Request for comment: Collapse of the U. S. A.

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Your initial premise that the banking collapse was

> created by fraud is wrong. Fraud certainly had a

> component in the banking industry, much as it does

> in every business transaction, but it was not the

> dominant factor.

>

> As a consequence everything else is also wrong.

>

> I'm going to get Lady D a 'The End of the World is

> Nigh' sandwich board also.

>

> Your craving for armageddon probably means that

> you genuinely craved people to turn off banks in

> 2008. I can't think of anything so short-sighted

> and pointlessly destructive.

Sorry you are wrong, capitalism is no longer the system, fraud is the system, how can you have capitalism if you do not let bad banks fail, how can you transfer risk to public purse and profits to private purse.

Why have we not had a savings and loans style investigation, because dishonest people have block it.

I am not the shortsighted one, the banks, regulators and governments are having problems seeing the issue here.

I have no desire for Armageddon, but until addicts face up to their problems, their problem will get the better of them.

[*Bob*]

Let me put it this way.

Imagine you're Hitler. You're sitting in the Reichstag with a box of matches in one hand and a copy of the Glass-Steagall Act in the other. Do you:

a) issue more sub-prime lending in an overheated market

b) phone a friend

b) set light to the curtains

[Huguenot]

"Sorry you are wrong, capitalism is no longer the system, fraud is the system"

This is it, absolutely no sense of perspective - it just sounds silly and it undermines everything you say.

You've made yet another false premise: that the US and UK markets claim to be 'pure' capitalism. They're not and never have been.

This plaintive wheedle: "how can you have capitalism if you do not let bad banks fail" should be telling you something - essentially that WE DON'T DO CAPITALISM ;-)

We live in societies that have both capitalist and socialist components. Nations are not so stupid to sacrifice their interests on the altar of teenage demands for philosophical purity.

[richardbach]

lol why you discusing stuf that concrens america like teh glass seagull act - america is jus a nation on teh wane another corrupt happy shooper dictatorship and rogue state run by theives philanderrs pederasts racists gangstrs an the military industrial complex its had its daye an it quite fankly teh sooner it relises that its a cultutral cul de sack and is primarly poulated by morons an idoits an inbreds with fake teeth its not called teh great satan by half teh world for nothing its so lacking in culture and depht it makes australia an new zeland look sophisticted lol

[Brendan]

Fjka ijippj hgqw wifg najkpa by wihch tmie I raleday adh ym alslb uto jaohi asd nja fahj ansoiasn!

[Loz]

OK NN, we are starting to get a glimpse behind the cut and paste and posting of links as to what you actually are saying. So:

1) You say, "No one had the decency to turn off the banking life support system in 2008". What would the consequences had been if they *had* turned it off?

2) In general, you pose lots of problems and forecast all sorts of doom and gloom, but what is the solution? What are the consequences of that solution?

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Sorry you are wrong, capitalism is no longer the

> system, fraud is the system"

>

> This is it, absolutely no sense of perspective -

> it just sounds silly and it undermines everything

> you say.

>

> You've made yet another false premise: that the US

> and UK markets claim to be 'pure' capitalism.

> They're not and never have been.

>

> This plaintive wheedle: "how can you have

> capitalism if you do not let bad banks fail"

> should be telling you something - essentially that

> WE DON'T DO CAPITALISM ;-)

>

> We live in societies that have both capitalist and

> socialist components. Nations are not so stupid to

> sacrifice their interests on the altar of teenage

> demands for philosophical purity.

The republican party would strongly refute your claim socialism.

Fraud deliberately designed and executed has brought about the emerging cleptocracy.

Kleptocracy, alternatively cleptocracy or kleptarchy, from Ancient Greek: (thief) and (rule), is a term applied to a government subject to control fraud that takes advantage of governmental corruption to extend the personal wealth and political power of government officials and the ruling class (collectively, kleptocrats), via the embezzlement of state funds at the expense of the wider population, sometimes without even the pretense of honest service. The term means "rule by thieves". Not an official form of government such as a democracy, republic, monarchy, or theocracy; a kleptocracy is rather a pejorative for a government perceived to have a particularly severe and systemic problem with the selfish misappropriation of public funds by those in power.

Yes copy and paste, for the greater good

[Brendan]

Molecular diffusion, often called simply diffusion, is the thermal motion of all (liquid or gas) particles at temperatures above absolute zero. The rate of this movement is a function of temperature, viscosity of the fluid and the size (mass) of the particles. Diffusion explains the net flux of molecules from a region of higher concentration to one of lower concentration, but it is important to note that diffusion also occurs when there is no concentration gradient. The result of diffusion is a gradual mixing of material. In a phase with uniform temperature, absent external net forces acting on the particles, the diffusion process will eventually result in complete mixing.

[Huguenot]

I don't really give a monkeys what the Republican party may claim, they'd be as incorrect as you.

The US government spent $1,500 billion last year (almost half their budget) on Medicare, Medicaid and Welfare - and this doesn't include the social programmes run at a state level.

The rest of your post on an emerging kleptocracy was as demented as it was foolish. It was like noisy posturing from an attention seeking teenager.

Whilst you must obviously think you're so clever that you need to publish dictionary definitions to allow the common folk to gain a glimpse of the exalted heights of your intellect, really what you're doing is insulting the many people involved in politics who work tirelessly and diligently to help other people.

[Brendan]

And you expect people to rise to such pubescent nonsense.

[richardbach]

cut an paste nutters lol get abck to yuor area 51 and alienn nonesense you nutter lol

[Frankito]

As my father used to say: 'give them a noose and most of them will hang themselves through their own ignorance..' NN, is doing a good job of bungee jumping from a very short rope.. Thank you for confirming that your fantastical assumptions are as illogical as your general ramblings.

But don't let me interrupt your creative genius for it is fascinating.. I did like your 'reality check', was that title intentionally ironic or did you just surprise yourself..?

*Where is Nette when you need her, we need some visuals...? Woolly buses, Hannibal lectors, pegs - they all make sense now.... they are Derivatives of sorts, cleverlyused by banks to conceal toxic debt and thus profit from all us hard-working mortals *

[New Nexus]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> OK NN, we are starting to get a glimpse behind the

> cut and paste and posting of links as to what you

> actually are saying. So:

>

> 1) You say, "No one had the decency to turn off

> the banking life support system in 2008". What

> would the consequences had been if they *had*

> turned it off?

>

> 2) In general, you pose lots of problems and

> forecast all sorts of doom and gloom, but what is

> the solution? What are the consequences of that

> solution?

1) You say, "No one had the decency to turn off the banking life support system in 2008". What would the consequences had been if they *had* turned it off?

Governments seize the banking systems, and separate the banks via Glass-Steagall Act or equivalent. Get the banking system running as close to normal as is possible. Close off market access to speculators and derivatives. Ring-fence bad debt and process via normal insolvency rules.

Setup international fraud crime court with special prosecutor and powers of subpoena, and international arrest warrant powers.

(For starters)

The 2008 debt problem has not gone away, it has been poorly managed, it is now creping from the banking sector to the real world.

Kicking people in the teeth with austerity measures is a smoke screen, to get people to look at their own problems and not look at the big picture.

[Huguenot]

Hah ha ha!

NN, I thought you said our leaders were all thieves? And now you want them to seize the banks? You really haven't thought this through ;-)

[Frankito]

Quote: to get people to look at their own problems and not look at the big picture.

My favourite quote of yours thus far..

[Loz]

Governments seize the banking systems, and separate the banks via Glass-Steagall Act or equivalent. Get the banking system running as close to normal as is possible. Close off market access to speculators and derivatives. Ring-fence bad debt and process via normal insolvency rules.

How would governments do that? It was fine for the banks that were on the brink of failure, but you just can't march into Goldman-Sachs and the rest and say 'this is all owned by the government now'. That would be challenged in the courts.

Also, you would make some of the biggest companies in the world worthless overnight - the knock on effect on other businesses, pension schemes and the rest would be calamitous for everyone.

But, if you are just talking about 'the banking system', then each government already controls that.

Having said that, I am a big fan of the separation of High St and 'Casino' banking operations. But that is not such a revolution and so probably not a big enough change for you.

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hah ha ha!

>

> NN, I thought you said our leaders were all

> thieves? And now you want them to seize the banks?

> You really haven't thought this through ;-)

Once again, I said seize them, not run them, just like in insolvency cases an administrator would be appointed.

[New Nexus]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Governments seize the banking systems, and

> separate the banks via Glass-Steagall Act or

> equivalent. Get the banking system running as

> close to normal as is possible. Close off market

> access to speculators and derivatives. Ring-fence

> bad debt and process via normal insolvency rules.

>

>

> How would governments do that? It was fine for

> the banks that were on the brink of failure, but

> you just can't march into Goldman-Sachs and the

> rest and say 'this is all owned by the government

> now'. That would be challenged in the courts.

>

> Also, you would make some of the biggest companies

> in the world worthless overnight - the knock on

> effect on other businesses, pension schemes and

> the rest would be calamitous for everyone.

>

> But, if you are just talking about 'the banking

> system', then each government already controls

> that.

>

> Having said that, I am a big fan of the separation

> of High St and 'Casino' banking operations. But

> that is not such a revolution and so probably not

> a big enough change for you.

I am sorry, but GS should be the first bank to be investigated by the FBRA,

Volume trading scams

Derivatives scams

Greece?s debt scam.

And the list goes on.

And you think the ?knock on effect? of doing nothing is going to do what.

Do you really think that pension funds are going to come out of this undamaged?

?each government already controls that?

Just like they controlled mortgaged backed securities, they did not understand the products and vehicles then and they have not brought onboard the right expertise to handle what is going on now.

[Loz]

So, you are actually saying that all banks and their assets should be seized by the government?

[New Nexus]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, you are actually saying that all banks and

> their assets should be seized by the government?

Let me tell you something about the New York stock exchange in the 1990?s and this applies to all stock exchanges at that time.

It was like a playground for little kids, the boys, I can?t call them men, would put bets on, among themselves, to drive a particular stock price to a designated price, up or down, not in the interest of their clients, but just so they could win their bets with their mates.

This is the kind of mindset that is now 20 years later running our world economy.

Alan Greenspan said in front of the Congressional hearing that he got it wrong, he did not get it wrong ? he just did not know that the hooligans had taken over ? yes he should have know, but he didn?t.

[Huguenot]

Ha ha

I think it's more than that Loz ;-)

NN thinks that "all banks and their assets should be seized by the government, who do not understand the products and vehicles and they have not brought onboard the right expertise to handle what is going on now"

Ha ha ha.

Because the right expertise would be presumably from..... the banks, who are all in on the scam.

"Ring-fence bad debt", what, you mean insulate the banks against their bad decisions andd make the taxpayer pay ;-) But... but.... but... it's just not capitalism!!!!

*chortle*

[Huguenot]

"Let me tell you something about the New York stock exchange in the 1990s"

Ha ha ha, please do!

*wipes tear from eye*

Were you even born in the '90s?

[New Nexus]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Let me tell you something about the New York

> stock exchange in the 1990s"

>

> Ha ha ha, please do!

>

> *wipes tear from eye*

>

> Were you even born in the '90s?

You made the assumption early in this thread that I was young, Oppp?s

I was born long before the 1990?s

[MissNoodlesHats]

Uh oh...there she blows again

"The rest of your post on an emerging kleptocracy was as demented as it was foolish. It was like noisy posturing from an attention seeking teenager."

Could you please refrain from this prejudiced abuse towards the teenage population. Were you bullied as a teenager perhaps ?

*Removes glasses , cleans glass, and yawns *

[Huguenot]

I didn't make any assumption, I have no idea how old you are. What I do know is that you're ranting like a hormonal teenager ;-)

A hormonal teenager for some reason obsessed with the USA.

I've asked you this twice, but you still haven't answered... why are you obsessed with the USA? Why are you so into their legislation and companies?