# Money, Power and Wall Street

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Michael, May 4, 2012.

Messages:
17,730
2. ### JeevesRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
691
Can't now - there is a thunderstorm watch - but have bookmarked it for tomorrow.

3. ### CarcanoValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,812
Thanks for posting...I watched it last night til 2am.

Would we get this from NBC...I dont think so.

4. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,662
All the juicy stuff is in the 4th episode.

But seriously, today I got The House of Morgan out of the library, and they prize it as one of the best financial book ever written. Only 720 pages:

http://www.amazon.com/The-House-Mor...sr_1_1_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

"Ron Chernow's "The House of Morgan" is both an engaging history of the Morgan banks and a brilliant account of the growth of global finance from Victorian times through the late 1980's.
As a backdrop to the Morgan saga, this book includes accounts of the main events of 20th-century financial history, such as the Panic of 1907, the creation of the Federal Reserve system, the Crash of 1929 and the depression and bank failures that followed it, the New Dealers' attack on banks led by Pecora that resulted in the Glass-Steagall Act and the separation of commercial banking from investment banking, and the rise of hostile takeovers, Eurodollars, petrodollars, Latin American lending, junk bonds and the securitization of debt, all refreshingly written for laymen rather than experts."

The reason I mention it because both this book and the documentary probably cover the same material..

Messages:
6,812
6. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
I suppose one good thing about the GFC is that people are beginning to realize the role the economy plays in society. I think that for far too long (at least a couple generations) we have been divorced from that 'money' IS. What it's role is. Even what 'society' means.

I remember once SAM wrote a question that seemed to be asking if there was a conspiracy of the elite to destroy society through multiculturalism. While I don't think so, I do think society is being changed by the way we use money.

I know people who actually get 'mad' when I suggest income tax is immoral. Then they accuse me of wanting to 'get out of paying my fair share'. Yet, when pressed these are the same people who are always looking to find a tax deduction. Well I say: Is THAT fair? Moral? Why were they so insistent income tax is moral, and yet trying to get out of paying as much of it as they can? Obviously they don't really think this is the case. What they want is the benefits, but they want someone else to pay for them. Which is what they accuse ME of wanting?! When in reality I am happy to pay for any and all services.

I do not think we will beat the bankers. Firstly, most people want to BE that banker. Secondly, most people DO want to get out of paying income tax - but they want others to pay. IOWs most people are immoral. I think the 'rich' probably will pay, and pay dearly. It won't be 'fair' but, this is the history of humanity. Then we'll start again. It would have been better, IMO, if we had stuck with a moral system of competing currencies and accepted that YES sometimes banks go bust and when they do you loose some of your money and the Banker gets hung if he was cheating/stealing.

As it is now you have people like Corzine walking away free with hundreds of millions of other people's money in his pocket. Or the CEOs of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers walking away with nearly a billion dollars (stepping over the homeless on their way to their Yachts). Dickless Fuld made $500+ million and the federal reserve bailed his company out to the tune of$700 million.

Only in an immoral central banks fueled plutocracy can such fraud occur right out in the open - broad daylight.

How will it end? Interesting times ahead.....

7. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,662
Not exactly true. That idiot actually lost the money on bad investments...

8. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
Money he stole from segregated accounts (accounts Farmers use to buy and sell Future contracts on their real world produce). No one has done this since the Dutch East Indian company created markets.

Whether he made money or lost money is besides the point - what he did was illegal. I'd even go say far to say that even had he made money, he still should be in prison. You can't walk into a bank, steal money, place a bet on a horse, win money, then claim you didn't nothing illegal because you paid the bank back. Stealing is illegal. It's one of the founding principals of all civilizations - why he's not in prison is because he was Obama's biggest campaign contributor and continues fundraising for Obama to this very day.

A sign of rot, deep rot, in an immoral system - that's the way I see it. Such a system will eventually collapse and be replaced. Replaced with something far worse is the usual scenario. In disgust people usually vote for a demagogue. One promising "Change you can Believe In". Like Fascism, Communism or some other morally bankrypt political scheme. Just look at Egypt, right back to square one.

Anyway, I wouldn't mind reading the book you posted if I have time to. As for the economies of the world. Given the Central Banking cartel can make up down and down up with the snap of their fingers, there is no way to make a short term prediction of what is going to happen. Long term I expect things to get worse. Much worse.

9. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,662
But, but, he did it for the sake of the company. He tried to increase profits, and greed is good, right? After all it is capitalism or what...

10. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
Capitalism isn't good or bad. It's like Science. A process. Free Markets in a moral society would be good. In an immoral society they may be bad.

Corzine did what he did because he's a douche. He wanted to be a big man among big men. He ended up being a turd. That doesn't matter to me one bit. What he did was steal. Stealing from "segregated accounts". They're purposely segregated because these are Farmers money. Farmers don't know what the weather is going to be like, no one does. So they sell a Future contract locking in some amount of profit for themselves to run their farm the following year. This money was stolen to make good with JP Morgan on a bet Corzine made and lost on the Euro. A bet that is an example of what a twisted sick thing WallStreet has become. It was not an investment in a business. It did not provide an entrepreneur with capital. It didn't fund the construction of a factory. It didn't do a damn thing. It was just some weasel f*ck make a bet on a horse. Which is neither good or bad - so long as it's your money, do whatever you want with it.

BUT, it wasn't his money. It was a lot of Farmers monies. They weren't getting paid out of this bed. They knew nothing about this bet. They just had their money stolen. There's examples of people who bought some gold, paid for it, had a receipt, was waiting for delivery - nada. Corzine stole their money too. They have a receipt for their gold - but no gold.

Aside from being examples of corruption in finance, way central banking is immoral, and why the elite buy bitches like Obama as any normal person buys a coffee - it's also a great example of why the concept of "Corporation" was invented. It was created exactly for this purpose. To shield the wealthy elite's personal assets and fortunes from confiscation. A hundred years ago Corzine would have lost his personal fortune and have hung himself like any self respecting businessman - not now a days. His fat ass is in Spain on his Yacht buying Spanish islands on the cheap - thanks to his Central Banking buddies.

They play.
We pay.

In a real Capitalist country there would be no central banks. The rich would be limited the aptitude and many would have gone bust in 2008. There would be a lot less poor and we'd be living in a much fairer more prosperous society. Not one where both parents work 40-60 hours a week while sending their kids to be raised in day supervision factories. And then State 'education' factories where many kids 'graduate' illiterate. We do this to pay back the trillions and trillions stolen from us through bond sales of our future labor so corrupt politicians can blow promises of rose kisses up the ignorant State educated Cattle classes asses. We haven't lived in a Capitalistic society for over a hundred years. What we do live in is a quasi-Fascist State where the Federal Reserve can crash the dollar and cause a depression or turn right around and cause hyper inflation - all without telling their bitches in Congress (mainly window dressing for democracy) a damn thing. These "Business Cycles" as they call them (as if they were natural like the carbon cycle - they're not) is how 0.01% has come to own 80% of everything.

Luckily, these sorts of things have a way of killing themselves - usually right along with the society. It's a sort of start over. I'd have some food and silver in store... just in case

Last edited: May 7, 2012
11. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,662
Central banking isn't good or bad. It is a process...

12. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
I see your point (smart ass )

While I'd suggest Central Banking is an institution. Science isn't an institution, but, yeah, I can see where this is going to get muddled.

FMPOV Central Banking is immoral. Capitalism is either immoral OR moral. The Free-Market is just a reflection of society. A Free-Market in Slaves, is a free market, but it's immoral. A free-market in blueberries, is moral.

Distribution of blueberries can only be done efficiently in a free market. I can be done by central planning, but this means a whole new layer of bureaucracy needs to be overlaid above the two people trying to make an exchange - which is inefficient ultimately pulling prosperity from the economy.

For proof, just look out the window. That's not a free-market. That's a massive government and it's central banking cartel.

13. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
Why? What are your criteria for declaring some economic practice "moral?"

People in your shoes usually draw some other distinction, to avoid the necessary corollary to your axiom there: that capitalism is immoral.

The implication that you can have a "free market" in a system wherein certain classes of people are used as property raises the question of how you'd define "free market."

Seriously. You throw this term around so much, and seem to simultaneously mean everything and nothing when you do so. It's time for you to advance an actual positive definition of "free market" so that others can have some hope of interacting with you in some meaningful way. Please list the defining properties of a free market, and give examples to guide us in identifying them in practice.

So, are efficiency and (market) morality held to be the same thing, or what?

And, who is it that you think is dictating the price you pay for blueberries?

14. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
Central Banks are immoral because they steal (typically from the poor and give to the rich). Which is why 80% of America is owned by only a handful at the top.

Capitalism is a process. It'd be like saying Science is immoral. That just doesn't make sense. Can someone use Science immorally? Yes. Likewise for Capitalism.

But, I suppose we could say Science is a philosophy and likewise so is Capitalism. I, for example, invested in a biotech startup that makes biofuel (which has taken a beating but meh...). That's "Capitolism". It's me, taking my labor, which is stored as money, and investing in a company. I hope to make a profit. I hope that green energy becomes the norm. That's how we make the world better.... isn't it? I mean, we're the ones that do things. So, we should invest in the things we want done.

Agreed?
Do I use 'free market' that much?

The free exchange of goods between people.

For example. I catch some fish. You sing some songs. I trade you my fish for a song. That'd be an exchange that took place in a free-market.

Example 2: I catch some fish. You sing some songs. I pay the government for a liscence to sell fish. I must sell my fish in the government's currency (dried poop cakes). The government also sets the number of fish I can sell. The government also takes a portion of my fish per sale. The government also sets the price on my fish. That's a non-free market.

How's that?

That's a good question. I haven't figured it out. I don't think they can be the same thing.

I'm not sure of this question? In a free market it'd be a negotiation between the buyer and the seller. I don't HAVE to buy blueberries. If I desire to do so, then I will only pay a certain amount. If they're cheap, I buy more. But, what does cheap mean? In the US you can buy a kilo of blueberries for nothing ($5-7) on the the road side. In AU 0.1 kilo will cost around$6-9 depending on season in the markets.

In an ideal world, markets would be as free as possible. Doesn't that make sense?

I have a question regarding income tax. Do you think it should be, in a democracy, voluntary? Why is it so many people try to find things to "write off" on their tax, if they are so happy to pay it? I mean, if this is a democracy, and most people support tax, they'd happily pay it - correct? Why the coercion? See, I think most people actually don't want to pay. Oh, they want the so called services. They just don't want to pay for them. That's immoral. It's too bad really, society has climbed up is anus so far.

Society is changing, and I don't think it's changing for the better. People have an odd way of thinking. It's one of me me me me me and as much as I can get and I shouldn't have to work and anyone who has more than me should give me some of what they have - they're stealing for me. MY TAX paid for the god damn roads and blah blah blah.

Well, TTYTT I sort of thought like that. I now understand it's incorrect. While I can not claim to know what's the 'ideal' system; I do know stealing is immoral. While it MAY seem like I'm being harsh with my POV regarding Income Tax, that's not the case at all. And I think the use of competing currencies might make that possible. Also, I am happy to pay for services. I buy food, internet, pay for flights, etc... I don't expect these to be free. I pay. That's fair. That's how I was raised, we pay our way as we go.

Which is all academic. What's going to happen is the exact opposite. I think we will grow government larger. We will give up more civil rights. We will elect demagogues. They will borrow more. When that fails they will start confiscating wealth. They will probably 'nationalize' the banks. Maybe a few big name bankers will be put down. Some of the political class will have to go with them. Society will stagnate. Life will become poorer for the already poor. They will riot. We will have to initiate another war on terror. Call up the draft. More civil rights will be lost. Government will grow even bigger. People will wonder why things are so shit when they're doing all they can to grow government is big as possible and give it complete control over everything to turn things around. Then it will collapse. At this point we will run naked in the streets, swinging wildly on lamp posts and eating one another in large Mad Max nomadic gangland style tribes with kewl tatoos and motorbikes with rockets and Big Guns... those without fuel will be lost to the desert Slave traders, some with water to trade will point at fire and mutter Auggg FyR - they will trade that water for fish flavored bio-engineered blueberries (high in Omega-3 interesting enough). Others will look to those of us with control over The iPhone and they will know us as Scientistocrats and worship us as their Gawds! We will live in Cloud Cities high above the carnage and host debates over the meaning of labor and it's connection to the body and property. Life will be Saweet-As

Seriously, we're going to inflate the USD and depreciate it. That's the Fed's super-secret magic formula. They'll of course have to wait till 2014. My I suggest cat food as an investment - I expect the old who build this Nation will be eating more of than they already are. Unlike dog food, cat food can be consumed by humans. You can thank your immoral BIG government and it's Central Banking criminals (like Corzine) for that.

Last edited: May 8, 2012
15. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,662
Name a country, where there is no central banking and it has been successfully running for decades at least, financially speaking....

16. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
The most successful country ... ever. The United States pre-1913.

But, imagine posing this question in 1650: "Name one country that has banned Slavery and been successful, finanacially".
The Greeks had slaves. Romans had slaves (hell 1 in every 3 Roman Citizens started out a slave) and etc...

The only argument that could have been made at the time is Slaver is immoral.

Think of all the fiat currencies (run of course through central banks) throughout history that have been destroyed. Literally every single one. 1000s.

When LBJ iniated the Great Society the government was 10% it size. We were putting men on the moon then. It's 90 times larger and yet there still not enough money. Just a little more. THEN it'll all work out. Then we'll have an equitable fair society.

It simply doesn't work. And it's not going to work. As Europeans are coming to terms with now. The Chinese had a central bank, so did the Russians, and it didn't work. It doesn't work. Ours only worked well for awhile because it was tied with golden handcuffs. But even then they were spending way more than they had. We went from around 20,000 tons of gold to 12,000 in 15 years. That's when the French said give us our gold. And soon thereafter we went fiat. Since then we've promised away 80% of the value of the USD.

Unless we're happy literally selling the next generation as Slaves. Then we have to end this system. We must bust up the large banks. We have to end the fed. AND people are going to have learn to live in a free-market again. Can we do this? Probably not.

Economic reality will be forced upon us. Faked Alien invasions actually are ignorant. Wen nuclear facilities blow up - that's actually bad, not good. The things we know to be true, will probably be found to ... be true!

When that time happens. I hope people have enough sense to see it was their politicians who did this to them. I hope people have the back bone to admit they were complicit. They wanted all that free stuff that they knew had to come from someone else. That they were writing off as much on their taxes as the next guy - hoping someone else would pay for the roads and the schools and the hospitals. That they are to blame, they voted in the idiots promising them all this bullshit for "free". Will they? Probably not. They're probably blame Terrorists. Or if they're Joe they'll blame the GOP while the Republicans blame the Democrats. But, it won't matter. Reality has a way of catching up. IMO it's caught up. I think things are complete shit in the USA and have been for a long long time.

Last edited: May 8, 2012
17. ### Billy TPlease use Sugar Cane Alcohol FuelStaff Member

Messages:
20,848
Hi Michael

Have you seen Michael Moors new (I think) movie: "Capitalism - a love affair" (That may not be exact name). You will love it - it shows the real shitty side of the US economy.

I watched it on local TV yesterday. - It gave me the emotional reaction of wanting to go out and destroy some part of capitalism, but rationally I know that will just make things worse. IMHO, stated more than five years ago in posts, GWB´s depression is coming and no one can stop it now. US (and the "developed" world) have dug themselves too deep a debt hole with fiat / unlimited printing press money. Time to pay the piper for the lovely over-consumption, under-production, borrowed-money dance is nearly here.

Last edited: May 8, 2012
18. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
I did watch it, I should watch it again

While I do think GW Bush was the straw that broke the camel's back. I also think, if not him, then I'd have been the next person. This ball started rolling back in 1913 and really picked up momentum in the 1960s and finally broke free in 1971. It was inevitable. Let's hope a war with Iran and the draft isn't their solution.

19. ### Michael歌舞伎Valued Senior Member

Messages:
17,730
One way or another we're going to get "Change We Can Believe In"......

20. ### SyzygysAs a mother, I am telling youValued Senior Member

Messages:
12,662
1. Slavery has nothing to do with the topic and it is a really bad analogy. Morals also has nothing to do with financial systems.

2. It isn't the existence of the central banks what the problem is but the unlimited creation of new money. When the economy expands, the society needs more money. When the economy contracts, they need to take money out of circulation.

My bad, I forgot to ask for a current country. Is there one?

Before 1913 in the USA in every 8 years there was a financial crises going on and banks went bankrupt by the hundreds. The people couldn't know whom to trust, if the local bank is going to exist in 5-10 years. Kind of hard to save money that way...

Because of point #2. Just because the system can be abused it doesn't mean it is a bad system. You just need better governments.