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.

 

Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?

page: 10
96
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Why aren't the people who cashed their equity in to buy Tvs and new cars in jail either? It took two to tango folks. The irresponsibility was hardly skewed here...




posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by ogbert


If that is the case; then why don't we try them for owning other corporations, under the slavery laws? If Corporations are considered people, then, how to they get away with owning other corporations/people?


I say lets go there too. I think they havent yet been tried like this because they have so slowly been worming their way into personhood incrementally. But hey they got a big boost this spring, with the right to free speech, so I say, lets use it against them. You bring up a fabulous option. I love it.

I honestly dont think any lawyers have yet thought of really pounding them with the personhood issue, but I think thats where we should head. You want to be a person? You dont just get the benefits of that, you get the liabilities too.
What class did you take that says owning corporations is like owning people? Owning shares in a corporation is complicated, but could hardly be considered owning a person. There are many types of entities that you can have an ownership stake in, some are to minimize estate taxes, protect assets, but mostly it is to preserve wealth and control your money from the grave.

I used to enjoy reading this website but it seems lately that there are a lot of misguided and uneducated posts here. Sorry, don't mean to be a buzz kill. This whole topic is kind of a waste of time. The market allowed for these imbalances and now it is correcting itself. It is merely history repeating itself. Hardly the first time it has happened.


edit on 18-2-2011 by White Locust because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
All Banks play a part in running the Federal Reserve and Government.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 





Why isn't the gent who makes $40K/year who signed a legal contract to get into a no money down loan for $300K which he could never afford be in jail? Because he's a "little guy"?.


Because of the 13th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution and numerous state's Constitutions directly addressing debtor's prison. The loans were granted to the DEBTORS.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 





Why isn't the bleeding heart government official who mandated that banks give loans to folks who could not afford them in jail? Because his intentions were noble?


Because the "bleeding heart government" did it LEGALLY. Check out how laws are made.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 





It is no different than saying that a rich guy who robs a bank deserves a greater sentence than a homeless gent who robs a bank. Both are equally guilty and both deserve scorn and punishment


Right. Since the poor guys didn't break the laws, but the rich guys did (by illegal trading of fraudulent, misrepresented and incorrectly handled loan packages), the rich guys should be held to account. If a poor guy FRAUDULENTLY falsified his mortgage application, he should be held to account as well.

JUSTICE SYSTEM = FAIL.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 02:39 AM
link   
It's probably not the popular opinion, but it wasn't Wall Street that did this, though they knew this system would collapse probably before anyone, and many people warned about it.

This was the government's lack of regulation, and predatory lending on the part of Commercial Banks, all the while egged on by the Investment Bankers.

So in a way you could say, Congress enabled it, the Bankers egged it on, and the Lenders at your local banks were the people who actually did something they shouldn't have done, and they knew it was crazy, they were probably the most greedy part of this entire scheme.


To take you back in history, this whole MBS/ABS securitization of mortgage loan payments was actually a fantastic idea and allowed many new people to get homes that probably never could have got them, and then things got out of hand.


Also to refute a statement made by the OP, the White House is hardly ever filled with "BANKSTERS" so you call them, in fact Rahm Emmanuel might be the only White House big-gun to ever whole a reputable position at an Investment Bank and actually make $ doing so (he made $14 million for Perella Weinberg thanks to his Clinton connections).



To straight off the bat blame Wall Street is hilarious. It was at bare minimum the fault of 4 to 7 parties, credit rating agencies, FNM, etc etc..

Wall Street Investment Bankers work 100+ hours a week sometimes, and make probably anywhere from the same wage as a Burger Flipper to double the wage of a Burger Flipper. CEO'S VP's and MDs make much much more than this, but that's because they are the few and proud that stuck it out and made the investment bank $.


Investment banking is a VITAL part of a healthy and unhealthy economy, Investment bankers have done alot of good, and I'm not sure why they are being demonized.

Look no further than the Federal Reserve for the real criminal here...the Banks never asked for money...Paulson DEMANDED the Congress let him print it...

It is the Federal Reserve that is deliberately driving this country into bankruptcy. Every dollar they print devalues the money you hold in your bank further, that is stealing plain and simple.

Do not confuse Wall Street and the Fed, though they do have some ties, and sometimes they do help each other out a bit, they are certainly, certainly not one in the same.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by bricmpt
 


Neither party broke laws in the vast majority of cases. The banks were trading legal instruments and folks were buying homes based on the easy cash made available by trading those instruments. Try to get past your hatred of someone who works in the financial sector and do a bit of homework.

Also, when someone signs a loan document to obligate himself for a debt that he is unlikely to be able to pay, he is making a good faith statement that he will in fact pay. That is tantamount to fraud and that is a crime.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


they were calling people and telling them that they believed whatever they said. if you said, "i'm making 100k a year, and have been at the same job for 10 years, and have no outstanding debts," you could not only get the loan with no proof of your ability to pay it back or proof that anything you said was true but you could get a better loan with lower interest rates and lower payments (and they were telling people that as well -- the bigger the lie, the friendlier the loan will be). then attached a huge balloon payment in fine print, so the loans would explode on everyone at the same time.

that's like.........



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Thats fine. The gent who lied is guilty of fraud and the bank that loaned him the cash is an incompetently run bank. Both got what they diserved. The fraud got kicked to the curb out the house he lied to get into and the bank got stuck with a bad debt they had to write off and a piece of real estate that nobody wants to buy.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by wildshoetwt
 


oddly enough, they called me every day, around 50 times a day, 7 days a week, night and day. different companies (hundreds of them). around 70% of the callers had arabic accents. i was like, "where are these mortgage companies?"
several of them called me over and over again. and i would tell them no, every time, but that wouldn't stop them from calling me the next day. and the day after that. this went on for almost a year.
they were offering 1% interest rates. you can just imagine how many people got pulled in by 1% interest on 30 year mortgages or 1% seconds, especially since you didn't have to prove you ever qualified and could knowingly lie to make the deal sweeter.

to me, that sounds like a hostile take over of our economy.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
double post
edit on 18-2-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 



that guy, wiliam black, in the moyer interview, says the same guys who did all this, are still in charge of our banks. and are currently running the biggest ponzi scheme in history, dwarfing madoff's ponzi scheme, by many orders of magnitude.
edit on 18-2-2011 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Sorry, but I can't hack Moyers. I did read Black's book though.

He's smart guy, but he looks at things from the context of what is being done wrong. Its a narrow intrepretation of the problem. I've worked with regulators and thats their job - x is supposed to be done this way and its not, hence there is a problem - and he's right. The challenge is that at a conceptual level he offers no solutions. It is similiar to saying that someone is going to hack the next Microsoft OS and thats going to be terrible. Of course its going to get hacked, thats what hackers do. Of course there are going to be folks out there manipulating the banking system to rip folks off, folks have been using the banking system to rip folks off since before folks were using tulip bulbs as currency.

The real challenge is that the guys on Wall Street are smarter than the folks in government by a factor of 10. They will always find out ways to engineer legal financial instruments that push the risk envelope and create havoc in the market and folks will get burned on those things. What happens is that the tools in the government regulatory bodies can't stand that the folks on Wall Street are making a couple of $million/year and try to over engineer the regulations. That only creates more loopholes and the cycle never ends.

Instead, the government needs to take a step back and implement higher level, simple regulations and force 100% compliance of those. Basic things that are simply not done today, for example an investment bank can legally advise its clients to do one thing while it is at the same time doing the opposite with its own money. In other words, tell their clients to move heavily into, say gold while at the same time selling gold short anticipating a drop in gold. In that way, they push the gold market up should their clients take their advice and then when it corrects their short position is worth all the more. That should be illegal, plain and simple. The government also needs to take over the rating of debt and securities and get it out of the hands of firms like Moodys and S&P who have shown themselves to be at least marginally conflicted. The government needs fewer, more simple regulations around which there is no ambiguity as to whether or not they have been complied with.

The government also has to treat serious financial crimes seriously. The financial markets, what ever you think of them are critical to the running of our society and the integrity of those markets is critical - almost a national security level of criticality. If someone knowingly and willfully takes steps to undermine the credibility of that market place, then they have committed a serious crime, with serious jail time and not the kind of prison where you play tennis. The kind of prison where you fear for your life every day. If that were done, you would see a lot more folks dropping dimes on shady things that were going on in their firms



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by MITSwagger
 


It's the other way around.....the Federal Reserve runs the banks and the government.....



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Regardless of the explanations of who did what, or who said what etc, we can look at the outcome which is the most telling thing.

You have a record number of people on foodstamps, homeless from loosing their house etc

But on Wall Street, those poor banks that were forced by the gun to loan out money are making record profits and passing out the bonuses as usual.

Its just like with Obama, don't listen to what he says but what he does and what the outcomes are. Everything else is BS.

So, on Wall Street, the party continues on with the DOW reaching new highs everyday, and the banksters enjoying their profits, while mainstreet suffers. Thats the outcome and the result of their actions and is what should be looked at.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Straight from the horse's mouth

Matt Taibbi pulls back the curtain from Rolling Stone




www.rollingstone.com...

edit on 18-2-2011 by Aquarius1 because: Added link



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 





Neither party broke laws in the vast majority of cases. The banks were trading legal instruments and folks were buying homes based on the easy cash made available by trading those instruments. Try to get past your hatred of someone who works in the financial sector and do a bit of homework.


Nothing against anyone who works honestly in any field for their money. All inclusive. But, perhaps all legal fields of endeavor are not honest, or ethical in and of themselves? It is my perception that there are entire fields that rely on deception, doublespeak and thievery in order to function. High level bankers, lawyers, politicians all must be corrupt souls in order to make a profit in deeply skewed systems. If you don't want to be this type of person, than find another line of work.

Corporate "entities" that lobby our lawmakers to rig systems so that their buddies become millionaires? Banking system that steals from the common man while handing CEO's 300 times a worker's salary? My problem is with them. And it does border on hatred.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


they were calling people and telling them that they believed whatever they said. if you said, "i'm making 100k a year, and have been at the same job for 10 years, and have no outstanding debts," you could not only get the loan with no proof of your ability to pay it back or proof that anything you said was true but you could get a better loan with lower interest rates and lower payments (and they were telling people that as well -- the bigger the lie, the friendlier the loan will be). then attached a huge balloon payment in fine print, so the loans would explode on everyone at the same time.

that's like.........


A borrower like that you depicted, IMO, is guilty of fraud and should be prosecuted. Maybe the lender should be in trouble legally as well for not exercising due-dillagince (sp?). I mean, if one profess to be a lending institution, is it not my duty to do so in a responsible, professional manner? I used to own a business that did types of home repair and I understood that it was my responsibility to do my homework in order to make sur the customer was getting GOOD work done. They trusted me with being a professional. Call me old-fashioned, but the bottom line isn't a measure of ethics or morality.

Perhaps my attitude of honesty in making money is why I am not wealthy. If so, than I am proud to be "poor".



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 





Instead, the government needs to take a step back and implement higher level, simple regulations and force 100% compliance of those. Basic things that are simply not done today, for example an investment bank can legally advise its clients to do one thing while it is at the same time doing the opposite with its own money. In other words, tell their clients to move heavily into, say gold while at the same time selling gold short anticipating a drop in gold. In that way, they push the gold market up should their clients take their advice and then when it corrects their short position is worth all the more. That should be illegal, plain and simple. The government also needs to take over the rating of debt and securities and get it out of the hands of firms like Moodys and S&P who have shown themselves to be at least marginally conflicted. The government needs fewer, more simple regulations around which there is no ambiguity as to whether or not they have been complied with.


Sounds like you know your stuff. I agree, especially the last two statements. Seems to me that the whole game is corrupt from the top. I hope improvement is on the way from somewhere. Well, I can always hope.



new topics

top topics



 
96
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join