which i DO agree with) that you are trying to gloss over the severity of the situation.
Yes, I think Gerald Celente is DEAD on when he repeats his belief that the economic implosion of wall street (and what he says will also be outright riots and rebellion) will bring about NECESSARY redistirbutions of resources (and wealth) BACK TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY. This will be an organic grassroots movement in the truest sense, as people in necessity of self reliance will be forced to break down the "mental distance of modern life" and reconnect with their NEIGHBORS.
Jefferson warned us that allowing these private banks to run our system of credit would result in a generation being homeless in the land their fathers conquered. He was VERY right. We ARE that generation, and it WILL be a difficult time, indeed.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Huh??? When did I say 'I just know that you're wrong'? And when did I say you have some kinda vendetta???? :? :roll:
"You BUY that????????????????????"
Maybe I read it wrong, but it sure reads like "you're wrong and nuts for thinking that." If I misread it, my bad. Sorry.
Also, you 1) claim not to know and 2) tell me I need to do better if I'm to convince you there's merit to what I'm saying, and then refuse to read or comment on my explaining what I think and why it is reasonable.
You do under stand that your abstract "market collapse" entails the outright implosion of every level of our economy, right? A collapse in the banking sector would mean a literally catastrophic chain of counterparty disasters, and an outright armageddon in the credit markets. With business absolutely unable to retain short term credit, EVERYTHING falls apart -- i'm talking about Food Lion can't stock the shelves with food because they can't get the money to buy the shipments, the trucking company can't get the money for gas or to pay employees, and the produce manufacturers can't get the funds necessary to operate.
When you speak of "market collapse" being a "good thing", i can't help but think that MAYBE you are underestimating the gravity of the situation.
TO BE HONEST, i somewhat share your inherently optomistic "subvert the dominant paradigm" mentality, but i think that in defense of your moral position (which i DO agree with) that you are trying to gloss over the severity of the situation.
Yes, I think Gerald Celente is DEAD on when he repeats his belief that the economic implosion of wall street (and what he says will also be outright riots and rebellion) will bring about NECESSARY redistirbutions of resources (and wealth) BACK TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY. This will be an organic grassroots movement in the truest sense, as people in necessity of self reliance will be forced to break down the "mental distance of modern life" and reconnect with their NEIGHBORS.
Jefferson warned us that allowing these private banks to run our system of credit would result in a generation being homeless in the land their fathers conquered. He was VERY right. We ARE that generation, and it WILL be a difficult time, indeed.
I do understand that, yes. No pain no gain. Our system is unsustainable. Period. Whether it happens now or later, it cannot continue indefinitely. Those on top are not going to let it change willingly. There is no "soft" means of changing things. I'd just as soon have it happen now, when there still is a middle class with some power that might be in a position to pick up the pieces and keep things together enough to avoid total anarchy. Better that than to keep limping along until the wage gap is such that there are only the wealthy owners and the poor slaves and worse odds.
Huh??? When did I say 'I just know that you're wrong'? And when did I say you have some kinda vendetta???? :? :roll:
"You BUY that????????????????????"
Maybe I read it wrong, but it sure reads like "you're wrong and nuts for thinking that." If I misread it, my bad. Sorry.
Also, you 1) claim not to know and 2) tell me I need to do better if I'm to convince you there's merit to what I'm saying, and then refuse to read or comment on my explaining what I think and why it is reasonable.
Ahhh... I see we're back to the whole 'taking my words, ignoring them completely and inserting new words in their place to somehow support your argument'. Good for you soulsinging if that's the route you wanna take... I'd rather discuss the topic at hand :?
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Ahhh... I see we're back to the whole 'taking my words, ignoring them completely and inserting new words in their place to somehow support your argument'. Good for you soulsinging if that's the route you wanna take... I'd rather discuss the topic at hand :?
Pot, meet the kettle. Still haven't read my post explaining my views on the topic at hand to discuss them, have you? Nope, you read the first sentence, quoted it, ignored and deleted the 5 paragraphs following and then tell me I'm guilty of selective reading to avoid discussing the topic. That's rich.
You do under stand that your abstract "market collapse" entails the outright implosion of every level of our economy, right? A collapse in the banking sector would mean a literally catastrophic chain of counterparty disasters, and an outright armageddon in the credit markets. With business absolutely unable to retain short term credit, EVERYTHING falls apart -- i'm talking about Food Lion can't stock the shelves with food because they can't get the money to buy the shipments, the trucking company can't get the money for gas or to pay employees, and the produce manufacturers can't get the funds necessary to operate.
When you speak of "market collapse" being a "good thing", i can't help but think that MAYBE you are underestimating the gravity of the situation.
TO BE HONEST, i somewhat share your inherently optomistic "subvert the dominant paradigm" mentality, but i think that in defense of your moral position (which i DO agree with) that you are trying to gloss over the severity of the situation.
Yes, I think Gerald Celente is DEAD on when he repeats his belief that the economic implosion of wall street (and what he says will also be outright riots and rebellion) will bring about NECESSARY redistirbutions of resources (and wealth) BACK TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY. This will be an organic grassroots movement in the truest sense, as people in necessity of self reliance will be forced to break down the "mental distance of modern life" and reconnect with their NEIGHBORS.
Jefferson warned us that allowing these private banks to run our system of credit would result in a generation being homeless in the land their fathers conquered. He was VERY right. We ARE that generation, and it WILL be a difficult time, indeed.
I do understand that, yes. No pain no gain. Our system is unsustainable. Period. Whether it happens now or later, it cannot continue indefinitely. Those on top are not going to let it change willingly. There is no "soft" means of changing things. I'd just as soon have it happen now, when there still is a middle class with some power that might be in a position to pick up the pieces and keep things together enough to avoid total anarchy. Better that than to keep limping along until the wage gap is such that there are only the wealthy owners and the poor slaves and worse odds.
Well if that's the case, LETS BRING IT ON!
Welcome to the revolution, and I SALUTE YOU AND YOUR BRAVERY.
I can't argue with THAT perspective.
I like you soulsinging.
You're an argumentative son of a bitch,
but i'm pretty sure you mean well,
and once i got "to the bottom" of your argument, i find your central thesis is not really so different from mine.
i think.
wanna argue that point?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
IThe elderly will have fallbacks like social security or God forbid, having their children care for them which worked pretty well for 3000 years before private wealth and selfishness ruled the day. And those that aren't elderly can go fuck themselves.
GREAT QUOTE :!:
I think this is the greatest argument against social security, welfare, etc... What if we had our tax money to take care of ourselves, or our children? Planned our own retirements, used our money as WE saw fit. I would think it would be even easier to take care of each other.
Well if that's the case, LETS BRING IT ON!
Welcome to the revolution, and I SALUTE YOU AND YOUR BRAVERY.
I can't argue with THAT perspective.
I like you soulsinging.
You're an argumentative son of a bitch,
but i'm pretty sure you mean well,
and once i got "to the bottom" of your argument, i find your central thesis is not really so different from mine.
i think.
wanna argue that point?
Not really. I've always felt our views are closer than you might suspect. The only real difference is our views on the motive. You believe those at the top are and have been engaged in a unified international conspiracy to keep everyone else down. I believe they're just greedy bastards out for their own gain and only cooperate with each other when it's convenient or expedient. The former seems too complicated for me to believe it would work long and it assumes way more honor among thieves than I'm willing to believe. I find the simplicity of greed, and mutual greed occasionally uniting for mutual help, much more convincing. But the outcome is the same... namely, that those in the middle and the bottom are at the mercy of the rest and spend most of their lives being used and fucked over.
It's also why I like to poke fun at your occasionally histrionic reaction to market fluctuations Because I'm not remotely disturbed by the thought of a collapse.
Ahhh... I see we're back to the whole 'taking my words, ignoring them completely and inserting new words in their place to somehow support your argument'. Good for you soulsinging if that's the route you wanna take... I'd rather discuss the topic at hand :?
Pot, meet the kettle. Still haven't read my post explaining my views on the topic at hand to discuss them, have you? Nope, you read the first sentence, quoted it, ignored and deleted the 5 paragraphs following and then tell me I'm guilty of selective reading to avoid discussing the topic. That's rich.
*crickets*chirp*crickets*
Helen? I thought you wanted to discuss the topic at hand, like I tried to do?
Ahhh... I see we're back to the whole 'taking my words, ignoring them completely and inserting new words in their place to somehow support your argument'. Good for you soulsinging if that's the route you wanna take... I'd rather discuss the topic at hand :?
Pot, meet the kettle. Still haven't read my post explaining my views on the topic at hand to discuss them, have you? Nope, you read the first sentence, quoted it, ignored and deleted the 5 paragraphs following and then tell me I'm guilty of selective reading to avoid discussing the topic. That's rich.
*crickets*chirp*crickets*
Helen? I thought you wanted to discuss the topic at hand, like I tried to do?
See my post that you quoted. I read your post and, if you'd read my posts and my opinions on the subject, you'd know there was nothing further to discuss. I said something is not right about all this and that I don't know what. You can give me as much 'proof' to the contrary as you like... which were just a few examples of how maybe things ARE as they seem... but still none of it adds up.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
See my post that you quoted. I read your post and, if you'd read my posts and my opinions on the subject, you'd know there was nothing further to discuss. I said something is not right about all this and that I don't know what. You can give me as much 'proof' to the contrary as you like... which were just a few examples of how maybe things ARE as they seem... but still none of it adds up.
If you truly wanted to discuss things, as you claim, you'd have read my post and commented on the topic "at hand." You keep saying you don't know what's going on, perhaps you ought to try reading up on it then before claiming you want to discuss things, especially when your discussion simply is "I don't know." So, again, you don't know anything about what's going on here, you just know that whatever I am posting is probably wrong? Pray tell, read that post of mine and tell me where it falls short so that I can explain the holes and help you understand the situation a bit better.
See my post that you quoted. I read your post and, if you'd read my posts and my opinions on the subject, you'd know there was nothing further to discuss. I said something is not right about all this and that I don't know what. You can give me as much 'proof' to the contrary as you like... which were just a few examples of how maybe things ARE as they seem... but still none of it adds up.
If you truly wanted to discuss things, as you claim, you'd have read my post and commented on the topic "at hand." You keep saying you don't know what's going on, perhaps you ought to try reading up on it then before claiming you want to discuss things, especially when your discussion simply is "I don't know." So, again, you don't know anything about what's going on here, you just know that whatever I am posting is probably wrong? Pray tell, read that post of mine and tell me where it falls short so that I can explain the holes and help you understand the situation a bit better.
Where did I say you're probably wrong? A gut feeling is just that... and a conspiracy theory is a theory... which is why I don't debate them.. cos I accept that IF THERE WERE PROOF... it would no longer be a feeling or a theory :? how hard is that to comprehend?
At least I CAN accept that I don't know everything If you like, I could continue and offer stupid one off examples to 'prove my point'... but that's not how I work! And I don't adjust myself to suit other peoples posting styles either.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Where did I say you're probably wrong? A gut feeling is just that... and a conspiracy theory is a theory... which is why I don't debate them.. cos I accept that IF THERE WERE PROOF... it would no longer be a feeling or a theory :? how hard is that to comprehend?
At least I CAN accept that I don't know everything If you like, I could continue and offer stupid one off examples to 'prove my point'... but that's not how I work! And I don't adjust myself to suit other peoples posting styles either.
Fair enough. Just don't say you want to discuss a topic that a few posts later you say you won't debate because you have no proof.
Where did I say you're probably wrong? A gut feeling is just that... and a conspiracy theory is a theory... which is why I don't debate them.. cos I accept that IF THERE WERE PROOF... it would no longer be a feeling or a theory :? how hard is that to comprehend?
At least I CAN accept that I don't know everything If you like, I could continue and offer stupid one off examples to 'prove my point'... but that's not how I work! And I don't adjust myself to suit other peoples posting styles either.
Fair enough. Just don't say you want to discuss a topic that a few posts later you say you won't debate because you have no proof.
I said I'd rather discuss the topic at hand than go down your route of getting personal and being offended that I 'ignored certain points'. Doesn't mean I WANT to discuss the topic at hand... just that I'd RATHER do it than the latter. You keep trying to turn threads into some kinda personal battle or something. If I don't have an answer or don't know the answer, I'm not gonna make something up... so stop trying to continue something that isn't happening.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
History shows that when we are left alone by the government, the economy is better, there is more job growth, and everyone is happier for it. When the government takes too much control over everything, the economy gets stunted and businesses start closing.
didn't obama state in his speech, he was for self reliance...laizezz faire has always been a great philosophy.
*good tidings for your girlfriends branch....
all insanity:
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
Markets are now at 7000, and aiming towards 6000 (or 750 headed to 650 S&P)
and IT LOOKS LIKE CITI WILL CONVINCE THE FED TO GO AHEAD AND BUY 40% OF ITS COMMON STOCK.
Nationalization IS INDEED upon us.
The government is REFUSING TO LET MARKETS WORK.
REFUSING TO LET BAD BUSINESS FAIL.
AND IS GOING TO DRAG US ALL DOWN THE TUBES WITH THESE ENORMOUS FINANCIAL BLACK HOLES.
Say goodbye to your 401k's folks.
Go grab a copy of The Creature From Jekyll Island or maybe The Case Against The Fed and LEARN WHY THIS IS HAPPENING so you won't be herded in to more false solutions. Also, MAYBE YOU'LL BE MAD AS HELL!
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Nationalization may be the only viable option in the end to stabilize the situation. (Yes, I know, the status quo system should just lay down and die, but that's not going to happen. Ever.)
It's long since beyond right/left politics. Now it's just grabs for things that might work in the sense that it prevents complete disaster. And nationalization has worked in the past. Both Sweden and Norway nationalized troubled banks in the late 1980s, and sold them again when they had stabilized and was profitable again. It ended up actually benefitting tax payers, as they got back the investment they took to save it. Actually, they profited slightly. They had to slam money on the table initially of course, but it ended up being win-win, and no cost in the end.
Well, except for the shareholders that lost their investment of course. Then again, as a norwegian economist has pointed out recently, if the bank is about to go broke, that money stands to be lost anyway. So in such a situation, nationalization may be a win-win scenario, or at least neutral-win. If it works, of course. But it has worked before.
Of course, all of this must be excruciatingly painful for free market zealots to behold. But there is no danger of the world going communist suddenly. Every country has been clear that they see this is temporary necessities. The market will return, although probably with a different set of playing rules and some added safety valves. The "Washington consensus" of hands-off economic policies will probably not gain poopularity for a long time after this. Some of us dont see that as necessarily a bad thing.
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Nationalization may be the only viable option in the end to stabilize the situation. (Yes, I know, the status quo system should just lay down and die, but that's not going to happen. Ever.)
It's long since beyond right/left politics. Now it's just grabs for things that might work in the sense that it prevents complete disaster. And nationalization has worked in the past. Both Sweden and Norway nationalized troubled banks in the late 1980s, and sold them again when they had stabilized and was profitable again. It ended up actually benefitting tax payers, as they got back the investment they took to save it. Actually, they profited slightly. They had to slam money on the table initially of course, but it ended up being win-win, and no cost in the end.
Well, except for the shareholders that lost their investment of course. Then again, as a norwegian economist has pointed out recently, if the bank is about to go broke, that money stands to be lost anyway. So in such a situation, nationalization may be a win-win scenario, or at least neutral-win. If it works, of course. But it has worked before.
Of course, all of this must be excruciatingly painful for free market zealots to behold. But there is no danger of the world going communist suddenly. Every country has been clear that they see this is temporary necessities. The market will return, although probably with a different set of playing rules and some added safety valves. The "Washington consensus" of hands-off economic policies will probably not gain poopularity for a long time after this. Some of us dont see that as necessarily a bad thing.
Comments
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
You do under stand that your abstract "market collapse" entails the outright implosion of every level of our economy, right? A collapse in the banking sector would mean a literally catastrophic chain of counterparty disasters, and an outright armageddon in the credit markets. With business absolutely unable to retain short term credit, EVERYTHING falls apart -- i'm talking about Food Lion can't stock the shelves with food because they can't get the money to buy the shipments, the trucking company can't get the money for gas or to pay employees, and the produce manufacturers can't get the funds necessary to operate.
When you speak of "market collapse" being a "good thing", i can't help but think that MAYBE you are underestimating the gravity of the situation.
TO BE HONEST, i somewhat share your inherently optomistic "subvert the dominant paradigm" mentality, but i think that in defense of your moral position (which i DO agree with) that you are trying to gloss over the severity of the situation.
Yes, I think Gerald Celente is DEAD on when he repeats his belief that the economic implosion of wall street (and what he says will also be outright riots and rebellion) will bring about NECESSARY redistirbutions of resources (and wealth) BACK TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY. This will be an organic grassroots movement in the truest sense, as people in necessity of self reliance will be forced to break down the "mental distance of modern life" and reconnect with their NEIGHBORS.
Jefferson warned us that allowing these private banks to run our system of credit would result in a generation being homeless in the land their fathers conquered. He was VERY right. We ARE that generation, and it WILL be a difficult time, indeed.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
"You BUY that????????????????????"
Maybe I read it wrong, but it sure reads like "you're wrong and nuts for thinking that." If I misread it, my bad. Sorry.
Also, you 1) claim not to know and 2) tell me I need to do better if I'm to convince you there's merit to what I'm saying, and then refuse to read or comment on my explaining what I think and why it is reasonable.
I do understand that, yes. No pain no gain. Our system is unsustainable. Period. Whether it happens now or later, it cannot continue indefinitely. Those on top are not going to let it change willingly. There is no "soft" means of changing things. I'd just as soon have it happen now, when there still is a middle class with some power that might be in a position to pick up the pieces and keep things together enough to avoid total anarchy. Better that than to keep limping along until the wage gap is such that there are only the wealthy owners and the poor slaves and worse odds.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Pot, meet the kettle. Still haven't read my post explaining my views on the topic at hand to discuss them, have you? Nope, you read the first sentence, quoted it, ignored and deleted the 5 paragraphs following and then tell me I'm guilty of selective reading to avoid discussing the topic. That's rich.
Well if that's the case, LETS BRING IT ON!
Welcome to the revolution, and I SALUTE YOU AND YOUR BRAVERY.
I can't argue with THAT perspective.
I like you soulsinging.
You're an argumentative son of a bitch,
but i'm pretty sure you mean well,
and once i got "to the bottom" of your argument, i find your central thesis is not really so different from mine.
i think.
wanna argue that point?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
GREAT QUOTE :!:
I think this is the greatest argument against social security, welfare, etc... What if we had our tax money to take care of ourselves, or our children? Planned our own retirements, used our money as WE saw fit. I would think it would be even easier to take care of each other.
Not really. I've always felt our views are closer than you might suspect. The only real difference is our views on the motive. You believe those at the top are and have been engaged in a unified international conspiracy to keep everyone else down. I believe they're just greedy bastards out for their own gain and only cooperate with each other when it's convenient or expedient. The former seems too complicated for me to believe it would work long and it assumes way more honor among thieves than I'm willing to believe. I find the simplicity of greed, and mutual greed occasionally uniting for mutual help, much more convincing. But the outcome is the same... namely, that those in the middle and the bottom are at the mercy of the rest and spend most of their lives being used and fucked over.
It's also why I like to poke fun at your occasionally histrionic reaction to market fluctuations
*crickets*chirp*crickets*
Helen? I thought you wanted to discuss the topic at hand, like I tried to do?
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
If you truly wanted to discuss things, as you claim, you'd have read my post and commented on the topic "at hand." You keep saying you don't know what's going on, perhaps you ought to try reading up on it then before claiming you want to discuss things, especially when your discussion simply is "I don't know." So, again, you don't know anything about what's going on here, you just know that whatever I am posting is probably wrong? Pray tell, read that post of mine and tell me where it falls short so that I can explain the holes and help you understand the situation a bit better.
At least I CAN accept that I don't know everything
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Fair enough. Just don't say you want to discuss a topic that a few posts later you say you won't debate because you have no proof.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Wow, you should be a lawyer
*good tidings for your girlfriends branch....
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
and
IT LOOKS LIKE CITI WILL CONVINCE THE FED TO GO AHEAD AND BUY 40% OF ITS COMMON STOCK.
Nationalization IS INDEED upon us.
The government is REFUSING TO LET MARKETS WORK.
REFUSING TO LET BAD BUSINESS FAIL.
AND IS GOING TO DRAG US ALL DOWN THE TUBES WITH THESE ENORMOUS FINANCIAL BLACK HOLES.
Say goodbye to your 401k's folks.
Go grab a copy of The Creature From Jekyll Island or maybe The Case Against The Fed and LEARN WHY THIS IS HAPPENING so you won't be herded in to more false solutions. Also, MAYBE YOU'LL BE MAD AS HELL!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
It's long since beyond right/left politics. Now it's just grabs for things that might work in the sense that it prevents complete disaster. And nationalization has worked in the past. Both Sweden and Norway nationalized troubled banks in the late 1980s, and sold them again when they had stabilized and was profitable again. It ended up actually benefitting tax payers, as they got back the investment they took to save it. Actually, they profited slightly. They had to slam money on the table initially of course, but it ended up being win-win, and no cost in the end.
Well, except for the shareholders that lost their investment of course. Then again, as a norwegian economist has pointed out recently, if the bank is about to go broke, that money stands to be lost anyway. So in such a situation, nationalization may be a win-win scenario, or at least neutral-win. If it works, of course. But it has worked before.
Of course, all of this must be excruciatingly painful for free market zealots to behold. But there is no danger of the world going communist suddenly. Every country has been clear that they see this is temporary necessities. The market will return, although probably with a different set of playing rules and some added safety valves. The "Washington consensus" of hands-off economic policies will probably not gain poopularity for a long time after this. Some of us dont see that as necessarily a bad thing.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Fuck shareholders.