Planned Collapse of America Article SCARY STUFF!

[bubba99]

Truly the rich want to get richer, and do in cycles. At the end of these cycles more regulation is put in to detour the very greedy from taking everything. Unfortunately at the end of the regulation cycle, the regulation is removed (Glass Steagall), and the cycle starts over.

We are now at the start of the re-regulation cycle. If we fail to elect a president that will limit “robber baron capitalism”, the Armageddon scenario may play out, but likely we will put limits on the new combo finance and banking houses, and go along in the next tick of the cycle. The new creative financial products that are heralded as the gift of “a free market place” are crap and need to be eliminated.

[jonnycsd]

Bubba99 says:

more regulation is put in to detour the very greedy from taking everything

Perhaps true to some extent, however regulation better serves the purpose of maintaining the status quo, which benefits the incumbent wealthy while providing barriers to aspiring up and commers. This is certainly the way regulation is used in Brazil and other Latin American nations.

In my opinion, it is better to have a dynamic system, where those who are good stewards of the nations wealth get more to manage, and those who are lazy or irresponsible stewards of wealth are stripped of it by market force.

By the way, exactly what “new creative financial products” would you like to see expunged?

[jonnycsd]

Bubba99 says:

more regulation is put in to detour the very greedy from taking everything

Perhaps true to some extent, however regulation better serves the purpose of maintaining the status quo, which benefits the incumbent wealthy while providing barriers to aspiring up and commers. This is certainly the way regulation is used in Brazil and other Latin American nations.

In my opinion, it is better to have a dynamic system, where those who are good stewards of the nations wealth get more to manage, and those who are lazy or irresponsible stewards of wealth are stripped of it by market force.

By the way, exactly what “new creative financial products” would you like to see expunged?

[jonnycsd]

Bubba99 says:

more regulation is put in to detour the very greedy from taking everything

Perhaps true to some extent, however regulation better serves the purpose of maintaining the status quo, which benefits the incumbent wealthy while providing barriers to aspiring up and commers. This is certainly the way regulation is used in Brazil and other Latin American nations.

In my opinion, it is better to have a dynamic system, where those who are good stewards of the nations wealth get more to manage, and those who are lazy or irresponsible stewards of wealth are stripped of it by market force.

By the way, exactly what “new creative financial products” would you like to see expunged?

[jonnycsd]

Bubba99 says:

more regulation is put in to detour the very greedy from taking everything

Perhaps true to some extent, however regulation better serves the purpose of maintaining the status quo, which benefits the incumbent wealthy while providing barriers to aspiring up and commers. This is certainly the way regulation is used in Brazil and other Latin American nations.

In my opinion, it is better to have a dynamic system, where those who are good stewards of the nations wealth get more to manage, and those who are lazy or irresponsible stewards of wealth are stripped of it by market force.

By the way, exactly what “new creative financial products” would you like to see expunged?

[jonnycsd]

Bubba99 says:

more regulation is put in to detour the very greedy from taking everything

Perhaps true to some extent, however regulation better serves the purpose of maintaining the status quo, which benefits the incumbent wealthy while providing barriers to aspiring up and commers. This is certainly the way regulation is used in Brazil and other Latin American nations.

In my opinion, it is better to have a dynamic system, where those who are good stewards of the nations wealth get more to manage, and those who are lazy or irresponsible stewards of wealth are stripped of it by market force.

By the way, exactly what “new creative financial products” would you like to see expunged?

[bubba99]

You know those new financial products like CMO’s, and CDO’s, and trillions in garbage loans to people who put nothing down, had inadequate income and lied about their assets. I would not really care if I were not one of the ones paying for their total lack of fiscal responsibility.

Up until 1999, we had regulations that separated the insured banks from the riskier Financial houses. Risk your shareholders money, not the FDIC’s. That Glass Steagall act was not hardly a South American style “preserve the status quo”, but a reasonable and prudent law to prevent the type of failure we see now.

Clearly the current financial meltdown was seen by many who chose to open their eyes to the “less than adequate” assets secured by the money they were lending and repackaging for sale to themselves and others. Those with their eyes closed were the “wealthy stewards” of the financial systems that made billions by selling crap to gain more. They are not stripped of their ill-gotten gains, you and I are paying for their lack of prudent planning and execution.

Take B. S. or Lehman Bros. for example, leveraged over 20 times, with little due diligence on the crap they bought held or sold swaps on. The stewards are granted their lofty positions more by the social order of the boards of directors than any real accomplishment. And given their poor performance, laws that prevent you and I from being on the hook for their bad judgments are a good thing.

If you want a free market place, the tax payer cannot be the one on the hook every time the “stewards” fail.

[bubba99]

You know those new financial products like CMO’s, and CDO’s, and trillions in garbage loans to people who put nothing down, had inadequate income and lied about their assets. I would not really care if I were not one of the ones paying for their total lack of fiscal responsibility.

Up until 1999, we had regulations that separated the insured banks from the riskier Financial houses. Risk your shareholders money, not the FDIC’s. That Glass Steagall act was not hardly a South American style “preserve the status quo”, but a reasonable and prudent law to prevent the type of failure we see now.

Clearly the current financial meltdown was seen by many who chose to open their eyes to the “less than adequate” assets secured by the money they were lending and repackaging for sale to themselves and others. Those with their eyes closed were the “wealthy stewards” of the financial systems that made billions by selling crap to gain more. They are not stripped of their ill-gotten gains, you and I are paying for their lack of prudent planning and execution.

Take B. S. or Lehman Bros. for example, leveraged over 20 times, with little due diligence on the crap they bought held or sold swaps on. The stewards are granted their lofty positions more by the social order of the boards of directors than any real accomplishment. And given their poor performance, laws that prevent you and I from being on the hook for their bad judgments are a good thing.

If you want a free market place, the tax payer cannot be the one on the hook every time the “stewards” fail.

[bubba99]

You know those new financial products like CMO’s, and CDO’s, and trillions in garbage loans to people who put nothing down, had inadequate income and lied about their assets. I would not really care if I were not one of the ones paying for their total lack of fiscal responsibility.

Up until 1999, we had regulations that separated the insured banks from the riskier Financial houses. Risk your shareholders money, not the FDIC’s. That Glass Steagall act was not hardly a South American style “preserve the status quo”, but a reasonable and prudent law to prevent the type of failure we see now.

Clearly the current financial meltdown was seen by many who chose to open their eyes to the “less than adequate” assets secured by the money they were lending and repackaging for sale to themselves and others. Those with their eyes closed were the “wealthy stewards” of the financial systems that made billions by selling crap to gain more. They are not stripped of their ill-gotten gains, you and I are paying for their lack of prudent planning and execution.

Take B. S. or Lehman Bros. for example, leveraged over 20 times, with little due diligence on the crap they bought held or sold swaps on. The stewards are granted their lofty positions more by the social order of the boards of directors than any real accomplishment. And given their poor performance, laws that prevent you and I from being on the hook for their bad judgments are a good thing.

If you want a free market place, the tax payer cannot be the one on the hook every time the “stewards” fail.

[bubba99]

You know those new financial products like CMO’s, and CDO’s, and trillions in garbage loans to people who put nothing down, had inadequate income and lied about their assets. I would not really care if I were not one of the ones paying for their total lack of fiscal responsibility.

Up until 1999, we had regulations that separated the insured banks from the riskier Financial houses. Risk your shareholders money, not the FDIC’s. That Glass Steagall act was not hardly a South American style “preserve the status quo”, but a reasonable and prudent law to prevent the type of failure we see now.

Clearly the current financial meltdown was seen by many who chose to open their eyes to the “less than adequate” assets secured by the money they were lending and repackaging for sale to themselves and others. Those with their eyes closed were the “wealthy stewards” of the financial systems that made billions by selling crap to gain more. They are not stripped of their ill-gotten gains, you and I are paying for their lack of prudent planning and execution.

Take B. S. or Lehman Bros. for example, leveraged over 20 times, with little due diligence on the crap they bought held or sold swaps on. The stewards are granted their lofty positions more by the social order of the boards of directors than any real accomplishment. And given their poor performance, laws that prevent you and I from being on the hook for their bad judgments are a good thing.

If you want a free market place, the tax payer cannot be the one on the hook every time the “stewards” fail.

[bubba99]

You know those new financial products like CMO’s, and CDO’s, and trillions in garbage loans to people who put nothing down, had inadequate income and lied about their assets. I would not really care if I were not one of the ones paying for their total lack of fiscal responsibility.

Up until 1999, we had regulations that separated the insured banks from the riskier Financial houses. Risk your shareholders money, not the FDIC’s. That Glass Steagall act was not hardly a South American style “preserve the status quo”, but a reasonable and prudent law to prevent the type of failure we see now.

Clearly the current financial meltdown was seen by many who chose to open their eyes to the “less than adequate” assets secured by the money they were lending and repackaging for sale to themselves and others. Those with their eyes closed were the “wealthy stewards” of the financial systems that made billions by selling crap to gain more. They are not stripped of their ill-gotten gains, you and I are paying for their lack of prudent planning and execution.

Take B. S. or Lehman Bros. for example, leveraged over 20 times, with little due diligence on the crap they bought held or sold swaps on. The stewards are granted their lofty positions more by the social order of the boards of directors than any real accomplishment. And given their poor performance, laws that prevent you and I from being on the hook for their bad judgments are a good thing.

If you want a free market place, the tax payer cannot be the one on the hook every time the “stewards” fail.

[PadreBrian]

Preach it! What we have now is NOT free-market…it’s Do anything you like and the gov’t will bail your investment company out.

[PadreBrian]

Preach it! What we have now is NOT free-market…it’s Do anything you like and the gov’t will bail your investment company out.

[PadreBrian]

Preach it! What we have now is NOT free-market…it’s Do anything you like and the gov’t will bail your investment company out.

[PadreBrian]

Preach it! What we have now is NOT free-market…it’s Do anything you like and the gov’t will bail your investment company out.

[Author]

Posts