After JP Morgan Rips off the world - DOJ drives the getaway car

[kimmy]

The thing about Gerald Celente is that he's an idiot.

He said there'd be a total economic in 2014. He also said that about 2013. He said that by 2012, there would be armed revolution and food riots in the US. I can't find what he said about 2011, but I can guess. He said that in 2010, there would be (wait for it) an economic collapse. He said that the economic collapse in 2009 would be even worse than the economic collapse in 2008. In 2008 he said there'd be an economic collapse, which isn't much of a prediction considering the collapse was already underway by late 2007.

Here's Gerald's predictions for 2015:

http://usawatchdog.com/2015-forecast-manipulation-depression-and-war-gerald-celente/

In a nutshell, he says the economy is all just a big shell-game and it's all gonna collapse. He's not saying when, this time.

You can see why Gerald Celente is a big celebrity on websites that carry lots of ads selling Doomsday Prepper gear to paranoid people.

-k

[GostHacked]

The economy is a shell game. We've seen major banks collude to rig interest rates. That's been documented. We've seen the banks steal people's money and homes. We've seen the banks destroy entire nations (Greece is just one example). The rigging of the global oil markets also reveal the shell game. Bankism is the word, and the next stage is bail ins and negative interest rates.

Remember who got the biggest welfare checks ever dished out by government? That's right, the banks. That money is taken right out of the American citizen's pocket.

The only reason that the collapse has been put off a bit were the multiple quantitative easing (aka welfare for too big to fail). Capitalism would have allowed those banks to fail. But instead bigger banks got bailed out while buying up the smaller ones that were in trouble. Sure a few banks went away, but that consolidated more money power into even fewer hands.

Celente calls it correct when he terms this fascism. It's socialism at the least, fascism at the most.

[Michael Hardner]

The economy is a shell game.

Are you saying the economy isn't real ?

The complaints you have are all over the place, as typified by this statement:

Celente calls it correct when he terms this fascism. It's socialism at the least, fascism at the most.

Fascism and socialism aren't gradients on some scale - they describe different types of government. They can both be in place in a government, or neither. And making a statement like that without explaining it makes the reader think that the writer doesn't understand these terms.

[GostHacked]

Are you saying the economy isn't real ?

The economy might be real, but the money we use within that economy is backed by nothing more than future labor. Meaning entire nations are indebted to banks. And if the nation is not making money, how does one expect to pay it back? Unlike you or me who might struggle to get a nest egg together for retirement, that does not happen on a national scale.

The economy just does not make sense to me. Sure I might be a little esoteric in my statement regarding the economy, but it seems really hard to define what it is and what exactly drives it. Are deliberate manipulations of the markets a component of how the economy works?

Banks collude to manipulate interest rates. This has become a fact since the crash in the USA in 2008. Actually they are still doing that. Even as recent as the past month or two when a couple UK banks were deliberately manipulating the LIBOR rates. Is that the make up of a sound economy?

The complaints you have are all over the place, as typified by this statement:

Fascism and socialism aren't gradients on some scale - they describe different types of government.

Well please describe the type of society/government where millions lose their homes and the banks get a bail out for allowing it to happen in the first place? All sanctioned by the government. Is that the actions of a so called 'democratic' nation? Does that represent capitalism?

[Michael Hardner]

The economy might be real, but the money we use within that economy is backed by nothing more than future labor. Meaning entire nations are indebted to banks.

Banks are just one entity that can invest in a country's future.

And if the nation is not making money, how does one expect to pay it back?

What nation is not making money ?

Sure I might be a little esoteric in my statement regarding the economy, but it seems really hard to define what it is and what exactly drives it.

I am also trying to build up my knowledge.

Are deliberate manipulations of the markets a component of how the economy works?

Sure, I guess. Crime... embezzlement are all parts of it.

... a couple UK banks were deliberately manipulating the LIBOR rates. Is that the make up of a sound economy?

The question of whethercorruption exists is different than the question of whether it's making a significant impact.

Well please describe the type of society/government where millions lose their homes and the banks get a bail out for allowing it to happen in the first place? All sanctioned by the government. Is that the actions of a so called 'democratic' nation? Does that represent capitalism?

Sorry, is this a response to my criticism of calling the economy fascist/socialist ? If so, then it's a non sequitur. You're calling on me to defend our system of government based on me pointing out that your general complaints are lacking ?

[GostHacked]

Banks are just one entity that can invest in a country's future.

Banks are the ONLY thing that can invest in a country's future. I cannot do it directly, I have to go through a bank or financial institution to accomplish that. I cannot just give my money to a nation and draw up an agreement regarding the investment. It's all done for me by the same people rigging the markets.

What nation is not making money ?

Making money is one thing, the ability to pay off and not increase the national debt is another thing.

Sure, I guess. Crime... embezzlement are all parts of it.

But they should not be part of it.

The question of whethercorruption exists is different than the question of whether it's making a significant impact.

Shall we revisit the crash of 2008?

On a smaller scale, we can look at Detroit's economic issues. I'd like to know if there is a city in NA that is NOT running a debt. Municipal debt, provincial/state debt, national debt. More money is owed than actually exists on record.

Sorry, is this a response to my criticism of calling the economy fascist/socialist ? If so, then it's a non sequitur. You're calling on me to defend our system of government based on me pointing out that your general complaints are lacking ?

It's actually an easy question. Failing corporations get bail outs because of their illegal practices wiping out trillions of dollars while ruining millions of lives and the government caves in to the demands. Is that democracy? I've defined it before as corporate fascism. And that is exactly what it is. Otherwise, in a free capitalistic society, those banks would have been allowed to fail. General Motors would have been allowed to fail. But the taxpayer is now on the hook for trillions.

I've seen the argument that GM paid the money back. Where did that money go? Who was it paid to? Did it help pay down the national debt? Or did someone else get the money?

[Michael Hardner]

Banks are the ONLY thing that can invest in a country's future. I cannot do it directly, I have to go through a bank or financial institution to accomplish that. I cannot just give my money to a nation and draw up an agreement regarding the investment. It's all done for me by the same people rigging the markets.

You can buy bonds.

Making money is one thing, the ability to pay off and not increase the national debt is another thing.

Canada is able to do that.

But they should not be part of it.

Okaaaay... so the original point is lost.

Shall we revisit the crash of 2008?

You keep trying to frame this as me defending the status quo in its entirety. But I only came in on the thread to ask you about your comments.

Failing corporations get bail outs because of their illegal practices wiping out trillions of dollars while ruining millions of lives and the government caves in to the demands. Is that democracy? I've defined it before as corporate fascism. And that is exactly what it is.

Of course it is, because it's your definition.

I've seen the argument that GM paid the money back. Where did that money go? Who was it paid to? Did it help pay down the national debt? Or did someone else get the money?

Those are easy questions to answer if you just Google it.

[GostHacked]

You can buy bonds.

And what are they worth if the country cannot honour them because the government is in perpetual debt?

Okaaaay... so the original point is lost.

Is corruption acceptable only when it is legal to be so?

[Queenmandy85]

All I can say is you've all made me very happy to live in Saskatchewan, even with the -38 windchill. I have a bank I can trust and governments (even though I didn't vote for them) that are okay at least.

[Michael Hardner]

And what are they worth if the country cannot honour them because the government is in perpetual debt?

Again, the original point is lost.

Is corruption acceptable only when it is legal to be so?

All of this is strawman arguments. It's not a discussion if I refute/question your points and you just come up with ponderous questions over and over again.

[GostHacked]

Again, the original point is lost.

How so?

All of this is strawman arguments. It's not a discussion if I refute/question your points and you just come up with ponderous questions over and over again.

Asking you what you think IS part of a discussion. Taking to task the so called legalized corruption is not a strawman argument, it is an important key to all of this. It's what allowed the crash of 2008. This is the works of the banks and the governments colluding with each other. That is not representative of a democracy OR a republic.

Did any heads roll at JP or any of the other major banks? Why did we not see many others like Madoff go to jail for gaming the system?

Besides, asking questions is how we get answers.

[Michael Hardner]

How so?

You say: Banks are the ONLY thing that can invest in a country's future. I cannot do it directly,

I point out that that is not the case.

Your original point is now lost, but you don't concede it - instead you just ask another question.

Maybe you could give an overarching summary of what you're trying to say, or - alternately - what you think I'm trying to say, and what you think of that.

Taking to task the so called legalized corruption is not a strawman argument, it is an important key to all of this.

Key to what ? I didn't say that legalized corruption is acceptable, though you seem to think so.

Besides, asking questions is how we get answers.

We need to do so intelligently, instead of just emotionally. Emotion should call us to action, ie. thinking and doing.

[GostHacked]

You say: Banks are the ONLY thing that can invest in a country's future. I cannot do it directly,

I point out that that is not the case.

Fine, you get a point for that.

Your original point is now lost, but you don't concede it - instead you just ask another question.

I had several points, and only one you have been able to prove me wrong. You seemed to have ignored the rest based on me being wrong on one point.

Maybe you could give an overarching summary of what you're trying to say, or -

I guess you don't really read my posts.

alternately - what you think I'm trying to say, and what you think of that.

Unlike other posters on this board, I will ask you for your thoughts and opinions. Otherwise would be dishonest.

Key to what ? I didn't say that legalized corruption is acceptable, though you seem to think so.

Silence can be viewed as acceptance. If you have a stance, take it. Don't be wishy washy about it.

We need to do so intelligently, instead of just emotionally. Emotion should call us to action, ie. thinking and doing.

Sure, I'll try this thinking and doing. Alright, what do you propose be done with the corruption that exists within government and the financial sectors?

[Michael Hardner]

Silence can be viewed as acceptance. If you have a stance, take it. Don't be wishy washy about it.

Fine. Let's end this now: I'm against corruption, bailouts of corrupt corporations, unnecessary gifts to corporate entities, as well as the cozy relationship between such companies and politicians.

what do you propose be done with the corruption that exists within government and the financial sectors?

I follow the Sunlight foundation. They are doing a lot in this area. Everyone should be responsible for being informed on what is happening.