anyone knowledgeable on the markets here? THIS CANT BE GOOD!!

yeah odon, when are you gonna hang on MY every word? :toetap05:

 

I'm responding as we speak.
I'm not saying it will be an opus but I do my best.
I could knock off a response in a few minutes if you like.
Surely not.

 

I have not skipped over her post.
Like I said, I am responding as we speak.

 

LOL. Go for it.

 

Both sides of this arguement and a few other sides are "out there", don't you think?
If you are saying your version is the correct one, fair enough.
If it runs along the same lines as others here, no, you don't need to tell me.
The way it has been articulated here, no, it does not ring true for me.
Not for the want of trying...I can tell you.
I'm not dismissing those theories; I'm just not convinced.
Neither am I being stuborn about it or burying my head in the sand. Honest.

If you posted all that you thought and I responded to every single point but you didn't agree or dismissed it, is that "selective hearing"? or filtering out anything that doesn't confirm your preconceived notions?
I could say that but it would be kinda rude.

I don,'t think banks were dishonest they may have been unscrupulous, burying the fine print and leaving customers in the dark.
Perhaps even with out actually having to twist anybodys arm to actually find out the ramifications if things went wrong.
Ignorance being bliss.
When times were good sub-prime was, I believe, percieved as a good thing.
It met a need in the market - everybody was happy.

I've looked at the models they used to make bad debt good...it is truly quite someting.
Who ever created it/them was a financial genius.
It is so complicated and convoluted it really does make my head spin.
Saying that, I really don't think they should be in the market.
They are too complex for their own good.
Neither bad or good just too complex and open to leaving people in the shit...which obviously has occured.
Most financial arrangements are open to leaving people with nothing, including the banks themselves.
I'm sure on the drawing board all of this looked great - till it hit the real world and negative events took over.

Quite true. The only point I make is perhaps we have to look at banks individually rather than collectively. They are not all attached at the hip. Hence why I struggle at thinking they were in cohoots with each other.

I can appreaciate even in the good times banks did something that even if with out any negative intent ruined peoples lives when it went wrong.

It would be nice for you to atleast hint at the bigger picture as you see it.
Don't think it is to convince me of anything just letting me know what you think. That is all.

Intrigue. I may never know what you think though. Oh, the drama.

Fair enough.

Not for the want of trying - I'll never grasp all of this.
I really don't think it is possible.
Not even collectively, here.

If you do think the Bilderberg group have a hand in all of this we shall never really know,
That vacume of secrecy is tight.

I kinda have to accept this rationale:

Daniel Estulin:
discretion is necessary to allow participants in the debates to speak freely without being on the record or reported publicly. Otherwise, Bilderbergers state, they would be forced to speak in the language of a press release. Doubtlessly, this discretion allows the Bilderberg Club to deliberate more freely.

With out knowing there actual intentions (and none of actually know) we are left speculating, I guess. Wildly, in some cases.

I have to say, Evan Davis, is one of the better financial reporters.
That is why I watched him over others.
I don't have much time for most news reports about any of this, as I agree they are biased or sensationalists.
.
Trust me though, Evans' reports were/are pretty straight forward.
He asks the right questions, not suggesting he recieves the right or honest answers.
Stranger things have happened though.

To be honest, it is a little too late for me to get too deep and meaningful about life the universe and everything.
I hear what you are saying and it does help me understand your point of view...so I thank you for that.

I'm glad we can agree on something.

 

Odon,

What do you think of the Royal Family? What do you think of the Queen and Prince Philip?

 

Strange question.

Erm, well, I can't stand the majority of the ones I know of.
I don't actually know most of them to be honest...you don't hear much from them.
Busy shooting something I imagine.
I like the Queen even though she is a miserable cow.
I'm not keen on Prince Philip he is fainlty prejudiced imho.
I respect some of the work Prince Charles and his kids do though.
Even if Prince Charles has a screw loose.

Overall I don't really think about the royal family.

Why?

 

Zomgz Wee R All Guna Dyeeeeee Halpzz11!!!!11!

If it's not fear mongering, I don't really care, everyone's fairly equally fucked to the point of moot, not much one could do.

 

I don't subscribe to the mainstream view of things, so I've no doubt that many would see my perspective as "out there". I have an open enough mind to consider all kinds of theories... some of which ring more true than others, and some that I keep in mind even though I have no substantial proof to back them up.

My version is correct for me since that is what I see and feel comfortable with.

Fair enough. I don't mind that we don't see eye to eye.

I guess we all engage in selective hearing and we filter out that which we have judged to be false or irrelevant. So, many of us will filter information differently. I find the mainstream concensus mentality very limiting and I often look outside the box to glean insight. From my perspective I've considered MORE information before filtering, compared to those who have never really opened their minds to begin with and only filter things out from fear of something different, unknown, or unpopular. I don't mind being different and unpopular, and I'm not afraid of exploring the unknown or venturing outside my comfort zone.

The fact that we don't see the same way, Odon, would naturally have me think that your capacity to see is limited in some way. And you, no doubt, would consider me too "out there".

Regarding the bulk of your post, I'm not going to comment other than to say we obviously disagree in how we view things and I don't wish to debate with you, but rather prefer to agree to disagree.

You're welcome.

 

I think the answers are in the mainstream.
If not, then the best answers we can get.
The fringe has too much "no substantial proof to back them up".
I can't function on a feeling.

Same here.
It did seem like you were saying you were right and I was wrong.
But, perhaps I read you wrong.

I agree. I even typed something similar, earlier.
It came across as patronising though.
So I deleted it, hence the lengh of time it took me to respond.

I've garnered a few things from this thread.
But when people mention the Bilderberg group my mind shuts down.
People know nothing about them that is in any way factual.
So I can't take it seriously.

At this point in time I do think you are a little.
Not a lot but a little.
But you even that out with being reasonable and open.
I like that It is refreshing.

Ok. We could go around in circles.

I did respond to HHB and ended: Does that make sense.
Given the opportunity I do think we could find some common ground.
Have a read of it...tell me what you think if you like.
I think it puts us on the same page perhaps.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNcLKbJs3xk

lol.

 

LOL!

Oh and I want to clarify, after watching more... this is a bit alarming to me. We're reaching beyond our level of awareness. This is stupidity and arrogance, and will have repercussions.

 

Odon...I can tell that you put some thought into this and I can also tell that you are fairly entrenched in your beliefs, that's great, I can respect that even if I disagree. I want you to take a minute before responding to what I'm going to say instead of having a knee jerk reaction because it might sound like I'm picking at you, or that I'm an ass, but that's just the way I come across sometimes, and I probably am an ass but there really is no malice in my rebuttal.

I have read the entire thread and I have to say that though your general intention and position comes through clearly, you have a tendency to babble and to make non-sensical statements. I don't have the time or inclination to go through your entire posts and respond to every occurance/point of contention like Bluesafire does (she's a wordy @^#&$ isn't she?), but I did want to bring your attention to at least one absurd statement. "Most of the top bankers - albeit inteligent - where not money men per se". I hate to be the one to break it to you, but a Banker...is a "money man", a Bank Manager is a money man that has attained a certain level of mastery and is given the responsibility of managing the Bank and its operations. A "Top Banker" usually refers to someone commonly regarded as having an in-depth understanding of finance/economics. You can't get a degree in Agriculture or Art History and be considered a "Top Banker".

I didn't study at Harvard, but I have a graduate degree in Business from a private University, and though my area of specialization was not Economics, I did get the jist of how the system works, or how it's supposed to anyway. I don't claim to be a genius, or even really that smart all things considered, but there are some basic principles that you can't really argue, like the manipulation of the Free Market System. With the current economic "crisis" we've seen the rules re-written for some of the elite companies and of course this was for the "greater good", but the rules of a Free Market system have undoubtedly and inarguably gone out the window. Think of the repercussions of this one aspect of our current "crisis" alone.

"They seem to have had no clue about what they were doing. No plan, indeed. That is far more scarey than assuming they had the intention to create the problems we all now face. Don't you think?"
I can explain basic economic principals if you want me to, but I really don't think you're stupid...just too trusting. Regulations have been proposed for the credit and finance industry for years. The dangers of continuing down this path have been presented before Congress time after time. The information was in front of them and the politicians continually turned down measures that would make their banking buddies accountable.

For everyone that's still stuck in the "How could they benefit from hurting the U.S." paradigm, these are not people rooted in this country. They have ties that are bound tighter than the bond of nationality and if the nation suffers...so what. We will be a weaker nation, businesses will suffer, unemployment will continue to rise, living conditions will plummet... but for a certain few, life will always be good.

One more thing...I can't resist. As for measuring Odons brain...
If he's graduated an Ivy league school, I'll give him a 125% of average based on I.Q.

If he graduated an Ivy league school and is fifth generation "old money" I'll give him a 65% of average (deduct additional 10% for membership in Illuminati, Skull and Bones, Free Masons, or other secret societies.

If he's just a limey brit, we'll be nice and give him an even 45%.

Just kidding...kind of :cheers2:

 

Well, like HHB mentioned, I believe this is orchestrated, to a large extent. These kind of things don't just happen sporadically. Most of life does not happen just randomly. So many things are connected throughout history. Plus you have to ask yourself why the news is drilling us with doom if this is supposed to be "random". We are being prepared for something but we are to concerned with our blackberries (and not the fruit because most people eat like shit), i pods and american idol.

However, I believe this mess WILL most certainly take on a mind of its own and spiral even out of the control of the people who started it.

 

Oh yeah???

 

"... deliberately create problems, and then offer only those solutions which result in the expansion of government. Create conditions so frightful at home and abroad that the abandonment of personal liberties and national sovereignty will appear as a reasonable price for a return to domestic tranquility and world peace."

~G. Edward Griffin

 

Crytoman wrote the following:

"I can explain basic economic principals if you want me to, but I really don't think you're stupid...just too trusting. Regulations have been proposed for the credit and finance industry for years. The dangers of continuing down this path have been presented before Congress time after time. The information was in front of them and the politicians continually turned down measures that would make their banking buddies accountable.

For everyone that's still stuck in the "How could they benefit from hurting the U.S." paradigm, these are not people rooted in this country. They have ties that are bound tighter than the bond of nationality and if the nation suffers...so what. We will be a weaker nation, businesses will suffer, unemployment will continue to rise, living conditions will plummet... but for a certain few, life will always be good."

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

In situations like this there is a hierarchy of despair. People at the bottom suffer from physical denial. For example, no money for gas, no car to drive, no bus fare, and you begin traveling on foot. For the well off they lose the expected amenities. For example, no vacation this year, no four nights dining at four or five star restaurants. For the super wealthy the need to downplay their wealth for fear of someone shooting them or robbing them or having their partners rob them if they haven't already. They may not know it is a depression, but they will be depressed.

Knowing the basics of economics isn't worth a damn in a society that uses the marketplace to control price, production, sales, value, etc., and is constantly being checked and changed by government. Banks are regulated in a variety of ways, but as noted they need to have the discipline of the market applied to them. Let them go "bankrupt."

I think what is happening is pretty much what happened in 1929. First Hoover and then FDR intervened in the economy so much and in such a wrong-headed manner that they turned a three or four year depression into a 12 year depression. This is why the people who repeat that no one knows what is going on, are probably correct.



Assez bon pour un garçon français, pas ainsi ?

 

I can see how it sounded none-sensical. I perhaps should have been more clear. What I meant was, some of those given charge of certain banks were more inclined to be able to manage any particular company not specifically banks. They are (I assume) good at motivating and implimenting strategy and/or change within a company.

Perhaps a few e.gs are in order (I hope I am not babbling too much?).

Sir Thomas Fulton Wilson McKillop was chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland.
But, he is a chemist not a financial expert.
At a meeting of the Treasury Select Committee of the House of Commons on February 10th, 2009, he admitted to having no qualifications in banking.

Dennis Stevenson, Baron Stevenson of Coddenham, Chair of Halifax plc in 1999 and when they merged with Bank of Scotland he became Chair of the merged group, HBOS plc, from 2001 to 2008.

Guess what he said at the same select commitee?
I'll put you out of your misery: He admitted to having no qualifications in banking.

If my memory serves they were not the only ones, infact out of 4-5 "top bankers" that were there none of them had any prior financial training.

http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/treasury_committee.cfm

You'll probably be more aware of the regulatory (or lack of) situation in America, than I am. But, as far as I am aware, the crisis has impacted many countries with varying levels of regulation.
I'm not sure regulation - how ever stringent - could have prevented this.

It is just another factor to put some blame on, imho.

And you say I babble ...

An Ivy league school? hardly. http://www.riverside.leicester.sch.uk/
Ironically it was just a bog standard comp' when I went there.
No business or enterprise.
I can appreciate my lack of higher learning somtimes prevents me from being precise in what I have to say and I do tend to babble sometimes...sorry.

Illuminati, Skull and Bones, Free Masons, or other secret societies????
lol. Not quite, mate. I was a scout for a while, that is about it.

 

The sad truth is the media like negativity and doom. Not just on this issue, a whole gambit of other issues. I don't think it is to create fear or prepare us for anything, just they seem to get some morbid kick out of reporting the negative rather than the positive. I can't remember the last positive national news story to be reported. They are even having a nice time dragging the 2012 Olympics down into the mud. Very sad, indeed.

 

lulz, the UK hires chemists to run banks. now thats funny..

well i suppose when they make millions while running a bank into the ground that makes for a perfect excuse..