What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
93 Comments
- gibbwake, on 10/08/2008, -6/+20So youre going to listen to peoples solutions who created this problem to being with? Get real, the only solution to this is to abolish the federal reserve. Most of you dont even know what it is. The federal reserve and central bank system is causing the crisis! To learn what the federal reserve is and to learn why it isnt federal, and it isnt a reserve, check out these documentaries. Its an unconstitutional abomination and it must be abolished!
**Fiat Empire**
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329 ...
Watch this award-winning film to find out why some feel the Federal Reserve's practices are a violation of the U.S. Constitution and others feel it's simply "a bunch of organized crooks."
Discover why experts agree the Fed is a banking cartel that benefits mainly bankers and their corporate clients as well as a Congress that would rather unilaterally increase the national debt than ask citizens how THEY would like to see tax revenues allocated. Find out how the media facilitates the partnership between the Fed and Congress and why it fails to fully disclose what's going on. Lastly, find out how the Federal Reserve Member Banks are owned and controlled by an elite group of insiders that use fiat money to fund their fascist agenda by moving the United States further from its founding principles towards endless bailouts and bankruptcy.
**Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America**
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560 ...
THE MONEY MASTERS is a 3 1/2 hour non-fiction, historical documentary that traces the origins of the political power structure. The modern political power structure has its roots in the hidden manipulation and accumulation of gold and other forms of money. The development of fractional reserve banking practices in the 17th century brought to a cunning sophistication the secret techniques initially used by goldsmiths fraudulently to accumulate wealth. With the formation of the privately-owned Bank of England in 1694, the yoke of economic slavery to a privately-owned "central" bank was first forced upon the backs of an entire nation, not removed but only made heavier with the passing of the three centuries to our day. Nation after nation has fallen prey to this cabal of international central bankers.
The success of the central banking scheme developed into a far-reaching plan described by President Clinton's mentor, Georgetown Professor Carroll Quigley, "to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank....sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the levels of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
Several short-lived attempts to impose the central banking scheme on the United States were defeated by the patriotic efforts of Presidents Madison, Jefferson, Jackson, Van Buren and Lincoln. But with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, America was firmly lashed to the same yoke, so that a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the masses a yoke little better than slavery itself. That yoke inevitably grows heavier with ever-compounding interest, and totals over $20 trillion of debt owed by the American people today ($80,000 per American) ultimately to these bankers.
This vast accumulation of wealth concentrates immense power and despotic economic domination in the hands of the few central bankers "who are able to govern credit and its allotment, for this reason supplying, so to speak, the life-blood to the entire economic body, and grasping, as it were, in their hands the very soul of the economy so that no one dare breathe against their will."
**Ring Of Power - Empire Of The City**
Part 1: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4675077383 ...
Part 2: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-443054337 ...
Legal Torrent, no copyright: http://tinyurl.com/6n3eem
The city of London, Vatican city + Washington DC are 3 independant states within states wich composes the empire of the city. The first is financial control, the the second is religious control and third is military control. Together they make the very unholy trinity.
Many people realize that this mystifying situation, in which an alleged democratic and self-governing nation is actually controlled against the will of the people. Once identified, there appears to be a clear indication that there exists a very powerful and occult organization which plans and directs world affairs.
If you've ever wondered why we can find a guy in a hole in the middle of the desert but we cant arrest drug lords who earn Billions of dollars annually or why the national debt annually gets larger despite the economy doubling or tripling in size, the answer lies here. - algaeturd, on 10/07/2008, -1/+11One element they're not really taking into consideration is confidence...if nobody else is buying it (and it's apparent that very few are) then it's not going to work domestically or globally. People can smell a rat and they're ducking out of the dollar. It's just not enough to keep throwing money into a bottomless pit.
- hugolp, on 10/08/2008, -0/+9Yeah, that was the excuse, but in reality the FED is the one creating this moments of panic. It creates them by allowing bubles to appear by having the money so cheap that everybody borrows a lot of money, and then at the end the borrowing ends and the crisis happens. If the FED didnt set the interest rates arbitrarly none of this would happen.
- Royish, on 10/08/2008, -0/+8Are they kidding?
http://gawker.com/5060145/neel-kashkari-americas-n ...
Henry Paulson used to be the CEO of Goldman Sachs.
Neel Kashkari was VP of Goldman Sachs.
The Fed is controlled by the top few elite banks like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan.
Notice how when things go wrong, they get risk free funding by the Federal reserve while the other banks get eaten up by them.
Notice how JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs Both have stocks that haven't completely tanked?
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=jp morgan
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=goldman%20sach ...
They are on the federal reserve board, they are always the companies who get to eat up the smaller companies.
Remember the Bear Stearns bailout which was a risk free loan to JP Morgan from the Federal Reserve.
It's socialism for the elite, at the American peoples dollar and freedom.
Private interests control our whole monetary system, how did we let this happen? - PatsRiot, on 10/08/2008, -3/+11Get rid of the federal reserve and the central bank system, thats the only solution to this crisis created by this beast.
- chowda, on 10/08/2008, -0/+7FTA: "Treasury is expected to begin buying assets within a few weeks through the use of auctions. But if market conditions continue to deteriorate, it could make use of another tool at its disposal: investing directly in troubled companies."
Here it comes... with the markets nose diving... they'll throw that 700 billion away like pissing on a forest fire, just to appear like they're doing something... central planning FAIL - PatsRiot, on 10/08/2008, -0/+6Its not a rescue, its the criminal looting of the last assets left in the country. Theyre looting us dry and jumping ship.
- jcub27, on 10/08/2008, -1/+7REVOLUTIONNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!
Its getting about that time..... - chowda, on 10/08/2008, -0/+5I thought the bailout already got signed into law... what "rescue bill" do you mean?
- odigity, on 10/08/2008, -0/+5Of course he knows what hyperinflation is. That's not relevant. What's relevant are his motives. I'll give you a hint - it has nothing to do with your well-being.
- argoff, on 10/07/2008, -4/+9I hope people understand that this is not something "new". Similar schemes have been put in place in countries all over the planet, and the outcome was the same every time. Hyper-inflation.
- pkfitness, on 10/08/2008, -0/+5bc289... you are talking symptoms and forgetting the problem, which is cheap credit and dilution of the value of the currency via the Fed's discretion. Just my two cents.
- shig, on 10/08/2008, -2/+6I predict that the solution to the market's woes will always be more government intervention.
Not that it will help, but that it will always be the plan. Now watch the speed, and decisiveness, of the elite to prove me right. - hyoomen, on 10/08/2008, -1/+5As if the New Deal and more than half of a century of 'stabilizer' monetary policy interfering with market dynamics wasn't bad enough, now America is further sacrificing basic freedoms for perceived stability. The Fed is getting more power, the Treasury is getting more power, Congress is continuing to overreach its constitutional bounds, and we're all complicit in mass-theft (via taxation) from people for generations to come.
For anybody wanting to get past the conventional analysis, check into the Ludwig von Mises Institute (named after the 'father' of Austrian economics which is highly correlated to libertarianism and market capitalism) at http://www.mises.org. - BullHunter, on 10/08/2008, -0/+4Mexico had a credit crisis (another one) and got bailed out in 1990 (there about) and that officially bankrupted the country - thanks to the banks.
- craighoxton, on 10/08/2008, -0/+4You do realise that a financial regulator is just a banker on half pay?
- Demos27, on 10/08/2008, -0/+4Either way we are going into a recession...the fed can do everything in it's power but it won't be enough.
- HartgE46, on 10/08/2008, -0/+4it's absolutely unreal... our whole system needs an overhaul. too bad it's going to take a depression before everyone wakes up to that fact.
Ron Paul/Peter Schiff 2012 - divinediva, on 10/07/2008, -1/+5It has to be convincing that it's going to provide some meaningful relief.
- polo8, on 10/08/2008, -0/+4Don't throw good money after bad. Postponing the problem is how this mess happened in the first place.
- Catchpen, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3Why do I get the feeling the playground bully is going to pay me another visit and take my lunch money again?
- hugolp, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3@bc289 that is a lie.The economic inestabilities have gone worst since the FED is in place. And there isnt much criticism against the FED because the banks that own the FED (remember the FED is not public but is a cartel of private banks) are the ones tha own or borrow money to the media. Thats why you dont hear that the interest rates are too low, although most economist where saying it. But the FED wants people to have cheap debt money so it can crash the economy later by reclaiming all those debts.
- crombenevolant, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3I believe the year you are looking for is 1929. 1921 was the beginning of the "roaring twenties" when the economy as in bubble mode and doing well.
- socialexpert, on 10/07/2008, -1/+4But that pressure could intensify when the rescue bill reaches a House vote.
- moses141, on 10/08/2008, -1/+4I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned Neel Kashkari, the 35 year-old investment banker from Goldman who is going to control all of our $700B.
Another guy from Goldman in charge of choosing which investment houses get billions in taxpayer money??? No conflict of interest there,,. And at 35, even with his impressive resume, this is a guy who was in high school during the crash of 87. He's hardly experienced enough to be in his current position -- nevermind get put in charge of $700B. - maz2331, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3Profitable companies used to issue a quarterly dividend check to shareholders that divided the profit in proportion to the number of shares held. This practice has mostly stopped due to income tax rates being much higher than capital gains, so now the companies just build larger cash reserves that in theory are reflected in the stock price.
Now, the big bad thing is the derivitives. Stock at least is an ownership stake in a real company, whereas a derivitive is, well, just *****. It's an investment based on investments, or a sort of insurance policy on another investment. These things are so opaque and strange that even the funds holding them really don't know what they are in many cases.
Also, a lot of this paper is leveraged heavily - ie: purchased with borrowed money, or not really backed by the issuer. That's what tanked AIG - they had a unit that issued a face value "insurance" type derivitive (credit default swap) of billions, while only actually having a few million in cash. These insured mortgage bundles against the borrower not paying up, which risk was totally impossible to gauge.
All the derivitives really boil down to "if X happens, I'll pay you Y" or "if X happens, you pay me Y". That's really it. And these things are on the books of companies at hundreds of trillions of dollars worth of "face value." - expert01, on 10/08/2008, -2/+5What I've never figured out is the stock market... alright, so you buy partial ownership of a company. What does it get you? Unless you buy a lot of a company (to get worthwhile rights as an owner), not much. Hell, you don't even get any of the profits the company makes. You buy the shares for $X, sell to Joe for $X+1, He sells it to Tim for $X+1... the shares of ownership are only worth something if other people want those shares, and they only want those shares so they can sell them to someone else for more, making it all overinflated as far as I can tell.
In fact, what that sounds like to me is currency, which is also only worth something if someone else wants it. Except stocks can't buy you anything but different currencies, so they're worthless (until someone decides they want to give you currency that can actually be used for something in exchange for worthless currency).
As far as I'm concerned, the entire stock market can just collapse. I know it has far-reaching consequences for those that have invested in stocks (individuals and businesses), but the businesses aren't losing actual money from the stock value crash (because they've already sold those shares). In fact, I can't even wrap my mind around how exactly the current system is a good idea.
Wikipedia says it best:
"The size of the world stock market is estimated at about $60.9 trillion USD at the end of 2007. The world derivatives market has been estimated at about $480 trillion face or nominal value, 12 times the size of the entire world economy."
Wow! I know people did not actually pay that much money for the stocks and the values are perceived, but wow! So, say I have a computer I paid $500 for. If someone else has the same computer and sells it for $5,000,000, do I get to claim my computer is worth $5,000,000 and add that to my personal wealth? No? But I can buy a piece of paper, wait for it to be worth a lot to someone else, and claim whatever they bought it for is what mine is worth? How is that not the same thing?
I'm so confused... - inactive, on 10/08/2008, -1/+4Are these the same regulators who were for the bailout?
You're all sheep. - Singularitarian, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3I feel like Atlas Shrugged is coming true.
- odigity, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3You noticed? :)
It's been following that book like a friggin script for years now. Eerie. - maz2331, on 10/08/2008, -0/+3Uh, a World War isn't exactly a good idea in an age of thermonuclear weapons.
- odigity, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2I do go outside. Today I gave away six copies of The Money Masters to my banker, grocer, and friendly neighborhood Dunkin Donuts worker.
What have *you* done to make the world a better place lately? - bc289, on 10/08/2008, -1/+3Well, cite where you get such claims. Otherwise, if you can't, you're no different from any other conspiracy theorist. You speculate about his motives when the reasons behind what he is doing is clear in the very academic papers he wrote when he was a professor of economics at princeton
- Hangly, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Hey, it worked for the Soviet Union. Look how well they did.
- toastmin, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Nothing like business advice from a news corp owned newspaper. There's no way I could prove mischief, but I haven't seen any anti-bailout editorials in it, or even healthy skepticism. Could it be that everyone that writes for the worlds most important business paper are in total agreement?
- quaunaut, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Actually, the market suffered a severe crash that year. However, the market also recovered, without the government's help.
In 1930, after the 1929 crash, the government got involved and tried to 'manage' the damage. The great depression is what resulted.
I'm not saying its 100% the fault of the government and none to the corporations, but its pushing the first domino. - Hangly, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2They'll get theirs.
- homercles337, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2Yep, that good ol' socialism for the corporations and the wealthy while the middle class and the poor pick up the check. Nice.
- maz2331, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2No matter what steps they take, the only real tool they have is to inflate the currency big time. If that happens slowly, the idea is that people don't notice, and it's non-disruptive. The idea: pay debts denominated in today's dollars back with dollars worth less over time.
So, you're owed $1000, and you do get back $1000 later. Too bad the $1000 then is worth less than a cup of coffee, but the accounts "balance out".
Controlling that process at a low annual rate is the whole point of modern central banking. That's it, nothing else. - crombenevolant, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2If you really want to stimulate the economy and get things going, suspend the capital gains tax. The biggest problem we have right now is the tightness in the credit market. Nothing over comes the fear of risk like good old fashioned greed. With the lure of tax free profits and historic low stock and fund prices money would flow like water into the markets. It would increase liquidity and confidence at the same time. And best of all, we don't have to borrow 100's of billions of dollars to do it. Yes there would be less tax revenue, but if the market completely tanks we will be in that boat anyway.....
- argoff, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2 ...
Yeah, I've read his writings, I know exactly what he's doing. that's the dam problem. (and also why he has the nick name- helicopter ben) and I quote "the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost". *****, of course there is a cost: hyper inflation. It is no different than the Wiemar republic trying to find creative ways to pump money into the economy. You need to go to your economics school and ask for a refund (in gold), then attend here: http://mises.org - and learn from economists who are actually accurate. - HartgE46, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2It's all about the value of the dollar and we... I'm sorry, THEY are completely trashing it. Restore the Constitution, abolish the Federal Reserve, and be done with it.
- odigity, on 10/08/2008, -3/+5I'm really proud of you. Few people have the independence and the courage to examine a thing from scratch and use their own judgement, rather than simply bowing to the intense peer pressure of majority opinion.
I did the same thing growing up and figured out that the stock market is 90% pyramid scheme. As soon as you stop paying dividends, value becomes illusion. Everyone bought into it, and I knew they were all crazy, but they thought I was crazy because there were in the majority.
It is absolutely possible for 99% of society to be completely wrong about huge things - including the stock market, monetary policy, and in general how the world really works. - odigity, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2The government can't give meaningful relief. Don't you understand? What we have here is a house of cards that everyone pretended was a stone castle for the last 95 years, and now it's crumbling.
But it's crumbling because it's a friggin house of cards. It's *supposed* to crumble. Trying to get the government to defy the laws of physics (or economics) to slow down that process is counter-productive. It won't work, and will make it worse. The people in power actually know this, they're not really trying to fix it, they're using it as cover to steal as much as they can.
The only thing that will help is shoving the government back in it's tiny Constitutional box so it can't meddle with business, money, banking, etc, let the free market do the job, stand back as the wreckage comes down, clear it away, and start building from scratch.
Kill the Federal Reserve. Make Fractional Reserve Banking prosecutable in court as fraud. Restore the government to a Constitutional monetary system. That's it. The rest is up to the consensual choices and actions of individuals participating in the market, and through private charity. - odigity, on 10/08/2008, -0/+2You mean you were groomed by propaganda in the heart of hell. No wonder you can't think or see clearly.
You Yale types are the problem. You're great at memorizing what the authorities tell you, and then applying it within their framework to help them maintain the system.
You're not so good at thinking for yourself and understanding how things truly are. - maz2331, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1Not if they just take a bunch of derivitives off the books. These things may well have zero real value, just like an insurance policy is worthless if the issuing company goes under.
- Royish, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1Sorry this is the correct link to JP Morgans stock
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=jp+morgan - ladyattis, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1You cannot consume more than what you can produce.
- Noods, on 10/09/2008, -0/+1Maybe because we have not reached a period where the Federal Reserve is inflating the currency at the rate it is now. Protracted War. Corporate Bailouts. Nationalization of banking institutions.
"While Treasury's asset-purchase program may have some impact, Mr. Gallagher said the bigger role is for the Federal Reserve, which moved Monday to inject *more liquidity* into the marketplace." - odigity, on 10/08/2008, -0/+1You mean you want to remove the penalty for saving? But then people might save instead of borrow and spend... more private capital would be competing with the banks, which wouldn't be able to collect interest on the money they print out of nothing, wages would rise, and we'd have a better tomorrow.
Are you mad? -
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is