I1L2T3 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 You note that I did post facts before your snipe! I'm 'fully' watching it now... Even though I got most of it yesterday! * I know none of you lot think I agree with you, I do, but i'm focusing on the future, not the past... hence why I sound slightly different. Also i'm not taking cheap and uneducated swipes at "whoever"... You're not making much sense. I have made no snipes at you. I pointed out your guess was a comical one and recommended that you do a little research before posting. I'm struggling to understand your level of activity on this thread. You have spent most of the day trying to derail it and have repeatedly talked down people who HAVE watched the film and have patiently tried to make you aware of the significance of the content. Anyway, at least you have bothered to fully watch it now. It's a start. Enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimatesens Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Yes, mainly because the last government overloaded the public sector. No way could this country support 53% of the of the working populous being in the public sector. Yes, mainly because the last government sold all the assets which were being used to prop up the pension funds. From gold to school playing fields... It hasn't borrowed for a year and is now just doing so in a restricted and controlled manner. No, jobs are being lost in their thousands because it's more profitable to recruit third world slaves than to pay a decent wage here. Our manufacturing industry has been gutted by design. No, pension funds are in trouble because they invested in assets falsely rated AAA by fraudulent rating agencies at the behest of the banks selling them. Resticted and controlled manner? 600bn bailout that doubled our national debt overnight. How is this resticted and controilled. The real question is WHY BORROW AT ALL? If we can issue bonds to banks on the back of which, they lend us money at interest, why not simply issue our own money and pay no interest? Before you start, don't say because we will get hyperinflation and wheelbarrows full of cash. That only happens when the issuing of currency is excessive. Issuing excessive IOU's to the international bond market has the exactly same effect. The Debt becomes unpayable and the interest rate goes up. The only way to service this debt is to borrow more money and print more currency (quantitative easing), resulting in the same debasement of our money supply and hyperinflation as we are all about to see. At least if we issue the currency ourselves we wouldn't be "privatising" a significant portion of our national budget to pay interest on debts to a bank that has never had any money in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Like I said, Hitler never did anything "illegal," that doesn't make what he did right. If you read my earlier post you will realise I referred to this but I was explaining to AnnB the possible reason no criminal charges were brought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Just as an aside I wonder if the sale of pets such as budgies has decreased because people can not afford to feed them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 You're not making much sense. I have made no snipes at you. I pointed out your guess was a comical one and recommended that you do a little research before posting. Go back and look, it wasn't a comical guess (note how I noted it was a guess at the time), i'm glad you picked up on that one I thought it wouldn't be obvious. I'm struggling to understand your level of activity on this thread. You have spent most of the day trying to derail it and have repeatedly talked down people who HAVE watched the film and have patiently tried to make you aware of the significance of the content. Anyway, at least you have bothered to fully watch it now. It's a start. Enjoy. The thing is, i've not learnt anything new from watching this film, i've been aware of it since before the crash. So when I find some sensationalist film inspiring someone to think they know it all by watching a single film and throw around blame like they know, well quite frankly is funny. I'm aware of the significance of the content, i've tried to make that obvious to you, but it seems that with a few on this thread that unless I (and others) totally agree with your shallow insights that we are totally wrong and need to be called names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 I've seen the film. I get it. Whatever system you have in place, there will always be those in power serving their own vested interest, obsuscating the issues of the day, and generally screwing over the ignorant masses. The problem isn't the system. The problem is that people are basically c**ts, and while they may deny it, they are basically out for themselves. You can change the system, buy it isn't so easy to change the fact that people are basically self serving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 ... No, pension funds are in trouble because they invested in assets falsely rated AAA by fraudulent rating agencies at the behest of the banks selling them. ... Public sector pensions are not traded funds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 No, jobs are being lost in their thousands because it's more profitable to recruit third world slaves than to pay a decent wage here. Our manufacturing industry has been gutted by design. When and are you saying this was done by the banks, that program has not mentioned anything like that whatsoever. That was mainly Labour and the previous Conservative government. Resticted and controlled manner? 600bn bailout that doubled our national debt overnight. How is this resticted and controilled. The real question is WHY BORROW AT ALL? If we can issue bonds to banks on the back of which, they lend us money at interest, why not simply issue our own money and pay no interest? Your out of context, I was clearly referring to the current government and time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimatesens Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Who forced you to take out the loans, the blame lies everywhere, the greedy public who can't live within their means, the deregulation of the banks, the building societies changing into banks, the ratings agencies. However there was little done that was criminal by the banks, although it was quite immoral as they were making more money on failed lending than good lending. The biggest problem was Labour bailing them out, they should have let them fail, that's how the market works. Not having a house or any money to feed their children forced people to take out loans. If people's wages went up in line with purchasing power maybe they wouldn't NEED to borrow at all. I don't see desperate poor people as the cause of this crisis. They have no power and very little say in the economy. They are usually at the mercy of their employer. As someone else has pointed out in this thread, some poor people are stupid. What chance do "stupid" poor people have against an intelligent well paid mortgage salesman convincing them it's all safe as houses. After all, he worked for a bank, aren't bankers careful about what they lend? How is the average borrower supposed to know that the bank will securitize his loan, sell it off and cause a market crash that will result in him losing his job? Like I said it doesn't have to be criminal to be wrong although a significant ammount of what the banks did WAS criminal. Misrepresenting assets and rating them AAA in order to get a commision from the bank when you really have no idea what they are worth has helped cause a crisis that is, as we speak, forcing poor people to borrow more. I suppose to you that that is also their fault. So yes, the credit agencies are to blame too. I totally agree with your conclusion. The banks should have been allowed to fail. Additionally the directors should be sent to prison for failing to meet their obligations to depositors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 8, 2011 Share Posted December 8, 2011 Go back and look, it wasn't a comical guess (note how I noted it was a guess at the time), i'm glad you picked up on that one I thought it wouldn't be obvious. The thing is, i've not learnt anything new from watching this film, i've been aware of it since before the crash. So when I find some sensationalist film inspiring someone to think they know it all by watching a single film and throw around blame like they know, well quite frankly is funny. I'm aware of the significance of the content, i've tried to make that obvious to you, but it seems that with a few on this thread that unless I (and others) totally agree with your shallow insights that we are totally wrong and need to be called names. With all due respect it doesn't seem that you are aware of the significance of the content at all. I've not called you any names spooky - check back through the thread. I'm sorry if you find mine and others insights shallow. I won't be losing any sleep tonight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.