Will Obama free us from slavery?

dongalong

Mythical Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,290
Media
0
Likes
62,405
Points
418
Location
France
Gender
Male
Enslavement by international bankers that is.

The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America

I just watched this rather long (215mins) but very informative history of money and banks and how greedy individuals have taken control of our lives throughout history using the banking system. It seems to have been recorded in the 80s or 90s but much of the information sounds so familiar to us due to the current economic situation.

Obama would be wise to visit Guernsey (UK Channel isles) to find a solution to all our problems (From 3hrs 10 minutes into the clip, a solution is proposed).
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
I can't possibly hope to view the link on my connection, Danglydong. I just hope that there isn't any Jewish conspiracy crap in there or misrpresentation of the old "Shylock" system.

I used to work for an Internatonal Bank. We need banks, even though I personally have never borrowed anything in business which has probably meant that I haven't done as well as I could. But the fact remains that those without financial resources but ability, need the money of those who would rather not or do not need to work for it themselves.

A true Capitalist makes their money out of exploiting those who want to make it. They use Banks to do this. All hail the Medicis, Popes and all, where would you be without them?

What I think has been different in this crisis is that banks have taken too much of the pie from people who couldn't possibly afford it, and then compounded their mistakes. But we have talked about that elsewhere.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Can I just add that our old banking system worked OK for everyone in expanding opportunities. Those times are mostly gone in the West. The reality is that if you are Blue Collar in the West you are competing globally for the value of your labour. And let's not stop there. A top quality electronic programmer costs $4000 a year in China and they are better off there than you are at home on $60,000. Don't forget though that it it is your household company names who are employing them and not you. It isn't their fault that they find themselves in this imbalance. The Tsunami for the West is deflating to accomodate this global reality. Sadly our Bankers still wanted to squeeze us for every penny under the old order.

My view, fuck them. Make sure you can grow some food.
 

Biggin'

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Posts
473
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
101
Location
New York
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
no he will not. he will make the people that he promised so much to - slaves to the government. The more people are uneducated and destitute, the more they think they "need the government to help them".

The democrats need people to be poor and destitute, so they can vote for them..
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Can I just add that our old banking system worked OK for everyone in expanding opportunities. Those times are mostly gone in the West. The reality is that if you are Blue Collar in the West you are competing globally for the value of your labour. And let's not stop there. A top quality electronic programmer costs $4000 a year in China and they are better off there than you are at home on $60,000.

I'm with you on the outsourcing of labor globally, but I don't follow how that ties into the banking system. Can you elaborate?

Don't forget though that it it is your household company names who are employing them and not you. It isn't their fault that they find themselves in this imbalance. The Tsunami for the West is deflating to accomodate this global reality. Sadly our Bankers still wanted to squeeze us for every penny under the old order.

When you suggest squeezing pennies are you referring to mortgage products? That's the only place that I've seen abuse in our banking system.

A true Capitalist makes their money out of exploiting those who want to make it. They use Banks to do this.

A capitalist is simply someone who owns capital. Your explanation is true of only a small minority of those that engage in capitalism; and who are they that use Banks to accomplish this? Shareholders in banks?
 

dreamer20

Worshipped Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Posts
7,963
Media
3
Likes
19,599
Points
643
Gender
Male
I used to work for an Internatonal Bank. We need banks, even though I personally have never borrowed anything in business...But the fact remains that those without financial resources but ability, need the money of those who would rather not or do not need to work for it themselves.

A true Capitalist makes their money out of exploiting those who want to make it. They use Banks to do this.

A capitalist is simply someone who owns capital. Your explanation is true of only a small minority of those that engage in capitalism; and who are they that use Banks to accomplish this? Shareholders in banks?


A venture capitalist would be that kind of capitalist.
Venture Capitalist - Venture Capitalist Definition

Our local banks would only indulge into venture capitalism for well established firms and prefer to give housing and consumer loans.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
no he will not. he will make the people that he promised so much to - slaves to the government. The more people are uneducated and destitute, the more they think they "need the government to help them".

The democrats need people to be poor and destitute, so they can vote for them..

But wait.... wasn't it the Republicans trying to pass themselves off as "everyday commonfolk" during the election? Isn't it the Republicans who have the ideal that if you give all the money to the rich 1%, that some of it may "trickle down" to the other 99% below them? Seriously, WHO needs poor people to vote for them? Republicans do. Unfortunately for them, many of them came to their senses and saw what the right winged party was promoting.
 

Wyldgusechaz

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Posts
1,258
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
But wait.... wasn't it the Republicans trying to pass themselves off as "everyday commonfolk" during the election? Isn't it the Republicans who have the ideal that if you give all the money to the rich 1%, that some of it may "trickle down" to the other 99% below them? Seriously, WHO needs poor people to vote for them? Republicans do. Unfortunately for them, many of them came to their senses and saw what the right winged party was promoting.


No wonder you are poor. Money wasn't not given to rich people, they earned it. Now you can disagree with HOW they earned it but they earned it fair and square. And they got taxes on it too.

Show me an example where money was just given to rich people. Almost 50% of people get money from government but it isn't rich people. Rich people are rich cause they tend to work harder and are smarter than poor people.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
No wonder you are poor.

Actually I'm not, according to the economic scale. I may not be able to live the life of luxury, but with what I make per year I can definitely survive on my own dollar. However, thanks for trying to label me something that I'm not. Really. I love it when ignorant SOBs like you try to define me. It really shows you how out of touch you are with reality.

Money wasn't not given to rich people, they earned it.

It was a figure of speech, moron. I take it you're not familiar with sarcasm? :rolleyes:

Now you can disagree with HOW they earned it but they earned it fair and square. And they got taxes on it too.

So, if I fucked a rich millionaire and inherited his fortune would you say that I earned it? If I just happened to be the son or daughter of a rich family, did I earn that money as well? How about if I just marry a rich person?

The fact is, not many people earn their money the old fashioned way anymore. Nobody is talking about it being fair or not. I'm just pointing out that there's a major difference between someone like Sean Fanning, the creator of Napster, and Paris Hilton.

Show me an example where money was just given to rich people.

Well, if you want to be snippy about it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/08/washington/08tax.html
Study: Bush Tax Cuts Favor Wealthy, Congressional Study Finds Middle Class Paying More Of Tax Burden - CBS News
Surprise, Surprise: Bush Tax Cuts Mainly Benefit Wealthy - Federal Tax Policy - Federal Budget & Tax - OMB Watch

Seriously... don't make this too easy. I know you're a bigot and all, but don't let it impair your judgement TOO much.

Almost 50% of people get money from government but it isn't rich people.

Wow, pulling figures out of your ass. What a magic trick! I should go tell Sigfried & Roy that you have them beat! :biggrin1:

Rich people are rich cause they tend to work harder and are smarter than poor people.

I take it you're a poor person then... because quite frankly, I think you're a blithering idiot. :rolleyes: :biggrin1:
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
Perhaps that was a bit too pithy.

Owning capital does not make you a capitalist, especially if you in fact owe the majority of its value. The important disctinction is the use, rather exploitation of a capital asset to make money. That makes you a capitalist.

I vacillate in my cynicism about homeownership and a capitalist dream. On the one hand it is very desireable for society that most can own their own home, but this desire is exploited and we are somewhat shackled to debt in its pursuit.

Having helped to get us in this mess through a ridiculous explosion in fractional reserve lending, the banks are now squeezing every penny out of us, in the UK at least. Actual return on deposits is down 33% in real terms and the real cost of borrowing is up 33%. No prizes for guessing who is making the difference in the middle. With tax on interest and inflation at 5%, UK residents are really losing 3.2% minimum on deposits held in UK banks at the moment. The interesting question will be whether those with the deposits that underpin the Banks, will realise this and have the balls to get their money out of banks and into deflated assets.
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Perhaps that was a bit too pithy.

Owning capital does not make you a capitalist, especially if you in fact owe the majority of its value. The important disctinction is the use, rather exploitation of a capital asset to make money. That makes you a capitalist.

I vacillate in my cynicism about homeownership and a capitalist dream. On the one hand it is very desireable for society that most can own their own home, but this desire is exploited and we are somewhat shackled to debt in its pursuit.

You nailed that one. The unnatural forces pushing the homeownership dream are the very forces responsible for our collapse.

Indeed, before lending guidelines (that had been set by the market and worked for decades) were revised via gov't intervention we had a very healthy and functional lending/home ownership relationship.


Having helped to get us in this mess through a ridiculous explosion in fractional reserve lending, the banks are now squeezing every penny out of us, in the UK at least. Actual return on deposits is down 33% in real terms and the real cost of borrowing is up 33%. No prizes for guessing who is making the difference in the middle. With tax on interest and inflation at 5%, UK residents are really losing 3.2% minimum on deposits held in UK banks at the moment. The interesting question will be whether those with the deposits that underpin the Banks, will realise this and have the balls to get their money out of banks and into deflated assets.
Its no different here in the U.S. The cost of borrowing is up, yet, credit is so tight most can't get it anyway. The spread/margin has increased moreso to offset massive mortgage losses than it is seeking large profits.
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
When the dust settles, I suspect that our economies will have lost up to 20% of their value in real terms (don't forget to add back inflation). We'll be back to 2003/4. In the meantime, those with very serious money, will have had the opportunity to acquire asstes at a 50% discount, and if they had their money in US$, then they are looking at a further 25% discount. Quite a sell off if you have the money. And let's not forget, as the OP started, it was the people with the real money pulling its supply that created the crunch.

You could get very conspiracy about this, but I would have to balance that opinion with the fact that things were unsustainable and a new balance was obviously needed in global economics. I could be wrong, and no doubt there will be something of a witch hunt for scapegoats.

Will Obama save us? or you rather? Not a hope in Hell. I think that the premise of the OP has moved beyond Central Banks.
 

dongalong

Mythical Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2004
Posts
16,290
Media
0
Likes
62,405
Points
418
Location
France
Gender
Male
I think it's time to start saving for the next recession to buy up the results of less visionary people's mistakes.
We all know that it will happen in 10-15 years, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.