English mother ****er.... do you speak it? I can't seem to understand what you are trying to say through all the grammatical errors.
Ummm..... its obvious you are trolling. You haven't been paying attention.
What do you know Sangha.... right here in this thread........
While a couple of their complaints sound nobel, what these moochers are about is more government and redistribution of wealth to them. This is Obama reelection 101.
Or you could just try to understand.
They are: Derivative Definition
There's no point argueing against financial instruments, it's just a piece of paper, it's how it's used. People can use money for corruption, it doesn't make money a bad financial instrument.
As to how it's used: it's not easy to regulate the financial markets, it's changing so fast, a lot of the people who uses these new instruments sometimes don't fully understand it, let alone the regulators. These are smart people who are sometimes PhDs in mathematics. If you ban one sort of derivative, another will pop up that do about the same thing but in a way that get around the law. If you ban shorting, you create an imbalance in the market for price discovery. One way it can be improved though is to make the transactions more transparent, though it would costs the firms more.
These bankers' job is to make money, they deal with abstract numbers and care only about how to move it around so it results in bigger bottom lines, so blaming them for doing their job well doesn't make a lot of sense, if you allow the job to exist. What can be done is highlighting the tie between the money and the politicians, but thousand of years of history have shown that most politicians will do what the money tells them to do.
BTW, I totally supported the bailout, it would have been much worse for the everyday folks if the banks were allowed to fail, resulting in actual widespread runs on the banks. The FDIC could not pay all the deposits it insured if confidence were not restored to the system.
I feel bad for the police at the end. It looks claustrophobic where they were, if you were caught in what you think are a hostile group of hundreds of people, wouldn't you act out in defense of yourself?
If the crowd was truly hostile (as you seem to cater to the notion that its easily percieved) and the police acted like that the "hostile' crowd would show them no mercy and rip them to shreds.
Then you and them would truly know the meaning of the word hostile.
Notice the words "you think". I know the meaning of the word "hostile", it's you who seem to be confusing it with a more extreme meaning.
hos·tile
[hos-tl or, especially Brit., -tahyl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
of, pertaining to, or characteristic of an enemy: a hostile nation.
2.
opposed in feeling, action, or character; antagonistic: hostile criticism.
3.
characterized by antagonism.
4.
not friendly, warm, or generous; not hospitable.
If the crowd "rip them to shreds" then the crowd will not be just "hostile", but rather quite "vicious", and they should be put in jail for a very long time. Maybe they know this and that's why they did not "rip them to shreds". Instead the protestors were out to bait the police into violence to further their own propaganda.
if you were caught in what you think are a hostile group of hundreds of people, wouldn't you act out in defense of yourself?
I feel bad for the police at the end. It looks claustrophobic where they were, if you were caught in what you think are a hostile group of hundreds of people, wouldn't you act out in defense of yourself? It's the policeman who went around spraying people indiscriminately that helped these protestors cause. And police actions like seeming to lead the protestors onto the bridge then turn around and arrest them. The protestors are doing about the same thing - baiting the police into violence is also a kind of entrapment.
They led them ONTO the bridge, they didn't lead them INTO the street (travel lanes).
They led them ONTO the bridge, they didn't lead them INTO the street (travel lanes).
when you see crap coming from those losers such as getting rid of all existing debt (ie stealing from banks, lenders etc) what you see are thieves and parasites
The video shows the police leading them onto the bridge, right up the street (travel lanes).
It doesn't show that at all. It shows them on a small portion of an entry-exit as they move towards the bridge. They were told to stay on the walkways once on the bridge, which are fairly wide. Instead they blocked all three lanes on that side of the bridge while on the bridge. No police leading them. In fact, the police came up the bridge from the other direction so as to arrest them. That is what the video shows.
| Moderator's Warning: |
That is not what appears to be the case on the video below:
What a dumbass thing to argue about.
What a dumbass thing to argue about.
Good point!
I disagree, we are on a forum to debate politics to find where we stand on things. It is important to certain people; therefore, we should respect their views/opinions. If we disagree, then we should blast them to hell!
syncophants
The point being missed here is that just like the American Revolution, change only comes when the wealthy want it. The 1% has two factions, the greedy Wall Street types, and the Patriotic Millionaires.
"Recently members of the group calling themselves “Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength” sent a letter to Pres. Barack Obama, Harry Reid (Majority Leader in the U. S. Senate), and John Boehner (Speaker of the U. S. House of Representatives). What made the letter notable was that it requested that “you increase taxes on incomes over $1,000,000”—the letter then being signed by a long list of millionaires."
Here is a link to Patriotic Millionaires a quiet group that knows how to twist arms in hardball politics. “Patriotic Millionaires� | Dissident Voice The Republicans and the Tea Party are going to come out of this like Torries after the American Revolution - assimilate or leave. The Democratic Party in my opinion will get slapped into the middle of next week. The result will be an America that serves all legal CITIZENS.
Good point!
There is nothing stopping any of those "patriotic millionaires" from raising their taxes tomorrow, lets assume 10%, and writing that check to the Treasury. What are they waiting for ?
Some readers will point out that I am free to donate to the treasury even now. But such solitary sacrifice would be utterly ineffectual, and I am no more eager than anyone else is to fill the pork barrels of corrupt politicians. However, if Gates and Buffett created a mechanism that bypassed the current dysfunction of government, earmarking the money for unambiguously worthy projects, I suspect that there are millions of people like myself who would not hesitate to invest in the future of America.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?