If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Rolling Stone)   Seriously how are we not wielding pitchforks and torches and setting up guillotines for these super villains?   (rollingstone.com) divider line 119
    More: Scary, torches  
•       •       •

8115 clicks; posted to Business » on 19 Mar 2012 at 1:00 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



119 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-19 10:55:25 AM  
We tried Subby, but the media portrayed us as self-entitled jobless losers who weren't sure what we were mad about.

And people bought it.

So here we are...
 
2012-03-19 11:09:15 AM  
Because Idol's on.
 
2012-03-19 11:10:00 AM  

BurnShrike: We tried Subby, but the media portrayed us as self-entitled jobless losers who weren't sure what we were mad about.

And people bought it.

So here we are...


Yeah, as I understand it, protesting to what were nearly legitimate business practices is something only liberals do. Real Americans and conservatives applaud the actions of BOA.
 
2012-03-19 11:12:15 AM  
If it's too big to fail, there is that thing that they did to Ma Bell back in the day. What did they call that sh*t again?
 
2012-03-19 11:15:21 AM  
How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway? I could see owning a pitchfork if you do a lot of landscaping at home (in fact, I think there's one in my parents' storage shed), but torches? I think the best I could muster up would be a cordless weed whacker and a Maglite. Granted, you could really bust some heads with that Maglite. That's why cops carry them, you know.
 
2012-03-19 11:18:54 AM  

Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway?


Well I had to borrow a pitchfork from my neighbor to finish up some yard work the other day but I do have Tiki torches. Those will work right?
 
2012-03-19 11:19:29 AM  

BurnShrike: We tried Subby, but the media portrayed us as self-entitled jobless losers who weren't sure what we were mad about.

And people bought it.

So here we are...


yup.

Not to mention that the abuses of the banking system in general (not to mention Bank of America specifically) are so fantastical, so outrageous that it's difficult to believe that they happened at all. Yet they did happen and they continue to happen.
 
2012-03-19 11:23:10 AM  

Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway?


I have a pitchfork, and some tiki torches. I only have one pitchfork, but I could share the tiki torches. They are even filled with citronella, so our mob will be mosquito free.
 
2012-03-19 11:26:42 AM  

EatHam: Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway?

I have a pitchfork, and some tiki torches. I only have one pitchfork, but I could share the tiki torches. They are even filled with citronella, so our mob will be mosquito free.


Same here, although BoA has no real presence in my region. I could protest one of their ATMs, if that helps.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-03-19 11:27:05 AM  
Because Federal and State governments belong to these people, that's why.

Remember when this was going on? Link (new window)
Who do you think won?
 
2012-03-19 11:27:51 AM  

antidisestablishmentarianism: If it's too big to fail, there is that thing that they did to Ma Bell back in the day. What did they call that sh*t again?


Breaking apart monopolies is what Commies do. I'm sure that is what the GOP would say if the administration did try to do that.
 
2012-03-19 11:28:31 AM  

EatHam: Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway?

I have a pitchfork, and some tiki torches. I only have one pitchfork, but I could share the tiki torches. They are even filled with citronella, so our mob will be mosquito free.


Mosquito free is good. Tiki torches are a good idea. My wife bought some cups that look like coconuts and we have those little paper umbrellas. We're going to need some rum.
 
2012-03-19 11:30:14 AM  
Because Jersey Shore is on.

Because March Madness is on.

Because I have to finish Mass Effect 3, goddamit!!!
 
2012-03-19 11:30:30 AM  
bookmarked so I can read the article when I'm supposed to be working tomorrow
 
2012-03-19 11:31:21 AM  
I need to finish my fourth time going through Skyrim. But I might be able to grab a stick and a lighter later.
 
2012-03-19 11:33:21 AM  

Eddy Gurge: I need to finish my fourth time going through Skyrim. But I might be able to grab a stick and a lighter later.


I used to be a protester...until I took an arrow to the knee.
 
2012-03-19 11:35:06 AM  
Because a significant portion of the populace will not be moved to act until they have nothing left to lose.
 
2012-03-19 11:35:57 AM  

Cythraul: Because a significant portion of the populace will not be moved to act until they have nothing left to lose.


which at this rate, will be sometime around august of 2016.
 
2012-03-19 11:36:52 AM  

GAT_00: antidisestablishmentarianism: If it's too big to fail, there is that thing that they did to Ma Bell back in the day. What did they call that sh*t again?

Breaking apart monopolies is what Commies do. I'm sure that is what the GOP would say if the administration did try to do that.


Or something similar. I would LIKE to think that, after November 2012, *if* Obama wins, you might see him lay the smackdown on BoA.

But, I doubt it.

Weaver95: Eddy Gurge: I need to finish my fourth time going through Skyrim. But I might be able to grab a stick and a lighter later.

I used to be a protester...until I took an arrow a billy club to the knee.


FTFM.
 
2012-03-19 11:38:19 AM  

antidisestablishmentarianism: If it's too big to fail, there is that thing that they did to Ma Bell back in the day. What did they call that sh*t again?


You can't compare AT&T to Bank of Arserica. T was a monopoly. They were the phone market. Bank of America, thanks to Ken Lewis, bought up a HUGE amount of the banking sector, but they are still not the dominant bank. The Countrywide thing sucked the wind right out of them. They lost $40 billion already and counting. They could probably recoup a lot of that if they spun off Merrill, but they won't get rid of their trophy investment bank. Not unless the shareholders can force them to.

Bank of America is an incredibly sh*tty bank for personal banking. However, BofA has been very clever in how they do business. A lot of hourly workers get paid on Bank of America-backed payroll checks. Some think they have to have an account with BofA just to cash it. A lot of people really love that if they have a BofA account, they won't have to pay ATM fees because they have the most ATMS (or second most) in the country. A LOT of people now have their mortgage with BofA so they have some connection and i think they offer some kind of discount if you have direct deposit and your mortgage with them on an automatic payment, or something.

You can't really break them up because there is no real local level leadership. It's a corporate office with lots of branches and other subsidiaries. You could carve off their branches to other banks, but you'd just be spreading the pie among the other 5 large banks.

Truth is, we have to consolidate banking like we have. At least on a national level. However, we need them to act responsibly, and we have to regulate them like a hawk with agencies that have teeth to make them hurt when they f*ck up. There are still small banks, credit unions and the like, but the national behemoths will continue to gobble them up until only a few are left. We'll wind up with an oligopoly, which we pretty much already have, and then you will have no choice but to pay every fee that they throw at you. I'm sure we'll have one Southwest style bank... No fees, no frills.

The government is terrified of doing anything to the lending market because it knows that it needs the lending market to do their thing regardless of who they f*ckover or hurt along the way.

The time to do it was 4 years ago. Because it didn;t happen then, they will never break them up now.
 
2012-03-19 11:38:59 AM  
Any big company is going to violate a few technical rules every now and then. Who can keep track of all those rules? It's not like that sort of thing is anyone's "fault". And don't hate on them just because they're big. BofA is big because it has a big heart, and wants to help as many people as possible achieve their financial goals.
 
2012-03-19 11:41:31 AM  

BurnShrike: We tried Subby, but the media portrayed us as self-entitled jobless losers who weren't sure what we were mad about.

And people bought it.

So here we are...


To be fair, Tea Partiers were (and still are) painted as just as crazy. Instead of young, jobless, shiftless hippies, they're stuffy old farts cruising around on Hoverounds worshiping Jeeeeeesuss-uh!

Probably because the Tea Partiers and OWS people have a lot of common ground.

And probably because the media is also bought and paid for.
 
2012-03-19 11:42:09 AM  

NewportBarGuy: The time to do it was 4 years ago. Because it didn;t happen then, they will never break them up now


yup, I agree - we missed our chance to reign in the madness. we're locked into our course now, and unless something really big happens (and by 'big' I mean 'disastrous'), the banking industry is beyond our reach.
 
2012-03-19 11:44:18 AM  
When I want cutting incisive commentary on economics, I turn to the Econom...uh...Rolling Stone.

The reason is that Bush was pro-business, and Obama is pro-Wall Street/Banking. They rigged the game. We got no leverage in this mess.
 
2012-03-19 11:45:09 AM  
I really don't know how we can unpaint ourselves from this corner. Congress really screwed the pooch when they repealed Glass-Steagal. The only way we're going to get meaningful change is for America to sink into another deep economic depression for 15 to 20 years or so, and THEN Congress might finally wise up and say to themselves, "Huh. These corporate banks don't really give a shiat about our country! All they care about is themselves! Perhaps we should enact some laws that would protect our country and our citizens instead of these corporate assholes."
 
2012-03-19 11:45:14 AM  

Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway? I could see owning a pitchfork if you do a lot of landscaping at home (in fact, I think there's one in my parents' storage shed), but torches? I think the best I could muster up would be a cordless weed whacker and a Maglite. Granted, you could really bust some heads with that Maglite. That's why cops carry them, you know.


I've got a snow shovel and some scented candles. I could probably rustle up a camping lantern, if things get crazy.

Will that work? Can I punch a BoA executive in the dick?
 
2012-03-19 11:45:43 AM  

xanadian: BurnShrike: We tried Subby, but the media portrayed us as self-entitled jobless losers who weren't sure what we were mad about.

And people bought it.

So here we are...

To be fair, Tea Partiers were (and still are) painted as just as crazy. Instead of young, jobless, shiftless hippies, they're stuffy old farts cruising around on Hoverounds worshiping Jeeeeeesuss-uh!

Probably because the Tea Partiers and OWS people have a lot of common ground.

And probably because the media is also bought and paid for.


I've never understood the comparison between the Tea Partiers and OWS. Sure, they may have a lot of 'common ground' in that they believe the economic situation in the country is anything but fair, but what both of them would do about these problems are probably completely different. Throw into the mix that the Tea Partiers are terrified of doing anything seemingly against the '1%ers' because they feel their fate as employed Americans are tied up with theirs. Higher taxes for the very wealthy and protectionist regulations are out of the question.
 
2012-03-19 11:50:17 AM  

I_C_Weener: When I want cutting incisive commentary on economics, I turn to the Econom...uh...Rolling Stone.

The reason is that Bush was pro-business, and Obama is pro-Wall Street/Banking. They rigged the game. We got no leverage in this mess.


I don't think the President (regardless of party affiliation or personal ideology) can really do much to directly affect the banking industry. Bush was the first one that I know of that had a SHOT at something like that, and he choked on the free throw. By the time Obama got in there, the moment had passed and we were locked into our course.

I think its going to eventually get bloody. OWS really rattled a few cages last year, and shows every indication of coming back again this summer. rank and file workers in the banking industry are starting to leak information about who and what goes on behind closed doors in the banking industry once the lights are off and the doors are closed. the public is already agitated about getting f*cked over by rich bankers and investment brokers. More and more jobs draining out of the country and moving overseas, more and more grandparents and baby boomers are doing the math and realizing that they might actually be more screwed than they thought. less assets being transferred to younger generations, more power and money being concentrated in the hands of an uncaring (and rather stupid/short sighted) elite. it's cliche to say it, but all of this HAS happened before and I think it's all going to happen again....we're going to get bloody, and we're going to start hurting one another.
 
2012-03-19 11:50:19 AM  

what_now: Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway? I could see owning a pitchfork if you do a lot of landscaping at home (in fact, I think there's one in my parents' storage shed), but torches? I think the best I could muster up would be a cordless weed whacker and a Maglite. Granted, you could really bust some heads with that Maglite. That's why cops carry them, you know.

I've got a snow shovel and some scented candles. I could probably rustle up a camping lantern, if things get crazy.

Will that work? Can I punch a BoA executive in the dick?


I have a pitchfork, but its one of those flat tined ones from Lowes. We really need the pointy ones from Friday the 13th, Part 2. And I could get some Tiki Torches. Citibank is gonna smell like Citronella tonight!
 
2012-03-19 11:51:56 AM  

Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year


Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.
 
2012-03-19 11:55:36 AM  

I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.


paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?
 
2012-03-19 11:57:53 AM  

Nabb1: EatHam: Nabb1: How many people even have torches and pitchforks handy, anyway?

I have a pitchfork, and some tiki torches. I only have one pitchfork, but I could share the tiki torches. They are even filled with citronella, so our mob will be mosquito free.

Mosquito free is good. Tiki torches are a good idea. My wife bought some cups that look like coconuts and we have those little paper umbrellas. We're going to need some rum.


And this is how an angry mob degenerates into a drunken luau.
 
2012-03-19 11:57:55 AM  

Weaver95: I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.

paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?


If costing tax payers money for law enforcement following them around and cleaning up after them is their goal, then they were very effective. If changing the system or even getting the attention of government, reglators, or the banking industry was their goal...well, they'll always have the pepper spray.
 
2012-03-19 12:00:48 PM  

what_now: Can I punch a BoA executive in the dick?


These men have no dicks.
 
2012-03-19 12:01:42 PM  

NewportBarGuy: what_now: Can I punch a BoA executive in the dick?

These men have no dicks.


Is this true?
 
2012-03-19 12:06:46 PM  

Weaver95: I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.

paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?


It's easy. "Well what did they CHANGE??? Nothing!!"

Boom, done. They were totes ineffective.
 
2012-03-19 12:06:57 PM  

I_C_Weener: Weaver95: I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.

paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?

If costing tax payers money for law enforcement following them around and cleaning up after them is their goal, then they were very effective. If changing the system or even getting the attention of government, reglators, or the banking industry was their goal...well, they'll always have the pepper spray.


OWS got people talking about wall street and what to do about the abuses. And for that they've been beaten, arrested, harassed. lies have been spread by people who should know better, and cops have reacted violently around the nation to the IDEA of a discussion of our flawed banking system. If just wanting to talk about reforming wall street earns you a cracked skull and coma...imagine what sort of response we'll get once we actually get a reform effort underway...
 
2012-03-19 12:08:15 PM  

Elandriel: Weaver95: I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.

paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?

It's easy. "Well what did they CHANGE??? Nothing!!"

Boom, done. They were totes ineffective.


www.thenation.com
 
2012-03-19 12:11:06 PM  

I_C_Weener: Weaver95: I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.

paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?

If costing tax payers money for law enforcement following them around and cleaning up after them is their goal, then they were very effective. If changing the system or even getting the attention of government, reglators, or the banking industry was their goal...well, they'll always have the pepper spray.


Oh for christ's sake. You mongoloid. You know damn well the "cleanup" happened because they were forcibly evicted and not allowed to take their belongings with them. Those same belongings then bulldozed and piled up, conveniently, took the appearance of trash. How about that? Crazy!! If they had at least been allowed to take their crap with them, I imagine the cleanup would have consisted of a guy wandering around a almost entirely clean park saying "Huh. Nothin' to do here."

But I guess that doesn't jive with the narrative, does it?? What about all the interviews with IT professionals, teachers, lawyers, retired policemen, army veterans, homeless shelter volunteers, etc etc etc? Do those people not exist? Are they all slobs and losers and unemployed sihftless hippy millenials?

I mean, can you seriously keep answering by projecting a single stereotype onto these people?

Does a bear sh*t in the woods?
 
2012-03-19 12:15:33 PM  
I don't have a pitchfork..... hrmm, but I do have some hay hooks, this could get gruesome.
 
2012-03-19 12:16:43 PM  
Weaver, they were as effective as the anarchists that protest the G8 meetings.

Elandriel, if that were the case, then why is the story pretty much identical in each city regardless of being evicted or leaving on their own. They by their nature generate a lot of trash with no logistics to remove it. It is why campgrounds have a huge part of their business plan dealing with waste removal. Camping out creates trash.

To deny this is to deny the simplest part of the OWS. They aren't a "can we have a permit to protest for a day" group. They are an occupy group who by their nature are rebelling against the system.
 
2012-03-19 12:18:58 PM  

Elandriel: It's easy. "Well what did they CHANGE??? Nothing!!"

Boom, done. They were totes ineffective.


That's exactly what they'd like you to believe. "Don't even bother protesting because it doesn't get anyone anywhere". Anything that keeps you at home and stops you from speaking out against the injustices done by these criminals.

I mean, if protesting actually changed something the blacks wouldn't have their own seating on the bus, and women would have the vote.
 
2012-03-19 12:22:07 PM  
Jealousy! Class warfare!
 
2012-03-19 12:29:47 PM  

Elandriel: Weaver95: I_C_Weener: Weaver95: OWS really rattled a few cages last year

Evacuate, in their moment of triumph? I think your overestimate OWS's effects.

paradox - how can anyone claim that OWS was ineffective and yet ignore the massive and well coordinated efforts of law enforcement across the nation to shut down the movement and discredit them in the press?

It's easy. "Well what did they CHANGE??? Nothing!!"

Boom, done. They were totes ineffective.


They changed the national dialogue from "omg huge deficits!" to "omg massive wealth inequality!" The terms "99%" and "1%", and the fact that the public is aware of them and what they mean on some level, is all because of OWS.
 
2012-03-19 12:36:17 PM  

BurnShrike: stuff


TOTES ineffective. Seriously you guys. And we're going to devote significant airtime* to make sure everyone knows how completely out of touch and ineffective these slackers are.

* except for the airtime devoted to "any insignificant news that isn't OWS so we can pretend they don't exist"
 
2012-03-19 12:52:26 PM  
Later, after McColl retired, his successors kept up his acquisitive legacy, buying notorious mortgage lender Countrywide Financial in 2008, and using some of the $25 billion in federal bailout funds they received to acquire dying investment bank Merrill Lynch.

BofA was essentially forced to buy Countrywide and Merrill by the government. They were the only bank that could absorb the debt of the two combined entities. They weren't bought because some guy wanted to have the biggest swinging dick.

I imagine BofA balked at buying either of those companies at that time. They were so bad financially, they were untouchable. The gov'ment said 'either buy these companies or we don't bail you out, because they are going under anyways.'
 
2012-03-19 12:53:34 PM  

I_C_Weener: NewportBarGuy: what_now: Can I punch a BoA executive in the dick?

These men have no dicks.

Is this true?


i249.photobucket.com

Yes.
 
2012-03-19 12:57:14 PM  
1992: OMG, Redlining (new window).

2012: Banks and mortgage lenders conspired to create a gigantic volume of very risky home loans, delivering outsize mortgages to dubious borrowers like immigrants without identification, the unemployed and people with poor credit histories.

talk about rewriting history. You can't have both sides. You can't say banks were being racists, force them to lend by law, then turn around and say it their scam all along.
 
2012-03-19 01:05:15 PM  
This is what regulatory capture looks like, kids.
If it's not against the law, then it's all OK.
Doesn't matter if it's right or wrong to these people.
And yes, banks are people.

/Regulatory capture is just another phrase for endemic corruption.
 
2012-03-19 01:13:47 PM  

SlothB77: BofA was essentially forced to buy Countrywide and Merrill by the government.


BofA was forced to buy Merrill, they were not forced to buy Countrywide. They sent a brigade of analysts to pour over the records and they decided they had to have Countrywide at a huge discount. They never saw what was obvious, the mountains of defaults and pending lawsuits.

Don't blame the Fed for that sh*tshow. That was all Kenny boy.
 
Displayed 50 of 119 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report