...commercial bankers tend to see consumers as customers who can be "exploited" by layering on more fees. Says Mooney: "I don't say this lightly, but the consumer is simply an income stream and exploiting that is the purpose of the banking organization."

There you have it.

A cognitive disconnect is where ones perception of reality differs from reality. So while it could certainly be applied here in many ways, I don't believe it was the idea you were intending to get across and actually makes no sense in the headline in the way it was used.

FTFA: While some members of the financial elite say they are willing to pay higher taxes, they note the picture for Wall Street firms is not as sunny as some on Main Street might paint it. Wall Street banks already are beginning to shed jobs, and consulting firm Johnson Associates Inc. is predicting bonuses for those who remain will shrink by 20 percent to 30 percent.

Those poor, poor bastards. I SHOULD GIVE THEM MY MONEY!

HawgWild: FTFA: While some members of the financial elite say they are willing to pay higher taxes, they note the picture for Wall Street firms is not as sunny as some on Main Street might paint it. Wall Street banks already are beginning to shed jobs, and consulting firm Johnson Associates Inc. is predicting bonuses for those who remain will shrink by 20 percent to 30 percent.

Those poor, poor bastards. I SHOULD GIVE THEM MY MONEY!

No doubt that some fresh-from-college Young Republican, in his blue blazer and red tie, will get cut from his entry level job so the top bosses can protect their margins and bonuses, he will then arrive on sites like this to demonize the OWS as misguided Marxist hippies out to destroy his Fox News view of America.

who would have thought that people who haven't even seen someone (other than on TV) that makes less than $300k/year would have a hard time understanding that THEIR ACTIONS AFFECT REAL PEOPLE, NOT JUST NUMBERS IN A BOOK.

farking ignorant twatwaffles that run our financial institutions.

Kazan: who would have thought that people who haven't even seen someone (other than on TV) that makes less than $300k/year would have a hard time understanding that THEIR ACTIONS AFFECT REAL PEOPLE, NOT JUST NUMBERS IN A BOOK.

farking ignorant twatwaffles that run our financial institutions.

China has the right idea.

Business crimes are sometimes hangin' crimes.

WhyteRaven74: JP Morgan would take this snot into an alley and beat him bloody for saying that.

Heh, that was my favorite too. Luckily he doesn't work there anymore; Lehman sacked Erin Callan for being less stupid than that. And she was farking dumb.

Better law: the CEO gets one lash from a bullwhip for each dollar gained though illegal business during their reign.

bunner: That sh*t is over. Verfallen. Kaput. History.

would you like another schnitzengruben?

fta: Blame the politicians and policymakers in Washington, many of them say, for encouraging people to buy homes they couldn't afford and doing nothing to stop or discourage U.S. consumers from piling on more than $10 trillion in household debt.

I am sick of seeing this god damn talking point in every article about banking, Wall Street and finance and not the actual catalyst for this talking point:

That the people overpaid and overborrowed for their homes because the barriers to entry were deliberately lowered by the banks so they could purchase credit-default swaps (part of the derivatives market, a sector of the financial industry that has NO oversight and NO regulations) against them failing since they were high risk, essentially covering their asses so they stood to profit if the bubble went south, which they knew it would so they kept encouraging bad mortgages in a classic pump-and-dump scheme.

The financial industry basically bought itself an insurance policy, and then went gambling with everybody elses money. The amount of debt accumulated was so high and so toxic that no one realized how much shiat they were in until it was too late.

You can not blame the American people for entrusting their financial decisions to an industry that requires a 6-year degree just to understand how it operates, run by sleazy used car salesmen beancounters who kept upselling them on home equity refinancing without letting them even read the fine print (not that they'd understand it if they did).

If the financial crash was simply due to mortgages alone, we wouldn't be in this mess today. It would have been a very manageable and a very fixable mess, backed by real assets. The real estate bubble on its surface was at least containable. The only thing that would've happened is any subprime issuing banks that overleveraged would have gone under, and rightfully so. They make high risk usuries, they pay the price (it's like the old adage: "If you owe the bank $1 million, that's your problem. If you owe the bank $1 billion, that's the bank's problem).

But as soon as all those bad mortgages got bundled into credit-default swaps and passed around the various financial firms like a hot potato, amplifying their value a thousandfold (what did they say the derivatives market was worth? ....$61 trillion worth of speculative bookmarks?), and because they were so toxic and everyone knew it, more money was poured into the hedges by the "too big to fail" finance firms. Well, you can guess what happened when the bubble popped: Like a run on the bank, investors came to collect their $61 trillion, bringing Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch and HBOS to their knees.

Why didn't they stop this? ....because there was more money in keeping the scam going and letting it fail. Remember: None of them have gone to jail, and the big executives still award themselves healthy bonuses. The only people who have suffered throughout this are the poor sods on main street with bad houses and worse debt. Because the mortgage brokers (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) got a bail out, the auto industry got a bail out, the financial industry got a bail out, and the American people did not.

1nsanilicious: clancifer: HawgWild: FTFA: While some members of the financial elite say they are willing to pay higher taxes, they note the picture for Wall Street firms is not as sunny as some on Main Street might paint it. Wall Street banks already are beginning to shed jobs, and consulting firm Johnson Associates Inc. is predicting bonuses for those who remain will shrink by 20 percent to 30 percent.

Those poor, poor bastards. I SHOULD GIVE THEM MY MONEY!

No doubt that some fresh-from-college Young Republican, in his blue blazer and red tie, will get cut from his entry level job so the top bosses can protect their margins and bonuses, he will then arrive on sites like this to demonize the OWS as misguided Marxist hippies out to destroy his Fox News view of America.

.

No doubt some hipster wanna be liberal will come on here and lament about how he is owed so much when he has contributed so little in the way of quality education. Somehow his ability to assemble something or paint a picture of said assembly or photoshop someone painting a picture of someone assembling something is on the same level as the ability to undertake a job that requires you to have a complete command and understanding of every rule and regulation; of every moveable part in a complex economy; of all the ways the moveable parts interact.

This isn't about the corrupt, it's about your not having the same ability to do the aforementioned and understanding that those things are the reason that bankers and brokers are paid more than you. They know more and assume more risk. And because they then use thier understanding applied to themselves they are now the evil people.


There are some who exploit the system but they get weeded out or should be weeded out, but do not assume that you have the ability to do the same. Not in this life time. Now be good and come up with some witty rejoinders and photoshops of this post like I know you can because that is what you are good at.

I actually tend to agree with your sentiment, but the way I see it, the bankers do well what the protestors wish they could - rent-seek from the government. They have the moral hazard of knowing that government will back up their dumb decisions, huge asset assisstence programs (like mortage tax cuts), and poor oversight. I know its mostly envy that fuels the protestors- it doesn't mean they don't have a point.

/yes I know I'm not endearing myself to either side.
// Flame on.

1nsanilicious: This isn't about the corrupt, it's about your not having the same ability to do the aforementioned and understanding that those things are the reason that bankers and brokers are paid more than you. They know more and assume more risk. And because they then use thier understanding applied to themselves they are now the evil people.

I keep seeing this talking point..."CEOs and bankers get paid more because they risk more!!!!"

Exactly what, praytell, are they risking? What happens if the risk doesn't pan out? They lose five million of their company's twenty billion dollars in assets? They lose their jobs and have to live on their ridiculous severance package until one of their friends in the industry can set them up with a new one? Their yacht gets foreclosed upon?