I don't watch videos with comments disabled - they are usually sketchy / disinfo.
- Grow Mushrooms at Home
This was awful reporting. We are in deep trouble if this is what people believe. I'm tired of watching all the liberals complain about the bank bailouts when they're the ones who voted for them. Your time would be much better spent watching The End of the Road: How Money became Worthless (on Netflix or Amazon) or Hidden Secrets of Money (on YouTube).
A government big enough to provide you with everything you need is powerful enough to take everything away (from you).
Deregulation is the problem. Therefore we need more government.
Why was this posted? It's not like every fascist progressive media outlet hasn't been peddling this crock for years.
This documentary failed to explain why it's ok to let these organizations fail, and why the entire banking world was scared. They were scared because almost all of them know they are insolvent, and the whole thing is rigged. The only thing keeping it together is people's faith in the institution. Hank Paulson had a panic attack because he came too close to the entire scam falling on his shoulders. Thank God government is just as corrupt as he/they are, no doubt tax payers will bail them out.
I wrote about this not too long ago
"We have allowed our nation to be over-taxed, over-regulated, and overrun by bureaucrats. The founders would be ashamed of us for what we are putting up with."
to me this left out some major players. Bush's, Pelosi, Reed, Cheney, McConnel, Bernanke, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, just covered the surface and went after the head bankers of a couple banks. Didn't really go after Paulson and colored him in a good light at the end. Not that good as I see it!
It's time! Rand Paul 2016!
"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"
Before all of this happened organizations protested at banks and in DC to lower lending standards. These org's said tight lending was Racist! They claimed racist white banks kept standards high to prevent poor and minorities from lifting themselves out of poverty. Bill Clinton forced banks to lower requirements of mortgages. Plus he increased government backing to agenties like Fannie and Freddie.
Overtime most of the mortgages became guaranteed by the Federal Gov through Fannie & Freddie. So they were 100% safe for the investor. But 100% unsafe for US Tax Payer! Politicians sold us out not by lowering regulations but guaranteeing private investments. They "privatize profits socialize losses" to buy investors. They gave homes to poor to buy them off. Only regular conservative middle class got screwed because they were forced to bailout everyone.
"Top-down and bottom-up" strategy for change. Use of optics to leverage a small group to look like a big group. Demand progressive change towards a communist utopia.
The "plan" and driving force was "The Cloward-Piven Strategy". Communist started WWI to prompt a worldwide workers movement to overthrow capitalism. It didn't work. After WWI Marxists formed a group to study why it didn't work. This group the "Frankfurt school" found American workers were getting rich or middle-class too easily and didn't want Communism. 1930s-50s during WWII, Frankfurt school moved to Columbia University in NYC. The married team of Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven were American socialist. Piven from Canada parents Jewish Russians. Cloward got his masters' in Social Work in 1950, became professor in '54 and Ph.D in Sociology '58 all at Columbia Univeristy. Both wrote an article in the May 1966 issue of The Nation titled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty" advocating overloading social & welfare programs to economically collapse the USA.
Dude with a tan is just a pawn and weed didn't cause it. Capitalism and greed has nothing to do with the crash. We haven't live under capitalism since 1913... We have Socialist Macro-economics & Micro-economics is capitalist. Governments & Big Biz are socialist and individual people are capitalist. Within 3-7 years Gov will be Communist if we can't stop it.
F.F. Piven: www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQkdSj6arn0
To Covet breaks a Commandment but can't be proven.
Murder and theft might be prosecuted but he Federal Reserve funds Congress. Will Congress seriously bite the hand that feeds it.
Governments are all to happy to mortgage the people's future, like a child without a credit limit, Just chores to do.
Pass the Monsanto Bill -DONE
Pass NDAA -DONE
Pass a Gun Registration Bill
Pass Carbon Tax Kyoto Treaty
Pass Affordable Health Care -DONE
Invade Iraq -DONE
Invade Afghanistan -DONE
Pass PATRIOT Act -DONE
What did they want each of these times?
Free includes debt-free!
MELTDOWN: Some of the Straw men blamed for the Bankster-controlled Global Economic Collapse... that's yet to come.
Nice video in the right direction, though.
"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
But it's not. Greed or any other vice or emotion exists and always will.
The problem is aggression.
If your greed drives you to create a better phone, like Steve Jobs, so you can sell it to me and make lots of cash, then your greed made the world a better place.
If your greed drives you to use government guns to force me to buy your product, or subsidize your business, or place regulations to impede me from entering your market, then you are part of the problem.
Complaining about greed is about as useful as complaining about electricity. Electricity exists. The question is do you let it electrocute you or do you let it light your home.
Also not saying everyone is equally greedy. Also am aware that Jobs, as an example, also used government guns with regard to IP which is destructive. But where his greed had no recourse to government guns, it was a good thing, where it did have recourse to government guns it was bad.
Thanks for posting.
not greed, or selfishness.
What does it matter if I want something for myself, so long as I do not initiate aggression against someone in pursuit of it?
Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com
"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard
"so long as I do not initiate aggression against someone in pursuit of it!"
Greed is like jealousy: an omnipresent aspect of humanity. It is not something that can be "purged" from oneself.
Greed simply is, always and at the same level within society no matter what the "era" is.
Greed does not cause corruption. Only human action causes corruption.
Some people desire a simple life of abundance; having only what is needed. Having too much makes you a slave to your possessions and wealth. Jealousy is an emotion that most people outgrow when they stop depending on feed back from others about their worth. How I see it anyways.
Milton Friedman on greed.
As with anger, it is how one acts upon emotion that defines their morality. One cannot "outgrow" jealousy any more than one can "outgrow" joy. Indeed, it is cultural marxism which has been tricking people into thinking that they actually can "outgrow" human emotions to become a New Socialist Man.
but I am unaware of feeling greed, and in fact get rid of stuff so I do not have to spend time looking after it! I am also unaware of jealousy. No one has anything I want.
...who no longer "feels" greed or jealousy, you are kidding yourself.
gives one a little different perspective.
No place reaches higher levels of new-age gullibility than this pathetic town.
Spending a lifetime doing yoga & meditation is called spending a lifetime out of balance.
Greed is wanting the "unearned".. that is key. It doesn't really matter your goals, be they a simple life, or extravagant... it matters whether you stole from others or did you earn it. And by earning I don't mean taking time and planning a complicated theft... earning means providing value in exchange for value.
It makes absolutely no difference how much you want or how much you have... it matters that you don't steal in order to meet your goals.
If I want a new car, I am being greedy by definition. There is not one thing wrong with being greedy, claims to the contrary come straight from the Frankfurt School.
After I decide that I want a new car, I then decide what I'm going to do -- what my human action will be -- to get that new car. I can either be an economic activist and earn the new car, or I can be a political activist and demand regulations/laws which will allow me to get a new car without having earned anything.
There is economic activism and there is political activism, and only one of them is moral. There is no third way.
Greed is wanting more and more and it is never enough, as in wealth, or power.
Greed is when something becomes an addiction and you want tons of it instead of just what you need. That could be money, booze, clothes, sex, food. You want it even if it is killing you. Now that is greed in my thinking.
Go back a few steps and relearn.
Greed is most certainly not defined as "...wanting more and more and it is never enough, as in wealth, or power." If that was the term's definition, which human could possibly ever declare what is "enough" for the "needs" of others? That's like saying there's "not enough love" in the world. Who's ever gonna be in a position to coerce more love out of anyone?
Try to persuade others to desire less stuff and love more people, sure. Once someone has decided that they want something, though, their approach to acquiring that thing is all that determines their morality. The original greed -- the desire for the thing -- is irrelevant.
Greed is not an addiction any more than sorrow is an addiction. It is the h-u-m-a-n a-c-t-i-o-n associated with nature-given greed which determines one's morality.
"Greed is the inordinate desire to possess wealth, goods, or objects of abstract value with the intention to keep it for one's self, far beyond the dictates of basic survival and comfort. It is applied to a markedly high desire for and pursuit of wealth, status, and power.
As a secular psychological concept, greed is, similarly, an inordinate desire to acquire or possess more than one needs"
Note the words "dictates" and "needs" in there. Marxian, through and through.
Who, for example gets to dictate which kinds of human action are greedy and which represent the pursuit of permissible needs? Would it be someone who meditates and does a lot of yoga? Perhaps someone who is the world's most renowned scholar of Austrian Economics?
How about We The People?
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: