I'd rather have an aggressive, uncensored and passionate critique of the status quo than all of these "filtered for content", pro-establishment, paid off and captured journalists any day of the f'ing week. Considering how completely far gone this country is at this point in time, no amount of swearing or passionate prose really does justice to how badly things have been managed over the past 10-20 years. I'd still like to hear which journalists you consider credible at the current time. i.e. ones who aren't paid off or captured by special interests.
Where are the lines of people complaining that banks FORCED them to take loan money from them? ANSWER? They don't exist. People took more money than they could afford to pay back & blame the banks for trusting them. It's ok deadbeats, the banks won't do it again.
Really? So you see nothing wrong with firing the SEC guy who is trying to work on an insider trading case. It is Madoff all over again, the banks know/knew something is up but as long as they are making money, everything is fine and they don't want to know. And you don't see anything wrong with bankers and SEC people getting together for days?? When was the last time cops had a jamboree with burglers and robbers?? Look up "revolting doors" if you don't understand the conflict of interest..
lol - i saw RT too - matt admitted to being high(weed) when he wrote the GS piece in rolling stone. The article makes more sense now...
I will explain it to you, so you will understand. (well, probably not): The banks are financial professionals, unlike Average Joe, so they should know that poor bastard has no chance in hell to repay the mortgage loan. That is predatory lending, plain and simple. Just because Average Joe doesn't understand finances, that doesn't mean they should be taken advantage of.... Second, you might actually want to READ the article and comment on that one... Third, if you have a problem bailing your fellow citizens out, you probably have a HUGE problem with bailing AIG and the rest out, and that was on a 10 times bigger scale. So unless you bitch about AIG, don't bitch about Average Joe. And read the fucking article, it will enlighten you...
I slightly changed your quote, because it was irrelevant anyway. Discrediting the source, instead of dealing with the CONTENT. When you have something against what he wrote, come back, high or low.
I'll give you one example but there are plenty. How about Michael Hudson: http://www.amazon.com/Monster-Preda...WVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1298258423&sr=8-1
If a lender gave you a loan and said it was a fixed rate loan for 10% but then when the real paperwork came in, it was a 14% adjustable rate loan with 25% cap, what would you think? Some of these lenders deserve to be in jail.