slave1: you obviously come from the Bush/Rove school of "no matter how false/retarded/fraudulent a point is, just KEEP REPEATING IT"yea, doesn't really work for them either.this thread has been great though, for adding intelligent people to my favorites.sorry Zipsplat...you definitely didn't make the cut.
Nobodyn0se: Awfully Amerocentric, don't you think?
paygun: Weaver95: a lawless morass of stinking mud and mayhemSomehow I will find a way to fit this phrase into conversation as much as possible from now on.
Camper_Bob: ZipSplat: Here they come, the tin foil hat brigade is storming the thread. Batten down the hatches, we're about to get bukkaked with stupid.You're not the least bit concerned about the fact that the tin-foilers have been right about pretty much everything for the past couple of years?
Camper_Bob: You're not the least bit concerned about the fact that the tin-foilers have been right about pretty much everything for the past couple of years?
ZipSplat: They are not revealing who is receiving how much because some of them may be in such dire need of being bailed out that if that information were public then other banks, businesses, and individuals would not borrow from that company, hastening their collapse which the Fed does not want. They're not doing "bad" things, they're trying to protect banks from being done-in by preferential borrowing.
Nobodyn0se: Bush WAS responsible for 9/11? Those "camps" in Texas really WERE for holding American political prisoners? Bin Laden WAS captured by the Republicans, which was publically announced right before the election to guarantee a McCain victory?Man, i've missed so much.....
Nobodyn0se: Zipsplat already did.
bnoogie: Two trillion in loans to banks, 700 billion to the TARP fund, thats a 27 with 11 zeros behind it. Divide that by the approximate 350 million residents, and we each owe 7714 dollars and change (assuming every man woman and child are working, but its actually about 1 person working for every 5 that are not, being either retired, too young to work or unemployed, so multiply by 6...) and you owe 46,285 just because we can't let the banks fail... If the gubmint gave me 46 grand, I could pay down signifigantly my debts which would help the banks, and give me more discretionary funds to spend every month since I wasn't servicing debt and money would flow into the lower ends of the business sector (service and retail) therby supporting and creating new jobs. Put the money in at the top, straight to the banks, and they hold on to it just in case things get worse. Their plan to get money flowing again hasn't worked. Its time to go with my plan.ME ftw!
lajimi: HEY, FED!1. Just who do you think you are working for?2. Just where do you think the money you hand out comes from?3. Just who do you think you are to refuse to tell YOUR EMPLOYERS what you are doing?/Try that in the private sector
veryequiped: Good to see you finally have the balls to speak your mind, had you actually had any previous, you could have stood up for your country.//If you haven't got anything intelligent to contribute, how bout you shut up.
hyperspacemonkey: THIS IS THE PRIVATE SECTOR YOU IDIOT
Nobodyn0se: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07235r.pdfSeems that the GAO does them all the time. Ask them for one?
GoodasGold: Amazed the thread hasn't been Godwinned yet.You know who else didn't like international bankers?Oops.
olddinosaur: You stupid ignorant farking fools!Since when do you think bankers value economic stability? Since a pig values dieting? Bankers love wild market fluctuations, it's what makes them rich.HERE COMES THE MATH:(and it's not thast complicated)A banknote is a receipt for real money on deposit, hence the term: "Hard Cash." Fewer than 1 in 1000 people know what that word actually means.So long as the banker had the public's trust, his receipts were traded like the money itself, and everyone was happy---most of all the banker.Bankers learned early, they could write up receipts for many times the money they actually had to cover, and as long as they did not get too greedy, everything was fine. Historically, you can issue 25 banknotes for every one unit of money on hand--but that's not cast in stone!If the banker issues too many banknotes and doesn't have real money to cover, he's in serious trouble. There would be a run on the bank, and he might get lynched.Smart bankers see a way around this: Let's say I borrow 1,000 units of money, and print out 25,000 units of banknotes, which I lend out at 8% interest. I "earn" a profit of 2,000 units of money, off of money which was never mine to begin with---and throw back 30 units to the lender; I keep the other 1,970 as profit.But people are getting suspicious, the public is losing faith. I don't want a run on my bank, so I collect 2,000 units on the interest, 2,500 more against the principal---and burn them.You see what I did there? I have 22,500 units of money on the books to collect--- but there's only 20,500 units in circulation to pay. That means somebody is going to lose, and it sure as hell won't be me! Next year I will do it again, so there are only 16,200 units available--but someone still owes me 20,000 units of money.They won't be able to pay, I will foreclose---and I will be left holding not only all the money--but all the property as well. I used thousands because that is an easy number to understand, but add zeroes until you get billions and trillions, and it all works the same.If you hire bankers to run your economy, it is like hiring sharks to run a fish farm. The process is so simple, even "zipsplat" could understand it.\\ if he would.
IdeasGuy: Bruno Ganz? I doubt that, seeing where he is from.
YixilTesiphon: End the fed.
pascoffee: You make more sence than anything I have read yet.
IdeasGuy: Once more, it seems a lot of people are confusing here the government spending real resources and going into debt (which will have to be reimbursed with taxes or defaulted) with the Federal Reserve making loans by printing money (and thus not spending real resources).Folks, money is a veil. These are just little pieces of paper. What counts are the houses, the factories, etc. The Fed does not own that. You do.
sarcastrophe: IdeasGuy: Once more, it seems a lot of people are confusing here the government spending real resources and going into debt (which will have to be reimbursed with taxes or defaulted) with the Federal Reserve making loans by printing money (and thus not spending real resources).Folks, money is a veil. These are just little pieces of paper. What counts are the houses, the factories, etc. The Fed does not own that. You do.Do you deny such a thing as an "inflation tax?"
bunner: hyperspacemonkey: THIS IS THE PRIVATE SECTOR YOU IDIOTyeah.. the profits are in the private sector.the losses.. not so much.
IdeasGuy: No. But there is currently no sign of inflation or anticipated inflation. Because this is a loan and thus the increase in the money supply is only temporary. There is no expectation for it to last.
hyperspacemonkey: The private sector is not YOUR front lawn I bet.
hyperspacemonkey: This sick idea that private companies would run things better than government
Smackledorfer: Government programs have a history of failing at running a business. Unfortunately, with the way business are being run, business also fail to run a business. More and more public companies prove to be little more than cash cows for the folks running them into the ground. CEOs with golden parachutes don't care about the long term success of their companies much more than government workers who get the same amount of money whether they win or lose.
Smackledorfer: Bit of a shiatty situation. And the stock market is strongly to blame with the failure of these companies too imo. If you start your own business and are the owner, and the business fails, you go broke. The economic incentive is strong there. If you start your own business and make it a quick success and sell tiny shares of it to thousands of people after incorporating it to protect your wealth and remaining the highest paid person in the business, you are best served by siphoning as much money as possible from the company and going someplace else.
Smackledorfer: That's the logic as I see it. Now of course companies aren't run just by CEOs and there is a shiat ton of middle and lower level employees who work hard to see the company they've hitched their stars to succeed. There is no reason why a government couldn't run a company decently by keeping the good aspects of a public company and throwing out the bad, is there?
Want more news before we break it? Try
See what's behind the green doorand help keep the tap flowing
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Feb 18 2018 22:00:01
Runtime: 1.070 sec