Then this is a problem. It's awful hard to go after someone that cannot be defined.

If it's CFO's of energy companies. Target.

CFO of energy broker companies. Target.

Top level management of steel companies. Target.

You can't change something that you can't define. Which is why this "movement" is going nowhere until somebody somewhere says "hey, let's take down Wall Street CEOs." Right or wrong, at least it's a target that everyone can focus on and create plans towards destroying. Until then, it's just a bunch of upset people who don't really know what they are upset about, they just know they're upset.

Defining a target does not take a week. It takes a few short words, example: Jamie Dimon.

No, the point was I'm not listing them.... if you're so far disconnected from what's going on and actually need someone to list them, then that person, probably shouldn't be posting here at all but rather out learning it...

and yes, it would take me weeks, with an S to list and list the 1000+ companies, 1000's of scams that took place, covering trillions of dollars in America, let alone world wide... across so many ceo's, board members, execs, etc. This is far from just a few people.

It would probably take me years, as it took years to build it up so they could do it.

I could spend a month on AIG alone, and another month on the companies related to them that allowed, build, and created the scam.

Truly, if anyone is confused on 'who' 'they' are, then they really should get out and start reading up, because no forum in the world is going to show you how fucked we are because of them.

This is a good question scottybuzz :thumbsup

When I was youngster I'd regularly play Monopoly with my father, brothers and sisters. There was one cheat, the rest didn't know, he always wanted to be the banker, we were grateful to him as we saw that job as boring. He'd always win, even when you'd feel like you had done better. One day, I spotted him thieving money from the bank, he denied it, I told everyone else, but they wouldn't believe it (the cheat was our father). After I first called him out, others started to keep a closer eye on his banking, it wasn't long until others spotted similar thefts taking place. We then banned him from being the banker, he tried playing us again, but he couldn't win anymore and quickly lost interest; he never played Monopoly with us again.

My point is, if we had just focused on our own game and hadn't examined and discussed the bigger picture, we'd have kept on losing no matter how good our gaming strategy was.

If we don't keep an eye on the Elite/Bankers and share information with each other about them, then the losers will either be us or our descendants. :2 cents:

There is a lot of noise and finger pointing in the media, I have yet to see any obvious signs of any widespread criminal activity or any signs of "them" trying to screw everyone... some actions that have been taken may seem criminal in hindsight, but when taken in context, they all made business sense...

There is likely some shadiness going on, "this asset is practically riskfree" is really no different than "we convert 1 in 50"... but stuff like that is pretty much par in any industry...
You are making it sound like "they" are plotting to screw everyone, I don't see any evidence of that..

Crazy how you can be so vague, ambiguous and condescending,.. all while ignoring a short, concise and well articulated point which you are clearly unable to address directly.

When to buy what and when to sell? Please en-light us.

AIG was pure all out fraud, scams, lies, manipulation, deception, speculation, and set to win even in a gain or loss, a win win for them either way - while shit tons of people took a massive loss, all money sucked away, nothing given back..

It was pure criminal activity, nothing more, nothing less... and it's only one of many many many examples, and even many many many related subsidiary companies that also took part, and even duplicated it.

Business sense? They took your fucking money and gave it to them, after they frauded everyone, then paid themselves out of that money too, that makes business sense to you?

So if you did that, you wouldn't be in jail? Righttttttttt.....

spot on. :thumbsup Look at the names i quoted on 12clicks question "Please, dopey, name one of the blood suckers".

If only people minded their own fucking business and their own wallets.

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

I'm not familiar with specifics, and I bet you neither are you... but the fact is they were a successful company providing valuable financial services for close to 100 years before they collapsed... how do you explain that?
a. they were running a fraud operation for 100 years?
b. last ceo is a shady fuck that turned the company into a shady operation only recently?
c. they were too "leveraged" and when values of certain assets they held dropped too much they collapsed?

all your posts just contain vague claims, you haven't posted any specific facts yet...
Can you spell out why you think AIG was a fraud operation?

written by someone WHO doesnt even understand the most basic grammar. and you expect me to believe you have ever read a book about economy ?:error
dont even waste my time..

The untouchables.

Oh I know enough, and Google knows even more, you should try using it...

Why do I need to explain it and what does it matter?

a) Never said they were.
b) Not only the ceo is going down for this.
c) No

Because I find it funny that you're kind half claiming that AIG hasn't done anything wrong because I won't spell it out for you.

:1orglaugh

It has been for at least six years
AIG's Six Year Saga Of Alleged Fraud
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_178545.html

Dammit grumpy..... it's way better to string them along. :)

copy/paste:

Suppose that every day, 10 men go out for beer and the bill for all 10 comes to $100?

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this?

The first 4 men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The 5th would pay $1.

The 6th would pay $3.

The 7th would pay $7..

The 8th would pay $12.

The 9th would pay $18.

The 10th man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that?s what they decided to do..

The 10 men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. ?Since you are all such good customers,? he said, ?I?m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20″. Drinks for the 10 men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first 4 men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other 6 men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by 6 is $3.33. But if they subtracted
that from everybody?s share, then the 5th man and the 6th man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man?s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the 5th man, like the first 4, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The 6th now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).

The 7th now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).

The 8th now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).

The 9th now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).

The 10th now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the 6 was better off than before. And the first 4 continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

?I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,? declared the 6th man. He pointed to the 10th man,?but he got $10!?

?Yeah, that?s right,? exclaimed the 5th man. ?I only saved a dollar too. It?s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!?

?That?s true!? shouted the 7th man. ?Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!?

?Wait a minute,? yelled the first 4 men in unison, ?we didn?t get
anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!?

The 9 men surrounded the 10th and beat him up.

The next night the 10th man didn?t show up for drinks, so the 9 sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn?t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

Funny pic either way, but wrong corporations.... it kinda makes me sad that someone actually created this.

and all that stuff is financed by banks. They forgot to mention that in the pic.

So is most of the world we live in.

You forget to mention that in your rhetoric.

And a few of those committed fraud, crimes, theft, and help set it up and push it to others, helping bankrupt a nation and its people.... which is the actual problem and not corporations that provide jobs and services.

Probably why you don't see down with Gillette protest signs, but hey... that's just me making a guess.

I hope the top 10 rich people in the world go tomorrow in porn business.
They can buy themselves the best camera's, buy the most beautiful girls, the best webdevelopers in the world and sell their porn for $10/month because they have money enough.


And maybe the other 99% little suckers on here will realize then how fair capitalism is.

Please enough with this. let me put it to you this way. If teh US was taken over by say China the millionaires/billionaires lives would change much more than some poor person. In other words the rich have more to gain by the US being free than anyone one else so it's logical they pay more. I really don't want to hear rich people bitch about taxes when the people risking their asses on the front lines so the rich can still be rich make so little they need food stamps.

I don't know if you just don't follow the news or you're just being willfully ignorant? Take the Koch brothers for example, one of their companies was exposed paying bribes to win contracts, they thwarted a US trade ban with Iran to sell them millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment(this is a country that sponsors global terrorism), they rig prices, constantly run afoul of enviromental regulations and they've spent more than $50 million to lobby in Washington since 2006. They also fund Americans for prosperity which funds the Tea Party which pays people like Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck to speak. David Koch is in fact the founder of Americans for Prosperity. These two are like real-life fucking supervillains, and they're worth about $30 billion dollars a piece.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...ran-sales.html


As for who to blame for the finacial crisis, Time magazine did a piece on that:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...877339,00.html

If you truly think that George Soros is not funding just as much insidious crap on the left with just as much financial and media resources as the Koch brothers, if not more, then you are allowing yourself to be completely duped IMHO

Start with Soros and Buffet.

George Soros = House of Rothschild Agent :2 cents:

worked great for the soviets...

because the top 1% and the government (none of which are in adult...) are making it harder and harder to succeed in this world. they are threatened by newcomers. don't be fooled, these people do not want you to succeed. they want you to be a worker bee, not a leader.

I watched this piece of a documentary a few years back and kept it in mind in case the guy is right. He's analysing and interpreting information that was released by the MoD back in 2007 as to how they see the world changing over the next 30 years. Interesting listen...

Plenty of 1%era in adult.
It ain't that hard to do.

While it is true that a lot of 'big business' owners have always had a tendency to try and restrict access to the market, they only started to succeed at doing this once they realized they needed the government.

Contrary to what they want you to believe (of course they're not going to be honest about this) a lot of the laws and regulations officially aimed at protecting the consumer are actually aimed at protecting a few big corporations. (either by transferring liabilities to the public/tax payer or by making all kinds of rules that apply to newcomers, but not to older companies or by making false advertising legal (example: if a product contains less than 0.5% of certain substances, they are allowed to advertise those products as 'containing 0% of that substance') etc.)

The sad part imo is that once people become aware of this, a lot of them start asking for more government intervention, while it is government intervention that is the main problem. 'Big business' owners with bad intentions love government intervention, because they control who writes the laws and how they are implemented. Most people would then of course respond by saying that we need to get all lobbyists and corporate money out of government, but to think that is possible is naive at best. 'Big business', money interests, common criminal gangs, big unions and politicians have always intermingled and scratched each others backs.

A blatant example would be Tammany Hall and William 'Boss' Tweet. Tweet ran a 'Fire company' in New York in the 1800s. A Fire Company was synonymous for a gang back then (think "Gangs of New York"). He got into politics to make more money. After a while he basically ran New York. The only thing that has changed since then is that they have learned to be less obvious about this.

The corporations have helped create the structures of wealth production, but as their only concern is profit, this causes terrible damage to societies in the form of low wages, concentration of wealth, destruction of the environment, creation of a class society, war between countries of raw materials etc.

The Revolution will keep the factories, but change the ownership, making them work for the benefit of the whole society not just the wealth of the 0.1%

Yea...... because that has worked so well every time it has been tried. :1orglaugh

You're late to the party...

The 1% is not a reference to the top 1% of the countries tax payers, it's a reference of those in control that are too big to fail. And nobody in this Industry, not you, a processor, or the entire Industry combined together reaches that 1%, or did, at all.... which is why 100% of our Industry is in the 99% that got fucked over by the 1%.

Corporations don't "cause low wages". Employers are able to pay the wages they pay because employees ARE WILLING to work for those wages.

If an employer can't find enough people to work for him, there's only one thing he can do: make the job offer more attractive (more benefits, better hours, increased wages).

</law of supply and demand>

There's nothing wrong with corporations per se. There is something wrong with organizations (such as certain corporations) that commit acts of aggression such as forcing people to buy their products/services or using force to prevent others from entering the market.

There's nothing wrong with greed. Greed is what drives every human being who has a job or wants a job. Greed is what drives every human being who by the end of the day wants to have improved his current condition. Greed is good.

The bad thing is aggression. The bad thing is trying to improve your own condition at the expense of others. Aggression is the violation of other people's property rights. Without absolute property rights, we'll return to pre-human conditions. Without property rights, we'll return to the animal kingdom where the strong eat the weak.

Greed is not what drives successful people... passion is.

Greed is what makes one man step over a dieing man for a dollar, no part of greed is good... not for yourself, business, or the world.