#occupy<insertlocalehere>

[jammies]

Originally Posted by valo403

What's disconnected from reality is your notion of this
And what would you have had the banks do? Not act as banks? Not act to pursue their mandates? Don't blame banks for taking advantage of regulations, blame the people drafting and enforcing the regulations.

The issue is that these two sets of people - bankers and those supposedly regulating and enforcing the regulations on banks - have a large amount of overlap. Not seeing that this is a ongoing and massive problem is the true disconnection from reality.

To press your analogy further, it's more like Iginla was in charge of amending the rules of hockey and made it so that just taking a shot that hits the goalie counts as a goal as long as your jersey number is 12. That's great for all the #12s in the league, and somewhat less than great for everybody else.

And as long as we're talking about "reality", politicians aren't (in general) experts on regulation and the economy. They take the advice of the people that are supposed to know what they are doing, but those people are too blinded by their ideology of "what's good for business is good for America" to do anything other than screw over the middle class in favour of the oligarchs and their acolytes.

It's all part of a system that needs to be reformed - the idea that changing the people at the top has more than cosmetic effect is laughable. THAT is what people are protesting - the inordinate amount of power that corporations and governments have and use against the better interests of the common person, despite the supposedly overarching authority of the democratic will.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Who is solely blaming just Wall Street? It's also political and governing systems that let it happen. I've said that before and I'll say it again. In fact, let me re-iterate it for you:

It's not just banks who were the problem, it was the political and governing system in which they operated.

It's also the mini-Donald Trumps who all greedy and thought that they could be Real Estate millionaires. Everyday folks need to be blamed too.

Also LOL @ the Calgary contingent of this protest occupying Calgary in front of Bankers Hall on a Saturday. No one will be there to hear or see their message on a weekend. Either that or they are expecting that some of their attendees have good paying Monday-Friday jobs that want to rage against the hand that feeds on weekends!

[valo403]

Originally Posted by jammies

The issue is that these two sets of people - bankers and those supposedly regulating and enforcing the regulations on banks - have a large amount of overlap. Not seeing that this is a ongoing and massive problem is the true disconnection from reality.

To press your analogy further, it's more like Iginla was in charge of amending the rules of hockey and made it so that just taking a shot that hits the goalie counts as a goal as long as your jersey number is 12. That's great for all the #12s in the league, and somewhat less than great for everybody else.

And as long as we're talking about "reality", politicians aren't (in general) experts on regulation and the economy. They take the advice of the people that are supposed to know what they are doing, but those people are too blinded by their ideology of "what's good for business is good for America" to do anything other than screw over the middle class in favour of the oligarchs and their acolytes.

It's all part of a system that needs to be reformed - the idea that changing the people at the top has more than cosmetic effect is laughable. THAT is what people are protesting - the inordinate amount of power that corporations and governments have and use against the better interests of the common person, despite the supposedly overarching authority of the democratic will.

I don't disagree at all, but it's not up to banks and the people in charge of them to change that (part of any industry is lobbying to government and attempting to influence change, to stick with the hockey analogy we've seen that with Lemieux going after the clutch and grab style and recently with Crosby and hits to the head), it's up to government and regulators to insulate themselves from undue influence.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by valo403

Well at least we know you're incapable of understanding how examples work.

Honestly there's no point in discussing this issue with you if you think that banks should be held responsible for make believe concepts like social crimes. Should there be a responsibility for them to give one compliment to every employee each hour as well? Tell them how special they are? A bank has a mandate, typically to act in the best interests of its shareholders, asking them to take actions that run counter to that mandate demonstrates your lack of understanding and general disconnect from real life.

Lol.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/a...articleid=1901

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Lol.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/a...articleid=1901

And, at the end, in his final two paragraphs, the author lobbies for tighter regulatory oversight and laws to curtail what he considers to be a problem.

Which is what I said earlier.

If you let the lions out of their cage, don't be surprised if they do what comes instinctively, including taking down men, women and children in the streets.

If that's a problem, then build better cages. You won't get anywhere asking the lions to play nice. Even the author knows that.

Cowperson

[opendoor]

The increasing divide between the rich and poor in the United States really is staggering, and that's where a lot of this frustration stems from. That country is in a likely irreversible decline and it's the lower classes which will feel the pinch the most. People have gotten used to being able to fall ass backwards into a pretty good position simply because they were born in the United States, but that's not going to continue forever. And those in power should really pay attention, because the less people think they have to lose the more extreme they'll become.

Too much short term thinking and poor regulation in the United States is coming back to bite them in the ass and it's really not surprising. The problem is that a lot of people are now realizing that no matter who they elect it's going to be the same story and they're starting to see their political system for the sham that it is. I wouldn't be surprised if you see more of this kind of stuff as time goes on.

I also wouldn't be surprised to see something similar happen in Canada in the near future. The government (through the CMHC) has backed half a trillion dollars in loans for houses providing basically a no risk proposition for banks on the taxpayers' dime. If property prices drop precipitously then we'll see a drop in peoples' net worth while at the same time an already agreed to bailout of the banks who've loaned all this money.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

And, at the end, in his final two paragraphs, the author lobbies for tighter regulatory oversight and laws to curtail what he considers to be a problem.

Which is what I said earlier.

If you let the lions out of their cage, don't be surprised if they do what comes instinctively, including taking down men, women and children in the streets.

If that's a problem, then build better cages. You won't get anywhere asking the lions to play nice. Even the author knows that.

Cowperson

I think most peoples' issue is that the people building the cages are more or less the same ones who are supposed to trapped by them. So they build the illusion of cages while still providing themselves trap door exits. That's why they're protesting against not only the financial industry but also the government.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Lol.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/a...articleid=1901

Cowperson already addressed, but yes, Lol inded. You're all over this one

[V]

Originally Posted by J pold

Holy generalization. Have you ever met any of the people I work with? Let alone anyone who works in the investment banking industry?

You guys are the new lawyers.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

And, at the end, in his final two paragraphs, the author lobbies for tighter regulatory oversight and laws to curtail what he considers to be a problem.

Which is what I said earlier.

If you let the lions out of their cage, don't be surprised if they do what comes instinctively, including taking down men, women and children in the streets.

If that's a problem, then build better cages. You won't get anywhere asking the lions to play nice. Even the author knows that.

Cowperson

I think here is where you hit the nail on the head. And again I reiterate that if you can do something, it doesn't mean you should. Unfortunately we live in a society where that mantra is thrown under the bus all too often.

As always, a reasonable and just assessment from one of my favourite posters on this message board.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I think most peoples' issue is that the people building the cages are more or less the same ones who are supposed to trapped by them. So they build the illusion of cages while still providing themselves trap door exits. That's why they're protesting against not only the financial industry but also the government.

That's actually a really great way to phrase it. Impressive.

[J pold]

Originally Posted by V

You guys are the new lawyers.

It would seem so.

Also, does anyone find it slightly ironic that those people who are so staunchly opposed to “corporate greed” are likely the same ones who are mourning the passing of the former CEO of one of the most profitable businesses of the last decade?

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by J pold

It would seem so.

Also, does anyone find it slightly ironic that those people who are so staunchly opposed to “corporate greed” are likely the same ones who are mourning the passing of the former CEO of one of the most profitable businesses of the last decade?

True, but Apple wasn't lending subprime mortgages.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I think most peoples' issue is that the people building the cages are more or less the same ones who are supposed to trapped by them. So they build the illusion of cages while still providing themselves trap door exits. That's why they're protesting against not only the financial industry but also the government.

And I have no problem with People Power rising up to change the establishment. Protest is a good thing.

Just saying that's where it should be focussed . . . . . instead of arguing the unrealistic semantic of "social crimes" or asking everyone to be nice guys.

WTF?

If you read through all of my posts, the consistent thing I've said is the financial system needs more comprehensive regulation, not less, particularly in the area of derivative trading.

But, if you want it done, pick the right target for protest. Hanging out on Wall St. is rather pointless and gives the politicians a free ride.

Cowperson

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

True, but Apple wasn't lending subprime mortgages.

Yeah they were only mass selling $600 phones to a lot of consumers with negative net worth.

It's not like bankers were tackling people in the streets forcing them to sign mortgage documents.

What happened was a typical mania, panic, and crash. It will happen in places in the world over and over and over again. I didn't see these protesters descending on the offices of Silicon Valley internet companies that were all too happy to take cash from the hot IPO market in the late 90s to buy expensive cars and do nothing more with it.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

True, but Apple wasn't lending subprime mortgages.

That's naive. Apple has benefited greatly from the 'I can have everything I want despite being broke' culture that spawned subprime mortgages, not to mention the fact that Apple (and every other company) is highly tied to a number of large investment banks in a myriad of ways. It's selective targeting, and it makes sense to go after the most obvious targets, but don't pretend like it's isolated.

[Ozy_Flame]

I'm not. Buying an iPhone does not nearly have the same long-term ramifications that locking into a 35-year mortgage does. The latter is far more damaging and risky.

Someone who has no money should not be buying an iPhone - I'm aware of that. But to assume that the protesters are broke, iPhone users is also a naive statement.

I'm sure Apple is involved in big business, no doubt. But the banks do far more to impact livelihoods on a long-term basis than Apple does.

[Incogneto]

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pr...VD/OPSIM900/PR

[Thunderball]

These protests are pointless until people look themselves in the mirror and realize that they are the root cause of this problem.

Way too many people live way outside their means, and as a result, elect politicians on either side of the spectrum who promote this lifestyle by introducing irresponsible legislation on lending and borrowing. As a result, they allow banks to get into this ridiculous game of handing out money where they know they shouldn't. People jump on that wagon, and then blame the small percentage getting rich on the ridiculous game handed to them.

Simply blaming the last visible link in the downward spiral isn't going to solve anything. Neither is simply assuming its "the man" keeping them down.

I know more than a few professional doctoral students (who should know better) with $150,000 debts going on fancy vacations, driving newer vehicles, buying designer clothes, and going out for drinks several times a week... who then blame "the system" when they can barely afford to pay down their debt with the salary that firms offer them. We have to stop looking at our parents (the baby boomers)... they are the generation at fault. We need to look back at our grandparents (the war time generation) and how they handled money. Then we have to demand that sort of fiscal prudence from our governments... even if that means doing without some things here and there.

Until people are willing to embrace austerity and living within their means... these protests mean nothing.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

These protests are pointless until people look themselves in the mirror and realize that they are the root cause of this problem.

Way too many people live way outside their means, and as a result, elect politicians on either side of the spectrum who promote this lifestyle by introducing irresponsible legislation on lending and borrowing. As a result, they allow banks to get into this ridiculous game of handing out money where they know they shouldn't. People jump on that wagon, and then blame the small percentage getting rich on the ridiculous game handed to them.

Simply blaming the last visible link in the downward spiral isn't going to solve anything. Neither is simply assuming its "the man" keeping them down.

I know more than a few professional doctoral students (who should know better) with $150,000 debts going on fancy vacations, driving newer vehicles, buying designer clothes, and going out for drinks several times a week... who then blame "the system" when they can barely afford to pay down their debt with the salary that firms offer them. We have to stop looking at our parents (the baby boomers)... they are the generation at fault. We need to look back at our grandparents (the war time generation) and how they handled money. Then we have to demand that sort of fiscal prudence from our governments... even if that means doing without some things here and there.

Until people are willing to embrace austerity and living within their means... these protests mean nothing.

I mostly agree with what you're saying. People are blaming others for their own selfishness and stupidity. At the same time, there are a lot of responsible people who are going to get hit due to that same greed. I've never had an ounce of consumer debt and have an extremely healthy ratio of equity in my house, but that's not going to completely insulate me if housing prices crash and the government spends billions of tax dollars bailing out the banks and homeowners.

The lions in the cage analogy Cowperson mentioned above is a good one. Not only does the financial industry need to be caged to protect them from themselves, but so do average people.