It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

We bailed you out, and now you want what!?!

page: 3
53
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: truthseeker84

Accountability, the rule of law, and following the Constitution should take preference over wishes for chaos. People like to talk, but I don't believe that living in a lawless World would be very pleasant when it's all said and done. ~$heopleNation




posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
where's MY bailout? i also made 'bad decisions' (as the bankers' criminality is often described) but mine were to my own detriment and not calculated number-juggling to make myself rich at everyone else's expense. where are ALL our bailouts?


You have access to a "bailout" in the form of declaring bankruptcy. Had the government not stepped in, that's precisely what the banks would have had to do too. The difference is that when you declare bankruptcy it's a relatively small amount of money lost. If AIG were to have done it every school in the country would have gone unfunded, a huge percentage of peoples retirement accounts would have been gone, and the government would have had to act as a lender of last resort for sectors like farming anyways (commercial paper being the important one).

If we didn't have the bailout there would be very few people retiring in the next 30 years and every retiree would be back to work. Maybe it would have been worth it for an honest banking system, but it certainly wouldn't have been pain free. You and I for example would have zero hope of ever retiring, we would be working until the day we die.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:30 PM
link   
I thought to myself when I read the OP.

"If anyone out there can even try to justify this, they'll be here."

Was not disappointed.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan If we didn't have the bailout there would be very few people retiring in the next 30 years and every retiree would be back to work.


this is not only spin, it is nonsense. try harder.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Americans were angry when Wall Street’s greedy and risky behavior triggered a global financial crisis in 2008. T


Hmm.......



They were angrier still when the government had to borrow and spend hundreds of billions of dollars to rescue mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,


Yo ?

Fannie and Freddie at not a part of WALL STREET.

Fannie, and Freddie are government created, and backed. They had to be 'bailed out'.



the largest banks and the insurance company AIG.


AIG isn't a bank. They are an insurance company that 'insured' mortgaged backed securities.

As stupid as those derivatives were. They were FEDERALLY backed.

As in the 'full faith, and credit' (chuckles') of the US government.

Fanny, and Freddie are still being bailed out.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96



Fannie and Freddie at not a part of WALL STREET.

Fannie, and Freddie are government created, and backed. They had to be 'bailed out'.



Here is a sampling of your government politicians:


37 out of 40 Goldman Sachs lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
86 out of 114 General Electric lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
53 out of 61 Citigroup Inc lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
118 out of 141 Comcast Corp lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
59 out of 69 JPMorgan Chase & Co lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs
39 out of 48 Koch Industries lobbyists in 2013-2014 have previously held government jobs


Here are top donors to Obama


Goldman Sachs $1,033,204
Bank of America $1,013,402
Morgan Stanley $911,305
JPMorgan Chase & Co $834,096
Wells Fargo $677,076
Credit Suisse Group $643,120
Citigroup Inc $511,199
Barclays $446,000
General Electric $332,875


It was the top .5% responsible for the crash

represent.us...
Study: Congress literally doesn’t care what you think


One thing that does have an influence? Money. While the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America have a “statistically non-significant impact,” Economic elites, business interests, and people who can afford lobbyists still carry major influence.


Brooksley Born tried to put a wrench in the Wall Street Elites plans in 1994, well before the 2008 crash and the bankers told her to take a hike. The Banksters knew the fire they were playing with as far back as 1994.

video.pbs.org...


"I walk into Brooksley's office one day; the blood has drained from her face," says Michael Greenberger, a former top official at the CFTC who worked closely with Born. "She's hanging up the telephone; she says to me: 'That was [former Assistant Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers. He says, "You're going to cause the worst financial crisis since the end of World War II."... [He says he has] 13 bankers in his office who informed him of this. Stop, right away. No more.'"


edit on 8-6-2015 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-6-2015 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2015 @ 12:35 AM
link   
The only bail out that needs to happen is all of us bailing out of their rigged system. One massive bank run just to shake the tree and see if they fall out and hit the ground.



posted on Jun, 9 2015 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4

originally posted by: Aazadan If we didn't have the bailout there would be very few people retiring in the next 30 years and every retiree would be back to work.


this is not only spin, it is nonsense. try harder.


It's not nonsense, pretty much everyone with their savings in the bank, or a market would have been wiped out. The same is true of people with debt, as it all would have been called in. The end result would have been massive bankruptcy. People in their 50's and 60's now would have been left with nothing.

Preventing those types of scenarios are exactly why the banks were determined to be too big to fail and until the feds pull their heads out of their asses and break those companies up into smaller chunks their TBTF status will remain.



posted on Jun, 9 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   
I saw no real reason to bail them out he first time I see no reason to do it again, even if it's different people.



posted on Jun, 9 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
In a sick twist, we actually should be rooting for these scumbags.
Why?
Because they're fighting the Federal Reserve.

"There, Greenberg is asking the court to award him and other AIG shareholders at least $23 billion from the Treasury. He says that’s to compensate them for the 80 percent of AIG stock that the Federal Reserve demanded as a condition for its bailout. Judge Thomas Wheeler has repeatedly signaled his agreement with Greenberg."
...
"In an opinion last fall, Judge Royce Lamberth of U.S. District Court in Washington ultimately ruled that that was what Congress intended when it wrote the laws governing Fannie and Freddie but acknowledged that such a sweeping assertion of government powers may “raise eyebrows or even engender a feeling of discomfort.” It will now be up to Sweeney and the Court of Claims to decide whether what Congress intended amounts to an illegal and unconstitutional taking."

So, even though we might not like these guys getting more $$$, at least the ruling will state that what the Federal Reserve and Congress have done is unconstitutional and set case precedent for future lawsuits.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
"We" didn't bail anybody out. Obama bailed these sleazeballs out....just like he appointed Monsanto execs to run EPA, just like he lied about healthcare, just like he started ISIS (according to many reports)....

And as I recall, any body who questioned the bailout was labeled a racist.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: ObjectZero
I saw no real reason to bail them out he first time I see no reason to do it again, even if it's different people.


A lot of people didn't see it that way, I'm somewhere in the middle myself. On the one hand, bailing them out caused the least harm. On the other hand, not bailing them out would have fixed some systemic issues that are still in place and will lead to a need for another bailout.


originally posted by: Zoyd23
"We" didn't bail anybody out. Obama bailed these sleazeballs out....just like he appointed Monsanto execs to run EPA, just like he lied about healthcare, just like he started ISIS (according to many reports)....

And as I recall, any body who questioned the bailout was labeled a racist.


We elected congress and the president. Even if you didn't vote for them, the fact that they were elected means you didn't properly convince others to not vote for them.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: ugmold

FIGHT FOR FREEDOM!



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: Temudjin
a reply to: ugmold

Lets say they didnt bail them out, how do you think your economy would look like?
You seen a movie called the purge or Mad Max? Monkeys without food will do some weird # in a society



Even assuming we bailed them out, the top brass can still go to prison and have others run it.
It was not like they were doing such a superb job to begin with and unreplaceable if they needed bail outs to begin with.


Right, it's not the individuals it is the SYSTEM. Getting rid of these leaders or even charging them with something will be a move for justice, but won't change the dynamic of our society.

The system is fundamentally corrupt and exploitative. Sorry, don't mean to sound marxist but the very nature of the hyper-capitalistic system we have is a giant pyramid scheme, which extracts money and resources in an upward direction from bottom to top. People along the "value chain" horizontally and vertically are NOT getting a reasonably fair share of the pie. Only the 1% and maybe somewhat another 20% in the upper professional class are.

edit on 10-6-2015 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
And people want to bitch about the poor, sick, and disabled on government assistance.

Nice. Sometimes, you really can't fix stupid.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf




And people want to bitch about the poor, sick, and disabled on government assistance.


... while they apply for a nicely bailed out job as bankster of course. I love a full-blown Idiocracy.



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 05:02 AM
link   
This is more than Relevant.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 17 2015 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan


You have access to a "bailout" in the form of declaring bankruptcy. Had the government not stepped in, that's precisely what the banks would have had to do too. The difference is that when you declare bankruptcy it's a relatively small amount of money lost. If AIG were to have done it every school in the country would have gone unfunded, a huge percentage of peoples retirement accounts would have been gone, and the government would have had to act as a lender of last resort for sectors like farming anyways (commercial paper being the important one).

If we didn't have the bailout there would be very few people retiring in the next 30 years and every retiree would be back to work. Maybe it would have been worth it for an honest banking system, but it certainly wouldn't have been pain free. You and I for example would have zero hope of ever retiring, we would be working until the day we die.


ya it was better for them to wait a little before they let it all blow up!!
till after the laws were passed so that our checking accounts could be reclassified making us creditors instead of depositors and the social security had all the money they possibly could siphoned off..

the fall is still gonna come, we can all still kiss any hope of retirement goodbye,
it just that the crash at the bottom is gonna have more of a kick to it.

and this isn't directed at you but,
by the way, it was Bush that bailed out the banks not obama!! it was just one of the last acts bush did in office and well, obama was left to tie up the lose ends!




top topics



 
53
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join