Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Bloomberg)   Another top banking figure is found dead, this time with his wife and daughter. There is a storm coming   (bloomberg.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, bankers, Banco Santander SA, ABN AMRO, Schmittmann, Dutch police  
•       •       •

17934 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Apr 2014 at 3:09 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-07 01:02:43 PM  
s7.postimg.org
 
2014-04-07 01:16:57 PM  
"When the Grey Hair is dead, Magua will eat his heart. Before he dies, Magua will put his children under the knife, so the Grey Hair will know his seed is wiped out forever".
img.fark.net
 
2014-04-07 01:26:53 PM  
Anyone else read the NY Times magazine article about the IEX exchange? Pretty damn interesting. What a weird, opaque system.
 
2014-04-07 01:55:32 PM  

UsikFark: Revmach



No, they go through feeling like a fist-sized Altoid burning their way through until exit. I curl myself around my midsection in a protective ball until it's over.
 
2014-04-07 02:11:41 PM  

wesmon: Revmach


Yeah, I'm not asking for any sympathy. I had a good run while it lasted... I'm just saying I can understand why people are offing themselves.

It's eye opening really. If I look at what my work in isolation, you can't point to any one thing I personally did that was wrong or unethical. If I look at the thousands of people I worked with over my career, and look at their work in isolation, 99% of them were on the right side of the legal and moral line.

It's that damn small percentage that intentionally and knowingly crossed that line. It's the handful of big shots at Citi who lobbied for the repeal of the Glass Seagal Act, a relatively small number of people globally that created bullshiat products, a few outright fraudsters, and a financial & judicial system where the poor get the shaft as a matter of policy and procedure.

So looking at my 100% above-board and ethical work product, did my work product enable that small group of people to do what they did? Yes, regrettably it probably did to some extent. Was it apparent this would happen when I started this career? No. Why didn't I change companies to a better place? After about 2002 or so, there were only a handful of places left after consolidating mergers and they were all equally farked up. Why didn't I quit? Eventually I did... but only when the decision was basically taken out of my hands. I didn't leave earlier because, quite frankly, life was good. Plus it wasn't like we were shipping Jews off to camps, the harm was easy to miss because goddamn it, I need to configure the corporate firewall for this algo trading platform set up on the dev segment and why the fark must I get approvals from 18 different people to do so? And will I get fired if the changes aren't approved by such and such date?
 
2014-04-07 02:27:41 PM  

Heron: CoonAce: August11:  If there is an assassin roaming the world and killing bank executives, and this is the advent of a global revolution, your "storm," it likely started years ago and our children will not see it through. I know your desire, though, we want to see it all, complete, in one fell swoop.

It's quite the opposite of a "people's" revolution.  A few may be legitimate suicides, but largely these guys weren't playing ball.  A bunch of mid-level JFKs, so to speak, only with better plausible deniability.  (Except for the flagrant nailgun incident; anyone who believes that was suicide is a sucker, and that's putting it kindly.)

Contrary to popular belief, a belief deliberately cultivated by his PR team before and after his death, JFK was not some moral rebel against the iniquities of US society. I could perhaps believe him assassinated for his stupidity if the evidence didn't so strongly point to his death coming at the hands of a troubled political radical operating on his own, but the idea that some shadowy conspiracy of governmental and criminal Powers had him bumped off because he wouldn't "play ball" when it was HE would caused the Cuban Missile Crisis through his belligerence and uncritical acceptance of Pentagon/CIA/FBI analytical paranoia, and HE who escalated our military involvement in Vietnam painting LBJ into a corner regarding how to handle the situation, and HE who took the first tentative steps towards finacializing US elections and government is simply ludicrous.


You forgot to mention that JFK also initiated "Golpe de 64," the CIA overthrow of the Brazilian govt.  He did not uncritically accept all clandestine matters and affairs, however: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

I hope you don't also believe that Amschel Rothschild hanged himself from a hotel's towel rack?  Those flimsy things come off the wall if you lean on them wrong.  These banksters are dying to make sure nobody talks.
 
2014-04-07 03:01:56 PM  

Destructor: So.... Everyone here is going to burn their 401k's, I hope. You know, solidarity and stuff that banking and investing is evil. EVIL....

Because if you don't... perhaps you're just as bad as the people you hate so much.

[www.drfunkenberry.com image 320x396]

After all... you're feeding them.


I can't speak for the [other] conspiracy theorists, but gambling, investing, getting paid interest, and all that other stuff like that is not evil, it's the lies they told in order to sell their product (the bundled sub-prime mortgages). If you're an austrian economist, even you (should) still believe that the free market requires some ground rules (you know, not lying about your product, not killing customers, not destroying the economy, not conspiring to form monopolies/oligopolies, not using economic power to change the rules to favor your company and hurt your competitors)

Those who did that, and who worked to lessen regulations that allowed them to do that, and put their guys in the role of the regulating agency, should be publicly tortured and hanged, not just for justice, but to send a message to future sociopaths (and their accomplices), that this is what happens when you go that far and flagrantly cause that much damage. They knew what they were doing
 
2014-04-07 03:08:50 PM  

wesmon: Destructor: untaken_name: Why? I didn't choose their profession, their spouse, their breeding habits, or their involvement in whatever got their family killed. If the people involved didn't care about their families, why should I?

Compassion.

I find my compassion lacking for the trust fund kiddies living off the spoils their daddies made wrecking the global economy.


I have to say, they can't help what they were born into any more than anyone else, and now will never get the chance to reveal their character (if they'd grow up to be charitable and use their dumb luck for good, or just hoard it/squander it on themselves alone, or even use it for absolute universal evil whatever that looks like, zombie Hitler perhaps?)

when in any doubt, leave children out of the war
 
2014-04-07 03:26:32 PM  

Panatheist: the free market requires some ground rules (you know, not lying about your product, not killing customers, not destroying the economy, not conspiring to form monopolies/oligopolies, not using economic power to change the rules to favor your company and hurt your competitors)


I'm not the banking industry's apologist. Bad things were certainly done in the bank industry. But to hold every actor accountable is, IMHO, irresponsible. I figure that in the worst case, for every banker that lied and swindled customers, there were 9 others who didn't. However, I'm an optimist (usually) when it comes to humans. It's probably better than that.

Panatheist: Those who did that, and who worked to lessen regulations that allowed them to do that, and put their guys in the role of the regulating agency, should be publicly tortured and hanged, not just for justice, but to send a message to future sociopaths (and their accomplices), that this is what happens when you go that far and flagrantly cause that much damage. They knew what they were doing


Oh, there were plenty of people responsible. Not just in the banking and/or insurance world, but in government too. If recent history is any indication, it is unlikely that they will ever see justice.

FWIW, I agree with what Tatterdemalian tagged on to the end of one of his posts:

/the problem with the economy isn't that the bankers are too mean, but because they are being forced - literally at gunpoint - to be too nice
//the value of the money, like the rule of law, softens as people try to force it to be kinder than it was ever meant to be
///and, like the new "social justice" replacing actual justice, the end result will be societal collapse, not social progress
 
2014-04-07 03:30:42 PM  
This is the dawning of the age of aquarius.
 
gja
2014-04-07 03:53:20 PM  
Let Wall Street after a decade plus. Damned near killed me. Cost me more personally than the money was worth.

Always reminded of CSN....
"You are living a reality
I left years ago it quite nearly killed me
In the long run it will make you cry
Make you crazy and old before your time"

Too God-damned true to believe.
 
2014-04-07 04:26:12 PM  

Destructor: FWIW, I agree with what Tatterdemalian tagged on to the end of one of his posts:

/the problem with the economy isn't that the bankers are too mean, but because they are being forced - literally at gunpoint - to be too nice
//the value of the money, like the rule of law, softens as people try to force it to be kinder than it was ever meant to be
///and, like the new "social justice" replacing actual justice, the end result will be societal collapse, not social progress


I know you didn't write it, but since you agree with it, how will laws making money "kinder" and social justice lead to societal collapse?
 
2014-04-07 04:28:18 PM  
ITT:

static.squarespace.com
 
2014-04-07 04:50:45 PM  

llortcM_yllort: I know you didn't write it, but since you agree with it, how will laws making money "kinder"


Loosening lending standards was a big contributor to the problems we have now.

llortcM_yllort: social justice lead to societal collapse?


Sticking any word in front of "Justice" is an enormous red flag. There is only Justice. Anything else is a hint that there is a bias and/or subterfuge at work.

Reverse redlining, for example, prodded along by the government contributed greatly.

Societal collapse? You got me there. But, I'm not particularly happy with the way things are headed right now...
 
2014-04-07 05:48:39 PM  

llortcM_yllort: ITT:

[static.squarespace.com image 640x480]


asheepnomore.net
 
2014-04-07 06:42:32 PM  
Another dead banking CEO.  They're dying quicker than these threads.
 
2014-04-07 06:44:14 PM  

Triumph: Another dead banking CEO.  They're dying quicker than these threads.


I don't think anyone likes them.
 
2014-04-07 06:45:02 PM  
But did they have all their fingernails?
 
2014-04-07 06:51:52 PM  

Destructor: the problem with the economy isn't that the bankers are too mean, but because they are being forced - literally at gunpoint - to be too nice


I dont understand what he/you are implying or saying

the problem with the economy isn't that the bankers are too mean, but because they are being forced - literally at gunpoint - to be too nice
what is "too nice" here, and who's holding the gun?

the value of the money, like the rule of law, softens as people try to force it to be kinder than it was ever meant to be

I disagree that the law has gotten softer (nicer?) unless you really mean that it's interpretation is softer (fuzzier) and more broad (in my opinion too overreaching)
and I disagree that money has gotten softer or harder or anything, and I really don't know what you're trying to say (or imply) with that, but it reeks of old white men complaining about welfare queens. correct me if I'm wrong.

and what is this?
and, like the new "social justice" replacing actual justice, the end result will be societal collapse, not social progress

this recent social justice isn't replacing anything. What i'm thinking you mean is any number of stories where people boycott a business because of politics, or complain about something because it goes against their politics. Thats just people exercising a tool they have. And you think people paying attention and being engaged will lead to social collapse? why? is it because you disagree with some of their politics? or am I way off mark? what exactly are you saying?

and I don't think bankers are mean or nice, they're indifferent and self serving to the extreme
 
2014-04-07 07:06:18 PM  
Reminds me of a Tom Clancy novel...
 
2014-04-07 07:06:24 PM  

Panatheist: I dont understand what he/you are implying or saying


Please refer to the reply I gave,

llortcM_yllort, bout 5 posts up.

Panatheist: and I don't think bankers are mean or nice, they're indifferent and self serving to the extreme


Ideally, that's the goal of every business. To provide a good or service of value in exchange for money. The better they can do, the better it is for the consumer. It's where people get cheated that we have a problem.
 
2014-04-07 07:23:02 PM  
ABN Amro is shocked

Shocked that they didn't get the other daughter.
 
2014-04-07 07:47:00 PM  
Didn't the head of a Lichtenstein bank also get shot in the parking lot of his office today?
 
2014-04-08 09:05:31 AM  

Destructor: Societal collapse? You got me there. But, I'm not particularly happy with the way things are headed right now...


By undercutting what makes the rule of law stable, which is the fact that people believe they can get a fair trial in the inevitable disputes that go to court. When the law is intentionally biased, even if the bias is introduced with the very best of all possible intentions, the bias makes it clear that certain people will not be allowed to get a fair trial. When the criteria for receiving the benefits of this corruption is to be a "downtrodden victim," it sets off a race to be as much of a downtrodden victim as possible, just to avoid being in the demographic that is always decided against.

For example, take Lenin's Hanging Order. Supposedly it only punished "kulaks," illegal farmers who grew crops on land they didn't actually own. Who decided ownership? The local magistrates, who quickly realized they could fudge their records without retribution simply because they were too popular and important to be suspected. "Kulak" quickly became a euphemism for "farmer successful enough that the local magistrate decided it was time to shake him down." Then when the Hanging Order was announced, it set off a sudden race to the bottom, as all the farmers tried to be as unproductive as possible, in the hope that some other farmer would be one of the ten most productive "kulaks" that would be hanged on the orders of the Great Revolutionary Leader.

/and the lack of productivity didn't go away when the Hanging Order did
//because there was always the possibility that Stalin, or any other leader, could bring it back
///and not only did Stalin do this, he weaponized it against Ukrainian farmers in the Holodomor
 
Displayed 24 of 174 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report