Man dies after setting himself on fire in front of French employment office

Taking a NATIONAL company, like our old Electricity Board, convincing ********s that it would be a good idea to sell it off, then letting the entire thing fall into the hands of a tiny few.

Then they hike up prices,and we can change provider, but they are more or less the same.

It is like taking all my belongings, selling them, but renting them back to myself.

So that the person getting the rent is getting rich, on what was already mine.

- - - Updated - - -

And THAT right there, as much as they will FIZZ and deny this, is THE source of all YOUR problems.

 

Jack, If your National electric company was privatized your taxes should have gone down a similar amount. If they did'nt perhaps you need to ask your government why not? JMO

 

Not exactly. You are right, that the bundling of toxic mortgage assets, was very important in making the collapse of the real estate bubble so catastrophic, but it doesn't explain why there was a real estate bubble to begin with. The bundling of those assets does though, something done ENTIRELY by the banking system, with no help from government(except in that government did nothing to regulate it). Mortgage backed securities were incorrectly identified as a means of lessening(if not eliminating) the risk in giving out loans, so banks became much more wiling to give loans. Since they would give the loan, and then bundle the debt and sell it off, they didn't actually maintain the risk for the loan. That was transfered to those buying the mortgage securities. It created an environment where the consideration of risk was basically taken off the table, and anyone was able to get loans for real estate. It caused a very serious bubble.

If there was a government policy that was fundamental to the problem, it was the federal reserves decision to keep interest rates as close to zero as possible. It meant that not only was the risk removed by mortgage securities, but interest rates were artificially low. It was a perfect storm of bad government and bad capitalism coming together to create a mess.

PS. That policy was championed by Allen Greenspan, who is/was about as extreme a free market advocate as it is possible to be while holding a major government position. Maybe he wasn't as good an adherent as some free market fanatics want, but people like them will never get into government anyways, so it is sort of irrelevant. However, he was unquestionably a believer in "free market capitalism."

 

To put it simply. IMO the banks were forced/coerced into giving loans they normally would reject. They bundled them for the sole sake of selling them off. Perhaps an unscrupulous intent but the fact they were coerced into that predicament should not be overlooked. Ever play hot potatoe?

 

You seriously underestimate the influence of large banks if you think they are forced/coerced into doing anything!! What were the methods and mechanisms used to force/coerce them into doing those things?

 

Haven't you heard?

'We' do not have one.

And neither do you.

What we both have are men who serve the very, very, VERY rich.

 

The US Fed is NOT Federal.

And it has no reserves.

[video=youtube;h7ZztkVZXoc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7ZztkVZXoc&feature=player_detailpage[/video]

 

So far have we drifted towards the "there is no alternative to the market" ideology, that many who argue for a return to the post war consensus years prior to Thatcherism/Reaganism, are branded as some kind of Marxist revolutionaries. I'm in favour of all privatized utilities being returned to the public sector, our railways re-nationalized, the market driven out of our NHS.and schools as well as a properly funded construction of affordable publicly rented homes for people to live in. Jobs will be created and increased tax revenues generated, thus helping to reduce the budget deficit. No more PFIs and PPPs but affordable, transparent and accountable services run in the public interest as opposed to satisfying the minority interests of shareholders with the sole intention of maximizing profits. In reality, not revolutionary in any way but pragmatic and sensible. But, as Jack correctly alluded to, such an approach is the antithesis to the interests of the ruling elites.

 

Here is another little factoid to get your head around.

No one will accept it, so I safe to throw it out. See all of this mess. You have no idea how relatively simple it would be to collapse it all, and start out new.

I say 'relatively', which still means it would be one hell of a task, and I am not so sure precisely what to do, just where to go to.

Put it this way. It would be much much easier than ever hoping things are going to get better, and that we may get our privacy back, and that there could be a jobs boost, and less of a divide between the very rich and the rest.

It would be better than just sitting awaiting the inevitable slow death, that is coming to your country, one way or another, as things are.

There is no use in mass street protests. They are merely a way to vent fury, but they have a therapeutic quality.

There is NO USE in voting for anyone. Ever again. You will never see a man come in that does anything else but give more to the rich, and mess us up even more. Ever. Not unless you wreck their system.

You will get total media lies, fiat currency, poverty, illness, misery, and ALL SUFFERING. All of it could be so much better. We need to address the ACTUAL source of the virus. The very very source. Then that is where you take your business. Not to the streets, not fighting one another, not to Congress or Parliment, to THEM. Somehow.

Who? The entire ball game is owned and run by around 200 families. There are not any nationality, since some are European in origina,some are American, but they are all inter connected, NO DOUBT.

They marry within a VERY small number of families. Tiny. Sometimes they marry IN the family. It's them. They have about 2/3 of the total wealth, and our currency, everything can be paper trailed back to these 200 familes.

If they were changed or gone, and their wealth (which they have stolen anyway), was taken, and shared, and their cartel broken up.

I assure you, this would not be an easy task, but if they were no longer allowed to be this way, (they mostly remain off Forbes), then 100% the World, ALL of it, would be better beyond your hopes.

- - - Updated - - -

These as well.

Make it all illegal.

That, cash for crapping gold, pawn shops, in fact, ban usury.

 

The familes may all own different things.

And there is a hiearchy among them. And generally ONLY the men are allowed to carry out the business or know of the dealings.

Simple as that. The same families have been doing this for about 300yrs. Yes. That long. They have made their money through war creation and death. No other way to tell you.

One such example (and this family are just the mere whipping boys for another one)..

Just because they may not put their name onto a thing, does not mean it is not theirs.

Although David Sassoon did not speak English, he became a naturalised British citizen in 1853. He kept the dress and manners of the Baghdadi Jews, but allowed his sons to adopt English manners. His son, Abdullah changed his name to Albert, moved to England, became a Baronet and married into the Rothschild family. All the Sassoons of Europe are said to be descendants of David Sassoon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sassoon

 

Of course it SHOULD be illegal but the politicians and their mates are on the boards of the companies who have a direct finger in the pie of what were at one time public services owned by us, the people - our national jewels so to speak. Then came along the vulture capitalists who effectively began a process of sustained asset stripping beginning in the early 70s and continuing at a pace today. There is virtually nothing left in the public domain, its virtually all been asset stripped and privatized. Even our prized NHS is being broken up and privatized by stealth. Sitting on the boards of these privatized businesses are former politicians, and the government of sleazeballs lobby for them and their mates in order to widen the reach of their tentacles. It's happening throughout the "democracies" of the West to such an extent that it has become normalized. We even have a poster on here who cannot grasp what privatization is, It's incredible. And we are then expected to have a discussion with such people.

 

We just need to somehow TAKE it back. By all and by any means.

Simple as that.

 

If only it was that simple.

 

Okay, lets say I am right about those families,which I am.

To save the world, and make it better, would you 'spare' them, let me put it that way?

 

Elderly Spanish couple commits suicide over debts

A retired Spanish couple has committed suicide after receiving an order to evict their home on the Mediterranean island of Mallorca due to unpaid debts.

Authorities said the 68-year-old man and the 67-year-old woman, who took an overdose of prescription drugs on Tuesday in their home, stated in a suicide note that they have killed themselves because they were unable to pay their debts and were soon going to be evicted.

Hours after the suicides, Spain’s parliament voted in favor of reviewing the country's tough mortgage and eviction laws. The legislation pending in the house would allow bankrupt homeowners to write off their debts by giving up their property. However, the discussions could last for months or even years before any amendments are made.

Under the current law, evicted homeowners are still liable to repay huge amounts even though the value of their house has plunged during the past four years.

In November 2012, Spain's government passed a two-year moratorium on evictions in response to popular protests and reported suicides. The moratorium, however, has stipulations that cover a very limited number of Spanish families.


Since November 2012, a total of five people have committed suicide due to mortgage defaults and evictions.

Battered by the global financial downturn, the Spanish economy collapsed into recession in the second half of 2008, taking with it millions of jobs.

More than 350,000 Spaniards have since the recession received eviction orders.

Spain must lower its budget deficit to 4.5 percent in 2013 and 2.8 percent in 2014. Economists, however, say those targets will be difficult to meet amid poor prospects for the economic recovery in the country.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/02/13/288722/spanish-couple-kill-selves-over-debts/

 

never took you for an anarchist.

 

So how many people are you prepared to have die in the process? Another french revolution perhaps where the rich and elite all get killed? Maybe like zimbabwe where they took the most productive farmland in Afriac away from their white owners and gave it to the people and within 2 years, the people began to starve.

Naturally the elite wouldn't fight back or anything.


Simple does it.

 

Yep. the big banks and other wall street crooks conspired to inflate the value of worthless mortgage backed securities. The rating services colluded to declare all this crap as good investments and the brokers went on a selling spree around the world.

Who wouldn't want a piece of the ever expanding US housing market, and after all all the ratings companies AND the big banks were assuring everyone of how great these products were.

The big banks were responsible for around 80% of the crap with fannie mae and freddy mac picking up the other 20% when they jumped in. It was criminal, and they got away with it because everyone was in on it, the regulators were all buddy buddy with the crooks and bush cut the heart out of the banking regulations.

now the republicans are screaming that wall street doesn't need the Dodd Franks act that's designed to prevent such crimes from being repeated.

 

Yes and you started from a FALSE PREMISE which I PROVED.

 

The problem really goes back to the1968 Charter Act that created Fannie Mae so that banks could sell their mortgages to free up more money to loan. This created Mortgage Backed Securities that were not regulated. Banks got paid for making a loan and didn't suffer if the loan went bad. Over the decades, financing companies other than banks were allowed in and the sprung up like weeds. Since liability was virtually 0, these companies tended to be looser with their loan qualifications.

In comes the 'affordable housing act' which creates loan products for Fannie Mae which mirrored the very practice of these other-than-bank lenders. Banks have to compete and soon their qualification criteria lowers as well.

You see government, by just one act that intruded into the private sector over 40 years ago, has led to the economic woes that we suffer today. If government has any job in the lending industry, it is to regulate and protect the public from unscrupulous business practices...not to PARTICIPATE in them.

 

Well said - I'm with you. These parasites should be eradicated from trading in our towns.
........

btw - Jack , Dont mention "the Jews" Remember what happened to David Ward ?

(wink)

 

The likes was sarcasm. You didn't do anything of the kind.Your post was nonsensical.

 

Absolute and utter nonsense. I'm afraid you haven't got a clue. I ought not to be surprised as you don't even have any concept as to what privatization is. You admitted it.

 

In a sense you are right but to use Bush terminology, you "misunderestimate" the structural issues as identified over 150 years ago by Marx of the kind I identified previously. The capitalist free-market is the systematic 'elephant in the room' underlying problem that you are not seeing. It's not merely about the inability of successive governments' to regulate unscrupulous practices that has led us to where we are today, but their inability to intervene adequately into the market full stop. Government intrusion, rather than being the problem as you alluded to, is actually the potential solution in mitigating against extreme adverse market outcomes. So you have this whole thing upside down and back to front.

 

Unemployment benefits expiring is inhuman , we are not some short of colonial trash and we deserve better , if the state does not sustain you then why to have a state ?