Greece wipes out Citizens Debt!! Tells Bankers to suck it

It comes down to responsibility and ethics. I never owed anything other than my college loans which I paid back within 4 years after graduation by working full-time while attending college full-time. I spend cash money always and never deal with credit unless it is for my businesses needs. Do you become a dead beat and just neglect your OBLIGATIONS to fulfill your promise to pay monies back to your creditor?

Can you live with yourself knowing that you are indeed a walking deadbeat amongst honest people who TCB properly by living within a well established and defined system of principles and morals? Do as you will if you choose to commit financial suicide by either neglecting debts or carelessly entering into contracts with ill intent. Karmic forces are in play even in the financial sector and can inflict severe harm onto those who choose the route of the Grifter's guild.

Do I like dealing with banks?...no! I prefer to deal with venture capitalists and angel investors when it comes to funding projects or business ventures. I cannot go to any of my clients and tell them to go stuff themselves due to business ethics. What is right is right...Don't borrow the money unless you can pay it back. Money is so cheap to borrow now-a-days people look at it as a crime not to borrow the money, but do not complain when the snake you have picked up bites you for you knew the nature of it before you chose to engage with it.

This Greece story will be most interesting to follow if true.

reply to post by edmc^2

world wide year of jubilee, for people, for businesses, and for countries...all debt wiped clean.....
so there wouldn't be any creditors bugging the banks for their money.. the only thing they would owe would be the salaries to their employees and the money in personal and business accouts...or we could wipe them clean and well issue new money, and makes sure that it's spread around enough to keep things running....
ya, they have to give the people their homes and forget about getting payment for them...but in return that brand new, multi-million (or billion) dollar building they just built is theirs free and clear....even china is in debt up to their necks!!! just the outstanding business loans in canada is more than all the money that canada has in ciruculation..
just how do you expect it all to be paid back???

if gubberments are able to write off a debt - then maybe...just an outside chance...they could write off my mort- gage. MORT=death in French.
the banking industry is set up for debt.
the old testament was right.
a 1 time usury fee only and 'they should be forgiven their debts every 7 years...'
now i just gotta find my passport and...gee Greece sounds nice...

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by edmc^2

 

world wide year of jubilee, for people, for businesses, and for countries...all debt wiped clean.....
so there wouldn't be any creditors bugging the banks for their money.. the only thing they would owe would be the salaries to their employees and the money in personal and business accouts...or we could wipe them clean and well issue new money, and makes sure that it's spread around enough to keep things running....
ya, they have to give the people their homes and forget about getting payment for them...but in return that brand new, multi-million (or billion) dollar building they just built is theirs free and clear....even china is in debt up to their necks!!! just the outstanding business loans in canada is more than all the money that canada has in ciruculation..
just how do you expect it all to be paid back???

This sounds like a NWO to me and who will be the controlling power for this new type of system? Are we heading that way - forced by a self inflected situation?

G8 - G20 - IMF - UN - which one of these institutions/organizations will be in charge?

Who will gain the most power if this plan becomes real / is implemented?

Surely the "bankers" will always make sure that they are way ahead of the game.

just how do you expect it all to be paid back???

That is the problem - there's no way to pay it back. Forced by a self inflected situation.

So I guess a new system for doing business will need to be implemented - one that everyone MUST agree on - no choice.

One that even a die hard Occupy Wall Street proponent can agree on.

What system I dunno.

Unfortunately whatever system they come up with - the rich/politicians/bankers will always get the upper hand and become more powerful while the poor will be enslave and always get the short hand.

Like they say - power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

A brave new world or a scary one?

Cheers.

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow


That was a bit cryptic wasn't it... Sorry, I was in a hurry but felt the need to chime in.

What part of the comment would you like me to clarify?

BTW: I won't even go into the whole corrupt banking world. There isn't anyone on the face of the planet that thinks they don't deserve some sort of comeuppance... However, back to our main programming:

Lifestyle vs. Life and Death choices -> It just means that I differentiate between the person, like one of the previous posters, who got dealt a really sucky hand with major medical bills and huge debt right out of the gate. There isn't anything that person could have done to avoid the debt besides die. And frankly I'm not that heartless.

I suspect though, that the majority of the people who would be trying to take advantage of this made poor lifestyle choices. They borrowed, or put another way, promised something they had not earned yet in order to have immediate gratification. The implicit fallacy in their assumptions is that things stay the same or they only change for the better (new raise, bonus, large tax refund, lottery, etc...).

Living within your means is a character issue. Preparing for hard times during times of excess is a character issue. Pledging something you don't have or haven't yet earned based on a faulty assumption is idiocy and it should't be rewarded. Think grasshopper vs. ant proverb... I'm sorry - but the ant did the right thing by preparing for the bad times during the time of plenty. The grasshopper was an idiot and if my memory serves me correctly he even mocked the ant.

So, regardless of the wrong done by the banks/financial system it is morally bankrupt to make a pledge and then break it. If you willingly signed up for the debt (excepting the poor chap with the medical bills) then pay it back. To do anything else is to live in dishonor.

reply to post by pilot70


Are you sure? I thought I had heard once that for each dollar actually deposited with a bank they get to loan out something like five dollars. The other four dollars just being made up out of thin air. If this four dollars does not belong to the bank then whose is it? Who will not get their money back if the bank can not collect that four dollars?
I concede this is all beyond me so perhaps you can clear it up a bit for me.
If the money the bank makes up does not belong to the bank who does it belong to?

reply to post by HighMaintenance

An excellent sentiment but why then don't the bank's stockholder's feel that way. They invested in banks. The banks gambled and lost and now I who received no share of the bank's profit when things were going well and who would have received no share of the profits if the bank's gambles had paid off am told that I and a few million other tax payers who had nothing to do with this have to cover the banker's losses????
I can not help but see the bankers here as a bunch of high rollers at the crap tables in Vegas. If they win they get lots of money but if they lose they say they'll go broke and will not be able to afford to visit Vegas and lots of casino workers will be put out of work. They are "TOO BIG TO FAIL" and therefore the casino staff workers should all chip in and pay off their losses.
This would be laughable except it seems to be working for them.

reply to post by JimmyNeutron

I get all of that, the analogy of the grasshopper and the ant, but it is an analogy that addresses only one aspect of a very complicated subject.
I will give you an example.
An economy that is expanding is looked upon as a good thing, by governments, the media, economists, pretty much everyone. How can that economy expand? It can only expand through debt in the current economic model that we live under, meaning the U.S. doesn't mine gold and then convert it into coins and then inject it into the economy. It expands through debt.
So, our government encourages borrowing, and makes tax policy based upon people and businesses borrowing, and in fact, to STAY in business you must provide the goods and services that the economy demands, SO, you MUST borrow to pay for the facilities and infrastructure to supply those goods.
Have I lost you yet? I hope not.
The bottom line, is, that it is a WAY OF LIFE, personally and in the business world. By design, By the architects of our society.
So, what is the downside?
To keep this scheme alive you have to print money, and devalue the currency whereby your dollar buys less and less and less, until we are where we are now. People don't earn enough to pay basic expenses.
People are not the architects of this system that is designed to doom them to economic slavery, they are merely pawns trying to survive within a structure they were born into.
To be a smart pawn, you play the system as well as the system plays you.
That means, morality ends where fiat money begins, pilgrim.

Originally posted by Puck 22
reply to post by pilot70

 

Are you sure? I thought I had heard once that for each dollar actually deposited with a bank they get to loan out something like five dollars. The other four dollars just being made up out of thin air. If this four dollars does not belong to the bank then whose is it? Who will not get their money back if the bank can not collect that four dollars?
I concede this is all beyond me so perhaps you can clear it up a bit for me.
If the money the bank makes up does not belong to the bank who does it belong to?

Yep - that's fractional banking. The reality is that yes, it is money created out of thin air. There originally are no assets to back it. It exists purely as a way for the bank to profit - essentially getting paid interest on money that never existed which was used to purchase an asset that presumably has tangible value that the bank then "owns" even though the money didn't exist in the first place. To make matters worse - the money used to repay the phantom money is real and tangible (I've heard it compared to a unit of labor, but that is a topic for a different thread). THE BANK WINS EVERY TIME - It really is a MAJOR scam.

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow


You are correct in that this is a very complex topic that is really impossible to simplify to a thread level discussion. However, it's fun to try.

Would it surprise you to know that I both follow you and agree with much of what you say... Where we diverge in opinion is the ethics of it. I reiterate, even though the system is an illusion and is used to perpetuate an enormous scam on a brainwashed public, two wrongs do not make a right. In the universal sense, I don't care what you call it, karma, reaping what you sow, or whatever, living in dishonor will come back on you.

So I'm not impugning your analysis, just the basis you are using to justify your personal ethics.

reply to post by GeorgiaGirl




it is not just a case of the "responsible" and the "irresponsible"

People can be affected by negative equity and job losses without being "irresponsible"


The salient point, metioned already, about the money which has been spent to shore up the banks- if that had been divvied up to every household, debts would have been lowered, there would have been an increase in spending power and the economy would have been revived!

reply to post by maestromason




sinners and stones etc, people's paths to financial problems are not black and white- kudos to you, but I think worrying about "honour" with some of these huge banks is not something I would get too worried about..........

reply to post by Resonant


I agree completely. That's what bothers me. The delusion has been so finely crafted that not even the tiniest crack is visible to the average individual. To those that do not examine the system, but seek only to thrive within it (pretty much everyone), every flaw is accounted for by "that's just the way the world works. What are you some kind of idiot or something?" But when it comes down to it, our society does not suffer at the hands of its murderers, rapists and thieves, it merely creates them through the sheer depravity of our system of finance. It encourages predatory behaviour (loans, mortgages, etc.), thinking of self before all else, the worship of the dollar over the TRUE wealth of this planet which lies in it's oceans and valleys, not in your bloody wallet. The way it has been crafted through education and social stigmatization, makes it very easy to control everything from how we act, what we buy and who we associate with. Anyone who thinks that they dress or act a certain way out of individuality needs to realise that they are just part of a niche that is just as controlled as everything else. Even the anti-mainstream is owned by the cabals now, so they now use rebellion as one of their tools as well. Just look at OWS for proof. They started out with promise, but it didn't take long for things to get.....shall we say, strange?

Originally posted by blueorder
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl

 

it is not just a case of the "responsible" and the "irresponsible"

People can be affected by negative equity and job losses without being "irresponsible"


The salient point, metioned already, about the money which has been spent to shore up the banks- if that had been divvied up to every household, debts would have been lowered, there would have been an increase in spending power and the economy would have been revived!

edit on 2-2-2012 by blueorder because: (no reason given)

Yes, I know.

It's the irresponsible ones I have a problem with.

reply to post by blueorder


Sadly enough, I agree with you. Real stimulus would have resulted if the masses would have received the bailout.

reply to post by JimmyNeutron

There are NO ethics in an unethical system. Period.
If YOU have ethics, within an UNETHICAL system, YOU lose! Always, and forever.
The only answer is to not participate in that system.

If you cannot understand what I am saying, then copy and paste it, and read it later. Truth never goes away.

Karma does not mean that you pay back a loan. Karma can walk, or run, away from a loan, or a debt. Karma relates more to how you relate to people in your life, REAL people, not some illusion of "debt"...

Karma does not enter into this discussion in any way whatsoever.

If I were to go to Citibank and get a credit card with 30K of credit, and I spent it helping REAL people on the street, actually helping people in need, and I couldn't pay it back, then who suffers? Actually, NO ONE.
Citibank never loaned anything. It is a SCAM.
]

reply to post by JimmyNeutron


actually, we bought the house we did because the payment was LOWER than the any rental unit suitable for our needs!!!!

maybe next time around they won't create a welfare system with a giant crack down the middle of the income spectrum that people fall into and then find themselves crap out of luck, no way to live!!!!

reply to post by JimmyNeutron

Yep - that's fractional banking. The reality is that yes, it is money created out of thin air. There originally are no assets to back it. It exists purely as a way for the bank to profit - essentially getting paid interest on money that never existed which was used to purchase an asset that presumably has tangible value that the bank then "owns" even though the money didn't exist in the first place. To make matters worse - the money used to repay the phantom money is real and tangible (I've heard it compared to a unit of labor, but that is a topic for a different thread). THE BANK WINS EVERY TIME - It really is a MAJOR scam.

Every country has the same banking system of creating money out of nothing. The only difference is in some Islamic countries which have what is called Islamic banking where there is no interest charged, but some large processing fees are charged and added to the principal that needs to be repaid, effectively making them not very different from those that charge interest.

It is hardly a scam, even if those who don't understand it keep screaming so.

The primary purpose of money is to make commerce possible, not to act as a long term store of value. Meaning if everyone is convinced money can be exchanged for something they value, they accept it as payment for something of value. If the volume of commerce is going up, either velocity of money has to go up or the volume of money has to go up. Since people don't change their frequency of payments often, the velocity of money is difficult to change. Hence the volume of money has to go up to make larger volume of commerce possible. That is not possible if the volume of money is tied to the volume of commodities like gold or silver. That is why the current monetary system in every country is delinked from any commodities and the volume of money circulating controlled based on the need for it.

Without modern banking that creates money out of thin air and yet retains the people's faith in the currency to act as a token of value, there would never have been the explosive growth in wealth brought about by industrial revolution. Money by itself doesn't create wealth for sure, but it enables growth in wealth creation when there is a potential for it.

Interest payments are not to enrich the bankers. When they can create money out of nothing, why do they need the same money paid as interest by borrowers to enrich themselves? Interest payments are an incentive to the borrower to participate actively in the economy and help generate wealth. Without such an incentive why should a borrower choose to repay the loan when it costs him/her nothing to indefinitely postpone the repayment? Interest is a way of ensuring that the loans go to productive individuals rather than non-productive ones.

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow

If I were to go to Citibank and get a credit card with 30K of credit, and I spent it helping REAL people on the street, actually helping people in need, and I couldn't pay it back, then who suffers? Actually, NO ONE.
Citibank never loaned anything. It is a SCAM.

Why don't you go to your neighbourhood shop with an IOU note signed by you and try to exchange it for anything you value, food, clothing or something else? Then you will know exactly what role the banks play.

In your example why limit it to 30K? Why not 30 million or 30 billion? Why just you? Why not everyone including the guys you were so generously helping? Sure no one gets hurt, but the money stops buying anything useful for anyone and that includes you.

The banking system and its rules exist to retain people's faith in the currency.

reply to post by Observor

In your example why limit it to 30K? Why not 30 million or 30 billion? Why just you? Why not everyone including the guys you were so generously helping? Sure no one gets hurt, but the money stops buying anything useful for anyone and that includes you.

Actually, that is precisely what IS happening, and that is why the banking system has been completely corrupted. The banksters are basically running up the credit card helping themselves and their friends and leaving us with the bill to the tune of trillions.
Look, if you want to give these criminals your hard earned money after what they have done to our economy, by all means do so.