Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

Status
Not open for further replies.
RandFan said:
[qimg]http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/9647/welfarefortherichisokay.jpg[/qimg]

But forget that, let's talk about the damn dirty hippies.
Click to expand...

Here is a different take on the subject.
Matt Taibbi’s Fact Souffle

I am not sure how it was determined that Federal Reserve forking over $220 million in bailout money to the wives of two Morgan Stanley bigwigs. $220 million was loaned to Waterfall to purchase loans. The loans were non recourse because at the time it was difficult to find the amount of investors neccesary to do what the program was supposed to. Do I agree that this type of investment allowed rich people to earned some money with little or no risk. Yes large institutional and some individual investors are those with the funds available. And at that time some incentive was neccesary to get them from choosing other investments for their money.
They were passive investors in Waterfall so I don't know what Matt Taibbi derision of their financial abilities or comments on the deceased John Macks appearance has to do with anything.

Here was want the TALF program was supposed to do
The asset-backed securities (ABS) market has been under strain for some months. This strain accelerated in the third quarter of 2008 and the market came to a near-complete halt in October. At the same time, interest rate spreads on AAA-rated tranches of ABS rose to levels well outside the range of historical experience, reflecting unusually high risk premiums. The ABS markets historically have funded a substantial share of credit to consumers and businesses. Continued disruption of these markets could significantly limit the availability of credit to households and businesses of all sizes and thereby contribute to further weakening of U.S. economic activity.

I do agree with the letter that certain facts about the TALF program investments should be transparent. I don't know why Bernanke refuse to give details if that is true.
 
RandFan said:
....

But forget that, let's talk about the damn dirty hippies.
Click to expand...

So are these loans all that they are on about? What if these two women aren't technically a part of the 1%? What if they're just in the top quintile or the second quintile?

Without any further information or seeing the audit trail, these are loans that should not have been made, or not at the rate they were made. I can say that without dressing as a clown or taunting the police in a downtown park.

"Super pissed off?" Probably not.

EDIT: I'm certain all the Occupy people will refuse a student loan bailout to establish their principled position in opposing such loans as detailed above.
 
Last edited:
Here's another addition for Randfan's list:
 

Attachments

  • occupyPoland.jpg
    occupyPoland.jpg
    41.8 KB · Views: 6
respect said:
It is more of the same stupid crap, everyone is dirty, blah blah blah, and then this pile of ****:

Of course there was bad mortgages mixed in, that was the whole ******* point, they didn't lose value because of defaults, they lost value because the collateral lost value overall, good mortgages and bad. It isn't like pension managers are a bunch of bumbling idiots who had no idea what they were buying. Taibbi is an idiot or a liar.
Click to expand...

Banks knew that this paper was not AAA worthy; the CRAs knew that this paper was not AAA worthy; the pension funds paid heed to the ratings agencies. If rating agencies, whose job it is to assess these securities and give an expert 'opinion' on their status are telling you that something is AAA, does that make you a bumbling idiot for believing it? The pensions had an idea what they were buying, Triple A rated securities, as rated by experts.

What's more, the government knew that there was a problem and did nothing about it. In 2004 the FBI warned of an 'epidemic' in mortgage fraud. What happened next?

But sources familiar with the FBI budget process, who were not authorized to speak publicly about the growing fraud problem, say that he and other FBI criminal investigators sought additional assistance to take on the mortgage scoundrels.

They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.

In 2007, the number of agents pursuing mortgage fraud shrank to around 100. By comparison, the FBI had about 1,000 agents deployed on banking fraud during the S&L bust of the 1980s and '90s, said Anthony Adamski, who oversaw financial crime investigations for the FBI at the time.
Click to expand...

and

Officials said they began approaching mortgage companies and others in an attempt to raise awareness about the growing fraud problem. But the lenders had little incentive to cooperate because they were continuing to make money. Black says that in many cases, they were part of the fraud.

"Nobody wanted to listen," Sharon Ormsby, the chief of the FBI's financial crimes section, said in an interview. "We were dealing with the issue as best we could back then."
Click to expand...

rest of article:

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/aug/25/business/fi-mortgagefraud25

Regulations can be discussed, especially about over leveraging (how they actually got in trouble), but I have seen little evidence that any protesters "get it" at all.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you haven't been looking for it.
 
Another rape at Zoo-Cotti:

One of the women, an 18-year-old Massachusetts native, told police that she got into an argument with the male friend with whom she was sharing a tent at about 6 a.m. Saturday. She left and met Iketubosin, the official said. He offered to let her sleep in his tent, saying he had to go work in the park’s makeshift kitchen.

The alleged victim took Iketubosin up on his offer and went to sleep. But she said she soon awoke to find Iketubosin removing her pants, the official said. She told police she asked him to stop, but he didn’t comply. Then he raped her, the official said.
Click to expand...
 
Wasted away again in an Obamaville. Searchin' for my last oxycontin. Some people say that we are here too stay, but I know, I just hate that damn snow.
 
KoihimeNakamura said:
Good old guilt by association. Do you have ANYTHING else?
Click to expand...

Somehow I'm reminded of the blinding hypocrisy of those teaparty critics who couldn't wait to tag the racist bigotry label any chance there was when there was a similar complaint, who didn't even consider that their judgements were themselves committing guilt by association. Near as I can tell OWS, lacks the organization, unity, and exhibits much more widespread interruption than anything I can recall hearing from the tea party. More than anything I think that puts things into perspective.
 
Last edited:
We know that a sizeable sector of the Occupy Walltards are anarchists and other violent leftists who balk at the idea of peaceful demonstration. How long until they go for some violence like they did in Seattle and other "anti-globalization" protests? Do you think it's going to end with them being dispersed and shut down by force or will it fizzle-out peacefully?
 
Virus said:
We know that a sizeable sector of the Occupy Walltards are anarchists and other violent leftists who balk at the idea of peaceful demonstration. How long until they go for some violence like they did in Seattle and other "anti-globalization" protests? Do you think it's going to end with them being dispersed and shut down by force or will it fizzle-out peacefully?
Click to expand...

What does, 'sizeable sector' mean? 10%? 20%? 0.000000001%? What's your rough estimate of anarchists and violent leftists who do not want to take part in peaceful demonstration? Perhaps you could show me your workings? Let's divide the amount of protesters, by the acts of violent protesters. It must be 1 in 10,000 or greater. Quite 'sizeable', if by sizeable you mean minuscule and insignificant. If you have any other data, please lay it down.
 
Well there's those guys trashing the eatery of a business in the video I linked above. That group looks pretty sizeable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom