PredFan
Diamond Member
Occupied here may be the only occupier who actually has a rational thought, and yet even he cannot defend the rediculous claims and demands that his group espouces.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To be clear, Wall Street is regulated.
The Housing bubble was caused because the lending industry was not regulated. I recall that when I refined my house to get a lower interest rate in the 90's, it was done in the rented offices of a loan originator, not a bank.
That loan was made and then sold, 3 times before it was paid off, and that is what created the housing bubble.
The loans made created a risk, but that risk was not born by the original lender. The loans were bundled and sold and a large enough percent were bad and became the now famous "Toxic Assets" that TARP was supposed to clear up, but that are still in existence and still a ticking time bomb thanks to the ill directed and probably corrupt Obama administration dupes.
Banking and Wall Street are both pretty regulated. The Loan originators were not in such rigid constraints and the Congress of the USA passed laws to push lenders into lending to this who could not repay and should never have been given the loans in the first place.
Do you want to know who is responsible? I'll tell you. It is the people and the government of the USA. We all had a hand in it and trying to deflect blame to others is pointless and Liberal.
Glass-Steagall would have prevented the mortgage back derivative bonanza from happening.
But let me get this straight. Because of lax regulation, people exploited and got rich off, knowing they were doing something extremely risky (So much so..they hedged their bets by taking out insurance)..it's the "government's fault".
Really?
At what point is it the "Greedy Unethical Bastard's" Fault?
These people hire autistic math savants to design investment schemes that defy regulation or even understanding by our regulators, they know they are being devious.
If we had really intelligent people, they would also understand a corporation cannot have an individual thought, therefore should not be allowed to contribute to political individuals directly or indirectly.
Corporations are legal personages so they can pay taxes. They are legal personages so they can be sued. They are legal people for the protection of the public not the protection of the corporations. Without corporations being legal people, there would be no multimillion dollar lawsuits against corporations.
Thankfully intelligent people will be in charge for the foreseeable future and we won't ever see corporations lose their legal personhood. Some might whine and cry for it, but that's because they don't know any better.
Corporate personhood has given us too big to fail and a 100 to 1 ratio of lobbyists to congressman, it's great. How long does it take to sue a bank? The only accountability measure real persons have against big corporations is a joke.
The right always reaches out with fixed bayonets and no desire for understanding.
I have to agree with that for myself personally. I can't answer for the entire right, but I have no desire whatsoever to understand the motivation of the thief, whether its a mugger in an alley or a man in suit here from the government.
I heard the perfect description of OWS this morning. It's Wayne's World living in the basement of the Golden Girls.
There is no perfect glib definition for such a diverse group of people with differing and often contradictory goals. Democracy is messy, fascism is clean and simple.
Oh..and money is not speech.
Money is a multi-functional tool. It buys ink, paper, air time. What is your point? Let me guess. People and Organizations that are like minded with you can't do anything wrong, and People and Organizations that are not, can't do anything right. Got Ya.
Naw.
Corporations are not people.
Money is not speech.
Simple.
If a corporation was an actual person and he lived next door you would hate his guts. Playing his stadium sized stereo system in the middle of the night and dumping his garbage over your fence.
If we had really intelligent people, they would also understand a corporation cannot have an individual thought, therefore should not be allowed to contribute to political individuals directly or indirectly.
Corporations are people. They are all the people who work there, and all of the consumers who buy the product. That isn't a hard concept.
A corporation is not held to the same standards of justice as an individual. It cannot be sentenced to the death penalty for instance.
If we had really intelligent people, they would also understand a corporation cannot have an individual thought, therefore should not be allowed to contribute to political individuals directly or indirectly.
So corporations would not be allowed to support social programs? There would not be such a thing as being a good corporate citizen? No corporate gay friendly policies. No corporate foundations or charities. What liberals want is corporate personhood, but only in very select areas. They can't oppose any liberal ideals, but can support all liberal ideals.
If corporations cannot support political candidates neither should unions.
There is a difference between supporting a candidate and having undue influence over that candidate.
If a corporation was an actual person and he lived next door you would hate his guts. Playing his stadium sized stereo system in the middle of the night and dumping his garbage over your fence.
Corporations do live next door to people and they do play the stereo in the middle of the night and throw garbage over the fence. Then they get sued. If they weren't legal personages they couldn't be sued. You would be required to identify the one person turning up the stereo and thowing the garbage and be limited to that person only.
No, your corporate neighbor already bought the cops and judges, no remedy there.
No, your corporate neighbor already bought the cops and judges, no remedy there.
Is that better or worse than liberals who own the cops and judges? Eliminating impartial justice has been a liberal goal for decades.
Instead of a corporate neighbor who kept the stero at max and threw garbage around, suppose it was an occupy site with 24/7 drum circles and shitting on your front lawn. Stopping that would be a denial of free speech wouldn't it? Who can you complain to? Not the police. They won't clear the space. You might be able to clean up the garbage the corporation throws, try pepper spraying occupiers keeping you from going to work.
Pretty crappy comparison as private property rights trump 1st amendment rights.
This fellow and those of you are trying to reach out to the occupy crowd?
Well your doing it all wrong.
The right always reaches out with fixed bayonets and no desire for understanding.
The right always reaches out with fixed bayonets and no desire for understanding.
I have to agree with that for myself personally. I can't answer for the entire right, but I have no desire whatsoever to understand the motivation of the thief, whether its a mugger in an alley or a man in suit here from the government.
I heard the perfect description of OWS this morning. It's Wayne's World living in the basement of the Golden Girls.
There is no perfect glib definition for such a diverse group of people with differing and often contradictory goals. Democracy is messy, fascism is clean and simple.
With the money they've been siphoning off from the the middle class for the last 30 years.
In this context, define siphoning and give examples.
"Trickle down" tax cuts. Leveraged corporate buyouts. Banking transaction fees. Tax breaks for outsourcers.
the tea party is proving money doesn't matter. See Indiana.If we had really intelligent people, they would also understand a corporation cannot have an individual thought, therefore should not be allowed to contribute to political individuals directly or indirectly.
So corporations would not be allowed to support social programs? There would not be such a thing as being a good corporate citizen? No corporate gay friendly policies. No corporate foundations or charities. What liberals want is corporate personhood, but only in very select areas. They can't oppose any liberal ideals, but can support all liberal ideals.
If corporations cannot support political candidates neither should unions.
There is a difference between supporting a candidate and having undue influence over that candidate.
that is why corporations are sued for millions all the time. Please provide proof. I can provide tons proving you wrong.If a corporation was an actual person and he lived next door you would hate his guts. Playing his stadium sized stereo system in the middle of the night and dumping his garbage over your fence.
Corporations do live next door to people and they do play the stereo in the middle of the night and throw garbage over the fence. Then they get sued. If they weren't legal personages they couldn't be sued. You would be required to identify the one person turning up the stereo and thowing the garbage and be limited to that person only.
No, your corporate neighbor already bought the cops and judges, no remedy there.
It takes a great deal of money to win a seat in Congress. Your either incredibly rich to begin with or need big donors. Doesn't have to be a bribe.
.....being a liberal in the south sucks balls.