Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Santelli Sreaming for Sanity and ACTION!!

page: 10
43
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by bpg131313
 



It really is quite sad to see this Administration attack the messenger for not liking the message being put out by the White House. It reeks of a lack of understanding early in this Administration. "They" know better than "us", were just not smart enough to realize it. Talk about Elitism.


No it was obvious that the only thing santelli had on his side was mob mentality.

The last thing I want steering this discussion is a bunch of hyped up stock brokers.... the same ones who got us into this mess to begin with...



[edit on 21-2-2009 by HunkaHunka]




posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


I certainly agree with you regarding the elitism of this Administration. I think the thing that stings the most is that they campaigned solely on "Change". They said that there'd be transparency on all levels. Had they not said all of those things, people would probably have given them far more leeway. But they DID say those things, and when someone says that they are going to make the dealings of Government far more transparent, and then engage in the practices they have thus far, you used the word "elitist", I'd have to add to that, "hypocritical".

Santelli knows what's going down. It's what we all feel, and are just happy that someone, anyone, in the MSM is actually saying something, even if CNBC was quick to muzzle him. We all know what he's thinking, and we all support him and stand beside him in this.

I believe, as others have stated on this thread, that we got the swift reaction from this administration because Santelli struck a nerve. They KNOW he's right. They just don't want all of us to know he's right. Because if everyone knew he was right, people would start looking at the likes of Ireland, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Ukraine, and Russia just to name a few and see that the first collapse won't be the United States, it'll be one of those. If history is any lesson regarding collapses, I'm choosing Hungary or Austria because it was that area that started World War One, the war to end all wars. History has already shown that that particular area is a powder keg. The collapse of their economy would bring the Euro to its knees as other nations have to absorb the added losses, further dragging them down. Britain is right behind them. All of this is happening and what does our government decide to do? They are deciding to drive us further into debt enacting legislation from behind closed doors without anyone, including congress reading it.

I'll be on the watch this weekend. Everyone seems to release the really negative news on weekends hoping that no one will notice. Santelli has made the call, and if we survive to July, I'll do everything possible to get to Chicago to join him for the Chicago Tea Party. It's obvious that no other message has worked with this administration. It's time we bring The People together and bring the power of our Constitution back as well.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 01:34 AM
link   

No it was obvious that the only thing santelli had on his side was mob mentality.

The last thing I want steering this discussion is a bunch of hyped up stock brokers.... the same ones who got us into this mess to begin with...[edit on 21-2-2009 by HunkaHunka]



If you can provide any evidence that Santelli was directly involved with the bailout of the banks, the bailout of the auto industry, or the bailout of mortgage holders, all of us here on this thread would love to see it.

As for the bankers going out and making money, I have absolutely nothing against this. That's Capitalism, something I'll embrace any day before socialism or communism. The profits aren't what I have a problem with. What I have a problem with is the government rewarding failure by not allowing these banks to collapse (which they all should have) and let the auto industry collapse as well. Everyone says that they are too big to fail. I disagree. Their failures would have brought about smaller companies. The banks failures would have driven people toward Credit Unions, which have different rules for lending. I'll embrace the Constitution before I'll embrace socialism. I'm strictly against bailing out anyone. They enjoy the good times and don't help me out when things are going great for them, yet when things get bad they suddenly want us to save them from being evicted out of houses they can't afford? I'll stick with Capitalism.

Santelli hasn't done a thing to cause this mess. This mess rests squarely on the government because they chose to prop up companies rather than let them fall (as they should have).



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 04:28 AM
link   
reply to post by RolandBrichter
 


He is screaming from the trading floor where CDO and mortgages are trades on a daily basis, the people cheering him on are the same ones that made the housing bubble a reality thus making money for themselves (until recently when it all came down). Good luck on that one Santelli.

[edit on 2009/2/21 by reugen]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Sighting the new mortgage bailout thing as an example, Santelli is really ranting against socialism being crammed down the remaining capitalists in the US throat. Nationalize banks..Nationalize health plan.. He(we) don't want to pay for these braindead losers with no clue of basic personal finance who are now in or near default on mortgage.....hell this is the tip of the iceberg. I guess the sheeple who voted for Obama are getting what they want..



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackProjects
Sighting the new mortgage bailout thing as an example, Santelli is really ranting against socialism being crammed down the remaining capitalists in the US throat. Nationalize banks..Nationalize health plan.. He(we) don't want to pay for these braindead losers with no clue of basic personal finance who are now in or near default on mortgage.....hell this is the tip of the iceberg. I guess the sheeple who voted for Obama are getting what they want..


Well, take the private US banking system for example, as long as things did go well all profits were private but now when the # really has hit the fan , every distressed bank is screaming for help i.e wants to socialize the losses. Its rotten.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Well, take the private US banking system for example, as long as things did go well all profits were private but now when the # really has hit the fan , every distressed bank is screaming for help i.e wants to socialize the losses. Its rotten.


Yes, it truly is "rotten" as you said. What Congress and Obama should have said was, Here's the way Capitalism works. People take risks by trying something new. Happens all the time. Those risks sometimes work and the company is rewarded by consumers through increased sales. The risk, having paid off, suggests to the people running that company that additional risks may be just as lucrative. It's at this precise moment where Capitalism is at it's greatest because it's a free system. No intervention by anyone. When you continue to gamble on risks you feel are going to be lucrative, you know as well as I do, that there's going to come a time when you're wrong. It's at that time when you'll have to suffer the losses of your poor choice involving that risk opportunity. That's the way Capitalism works. If the risk pays off, you're rewarded by consumers. If it doesn't, you're going to suffer losses because consumers won't buy-in to what you took a risk on. Notice the complete lack of government involvement in all of that. It's all private. Companies fail all the time.

Take for instance the auto industry. Try finding a Datsun or Studebaker these days. You might find one on the road every now and then, but they aren't being made anymore. That's because their particular risks weren't rewarded by consumers. What happened to them? They often times have two end results. The first is simply closing down. If no one wants to absorb the company and its workers, even if it's to put them to work doing something completely different than what they were doing, then it's going to suck, but hey, they were going to be out looking for new jobs anyway. The second is when literally everyone around looks at your company and stands in awe of just how magnificently you have failed. When you see that particular look on someone's face, you'll never forget it. It's indescribable, but amazing to see. Literally no company wants to dirty it's hands with what has happened to the company, so it is allowed to simply die. The workers move on to other jobs in the same industry, or choose to learn new skills and get into something different.

It's inevitable that panic sets in when a company knows it's plummeting to earth. They will look for anyone to help them out. That's desperation for you. They'll look for merger opportunities with other companies (like in the first example), they'll look at infusions of cash from banks and private parties because sometimes all they have is a money issue (if it's a huge money issue, this will inevitably fail because they obviously have managed to choose wrong with every risk opportunity and the market is telling them so), and when all other options have failed, they will eventually look at the biggest money holder here - the US Government itself.

This is where it should immediately stop, but it doesn't. See, these companies paid a lot of money to their representatives and senators in the form of campaign contributions and now that they are in a real bind regarding their company, they are going to call them up and tell them that they've given them all this money, now it's time to get something back from them. These legislators will then go to Congress and to the media and will give everyone a sob story about how hard its been for this company. They'll tell everyone why there's literally no choice but to give a huge amount of money (sometimes in the form of government contracts) to this company to keep it afloat. There's your socialism. Congress did it. Well, Congress needs the President to sign off on it, so he's got to be in on this socialism too. Bailout Package, anyone?

Here's what they won't tell you though. When those small companies are allowed to fail, all those workers will have learned a very valuable lesson. They'll know the risks that simply must not be taken. They'll start banding together. They'll look at that silent company or manufacturing plant, and they'll start talking about all the things they always wished they could do (risks) that the company never would allow them to do because it wasn't part of that company's "plan". These people often times get service field jobs while putting together their bigger plan. They approach investors with this plan, and sometimes even banks. If the investors like the plan and the risks being taken they will invest. Old banks collapse, new ones are formed. Old auto makers collapse, new ones are born. That's the way of Capitalism. The problem stems from Congress, or the President himself, choosing that these dying companies need to be saved, rather than allowed to fail so they can generate a bunch of smaller companies that will one day probably be as big as the original. Maybe they will, maybe they wont. It all depends on the risks they want to take and whether or not consumers will applaud or loath that risk.

Government is the one to blame here. They are the ones that failed to read the Constitution and discover that there's literally nothing within it granting them the power to intervene at all. They simply choose to ignore that document because so many Americans don't even know what's in the Constitution. They don't want to educate the kids on what's in there because they know it'll eventually get them called out on the carpet for all the Unconstitutional things they are doing. Government is to blame for this fiasco. These companies should have been allowed to fail and die. Then they could have been bought up by succeeding companies, or the workers could choose new professions or start up a new company.

Santelli has nothing to do with this failure. Everyone in that room behind him has nothing to do with this failure. Uncle Sam has EVERYTHING to do with this failure. As for the corruption and scams in the bank, look at the SEC (also Uncle Sam) for their failure. Santelli knows this. Most of us know this. Sadly, most Americans remain willfully ignorant.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 11:37 AM
link   
www.youtube.com...



K. Denniger DESTROYS Obama Spokesman Who Was Attacking Santelli (Video)



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Thanks for adding the link. K.D. put things in perspective rather well. Gibbs is completely brain-dead for his comments the other day and I look forward to the Chicago Tea Party and standing beside Santelli with all the other real Patriots in this nation. The government is completely out of control, and apparently has no idea what the Constitution is and that it is a limit on Government, not a limit on the People.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by bpg131313
 


you are welcome,bpg,

I didn't like Gibbs the moment I heard him speak, he is way out of his league, Obama is as well.

What a mess.


[edit on 122828p://bSaturday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Starred. Good find. Thanks for that link.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   
well one problem i have with the mortgage plan is that it doesn't focus on reducing the PRINCIPAL owed by borrowers.....all it does is extend the terms of the loan...and also the plan won't be available to those in the hardest hit areas of the housing fallout where prices have fallen so much and people are waaay underwater

Santelli is just upset about how the whole thing is handled....namely that all people are being rewarded for bad behavior.......including bankers, politico's and joe 6 pack's who were for a lack of a better word Dumb/player by lenders , while some were just unlucky (unemployment) .....but obama's plan is NOT really bailing out speculators ...i don't get it if rick thinks this will help them out of his pocket

[edit on 21-2-2009 by cpdaman]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by bpg131313
 


Yes, moral hazard, if we were to have a free market (milton friedman way) as it is intended none of the banks should have been bailed out, all of the "bad banks" should have been allowed to fail but then the stress to the financial system as whole would have been too large which might have caused many of the good banks to go under as well. It's a hairy situation, i expect more bank failures in 2009, there is a huge CDO market that needs to be settled and other related derivatives. Banks also seem to think this, maybe not as severe as October 2008 but there is still a credit crunch, the TED spread down to almost normal levels but not much lending activity is happening, the banks are scared still, while the FED is pumping more money into the system trying to resolve.

Check out the monetary base, St Louis FED series.
research.stlouisfed.org...

TED spread Bloomberg (difference between LIBOR and T-Bill)
www.bloomberg.com...



[edit on 2009/2/22 by reugen]



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   



Just thought I would leave this here.
Enjoy.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by BlackProjects
 


well, then by gosh!!...which would you prefer they do. take back the money that they have thrown around to the banks and such for those nice salary and bonuses, or well, just help out the homeowners now......which, might at least make less need to throw more at the banks?

we aren't a pure capitalistic economy, and we aren't a socialist, we are a hybred, and that is much worse! we lean toward the socialist when it comes to big business, but when comes to actual people well, then there's all this hoopla about retaining our capitalistic society!
you want a capitalistic economy, fine, but it goes both ways, it's not socialistic if you are talking to ceo's and such, but capitalistic when you are talking to the actually people footing the bill for the big business socialism!



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
www.youtube.com...

Rick Santelli Responds to The White House Propaganda Minister-02/20/2009

OK eveybody, stop paying.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Yes this administration are bullies.

Yes Obama has a temper.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
chicago tea party site

They have a site set up with a feed for updates.

I think they are planning on having it for real.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by j2000
chicago tea party site

They have a site set up with a feed for updates.

I think they are planning on having it for real.


awesome, thanks






top topics



 
43
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join