Forum Post: Obama speaking on OWS NOW
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 6, 2011, 11:25 a.m. EST by nomadicHorse
(11)
from Athens, OH
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Obama saying that Protester of OWS are speaking for the Many that feel that they have been screwed by Wall Street ~ my words for what he said :=)
If Obama "feels our pain"... then ask him to collect all the bail-out money he GAVE to Wall Street... and redistribute that money evenly among the American people.
BRAVO!
Yes, how much total was it? LOL! Seven hundred billion or some ridiculous number? Every man, woman and child in America could have a million dollars each. I'm sure THAT wouldn't harm the economy. Outlandish move? Yes, but no more outlandish than the working class and poor in a bad economy paying for golden parachutes for criminals.
We have been following the paper trails that they WANT us to see. The national deficit increased $7 Trillion dollars under Obama in just two years. The amount of money transferred to the Banks, Corporations and Govt Agencies will NEVER be disclosed. And how could Obama take it upon himself to hand Solyndra a cool $500 Million? Obama and Bush are cut from the SAME cloth... and they have BOTH stolen over $14 Trillion from the American people.
O is all talk and when he does something its to pad the bak accounts of the 1%. he full of Shiite!
Yes. His motives are BLATANTLY obvious. Just follow his track record.
Funny how that wording is never used in the MSM. No one is talking about this fraud. No one is talking about the give aways unless they frame as a "crisis" They use fear to bully people so they can steal from them. All this created "crisis" is baloney to reward their corporate friends. If we actually had any real media out there that paragraph you wrote would be hammered home every day until the people get it. Enough do now and hence OWS. But still more believe the lies...we've got a lot of work to do to fight their b.s.
BINGO! Every co-called CRISIS is merely "smoke and mirrors". This OWS movement doesn't know exactly what it is REALLY protesting against yet. But, when the people in the streets all find out exactly WHY they are so pissed-off... there's going to be hell to pay. Hell to pay...
Everything in MSM is propaganda from the socially engineered, manufactured cultural "new hope" heros who run for office to every crisis they fake. Public opinion is so manipulated its as bad as China's People's Daily ever was. Yes.It.Is.
I'm going to make a statement here... only because I have lived in Korea, China, Taiwan, Thailand, Argentina, Mexico, Spain and England. And my statement is this: There is NOTHING more deceptive and manipulative on the face of this planet than the AMERICAN MEDIA. And I have met over 1,000 people world-wide who agree with me.
AGREED and I lived in China for two years. That is when I saw that our media is as bad as anything I ever saw there. I was in Fujian province patriot...putian city ...and traveled all over. I have friends over there who are factory workers in some of OUR corrupt corporations factories. What we are doing to these people with the blessing of the CCP is slavery.
All in the name of GREED. Let the worker bees slave night and day... for peanuts... in order to line the pockets of the 1% Elite.
"The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) is a program of the United States government to purchase assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector that was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008"
"Originally expected to cost the U.S. taxpayers as much as $300 billion,[1] by December 16, 2010, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the total cost would be $25 billion,[2] although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner argued that the final cost would be still lower.[3] This is significantly less than the taxpayers' cost of the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s."
--Wikipedia
Please don't confuse Obama with Bush, and yes $25 billion is a hefty price tag but this is far from the worst misappropriation of funds in American history.
You are following the paper trails that they WANT you to see. The national deficit increased $7 Trillion dollars under Obama in just two years. The amount of money transferred to the Banks, Corporations and Govt Agencies will NEVER be disclosed. And where were you when Obama took it upon himself to hand Solyndra a cool $500 Million? Obama and Bush are cut from the SAME cloth... and they have BOTH stolen over $14 Trillion from the American people.
I ain't sayin it's pretty, but how much of the $7 Trillion we blame on Obama came from two wars that never would have happened without Bush, and how much came from the programs set up by Bush just before he left office, so that the costs wouldn't be put on his name? Not all of it, no, but please don't say they are the same cloth. Obama has faced nothing but complete and utter opposition from Republicans from day 1. They have been intractable, while Obama has tried to negotiate and meet them in the middle every step of the way. If there is a serious problem it is that he did not use the support of his base to barter better. Instead he let the Republics use defaulting on our nation debt as a threat to get their way and then we all let them get away with it by blaming Obama as much as them. It is the rhetoric of hate that we need to be addressing. It is the power of corporate influence that we need to be addressing. Obama is a casualty, not a cause. If you confuse that and you blame and hate and reject all, then you create division and let the unified force of corporate influence win the day.
Yes, Solyndra was stupid. I could try to defend it and say that every investor is bound to have some losses but the evidence seems to suggest that at least a few advisers knew it was a bad idea in advance, so, yeah, I got nothin'
OK meep. I can tell that you are a nice person. Here's my research for the day. George Bush Sr was the Director of the CIA before he became President. Then, George W. Bush Jr became President of the United States. Obama is cut from the exact same cloth. And you want to know how? Read this:
1) Osama fake Bin Laden raid was 3 days after the release of the now thoroughly debunked fake long form birth certificate.
2) Don't fall for Obama's faux-populism. He stated himself in 2009 that he is holding the pitchforks back for the banks. Obama is third generation CIA and deeply part of the system.
3) Who is Stanley Dunham? Stanley Dunham was an OSS officer, which is the agency that was turned into the CIA shortly after the end of World War II.
4) Barrack Senior meets Stanley Dunham, one of Obama’s grandfathers, de-boarding in Hawaii.
5) Obama Senior is the first foreign black Harvard student and takes Russian with Stanley Anne Dunham at U Hawaii during the height of cold war.
6) Stanley Anne Dunham goes on to marry Lolo Soetoro shortly after her divorce to Obama Senior. Lolo Soetoro is known to have been a general in the CIA backed coup in Indonesia.
7) Obama junior works for known CIA front company, Business International Corporation.
8) Obama junior not remembered during the 80s and 90s in USA, as even Trump admits on mainstream media.
9) Obama junior Travels to Pakistan in ’81, which was designated a state sponsor of terror (prohibited as a place of travel) at the time, therefore he was not traveling on a US passport (except possibly with intelligence agency approval). Most likely travels on Indonesian passport (admits to stopping in Indonesia on his way to Pakistan in his autobiography), where he makes affirmative act of allegiance as an adult by renewing his passport to continue to Pakistan.
10) Dual-citizenship was prohibited by Indonesia at this time and US code required compliance with foreign policy, therefore his renewal would constitute a forfeiture of US citizenship. – See Pastor Manning interview of Wayne Madsen
11) Islamic prophecy has it that a tall black man with the sign of the Imam Hussein will rise in the west by way of deception – See Steve Quayle
12) FACT: Obama is third generation CIA, worked as a covert agent in the Af-Pak theatre during the 80s and early 90s
ZING!
Yea he should know cause he helped them out. if he was serious about what he barks he'd send Halter down here and lock Jamie Dimon and his pals up ASAP. Obama is full of it. he's their paid for flunky.
Hey Obama, do you feel our pain enough to stick your neck on the line and challenge your masters (Federal Reserve owners) like JFK?
Didn't think so.
I don't give a good god d**m what that liar says anymore. He will try to use this movement and co opt the energy for HIS purposes like any manipulative pol would. I will ignore his sorry lying ass forever more til there is an immediate and sweeping reform in the favor of the people and not a bunch of feel good nonsense spewed. Not a bunch of promised bills that will be passed and enacted of course AFTER 2012. These pols are all controlled by the corporations and until THAT changes trust absolutely nothing they do or say no matter how feel good and "emotional" it seems to be. No matter how benevolent they seem they are malevolent to the core.
He will try to surf this movement into a second term! He's a shameless grifter like the rest of the Corporatist trash he fronts for. We should ignore him he's irrelevant now. We have to take back the country and not wait for him to do it.
Exactly! Ignore him, it's too late to worry about some pol's lies and ass kissing now. They have their own agenda and it's not anything good for us.
Most of them aren't malevolent. Rather they are rats caught in a maze, a maze that they think is the most important thing in the world. They've been absorbed into a culture that makes them believe that getting the cheese is all that matters. I totally agree with you though, that if we do something about that dang stinky cheese we might have better behaved rats... slightly... they're still rats after all ;-)
Very well said. Perhaps when the corporations are out of our election process and media we will actually be able to know our vote will count. Some of US will run and won't BE rats or wolves but, human beings with some empathy for the people.
I had an Economics Prof in college during '60's that had some interesting ideas on how Capitalism's Problems would be unifiable & inflated by a Democratic System that could not respond ~ seems this is where we are in a time line of history. What is coming is what No One Knows ~ History is happening with OWS of people showing their frustration of a system breakdown with out economic & Political system ~world wide~ be active, be an observer but above all else BE PREPARED TO TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF
OWS is new DNC strategy
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken-Walshs-Washington/2011/10/06/obama-democrats-plan-to-tie-gop-to-wall-street?s_cid=rss:Ken-Walshs-Washington:obama-democrats-plan-to-tie-gop-to-wall-street
This and other tactics are to be expected, given no credence, shamed and ignored.
Best thing he can do is get the hell out of the way
But what seems to be overlooked here is that OWS is getting recognized by the large percentage of all political parties. Their voices are being heard...congrats.
As I have been saying.... Now that Moveon.org, Obama and Biden have all come out in support of OWS, we now know that it was never anything more than just an Obama reelection rally. Somehow, OWS keeps thinking it is "outside" the system when it is in the very center of the system.
OWS is spoken for...by the 99%. We should not let politicians align with us just for a free ride to Washington.
nobody speaks for OWS(as far as I can tell). As far as I can tell OWS dosn't like Obama as much as every other bought and paid for politician. Maybe you are a lobbyist sent here to post stuff and split the movement-or at least discourage conservatives from taking part.
No, not paid... but there are probably some of those too. I agree... "we don't like the president but we support everything he supports" ... must just be a personal thing I guess.. and a bit of his buddies.
He's pushing class warfare and tax increases, and pretending that big government can create jobs. To hell with that.
Leave us alone, we'll create the jobs. Keep it up, no jobs.
How has the Obama administration stopped banks from giving loans to small businesses from the billions of dollars in profits that they have made in the last four years?
Many economists believe that we would have faced something as bad as if not worse than the Great Depression if the government hadn't done something. Others may disagree, but it's very hard to make a reasonable claim that government intervention has been nothing but a failure, and that it will continue to be so. At least to make a claim salient enough to not act. Keep in mind that the Great Depression lasted almost a decade, so if that is where we were heading, it's going to take some time still to recover.
Many of those same economists couldn't even see the 2008 collapse 1month before it happened. Many of those same economists said that the stimulus bill would keep unemployment below 8%. Many of those same economists said that the Fed printing money would not create inflation. Many of those same economists said that QE2 speed up the recovery. Many of those same economists encouraged the Fed to buy the worthless mortgage derivatives from the banks at face value.
So forgive me if I don't beleive you when you say "Many economists beleive". What I do know is that many economists have no friggin' clue. In the end when we spend and print our way out of this disaster, who do you think is going to suffer when the boomer s are dead and gone?
Many valuable points there. Economists aren't perfect, they're like weather men, they can give you the percentages based on historical data but that won't protect you from the storm of the century. What they are pretty good at though is analyzing the past. Not too useful in 2008, but that doesn't mean we should disregard them completely. I'd rather know there's a 10% chance that it will rain tomorrow and be surprised when it pours then disregard the weather man altogether and always be surprised.
You are correct, spending and printing our way out of the disaster is stupid. But investing our way out of the disaster is not. The only way we can do that is if Republicans and Democrats look at the problem together seriously and think about what the best investments would be. Once we do that, you are right, we should stop there, cross our fingers and pray. Throwing more money at it than can reasonably be called an investment would be stupid. The problem is that the conservative movement is refusing to even acknowledge the possibility that investments could exists. Please, Republicans, we need you now more than ever! Work with the people to invest in our future. We have a huge pile of jobs that nobody has the education to take and an infrastructure that is a few decades overdue for an update. These are things that will make the long term recovery stronger, and it wouldn't hurt to get a few people doing something productive now.
P.S. Small businesses are not borrowing because their sales are down. Also: many (most) economists are trained in the Fed system. They believe in the free lunch theory. There are free-market economists, but of course you don't hear about them much. Just search on youtube for Peter Schiff Was Right. This whole thing was avoidable, it was predicted, it was warned about. What comes next has been warned about too.
The Fed caused that depression, they intervened with currency expansion and prolonged it, making it last until they STOPPED. FDR confiscated all the gold, making it a criminal offense to get caught with gold U.S. coins.
The Bernank has studied the depression and concluded that they did not inflate enough.
What is happening now worldwide will show the efficacy of that strategy. When money is printed willy-nilly, the people who have to work for their money are utterly destroyed.
Let's just watch and see how that all pans out.
Printing money willy-nilly is quite silly billy. (sorry it just came out) But really (stop), if the money is not just printed randomly but used to invest in things required for economic expansion and that can only truly be done by an entity as large as government (like education and infrastructure) then it seems like an excellent investment to get us through the short time while putting us at an advantage for the long term recovery. Government investment is just like any other investment, if it is wise it leads to growth, if it is empty it leads to loss.
That said, the old adage of paying a man to dig a ditch and fill it back in is just bonkers. But I don't see any problem with a government investing in it's future, particularly when unemployment is high and borrowing is cheap. That's why I say let's work together to make the investments the best we can instead of trying to ideologically sabotage each other to prove our own points. Each side has something so valuable to contribute and it's a shame when they can't work together because they're having a hissy fit.
The question to consider is what it is that makes counterfeiting a crime.
If I print money in my basement and use it to get elected to rule over you, is that a good investment? How about if I print my own money to start a business, and print more because the business wouldn't survive on its own, then offer you a job there, is that investment?
The crime is that you have to create wealth and save it before you can invest. The counterfeiter blows you out of the water in the marketplace, plus the fake money keeps on giving by forever decreasing the value of the money you hold. Which steals the time of life you have put into creating and saving it.
Remember that, when you excuse government counterfeiting and interference in the market. Remember that whenever they mention the Euro in the news (it's toast). Remember that when you hear that the Fed created $14 Trillion out of thin air to loan to whoever they wanted, and then wouldn't divulge it until Congress passed a new law FORCING them to.
The whole stinking thing is like a turd. The closer you look the more disgusting it is.
Your frustration is entirely valid. A few points: 1) governments give banks the right to "print money" is that counterfeit money too? 2) I have heard that a moderate level of inflation has been linked to a low unemployment rate, am I mistaken? 3) is deflation better than inflation? won't people stop investing if just holding cash earns them more value than risking it on new enterprise? 4) if we have a growing economy and we don't want deflation, shouldn't someone be printing money?
These are not perfect points, and I will concede that we are not currently in a growing economy so point 4 has some weakness at the moment. On the other hand, what if we agree to invest a little more money now in exchange for a little less when we are recovering? As long as that money is an investment that seems reasonable, and actually an incredibly common and valid business practice.
keep in mind also that what I'm suggesting the government do cannot be done by the private sector. The private sector in this country will never take responsibility for infrastructure nor can they be expected to. They also cannot be expected to provide adequate student loans and high quality education for all our children, ensuring the best and most competent workforce possible. If we invest in those things and only those things and with the hawk-eye of both Democrats, Republicans, and the people ensuring those investments are made right, is that still a stinking turd to you?
1) When money is printed that is backed by nothing, that is counterfeiting. So yes. This is what caused the housing bubble, the inevitable collapse, and now the impending collapse worldwide. 90% of currency creation happens at the local bank. With the derivatives, 10 times the net value of every asset on earth is supposedly owed. The banking system is insolvent. Liquidation was averted by allowing them to falsify their asset sheets (mark-to-fantasy instead of mark-to-market). They are walking dead. It's too much to paper over without outright currency failure. It will be interesting to watch.
2) I believe that is based on false time-framing. Spending counterfeited money into the economy initially creates a boom. But the counterfeit money isn't real value. Eventually the chickens come home to roost. So you get boom/bust in a repeating cycle. Plenty of opportunities to seize for monetary and political gain.
3) On this question, imagine a fixed quantity of money. As productivity improves, costs go down. Your savings holds value and actually increases in purchasing power. More people save, and this makes more available for investment. The invested money is actual savings, and so creates more sustainable growth. Is this bad? Consider who it is that gets hit the most cruelly by inflation.
4) I am all for that, as long as I'm the one that gets to print the money. All the better if I can print it, then loan it to you at interest, so you have to come back and have me print more for you to borrow so you can pay the interest. And I can take that printed money you pay me back and buy real stuff with it. What a racket. Oh, and it would really be best if I kept all this stuff secret. And if nobody could tell me how much to print or who to lend it to or what interest rate. I could be above the law, above any authority. I could buy up the press, the politicians, profit off both sides of any war (they line up to borrow for war). With my interlocking corporations I can get whole legions of people working for me without ever knowing I exist. When people become destitute by my depredations, I can toss a few of my fat cats off the balcony into the murderous mob below. That will satisfy them, and there are thousands more clamoring to take their place for some of that free lucre.
It seems to me that the primary reason why a free people would voluntarily form a government would be to protect their own rights. To agree on a referee function for disagreements, to agree on impartial punishment for crime, to mount a common defense against aggression. All the rest, local communities can handle, and it has been shown definitively that a central authority botches the job every time. Government 'investment' attracts tax pigs like flies to a turd. It always ends up stinking. I think the present situation is a case in point.
Sorry for being so long-winded, I appreciate your thoughts.
Yeah, our approach to the banking system does seem a little batty. I do strongly disagree with you on the point about deflation being acceptable. In a deflationary economy there is no incentive to invest. Holding onto your cash without investing it is 0 risk but with a return, why would you invest it in something else and risk losing it, unless it promises an extremely high rate of return? In which case most investment would only be in corporations that already exist and are successful. There goes competition and innovation. There is a value to a predictable level of inflation. On the other hand, we could probably improve the way we manage that inflation.
There are advantages and disadvantages to placing more emphasis on state level politics. On the one hand the ability of states to adopt different policies and for those policies to compete seems good to me. On the other hand what do you do when your Union has a Greece? Our strong national identity helps to ensure that we bolster each other, and keeps the poor decisions of one state (Greece in this example) from pulling down the rest of the nation (The EU in this example)
Take the idea a step farther. Say everybody hoards their savings, expecting it to appreciate, and nobody invests. No investment, no improvement in productivity. No more appreciation. See how things will balance naturally without some central planner? People make their own decisions without having to make the terrible choice between investing in a rigged market or having their savings STOLEN from them.
In our union we have a California. Its problems dwarf Greece. Greece is important because it gave up its sovereignty when it gave up control over its own currency for central control. They traded the usual problems of fiat currency for a much, much bigger problem. And naturally the solution is to bind the citizenry with unpayable debt and the crisis is being promoted as a need for more central control over everything. And they have got the people rioting for more something for nothing (supposedly, though the press lies and perhaps those people don't want any more borrowing which would explain why they BLOCKED the 'troika' coming to loan them more at the price of them ruling over them). Greece gets all this attention because if threatens the whole meme of central control, and its withdrawal and default could mean the unwinding of the whole Eurozone authority. My opinion, it's probably toast.
How is no more improvement in productivity reaching balance? You didn't mention the part where people start investing again, and anyway, what you are describing is boom and bust, which you yourself seem to dislike.
OK, when appreciation slows down because nobody is investing, then there is incentive to invest. People will naturally do it. This is not boom and bust like what we have seen with the value of the dollar dropping to 3% of where it started. The housing boom in particular could NOT have happened without the infusion of Trillions into the market. Do you like the resulting bust, which we have not seen the end of yet?
No I do not, sir, but I think it's more the fault of bad banking practices and primarily the fault of government over-incentivising home ownership. So yeah, I see the reasoning behind wanting to restrict government's ability to incentivise and deincentivise, because politics make poor grounds for deciding what is needed and what is not. On the other hand I do think it is the job of the government to maintain our infrastructure, educate the masses, and ensure our food, air, and water do not become toxic, so I would not want to throw the baby out with the bath water as it were.
Anyway, the bust of the housing market has more to say about government intervention than it does inflationary rates. I don't think a steady and predictable rate of inflation is even 10th on the list of causes for the housing boom and bust.
Thank you for your insight.
I propose to you that the creation of over a Quadrillion in derivatives stems directly from the ability to create money from nothing, and that it would have been impossible if money were redeemable as an asset.
When we used gold as money the banks just invented bank notes so that they could create money out of nothing. There is no currency that you can choose that will stop banks from trying to make money out of nothing. The options seem to be: 1) vigilance, watch them every hour of every day and try to stay ahead of their schemes, hard work, and you're bound to let a giant collapse through the cracks every now and then 2) centralization, ban them and have one national central bank, but then who do you give loans to when and how??? 3) localize them, limit their size, only permit credit unions, etc. etc. but then you can't have the convenience and standardization of a national chain... or maybe you can if there are separate companies for online account management or something...
I suppose there may be combinations of the above, we currently have about 80% option one and 20% option 2 (my numbers, and totally made up). I guess the only proposal I've heard that doesn't seem to have a strong counter point is to separate investment banking from personal banking.
That's not entirely true, meep. The banks were not allowed to just create money out of thin air while we were on the gold standard. The government took us off the gold standard and gave them permission to do so.
If the government declared a new gold backed currency as legal tender and took away the legal tender status of Federal Reserve Notes, the utility of FRN would cease and they would no longer be used.