Debt is Pushing the US Into Fascism

[georgephillip]

You do understand that, right? Commodities traders, are people who buy and sell commodities.

Any fraud among commodity traders?

commodities fraud | Definition, History, & Examples

"Commodities fraud, any illegal attempt to obtain money in connection with a contract for the future delivery of assets, which ultimately are never exchanged.

"Commodities fraud typically involves assets traded on organized exchanges such as the Chicago Board of Trade, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the New York Futures Exchange, the MidAmerica Commodity Exchange, and the Kansas City Board of Trade.

"Commodities fraud pertains to exchange members who fail to register with the exchange, who perform transactions with no economic purpose other than to generate profit for the member of the exchange, who provide false or misleading information to customers, or who steal customer funds."

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Audit 10% of all returns over $500,000 and 100% of all returns over $10,000,000.

Predators go where the prey is, and why go after minnows when you can get fat salmon full of roe.

Hang all speculators?

Speculators Were Hung in the 17th Century. Ah, 'The Good Old Days'

"Speculators at megabanks or investment firms such as Goldman Sachs are not, in a strict sense, capitalists.

"They do not make money from the means of production...

"They are parasites.

"They feed off the carcass of industrial capitalism.

"They produce nothing.

"They make nothing.

"They just manipulate money.

"Speculation in the 17th century was a crime.

"Speculators were hanged." - 'Overthrow the Speculators', by Chris Hedges."

They do not make money from the means of production...

I thought profit was evil? No one should make money from the means of production, eh comrade?

"They produce nothing.

"They make nothing.

They sound like you!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sounds awful!!

How much extra have they set aside?

What were their profits over the last decade if they didn't fully fund?

Why would the USPS need to earn a profit?
Do you think the cost of living and doing business in the US needs to be higher than it is today?

Why would the USPS need to earn a profit?

To fund their pensions.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If there were no financial sector, how do people get loans to build things?

Public banks can afford every service as private banks at a fraction of the cost:

Speculators Were Hung in the 17th Century. Ah, 'The Good Old Days'

"The Bank of North Dakota, the vision of socialists from a century ago, has been in operation for 90 years.

"It offers the state’s farmers and businesses low interest rates on loans.

"After floods destroyed much of Grand Forks in 1997 the bank provided a six-month moratorium on mortgage payments and gave low-interest loans to the community to rebuild, a sharp contrast with the raw exploitation that marked the arrival of Wall Street bankers and speculators in Gulf Coast areas hit by Hurricane Katrina."

Public banks can afford every service as private banks at a fraction of the cost:

Sounds awesome!!!

Just what Chicago needs, a bank that lends money at low rates to friends of the mayor.

What could go wrong?

 

[Andylusion]

Don't be a debtor. Stop borrowing. Live within your means. If you don't have the money to buy something..... don't.

So if you can't afford to buy food or pay rent, which do you spend cash on and which basic need do you put on your credit card?

Living wage - Wikipedia

"A living wage is defined as the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet their basic needs.[3]

"This is not the same as a subsistence wage, which refers to a biological minimum. Needs are defined to include food, housing, and other essential needs such as clothing.

"The goal of a living wage is to allow a worker to afford a basic but decent standard of living through employment without government subsidies."

Capitalism seldom pays a living wage because parasites like shareholders extract value from a corporation beyond what they contribute.

All of that is wrong.

Capitalist seldom pays a living wage.

Really? Because we have 330 Million people in this country, and nearly every single one is both living... and under capitalism.

How are people able to live 80 years of life in this country, if they are "seldom" paid a living wage?

How are people living a higher standard of living than 99% of the planet, if they are seldom paid a living wage?

I'm 43. I've been working since I was 15. I've been on my own, since my 20s. I have never taken a government handout until this very year. How is that possible if I was never, or seldom, paid a living wage?

So if you can't afford to buy food or pay rent, which do you spend cash on and which basic need do you put on your credit card?

You *CAN* afford to buy food and pay rent. I've done it.

If you are telling me you can't... then one of three things is true, generally speaking. There are exceptions, such as having a mental disability. But generally speaking, if you can't pay for food and rent, the solution is one of three things.

1. You need to get a better job. And YES, you *CAN* get a better job. I have zero skills. Zero degrees. Zero certifications. Zero anything. I am the definition of a living breathing ZERO. I have no redeeming value in this world at all.

I just got a job offer for $18/hour. If I can land a job like that, with no education, no training, no nothing... then you can get a better job than McDonald's.

2. Cut your spending. You don't *NEED* a smart phone with unlimited calling, and data, and on and on. I get it that you want luxury items like that, but you don't need it.

Just like you don't need a new car. I bought my perfectly good mint condition Mercury Grand Marquis, for $3,000 used. Haven't had many problems with it. That was almost 10 years ago.

You don't *NEED* cable TV, or even a TV. I don't even own a TV, and haven't missed it, in 20 years.

Lastly, you might need to move somewhere cheaper. My first apartment was 600 sq ft, for $350/month, 1 bed room. Yes, it was outside the city. And you know what? It was cheap, and affordable.

And by the way, nothing irritates me more than people saying they can't afford food, and go through the drive through at McDonalds. You can't afford food, and you are going to McDonalds? Where you pay $1.50 for a drink, when you could get 2-liters of soda for $1.39? Where you pay $1.89, but a 5 lbs bag of potatoes at the store is $2.49?

Yeah, you can afford food, if you are not stupid. You can buy a bag of rice for $1.79, and have it last you a month... and you are saying you can't afford to buy food and pay your rent?

No you can. Period. You can. Anyone who suggests otherwise, is wrong. It's that simple.

Now I get you don't *want* to just eat rice every day, for the rest of your life..... get a better a job, or find someplace cheaper to live.

3. Some people need to just move in with their parents. You are not guaranteed everything you want in your life. If you simply can't earn enough money, or you have expenses you can't handle... that's what family, charity, and church is for.

Our church has specific offerings every 3 months, that are set aside, to help those who are in need.

Family is supposed to help family.

Charities exist for such people. Pacific Garden Mission for example.

But, for every single working people in this country.... yes they can afford to pay rent and buy food. They may blow their money on luxury items, that makes that hard. They may choose to work garbage jobs that don't pay enough. But those are choices that they are making. They *CAN* pay for food and rent.

 

[Andylusion]

Sounds awful!!

How much extra have they set aside?

What were their profits over the last decade if they didn't fully fund?

Why would the USPS need to earn a profit?
Do you think the cost of living and doing business in the US needs to be higher than it is today?

That's a strange question.

Because the poor and middle class, shouldn't be taxed into poverty, to pay for union benefits and government luxury living.

 

[Andylusion]

If there were no financial sector, how do people get loans to build things?

Public banks can afford every service as private banks at a fraction of the cost:

Speculators Were Hung in the 17th Century. Ah, 'The Good Old Days'

"The Bank of North Dakota, the vision of socialists from a century ago, has been in operation for 90 years.

"It offers the state’s farmers and businesses low interest rates on loans.

"After floods destroyed much of Grand Forks in 1997 the bank provided a six-month moratorium on mortgage payments and gave low-interest loans to the community to rebuild, a sharp contrast with the raw exploitation that marked the arrival of Wall Street bankers and speculators in Gulf Coast areas hit by Hurricane Katrina."

If any locality wishes to do that, then that is on them.

The problem that we see in other countries with government run banks, is that they suck, and that they are filled with corruption.

India's state owned banks are notorious for their corruption and terrible service.

By the way, the US in the distant past, had state owned banks, nearly all of which failed. Even the Bank of North Dakota, isn't really a good example of a successful state-owned bank, because most left-wingers don't realize, that the Bank of North Dakota actually intentionally does not compete with commercial and retail banks.

They have almost no retail services, and only has one single branch. Which is why, they do not even have FDIC insurance.

Service by state owned banks is routinely terrible, because once again, it's run by the government. Meaning, you are not the customer. The customer is the government. The government will pay those union employee wages, whether you are happy with their service or not.

Just like if you go to the BMV, you have 7 station, 4 employees, and only 2 of them are working, even though there is a line that goes out the door of people waiting.

You go to Fedex, or Mail Boxes Ect, and you have people being served, the moment they enter the door. Because you are the customer. If you are not happy, you go somewhere else, and then they don't get your money, and they lose their jobs.

The other problem is corruption. And this is huge. Every state-owned bank, as ended up being involved in corruption.

Promises of Public Banks Don't Match Reality

When the government owns the banks, lending decisions become increasingly driven by politics rather than economics.

www.cato.org

This is a well documented trend throughout history, including US history.

And we could talk about corrupted public banks around the world, such as India were political supporters got zero interest loans from the government run banks, while successful hard working people, were denied loans despite having a decade of documented income. One such report, even had a Indian citizens saying the bank teller told them directly that they needed to go to a fund raiser for a politician, and the names of those on the fundraiser list, were known to the bank, and would be approved.

And by the way... We already know, just from the recent past, that in the US, government run banks fail, and are corrupt.

The corruption of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is well documented. The numbers on the books were fabricated to guarantee automatic bonuses for management.

And the biggest bailouts of the entire sub-prime crash, was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is also well documented.

And we know that political supporters were given special treatment by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. We know they had a special agreement with Countrywide Financial, for example.

Which here, is the largest irony of the entire discussion. Left-wingers constantly say they are against corruption, they are against rich people getting special favors, and that they are against poor people paying taxes to benefit the wealthy.....

Then they turn right around, and support exactly the policies that allow corruption, rich getting special favors, and poor people being taxed to pay for the wealthy.

 

[keepitreal]

I'd say dems are pushing up to fascism. But agree dept is out of control.

Elite Democrats serve the same ten percent of voters as Trump does, namely their investor class which is roughly the richest ten percent, i.e., the creditor class.

For thousands of years creditors have enslaved debtors in order to maintain their golden lifestyles.

Renegade Inc - Michael Hudson: He died for our debts, not our sins | Brave New Europe

"'To understand the crucifixion of Jesus is to understand it was his punishment for his economic views,' says Professor Hudson. 'He was a threat to the creditors.'

"Jesus Christ was a socialist activist for the continuity of regular debt jubilees that were considered essential to the well being of ancient economies."

Oh knock it off...Jesus was an activist for His Father
He indeed died for our debts, our sin debt
He paid the price, in full, one time for all

His crucifixion...His punishment for His economic views...HOGWASH
THE DEVIL IS A LIAR

Creditors DON'T enslave debtors, DEBTORS ENSLAVE THEMSELVES
People don't want to live within their means, they want what they want, when they want it
We JUST started taking cc/debit/tap and pay LAST WEEK...our sales have TRIPLED

It's not that debt is out of control, debt is what our financial system is running on
THERE IS NO MONEY...CURRENCY HAS NO VALUE WHATSOEVER, IT'S A FACADE

 

[Andylusion]

You do understand that, right? Commodities traders, are people who buy and sell commodities.

Any fraud among commodity traders?

commodities fraud | Definition, History, & Examples

"Commodities fraud, any illegal attempt to obtain money in connection with a contract for the future delivery of assets, which ultimately are never exchanged.

"Commodities fraud typically involves assets traded on organized exchanges such as the Chicago Board of Trade, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the New York Futures Exchange, the MidAmerica Commodity Exchange, and the Kansas City Board of Trade.

"Commodities fraud pertains to exchange members who fail to register with the exchange, who perform transactions with no economic purpose other than to generate profit for the member of the exchange, who provide false or misleading information to customers, or who steal customer funds."

Right... every single country, every single group, every single community, or civilization has fraudsters.

Socialism doesn't change that. In fact, if anything fraud is far worse under socialism, because usually the people committing the fraud, or doing so in connection to the government.

We saw that with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Clear evidence of fraudulent accounting.

And we saw that in Venezuela, where Hugo Chavez daughter was found to have a clear fraudulent off-shore food program, for dramatically over priced rice, that was sold to the Venezuelan government.

Fraud exists everywhere people exist.

That doesn't mean that every single person is engaged in fraud, or that the system itself is fraudulent.

The vast majority of commodity traders are doing perfectly good, and legal business. Nothing you said, changes that.

 

[Andylusion]

For example, every time Trump says America is a force for good in the world... that should be a uniting statement. But the left claims it is divisive.

The left recognizes your example "America is a force for good in the world" is a lie of Trumpian proportions. There is no way adherents of white supremacy can affect US politics without dividing Americans.

That's because the left-wing itself is evil, and when evil people see clear good, they hate it.

Evil people, hate good people. That's why you hate CEOs that produce millions of jobs, trillions in wealth, and benefit all of humanity, while you yourself produce nothing.

This is why you have to make up statements that are clearly opposite of the facts, like somehow this has something to do with white supremacy.

You can't argue facts. You have to invent claims to attack.

 

[Andylusion]

I can't think of a single example of anything Trump said that was divisive.

White supremacy requires dividing those who should be allies.
View attachment 392337
"Down in the polls and failing to control a raging pandemic, the president cast himself as waging battle against a 'new far-left fascism' that imperils American values and seeks to erase history."

Trump Uses Mount Rushmore Speech to Deliver Divisive Culture War Message

No one anywhere is pushing White Supremacy. You are just making up lies.

 

[Andylusion]

They paid for the equipment, raw materials and factory that the workers need to earn their wages.

No they didn't.
They placed bets in a Ponzi Scheme.

The Incredibly Unproductive Shareholder

"Yes, shareholders. I know that we have all been trained to worship shareholders and to assume that their interests trump all others, but the fact is, stock-market investors have become, collectively, an extraordinarily unproductive force in business. Indeed, for the last two decades, their contribution to corporations has been literally negative."

First of all, you complain about shareholders... but who are the shareholders again?

Pensions. Retirements. 401Ks, IRAs. Unions. Government funds. Insurance policies.

People like me, who invest in their 401K. People like my retired parents.

So basically, you are complaining that the American workers have a retirement, and in you world, everyone would be in poverty, and that's your plan.

Second, anyone who thinks that investors have a negative contribution to the companies they invest in, is unbelievably ignorant.

Investment is what drives most all growth in the world. If you don't understand how investment is a positive, that's not a problem of the system, that's a problem of you being dumb, and ignorant.

 

[Andylusion]

As long as we keep electing wealthy men to lead the nation, the gap between the average worker and the rich guy is going to grow regardless if party. But oh my one is not to talk about class division. I call bull on that.

There's no doubt in my mind both major parties serve the same richest ten percent of voters, but it's also worth noting how 2020 will be the first presidential election in the last 40 years to take place without the requirement for the RNC to obtain a federal judge's approval for any "ballot security" operations at the polls.

Ballot Security Task Force - Wikipedia

"The National Ballot Security Task Force (BSTF) was a controversial group founded in 1981 in New Jersey by the Republican National Committee (RNC) as a means of intimidating voters and discouraging voter turnout among likely Democratic voters in the gubernatorial election.

"The group's activities prompted the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to bring a federal lawsuit, alleging a violation of the Voting Rights Act, illegal harassment, and voter intimidation.

"The RNC and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree in 1982, barring them from engaging in further such conduct until 2017. The RNC unsuccessfully tried to lift the consent decree early; these attempts were rejected by the federal courts each time.

"The consent decree was set to expire on December 1, 2017. Democrats sought an extension to it based on allegations of new conduct, but the request was denied in January 2018 and the decree expired.[1]"

So... in your world, preventing voter fraud, is in your opinion, equal to voter intimidation.

How is it intimidating to say "don't violate the law".

My Condo area has "Neighborhood watch, private security patrol" signs all over it. My company has security cameras, and says they have security cameras.

I have never once felt "intimidated" by people actively enforcing the law.

I assume you have police that patrol the roads in whatever neighborhood you live in. Do you feel like they are engaged in driver intimidation?

I don't.

There are police cars up and down the highway I drive on to get to work. Never felt intimidated.

The only way you can feel "intimidated" by people enforcing the law, is if you are law breaker. If you are trying to cast illegal votes, then I wager you'll feel intimidated..... and that's good. You should.

Republicans as usual, are dead on right, and Democrats are just... evil. You are evil to support vote fraud. That makes you a terrible person, and proves we're better than you.

 

[Andylusion]

He bought the equipment, raw materials and factory. All he owes labor is a wage.

Without the person who invested the money, there is no building. No factory. No machines. No equipment.

90% of shareholders have never contributed a penny towards the building, factories, machines, or equipment; they have simply participated in a Ponzi Scheme based on finding a Greater Sucker to increase their gain$ from capital.

You are wrong. Shareholders always contribute towards the building, factories, machines, and equipment, because if there were no shareholders... none of that stuff would have been built.

Even after the IPO, there are times when the company will have additional share sales. And it is only because of current shareholders, that those additional shares can be used to raise funds.

In fact, this is happening.... right now with Tesla. Your favorite green energy electric car company.

Tesla (TSLA) announces $5 billion capital raise — taking advantage of stock price's meteoric rise

Tesla (TSLA) today announced a $5 billion capital raise to take advantage of the stock price’s meteoric rise. While Tesla...

electrek.co

So Tesla is selling $5 Billion dollars worth of stock.

And that $5 Billion will be used to build production plants, equipment and machines, and I would equally wager jobs.

And, by the way.... the shareholders of Tesla, have zero dividends. Tesla does not yet pay dividends, and may never.

So you can't even attempt to claim that the shareholders are taking money from the workers, because they haven't collected a penny of the profits of Tesla.... AND YET... those workers owe absolutely everything in the creation of their jobs, to those shareholders.

And by the way....

Even for those shareholders that do get a dividend payment (which includes people like me, since I tend to focus on dividend producing stocks), the idea that shareholders are collecting so much money, compared to how much they invested, is ridiculous.

For example one stock in Walmart is $136. The dividend payment, which is 54¢, and only happens four times a year.

So investors have plowed $136 dollars into a share, to get $2.16 a year. We've invested far more, than how much we're getting back.

It would take 62 years for me to get back what I paid, in dividends.

Now obviously the pay off comes from the growth in the value of the stock itself, but again... that doesn't come from the company. If the stock ends up being worth $200 next year, that does not take one penny from the company, and thus you can't say that if I didn't have that share in Walmart, that some worker would go from minimum wage to $50,000 a year. Simply not true.

By the way, there is yet another way, that shareholders benefit the company, in that shareholders make the stocks themselves have value. That means that the stocks that the company itself owns, can be used in stead of cash.

So let's say you are company that makes cars, and you decide that you would like to also make commercial busses or something. Instead of spending billions of dollars trying to start your own bus manufacturing plant yourself, you decide to simply buy a bus company that already exists.

Now assuming they want to sell, you could buy them by spending billions of dollars. But that defeats the purpose of buying them out, and that's costly.

Alternatively you could buy them out, with stock. You give them stock, and they sell out for the stock.

Noble Energy's stock surges after Chevron confirms $5 billion buyout deal

Shares of Noble Energy Inc. undefined surged 8.8% in premarket trading Monday, after Chevron Corp. undefined confirmed an all-stock deal to buy the oil and...

www.marketwatch.com

This happens rather routinely.

The bottom line again, shareholders and investors play a critical and valuable roll in the growth of the economy. And anyone who denies that is just ignorant and dumb.

 

[Andylusion]

Ok that's all fine but then when people say it's bad to bring up class division that is not true. We are divided by class. What is wrong with saying it?

Americans would rather die homeless on the continent their forefathers occupied than admit the existence of the class war in their homeland:

Class conflict - Wikipedia

Ironic given Sanders is in fact a super wealthy person, who is trying to buy an election, while keeping his money by not paying his staff the $15/hours minimum he claims to support.

Moreover, people are cutting spending, because we're going broke. Those programs are slowly bankrupting the country. They have to be cut, or they will end up cut anyway, when we run out of money.

 

[Andylusion]

We elected a non-wealthy person, namely Obama who was a community organizer, and the result was a poorer America.

How did GDP growth under Obama compare to Trump?

Trump boasts the US economy is the best it's ever been under his watch. Here are 9 charts showing how it compares to the Obama and Bush presidencies. | Markets Insider

That ignores the fact that Obama, and the Democrats, were the ones that pushed sub-prime loans that crashed the economy to being with.

I can say for myself, that my best years were under Trump, and worst were under Obama.

Not to mention that Obama Care wiped out my affordable health insurance, and quadrupled the costs on me. I used to have an insurance policy that covered everything I needed, for $67 a month. Now the cheapest policy I can find is $300+.

 

[Andylusion]

How is that neoliberalism?

How did Trump or Obama force that on them?

They didn't. The greeks voted for free stuff, and like all socialism, ran out of other people's money.

From 2014:

"Greece is the most recent and historically unprecedented neoliberal experiment on a global scale.

"The neoliberal offensive is moving head on in the country and, if Chile 'was the laboratory for the early phases, Greece has become the laboratory for an even more fierce implementation.'(1)

"What we have in place right now in Greece can be best described as the 'downsizing of a country'(2) that brings profound changes in its social and economic fabric.

"Greece’s economy has shrunk by nearly one-third since 2007, and the debt has become unmanageable."

Neoliberalism as Social Necrophilia: The Case of Greece

Rich Greeks refused to pay taxes while the politicians who served their interests inflicted massive levels of debt on Greek society as a whole. In other words, capitalism strikes again.

So just read through what you just wrote.....

"Greece is the most recent and historically unprecedented neoliberal experiment on a global scale."

That's opinion... Not a fact. Prove that?

"The neoliberal offensive is moving head on in the country and, if Chile 'was the laboratory for the early phases, Greece has become the laboratory for an even more fierce implementation.'"

Again, that's an opinion, not a fact. Prove that?

"What we have in place right now in Greece can be best described as the 'downsizing of a country'(2) that brings profound changes in its social and economic fabric."

Now that is a fact, that Greece has declined. And we know why. They spent money they didn't have, and then they went bankrupt spending money they didn't have.

That doesn't prove either of the prior statements. That just proves socialism always fails. And ironically, this is exactly what you have advocated in this thread.

"Greece’s economy has shrunk by nearly one-third since 2007, and the debt has become unmanageable."

Yeah. Yeah that's what happens when you spend money you don't have. Like Social Security and Medicare, that has trillions of unfunded liabilities.

Still doesn't prove any of the prior statements. All that proves, is that socialism, and spending money you don't have, results in economic ruins.

Rich Greeks refused to pay taxes while the politicians who served their interests inflicted massive levels of debt on Greek society as a whole. In other words, capitalism strikes again.

Those are mutually exclusive statements. Politicians.... Capitalism strikes again.

If Greece was entirely capitalist... there would be no pension system in Greece causing the country to go broke. There would be no government schools, or government hospitals. There would be no money pit known as mass transit.

In other words, everything that caused Greece to go utterly bankrupt, would not exist, and thus the country would never have gone bankrupt. People would be building businesses in Greece, and growing the economy, and building wealth.

And by the way, this is a routine aspect of left-wingers, looking at everything that is socialist, and blaming it on capitalism, which is ridiculous.

Lastly, it wasn't just the rich that were avoiding paying taxes... everyone was. And is I should say.

When tax rates are too high, people avoid paying the taxes. That's normal. You can complain about that, and that's fine, but it's stupid to complain about it, because that's never going to change. People will never pay half or 2/3rds of their income in taxes.

Again, when Reagan was an actor, and the top marginal rates were 70%, he just stopped working. When he earned enough to hit that high marginal rate, he didn't just keep working, and pay 70% taxes... he just went home. And rich people do that all the time. Greece is no different. Everywhere is no different.

Which by the way, is why nearly all true openly socialist countries end up in violence, because you can't force people to pay all their rightfully earned money to the government, without the threat of lethal force. This is why Stalin had gulags, to force people to do work, when they otherwise wouldn't.

This is why Hugo Chavez changed the constitution of Venezuela to allow the military to operate in cities, and had military personnel taking over stores and factories.

You have to engage in violence, in order to have socialism. So, yes the Greeks didn't pay the high taxes. Yeah. Correct. That's our point.

 

[badbob85037]

Is the US borrowing its way to Fascism?

20th century versions of the merger of state and corporate power (Germany, Japan, Italy, and Spain) interacted differently in each country's particular history and conditions.

If it comes here, the Federal Reserve will play a key role:

Richard D. Wolff - The U.S. Is Borrowing Its Way to Fascism | Brave New Europe

"Today’s crisis-ridden capitalist economy is more dependent on credit than at any time in the system’s history.

"More than ever, credit sustains the purchasing power of consumers and of government programs.

"Capitalists depend on that purchasing power..."

"Once it was mostly private entities—rich families, banks, insurance companies, and pension funds—that were the chief lenders to corporations. They bought and held the corporate bonds and IOUs.

"Now those private lenders increasingly sell their corporate bonds to the Federal Reserve.

"That happens when the corporate loans get packaged into asset-backed securities sold to the Federal Reserve.

"More recently, the Fed has undertaken the market purchase of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) composed of corporate bonds and of corporate bonds direct from their private issuers."

Some Things Never Change
View attachment 387406
Renegade Inc - Michael Hudson: He died for our debts, not our sins | Brave New Europe

Give it a rest.

 

[Andylusion]

There is not one single decision made by the Greek people, with the Greek government, that you can blame on Obama, or Trump, or anyone.

How many decisions did the Greek people make regarding monetary policy after the formation of the EU? When a government doesn't control a sovereign currency, how can it cope with economic crises like the crash of capitalism in 2008?

First off, capitalism didn't crash. If capitalism crashed, there would be no food, and we would have mass starvation, and people most certainly would not still be trying to get into the US.

Capitalism crashed in Venezuela, when the socialists got control, and wrecked the economy.

Capitalism has never crashed. Never. It's always socialism that crashes. Always. The sub-prime loan crash, was because government pushed sub-prime loans.

So how does it cope with an economic crisis like 2008? Well.... look at the countries that had no crash, and as yourself what did they do differently?

In all of those countries, they cut spending, and had their debt under control.

Point being, if you don't borrow yourself into bankruptcy to start with, then you don't need to worry about an economic problem.

It is the same thing as me having an emergency fund, or they used to call it a rainy day fund.

You want to know why Ohio isn't facing a financial crisis like say California is? Because Ohio had a $2.7 Billion dollar rainy day fund.

So here's my answer. Greece should have done what every responsible adult should do, and they should have cut their spending during the 10 years before 2008, and thus avoided the crash completely.

By the way, Papandreou was openly socialists. His party, was the Panhellenic Socialist Movement.

PASOK - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Again, it cracks me up that Socialists can be in charge of something since the 1980s, cause a massive crash, and instantly blame Capitalists for it.

I can promise you, that if from the 1980s on, the Greek government had kept government spending below 20%, all the way to the present day, the crash and bankruptcy of Greece, would never have happened.

 

[Andylusion]

Audit 10% of all returns over $500,000 and 100% of all returns over $10,000,000.

Predators go where the prey is, and why go after minnows when you can get fat salmon full of roe.

Hang all speculators?

Speculators Were Hung in the 17th Century. Ah, 'The Good Old Days'

"Speculators at megabanks or investment firms such as Goldman Sachs are not, in a strict sense, capitalists.

"They do not make money from the means of production...

"They are parasites.

"They feed off the carcass of industrial capitalism.

"They produce nothing.

"They make nothing.

"They just manipulate money.

"Speculation in the 17th century was a crime.

"Speculators were hanged." - 'Overthrow the Speculators', by Chris Hedges."

Wrong on every single statement.