Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: “The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is The People vs. The Banks.” - Lord Acton

Posted 2 years ago on Feb. 1, 2012, 12:06 p.m. EST by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

True then. True now.

"The primary reason..the Economic Elite has gained..dominance is their commitment to psychological operations that divide-and-conquer the US public. They use their overwhelming influence over mainstream media outlets and political candidates in very clever ways..to divide us."

67 Comments

67 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

There are 24 empty houses for each homeless American. 1 in 7 homes are empty.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

"The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace, and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me, and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in my rear is my greatest foe." - Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the US, November 1864.

[-] 1 points by ProudAmerican1970 (-11) 2 years ago

I get it now. You people are pissed off at the banks because they won't loan you any money because your credit is shot! That's the bottom line here isn't it??? LOL You are so transparent!

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

We are pissed because a group of wealthy people used the dollar's status as reserve currency, obtained by the blood of generations, to sell fraudulent financial products around the world. These products wrecked the global economy and caused millions of people to lose their jobs and homes. They have not been caught or even punished. Get it now?

And you, sir, are a troll.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

“Over time, whoever controls the money system, controls the nation.”

The bulk of our money supply isn’t created by our government, but by private banks when they make loans. Through the Fed’s fractional reserve process what we use for money is issued as interest-bearing debt.

Our money system is controlled by private banks for their agendas, not for the common good. Our government has the power to issue money (Art.1, Sect.8) and spend it into circulation to promote the general welfare; including for infrastructure, education and health care; not misuse the money system for speculation as banks have historically done. Our lawmakers must now reclaim that power!

Money has value because skilled people with resources and infrastructure work together in a supportive social and legal framework. Money is not tangible wealth in itself, but an unconditional means of payment. It’s the essential lubricant that lets things “run.”

Money is an abstract social power based in law and whatever government accepts in payment of taxes will be money. Money’s value is not created by the private corporations that now control it.

Unhappily, mankind’s experience with private money creation has undeniably been a long history of fraud, mismanagement and even villainy.

Private money creation through the fractional reserve accounting fosters an unprecedented concentration of wealth which destroys the democratic process and ultimately promotes imperialism.

1% of the American population claims ownership of over 40% of the wealth, and receives 24% of income, and vital infrastructure is ignored. The American Society of Civil Engineers gives a D grade to our infrastructure and estimates that $2.2 trillion is needed to bring it to acceptable levels. That fact alone shows the world’s dominant money system to be a major failure crying for reform.

http://www.monetary.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/The-Need-for-Monetary-Reform-Handout.pdf

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago
[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

money is the medium of control in this scenario

[-] 0 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

“Banks lend by creating credit. They create the means of payment out of nothing. ” Ralph M Hawtry, former Secretary to the Treasury.

“The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.” William Paterson, founder of the Bank of England in 1694, then a privately owned bank.

“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.

“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and money system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.

“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is, perhaps, the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banks can in fact inflate, mint and un-mint the modern ledger-entry currency.” Major L L B Angus.

“The study of money, above all other fields in economics, is one in which complexity is used to disguise truth or to evade truth, not to reveal it. The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled. With something so important, a deeper mystery seems only decent.” John Kenneth Galbraith (1908- ), former professor of economics at Harvard, writing in ‘Money: Whence it came, where it went’ (1975).

As Nicolas Trist – secretary to President Andrew Jackson – said about the incredibly powerful privately owned Second Bank of the United States, “Independently of its misdeeds, the mere power, — the bare existence of such a power, — is a thing irreconcilable with the nature and spirit of our institutions.” (Schlesinger, The Age of Jackson, p.102)

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

people need money to circulate resources

banks create money by making loans

everyone is in debt

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

Banks make loans by "creating money out of thin air," this is known as fractional reserve banking.

Private issuance and regulation of our credit and currency is the root cause of all our many problems. Over time whoever controls the currency will control the nation.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

we are already at that point

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 2 years ago

. . . that most of us are unaware of this fact: is an indictment against the system . . .

Our sovereign currency and credit has been usurped for private gain instead of public good. Let’s take back control of our money from Wall Street and build prosperity on Main Street by creating state, county, and municipal public banks. Public tax monies should be leveraged by public officials, not speculators and swindlers. Check out the Public Banking Institute for more information.

http://publicbanking.wordpress.com/

Understanding the US economy and politics as suffering from parasites: two professional perspectives.

http://www.examiner.com/la-county-nonpartisan-in-los-angeles/understanding-the-us-economy-and-politics-as-suffering-from-parasites-two-professional-perspectives

[-] 0 points by BradinUtah (32) 2 years ago

WHAT? People or the banks? People control the banks. If the 99% withdrew their money from any bank it would be closed in 48 hours.

[-] 1 points by flip (6879) 2 years ago

not sure that is correct - Sasha Lilley: Protests against Wall Street have inspired many people to move their money from big banks to smaller banks and credit unions and encourage others to do the same. Why might you be skeptical of this effort?

Doug Henwood: There are several reasons. First of all, I think a lot of the big banks wouldn't be too sad to see some of these customers go. One of the reasons that the Bank of America and other big banks were imposing the five-dollar fee for the use of debit cards was that they're trying to drive a lot of small customers away. They lose money on them and are happy to see them go. So I'm not sure this is going to cause a lot of consternation in the executive suites.

SL: How do they lose money on them?

DH: Because it just takes them a few hundred bucks a year to process the accounts. If the balances and transactions are small, then they're just not worth the bother.

This will also present a problem for credit unions: if they get an influx of smaller accounts, they're also going to be expensive and cause the credit unions problems to deal with. But that's just one issue. I think there are larger ones as well. The credit unions have for the most part more money than they know what to do with right now. They've had a growth in assets, not merely just over the last few days -- actually some of the numbers I have sound impressive, though on closer scrutiny they're not that gigantic -- but they've had an influx in assets over the last several years. And more than half of that influx of assets has gone into things like Treasury bonds and Ginnie Maes. They don't have enough places to plough their money into locally or for the benefit of their members, so they buy securities. And you don't get any bigger or more irresponsible than the US government, but that's where a lot of this money is going to go -- into US government securities. So if you're going to put your money into a credit union, you should think about what the credit union is going to do with that money.

But also I think we're evading some larger political questions. We need a different financial system, for sure. We need different relationships of ownership -- relationships of property. And the proper place to do that is at the political level, not at the level of individual portfolio allocations. Now if people want to move their money into a smaller bank or credit union because the fees are lower or they like the service, that's one thing. But you're not really doing anything all that virtuous by moving your money that way, I don't think. A consumer preference isn't a political act.

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

See, it does NOT cost a company several hundred dollars to maintain an account. That is utter bullshit and there is no proof showing that the financials work out like that at all!

An account at a bank is a line in a database somewhere. Your file contains maybe, MAYBE 1KB of data, max! One medium-sized server can hold millions of these accounts' data. Sure, it costs money to maintain the software and the physical servers, etc. but when these costs are spread out over millions upon millions of users you're talking about a cost of a few pennies per account for maintenance.

The tellers aren't paid very well. Maybe the loan adjusters and other more advanced customer service specialists cost the company more $, but those people are also negotiating loans that will bring in funding to the banks, so their roles could be seen more as sales reps than liabilities.

[-] 1 points by flip (6879) 2 years ago

well i have not done my own research but dougie is one smart guy so i will go with him on this until you get me some better info to back up your opinions

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

Now this sounds more reasonable to me:

" Bank account costs $250 By Marcie Geffner · Bankrate.com Monday, July 26, 2010 Posted: 8 am ET

How much does your checking account cost? Is it free? Or do you pay $5, $10 or $15 per month?

The answer, according to the American Bankers Association, or ABA, isn't zero. Nor is it between $60 and $180 per year.

In fact, the ABA says, the annual cost of a checking account is actually $250 to $300.

Of course, that's not the cost to the banking customer. Rather, it's the expense the bank incurs to maintain that account for that customer for one year, and it's a figure that tries to suggest banks lose money on most of these accounts.

"In fact, the cost of opening an account runs between $150 and $200, and the yearly cost of maintaining an account runs between $250 and $300. These costs reflect the expense of processing transactions, providing monthly statements, investing in payment system technology and software, paying the cost of tellers, ATMs, and online banking, staffing call centers, complying with countless regulations, ensuring privacy and data protection, and preventing fraud and covering fraud losses," the ABA explained in a one-page analysis, "The Cost of a Checking Account."

For the record, the ABA's footnotes attribute the $150-to-$200 figure to Robert C. Giltner of Velocity Solutions in Wilmington, N.C., at BAI Retail Banking Solutions Live, May 19, 2010, and the $200-to-$300 figure to an estimate by Celent, a unit of Marsh & McLennan Cos., in May 2010 as reported in a June 17, 2010, article, "The End is Near For Free Checking" in The Wall Street Journal.

Sure, tellers, ATMs, online banking and call centers cost money as do technology, regulatory compliance and fraud. And sure, it's reasonable for banks to be sensitive about this issue since customers have been warned that financial reform may kill off free checking accounts and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., or FDIC, has released two templates for very affordable basic bank accounts.

But doesn't it seem convenient, even disingenuous to imply that those big categories of costs relate only to checking accounts when they're actually overhead expenses that apply to every other banking service as well?

Read more: Bank account costs $250 | Bankrate.com http://www.bankrate.com/financing/banking/bank-account-costs-250/#ixzz1lLwS9Lrw

"

http://www.bankrate.com/financing/banking/what-do-you-really-cost-your-bank/

"But doesn't it seem convenient, even disingenuous to imply that those big categories of costs relate only to checking accounts when they're actually overhead expenses that apply to every other banking service as well?"

Hey, that's my point! It takes a lot of "creative accounting" to come up with the number that Doug mentions to maintain one account.

I work in IT, and I know for a fact that we aren't spending more than a couple of cents at best on each customer account that we manage. We have server overhead expenses and other tangibles that have to be accounted for regardless of whether our customers database table has 1 or 1,000,000 records in it. It costs us the exact same amount each month to keep the equipment running despite any new records that are added to our databases.

The ATMs probably cost a decent amount upfront, plus a marginal maintenance expense to re-fill the machines and do any repairs. But again, it is a cost that scales down exponentially based on the number of customers that are going to use it. Sure, that ATM costs $20,000 for the first transaction, but by the time you have 5000 people using it on a weekly basis, suddenly your ATM costs $4 per account, a number which keeps decreasing as the ATM's value depreciates and more transactions are enacted.

The point is that Bank of America, or any other bank, really doesn't care if a few new people sign up or drop their accounts in protest. The bank would care if a very large number of people dropped their accounts, because then their equipment and maintenance costs would not be justified with the lower number of open accounts that are in use.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

"In fact, the cost of opening an account runs between $150 and $200, and the yearly cost of maintaining an account runs between $250 and $300. The

the cost of maintaining an account is a few key strokes

[-] 1 points by flip (6879) 2 years ago

nice research - don't have time to read it all - not sure doug is wrong but you might want to read the whole interview

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

Good point. Let's do this now.

[-] 0 points by BradinUtah (32) 2 years ago

THE BANK WORKS FOR ME, that's why. If I don't like the way my bank does business, I simply say, "Your Fired" and take my business elsewhere- as I did with BoA. We already control the banks. Let's loose this "I am a helpless victim " mentality, man up, and take responsibility for our lives. Whining about the banks, the rich, the government is pathetic.

[-] 1 points by flip (6879) 2 years ago

in case you can't read the whole comment above this is the point! One of the reasons that the Bank of America and other big banks were imposing the five-dollar fee for the use of debit cards was that they're trying to drive a lot of small customers away. They lose money on them and are happy to see them go. So I'm not sure this is going to cause a lot of consternation in the executive suites.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

We are taking action and are in control of the situation. No one is whining. We are protesting. Get it straight. What is pathetic are these brainwashed trolls, working for the 1%, who are paid to try to knock us down.

No can do, moron. No can do.

[-] 0 points by BradinUtah (32) 2 years ago

OWS Protesting isn't "taking action" - it is whining that others aren't giving you what you want. You are "in control of the situation"? Judging from most of the post on this forum, most in the OWS movement are not even in control of themselves.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

Utah, huh? I spent some time out there. Nice.

Now go have sex with your sister...

[-] 0 points by BradinUtah (32) 2 years ago

Your intelligence and ability to support your position are quite impressive.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

I have already explained the situation. You simply cannot accept it...this makes you a moron...or a troll.

[-] 0 points by BradinUtah (32) 2 years ago

Another brilliant argument. Were you on the debate team in your high school?

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

We are pissed because a group of wealthy people used the dollar's status as reserve currency, obtained by the blood of generations, to sell fraudulent financial products around the world. These products wrecked the global economy and caused millions of people to lose their jobs, homes, and in more than a few cases, their lives.

As members of a democratic society, we have no power to stop these people and institutions from causing further damage. They will keep it up until one of two things happens:

  1. They are caught, punished and stripped of their money or, more likely,

  2. They actually wreck the global economy for good.

Get it now?

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Come on… would you stop it with this elite, corrupt, illegal bullshit rhetoric. The banks, the rich the elite and even the corrupt are not the source of your problems or the source of the world’s problems. The REAL source of the problem is stupid people. Most people are stupid. They are too stupid or lazy or both to ever check the facts. If it were not for stupid people we would not have President Obama. Really, did you all believe the whole country was going to get free or even affordable health care with his plan? Or the Clinton’s plan?? When you went and cast your vote for Obama did you really think there would be free college education for everyone? When the stupid stop thinking that anything is free we will be able to have progress. Nothing is free in this world. Everything and I mean everything comes at a cost. It is stupid and naïve to look to the government to solve social or economic problems. The bigger the government gets, the more it spends and the worse off the people are. Every time the government meddles in something they screw something else up. They wanted banks to lend money to people who didn’t qualify and the threat was if you don’t make these loans then we will not let you grow. So the banks made the loans. Now we have what the banks knew from day one was going to happen…people who can’t pay for the homes. Is anyone so stupid to believe that the banks are happy about sitting on all of these dumped houses? Does anyone realize the bank still has to pay the property taxes on these places and maintain them on top of the legal expense the incurred to take the property back? A typical foreclosure puts the bank about $50,000 in the hole on what was a $200,000 mortgage. Does anyone out there UNDERSTAND that when the bank has money tied up in a foreclosure that is money that cannot be loaned to others who could afford a mortgage??? To blame this mess on the banks, the rich, the elite or anyone but the Federal government is just plain stupid. Exercise your right to vote in November and vote for a change. Get rid of Obama (not even his staff seems to like him) and elect new people who have had the last four years to think about how to fix this mess. And understand this…if you want change participate. Participate in the government, run for office, help a friend run for office. Learn the rules and become part of the solution because if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem…..Occupy a seat in a class room or a place on the ballot.

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

'lt' : Hmmm ... anyone ever comment that you're a bit 'Obomber the Oblah-blah' Obsessed ? Have you been 'OhDee'ing on The "ABCNNBCBS - (Lame)FUX SNEWzzz BS ? Or are you Republican ?

1) "Come on… would you stop it with this elite, corrupt, illegal bullshit rhetoric. The banks, the rich the elite and even the corrupt are not the source of your problems or the source of the world’s problems." --- REALLY ?!!! You joined this forum on 29th Jan. and you know 'this' already ? Hmmm ...

2) Re. "The REAL source of the problem is stupid people. Most people are stupid. They are too stupid or lazy or both to ever check the facts." ...

3) So, "people" like 'people' who think there's any systemic difference between 'Republocrat and Demoblican' you mean ? People who seem to have forgotten GWB et al ?! Like "people" who are into 'Democraps or Republiturds', you mean ?!! "People" like you, perchance ?!!!

Oi "learnthis" ! "learn" WHAT ?!!! What did you 'learn' ?!! Where did you 'learn' it ?! & Is it too late to get your money back ?

"nosce te ipsum" ...

Dolt !

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

it is not the length of time it is the quality of the input. I have watched this movement flounder like a slimy fish on a dock with a hook in its mouth. No movement in any direction. No clear thoughts. Jumbled garbage. Your movement is losing credibility and that is sad because there were some good ideas..that are being lost.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

All this you've concluded after just 4 months ?! Tho' you might possess a wrist watch and a clock, I suspect that you've a bit to learn yet on the nature of 'Time' !! It really shows that you come from an 'instant gratification' ; 'asap' culture !!!

Could say more but gotta run ...

tempus fugit ;-)

[-] -2 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Occupy a seat and learn to read. I joined JANUARY 29, 2012. What have I been saying....you people need to learn to read then you can get your facts straight. Bounce kid bounce or whatever it is you do, make sure you do it with your head.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

I saw when you "join" + see & "read" point 1) above !!

However, "I have watched this movement ..." means that you could have done so BUT only for four months, max !! Despite taking the time to write the somewhat longer comment with links below, I'm just about to type the last thing I'll ever type for you, so the last word is yours now ...

DICK !!!

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Hi Dick, The world has been watching and waiting for something other than disjointed babble to emerge...and sadly we still wait.

[-] 3 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

Wrong. You are a troll and a moron. Go back to sleep. We will wake you when we win.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

thanks

can we have crepes of breakfast?

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

So calling names is what you do when you don't understand the facts, is it? GO read my friend and you will have a full clear understanding of the whole problem. You are a drone because you believe everything you are told and don't do the homework yourself.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

No, calling names is appropriate for when you have this many trolls on a Forum. And you, moron, are a troll.

[-] 2 points by ProudAmerican1970 (-11) 2 years ago

I have to say that this is probably the BEST post on this entire website! Clear, precise, to the point. Unfortunately, everything that you have taken the time to type will fall on deaf ears. They don't want to hear the truth, they only want to believe what they want. Sad isn't it?

[-] 1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Very sad. I talked to a few of them and they told me, "Change does happen over night" between hits on the bong. I asked them to name one change that happened over night and they told me, "the slaves were freed" and another came up with, "women got the right to vote". They were so proud of themselves!! Then I had to ruin their day and explain it took the slaves 100 years to win their freedom and I had to explain it took woman about 70 years to win the right to vote.....aw...The saddest part is the fact that these young people believe everything they are told and everything they tell each other. No one takes the time to educate themselves on any subject matter and if the words corrupt, elite and percent did not exist they would exhaust their vocabulary in under 30 seconds. They are starting to remind me of the Jugendbund der NSDAP. Brainwashed and mindless. Now they think I am an undercover spy!

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

The problem will not be solved using the tactics you suggest. That's like waiting quietly in the back of the bus. You will eventually get a seat up front...when the bus is empty, at the end of the line.

No thanks, dude.

You sound like an undercover I know who has been spying on the movement. Shall I reveal your name.....and location?

[-] 1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Ok did you forget to take your meds today. Undercover spy? Please do reveal my name and location..make sure you have it right otherwise you could have a big legal problem on your hands.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

Yeah, right....big problem. I have no money, no job, no assets of any kind. You can not touch me.

But, you are a moron.

[-] 1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

So please go ahead and reveal my name. I would really like to find the people that control the donations that were taken in . It would be fun to have classrooms in the park this summer. People could attend a class on solar energy, or farming, or raising organic animals, energy conservation etc. We could try to recruit teachers and people would have a chance to explore what areas intrest them. What do you think about that idea? Would you go?

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

WTF? Identity confirmed.

Thank you.

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

We should avoid having narrow views that require mischaracterization of the entire system...

Some behaviors of wall street and corruptions of government -are wrong... Are you able to comprehend this? We should not go around telling people they are 'stupid' for trying to stand up for what is right...

Then what we do is this - we point out the things that are good, and then the things that are bad...we don't just lump everything into 'nothing is illegal or corrupt and everything is super-duper' or 'all ows is bad'... is this really that confusing?

Start with particular issues instead of trying to lump everything into one big lump of false diatribe...

[-] 2 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

"Why Davos is ignoring Occupy....(A) panel really helped me understand the general Davos attitude towards Occupy. The delegates here don’t feel threatened by it, so much as they just feel a bit indignant at how misguided it is. Obviously, in a big inchoate sense, inequality is a problem. And maybe Occupy is a manifestation of that problem. But the Davos crowd is not even close to listening carefully to what Occupy has to say: they’re evidence of the problem, but they’re not remotely helpful when it comes to solutions.

As Lance says, “an organization that is at heart a grouping of the world’s largest corporations isn’t necessarily in the best position to improve the state of the world, particularly in an era of the Arab Spring and Occupy”. It’s another way in which Davos feels past its prime. It’s not helping to change the big world problems, in Europe: the best it can do is identify them. And it’s utterly divorced from the movements which really might make a difference."

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Was not aware of Davos (world economic council)... but what you mention here makes sense...

Let's face it, one of the most common behaviors is adapting to the environment, and in modern society that means mostly opportunism... And what that means is we often focus on how to advantage whatever system is in place, in order to get our 'piece of cheese' from it... So most individuals (and companies) are almost totally focused on obtaining money and status to get benefits like safety, more freedom, and other perks...

Now to try to change the fundamental inequalities of society and economic systems or exploitations, is a totally different animal than just raw opportunism (with its common sprinkling of false posturing and pomp in order to deceive by appearing noble or just, beyond what is actually the case)...

So essentially we are in a dsyfunction 'micro-dynamic' and unless we change our focus to real concern for changing fundamental aspects in society, and directly challenging stale global mindsets of society - instead of trying to appease or apologize for those in positions of power or advantage, then saying that we are trying create change and progress is just questionable rhetoric...

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 2 years ago

Well said.

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

I have to say that the majoirity of what I read here is inaccurate information...most likey learned by word of mouth and not by fact and fact checking. To call the activities of many of these corporations illegal is crazy. GE and other large corporations have a whole slew of lawyers who make sure they operate within the law. The laws may not be right but America's corporations are not a bunch of law breaking cowboys. The employee the majority of the American people and create jobs here and abroad. While we may not like the amount of taxes they pay the more we take from them in taxes the less money they have to hire people and expand their operations creating new jobs. Our tax code is screwed up, no doubt about that but the companies are not corrupt our tax code is corrupt. We need a tax code where EVERYONE from the poor to the rich contribute SOMETHING. $20 dollars for a year, would be better than nothing.
Writing that someone is corrupt just because you like the word is libel. Some people may find themselves in hot water for making these libelous statements. The problem is not the companies or the rich or the elite or the poor it is the tax codes. It always seems the people who scream about money are the ones that do not have any and haven't lifted a finger to work to get any. Instead of point out all the faults when is someone going to point out the things that are good because in this country we have so much more that is good than is bad and ..the public does not get to decide what corporate executives get paid the corporations board of directors get to do that.

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

"the problem is not the companies or the rich or the lite or the poor it is the tax codes"...

So the banks getting trillions in bailouts and then giving themselves bonuses is 'the tax codes' ... Must be nice to completely misunderstand the world and then boil it down to one factor, which has nothing to do with the basic mindsets that undermine society...

If the corporations paid even less tax, they would create jobs and throw candy at us...?

How nice... there would be no bad decisions made by companies, or lawyers rigging the laws, or corrupt influences (because its not bad decisions and actions that is the problem remember, it's only the tax codes) - will there also be unicorns in this place you claim will be created by by adjusting tax tables?

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Little elves write the tax codes and leave them on the Treasury Departments door step, when the moon is full. If corporation were not complying with the tax codes they would be facing hefty fines and criminal charges. Of course there have been companies that have done just that and there are people in jail for assisting with such. As long as the code is so huge and complex and full of holes corporations as well and people are only going to pay the amount they are obligated to pay under the code. Do you really think that anyone is already paying is going to pay one dime more than they have to? Did you send in an extra $50 last year just because you wanted to? Insane. So what is the problem? Where the corporations going to say oh let's pay as much as we can? Or are they going to pay as little as they are legally obligated to? Get real.

As for the trillions in bailouts...subprime mortgages..created by the government, for people that could not afford them to start with and guess who got to write these crappy mortgages? The companies that TARP had to bailout. Tarp had to bail them out because our dear leaders are the ones that got them into the mess in the first place and if the did not bail them out we were all going down the river. Do you understand what the TARP money was for? The troubled assests as defined by the Department of the Treasury were the frigging subprime mortgages. TARP allows the United States Department of the Treasury to purchase or insure up to $700 billion of "troubled assets," defined as "(A) residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008, the purchase of which the Secretary determines promotes financial market stability; and (B) any other financial instrument that the Secretary, after consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, determines the purchase of which is necessary to promote financial market stability, but only upon transmittal of such determination, in writing, to the appropriate committees of Congress."

Please I beg of you Occupy a seat in a classroom.

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

The idea that the government 'had to bail them out' is dishonest.... They chose to... They could have used that money to help homeowners, not let the bankers roll in extra bailout bonuses after already making a killing by excessive trading trickery and credit swaps...

Corporations have the influence to change the laws and political landscape to serve their interests, learn when you are in the classroom, don't just believe that corporations can't do the right thing because they 'have no choices'.. baloney...

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

The government had to bail them out or we were going to have a global melt down that would have taken 25 years to straighten out. The government knew that they would be repaid the TARP funds they loaned the corporations and most likely make a profit on the loans. The goverment could not hand out the money to home owners because that money would be gone forever.....Aside from having some very bad judgement and paying their top people over the top salaries when times are hard I can not for the life of me figure out what corporations did wrong. Give me facts and figures.

[-] 3 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Here's what corporations did wrong:

Just because they can get government to deregulate their activities, so that they can get people who are not as smart as them (since they hire rocket scientist and wunderkind) and can exploit people and cause them economic harm and injury for profit is not appropriate... changing rates, policies, and using predatory baloon clauses, etc....

People do not 'deserve' to be exploited just because you are smarter than them and can rig the system to your advantage... money does not justify mistreating people, even if you can get the laws changed to allow you to...

I'm not saying that some people who got loans weren't over their head, but let's not try to claim that the corporations had no choice and had to exploit them, by spending millions on lobbying to circumvent regulations in place to protect consumers...

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Banks are well aware that the cost of a foreclosure ranges around $70,000 in addition to the loss on the value of the property. I bought a foreclosure for $89000 and that house had a mortgage balance of something like $240,000. $240,000 (the amount that went out the door of the bank)+ 70,000= $310,000- 84,000 (sale price less real estate fees=TOTAL LOSS ABOUT $224,000. Believe me banks lobbied to not be forced to make subprime mortgages and they lost. There was no exploitation of most people. After they got their mortgage they went and bought a new car and furniture for the house and whatever else their little hearts wanted all on their credit cards. What is the matter with living within your means? The neighbors cleaning lady has a newer and nicer car than mine and she is crying to my neighbor she can't afford to pay her mortgage.

The biggest problem was over regulation of the banking industry forcing rules on them that forced them to loan money to people who were not credit worthy.

[-] 2 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

There were some question about some bills that required some banks to make loans...

However you are talking about a complicated cultural dynamic that is involved in how economic structures and education and politics and advantages in the system can be used to exploit the public for profit...

This isn't really about spreadsheets, it about values... Money should not be used as an excuse to engage in activities to harm other's well-being, financially or otherwise... "Well I can make money with predatory loans to take advantage of people, therefore I 'have to' to do it".... is baloney... Market greed does not override ethics...

First of all, if you believe that as long as you can legally get away with something, then that means that it is ethical, then you will be perpetually confused...

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Companies are in business to make money not to promote ethics, good happy feelings or anything else.

[-] 3 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

All behaviors have ethical components or aspects - this means that behaviors have requirements in order for them to be appropriate to be undertaken...

If you believe that business (or anyone else) does not have a responsibility to be ethical, then you are confused...

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

define ethical

[-] 1 points by Listof40 (233) 2 years ago

Well, there are a number of aspects regarding ethics, and I'm not even really sure if u are just trying to pull my chain here...

But essentially ethics is often directly related to truth itself (more specifically regarding 'fundamental truth') and how this relates to values ...and also some other areas and aspects...

For example, if one falsely accuses someone, and this results in that individual's execution (not unlike Socrates' fate), this is not ethical because truth itself is violated... often related to confusion, ignorance, or of not being taught what is 'right' to value...

It is not technically possible for practicing false witness or fundamentally false statements to actually be fundamentally ethical (theoretically, within a foundational context)... regardless of any cultural considerations...

Let's see what Socrates thought:

"And now I, who am old and slow, have been overtaken by the slower pursuer: and my accusers, who are clever and swift, have been overtaken by the swifter pursuer -- wickedness.  And so I shall go away, sentenced by you to death; they will go away, sentenced by truth to wickedness and injustice."      Socrates (Apology)

[-] 0 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Ethics has nothing to do with truth it all. Ethics is simply the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation. It is a a theroy or system of moral values. A guiding philosophy as to what is good and what is bad and drum roll..... it is subjective, most of the time. What one persons believes to be "ok" another person may see as "evil". One person may believe that eating horse meat is ethical while another may believe that the person who eats horse meat has no ethics. It may be unethical to bend a rule when you are bending the rule for your benefit but it may be perfectly ethical to bend a rule if it benefits someone else. Most professions have their own codes of ethics and they use those codes as their moral beacon as do corporations, doctors, lawyers etc. While we may not agree with someone ethics ones disagreement does not always make the other person or corporation unethical.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

'lt' : What utter twaddle ! "Majority" ?!! What's your sample size ?!!! + Re. "the companies are not corrupt" & "The problem is not the companies or the rich or the elite ...", see :

a) http://www.businessinsider.com/these-are-the-30-american-companies-that-paid-less-than-zero-income-tax-from-2008-2010-2011-11?op=1#ixzz1ejBOPiGq ;

b) http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf ;

c) The Oscar winning documentary film : "Inside Job" ; http://documentarystorm.com/inside-job/ . 'Inside Job' provides a comprehensive analysis of the global financial crisis of 2008, which at a cost over $20 trillion, caused millions of people to lose their jobs and homes in the worst recession since the Great Depression, and nearly resulted in a global financial collapse ;

d) The documentary "The Warning" ; http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657/ for an excellent insight into the individuals and events involved in the lead up to 2008 &

e) "The War Against the Poor, Occupy Wall Street and the Politics of Financial Morality" : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29649.htm .

Of course given your deluded and reactionary clap-trap in your comment posted above you won't avail yourself of any of these links but ...

dum spiro, spero !!!

[-] 3 points by PandoraK (1678) 2 years ago

Shadz, some folks are so caught up in their delusions of grandeur that they just aren't worth the time, breath or key space to attempt communicating with. Let this one go...

[-] -1 points by learnthis (120) 2 years ago

Occupy a seat and learn this. Don't believe everything you read. Consider who is writing what you have read and then check the facts for yourself. Learn to read financial reports and check the facts. My response to your links was written by more than one tax attorney, accountants and the like that are qualifed to read the complex returns of a corporation. A.)Here is the response for item a. http://www.cost.org/Page.aspx?id=80117

B.) Agreed Inside Job is a good documentary and let me say this THE SCREWED UP RULES AND REGULATIONS WE HAVE ALLOW what went on to go on and the rules are more screwed up than ever. If I go to a busy intersection and turn all the lights green at the same time we are going to have a crash. Our government with the scewed up laws made by liberals mandated lending money to people that never should have been given a credit card. I also have to say that the fine folks who filled out the mortgage applications with less than truthful information should also go to jail because they are also to blame. And that my friend is called mortgage fraud and carries a 30 year penalty.....MY POINT is the rule makers (our government) made the rules for the game and the players played within the rules. Who is to blame when the game ends badly??? Don't blame the players ...blame the people who made the rules.