25 Reasons To Absolutely Despise Bankers And Their Minions

[Cliffy]

Are they ALL like this? More probably much like most professions, some real A$$holes and some decent people!

Like everything else, it is like a pyramid sceme, good folks on the bottom. The higher up you go the bigger the azzholes.

 

[JLM]

Like everything else, it is like a pyramid sceme, good folks on the bottom. The higher up you go the bigger the azzholes.

Good analogy Cliffy. And the higher up you go, the bigger the impact the sh*t has when it falls! -

 

[darkbeaver]

CANADA INCLUDES CYPRUS-STYLE "BAIL IN" HAIRCUT FOR CANADIAN DEPOSITORS IN NEW BUDGET PLAN.

From Page 144: “The Government also recognizes the need to manage the risks associated with systemically important banks—those banks whose distress or failure could cause a disruption to the financial system and, in turn, negative impacts on the economy. This requires strong prudential oversight and a robust set of options for resolving these institutions without the use of taxpayer funds, in the unlikely event that one becomes non-viable.”
Translated, Without the use of taxpayer funds means via depositor funds.

And the meat of the provision, from Page 145:
The Government proposes to implement a bail-in regime for systemically important banks. This regime will be designed to ensure that, in the unlikely event that a systemically important bank depletes its capital, the bank can be recapitalized and returned to viability through the very rapid conversion of certain bank liabilities into regulatory capital.

My take on history is not as thorough as some would prefer but...seems to me the reason we ended up with banks had to do with not wanting government or any other type of ruling faction to control money. A couple of hundred years later banks have gotten out of control themselves and the lack of controls we have expected governments to have over banks is back firing on us. Till...along comes the IMF and it took many attempts with many countries to finally succeed in dissolving a bank perfectly riddled with corruption. Here comes the foundation for the legal framework needed to dissolve a bank due to corruption as opposed to just bankruptcy. What are they going to do with the bad bank they are left with? Why they'll dissect it and it should be interesting. IMO. Every country that has had the opportunity over the last few years to deal with the corruption while their economies crapped didn't. Not only did the governments of these respective countries fail to heed the call so did the citizens by not pressing for real change. At the end of the day though, better to find a small country where the effect would be limited in terms of citizen suffering, the international financial effect huge but with the mess being contained to 1 bank. Always test your toes in the water first...it could of been Greece but people fought the austerity programs and not the corruption. Too bad. This is a sad/happy moment, there is no way to get control of the banking systems of the world without pain.

A couple of my own points

1. Putin seems quite content to lose money in Cyprus, he seems quite confident it will cost the EU a lot more in the end.
2. The IMF pushed the ECB into this.
3. Since the late 1990s the IMF has been a G7 initiative.
4. Between the IMF and ECB, keep your friends close but your enemies closer.
5. If things go as planned and investor confidence takes the expected hit the EU will end up bankrupt.
6. I think of it this way...WW1 screw me once shame on you...WW2 screw me twice shame on me...who is the biggest power in the EU...why it's Germany.
7. Who wants to create a situation where no private bank or government can control international finance? The IMF. Of course considering the difference between the American dollar being the international currency as opposed to the international credit system being that has been growing in popularity over the last few years due to our current understanding of how dangerous it is to rely on either governments or banks to be honest in a position of control. An international union with a universal international currency is what we need to prevent countries from using their currencies to manipulate and bribe. Everyone keeps their sovereignty and their currencies for local use, it is would only be international expenditures and transfers that are under the credit system.
8. We need to try something new and there has been no other suitable option put on the table.
9. Everyone loves to hate the IMF but at the end of the day the hard line stance of this group is accomplishing something. It is a different kind of monster compared to what it was before the 1990s.

Of course the internationalist solution," AN INTERNATIONAL UNION" A monopoly by any other name. One world power, NWO crap. Of course this currency would be unique, a never before seen phenomena of a currency unable to be used to bribe or corrupt. No doubt you will want to call it The Universal Bank of Earth.

They say you can't hate someone you don't love. Maybe you two should get a room and work it out.

We should hate bankers, at the beginning, this is natural but as Christ and Krishna have instructed, " love thine enemies" because they show you exactly the right thing to do, every time without fail. So while we initially hate the bankers we eventually give thanks to them in true acts of love for educating us so thoroughly as to their deep seated evil. So we should all love the bankers to pieces, literally.

 

[Historic]

You are right in a way in that it is all in the interpretation regarding the tax payer/depositor dilemma. At the end of the day though it is the amount of money deposited in a bank that dictates the play. If the funds are not there...my guess is that even though you are seeing and reading about this crossing of the line your money is in the bank. With any luck depositor fear will tank the EU ( I also disagreed whole heartedly with the North American Union proposed for here) and we should learn a lesson from it. Banks have the governments beholden because of our lack of real desire to stop using them as we do. We love credit...

The Glass Steagle Act (hopefully I didn't misspell it) is a good example of what experts declared was needed to keep banks in check at one point in time. They were right.

As to the usefulness of unions of any scale. With anything it is a mixture of good and bad. I am not opposed to something new, or rather different, as long as we the people do not just sit back and let it happen because we know in our hearts the decisions that will be made are the ones we want. What I want to see is a table with every country represented who wants to do business with other countries. Yes, a union, one where the globe works together from individual places and points. It is the only way to peace.

I want to see a country's currency kept within it's borders because I think this to be the only way to stop inflation, the only way to slow mass production by keeping the value of that currency stable. The possibilities are endless. It would take an international currency system separate from a sovereign currency system to achieve this. It would not be a big change due to the fact that we all have our own currency already but the value of that currency would not be affected by the value of other currencies because of its isolation. It would be the value of any international currency belonging to that country that would float.

 

[darkbeaver]

Sep 10 13:18

COMER VS BOC


Lawsuit against the Canadian federal government brought by the 'Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform (EST. 1986))'
(COMER — Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform) in an attempt to return the issuance of the currency to government.

 

[tay]

Most of Canada's financial regulators are walking away from a proposal that would have legally required people giving financial advice to put their clients' "best interest" ahead of their own financial benefit and their employer's bottom line.

A bulletin released today by the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) says all provincial regulators except the Ontario Securities Commission and the Financial and Consumer Services Commission in New Brunswick will scrap talks they've been holding for the past five years to introduce a mandatory best interest standard.

That standard would apply to anyone providing financial advice to the public — from bank employees to workers at investment firms and brokerages.

"This is a very disheartening day," said investor advocate Ken Kivenko. "Things are definitely not working for Canadians who trust the financial advice they're getting."

The vast majority of investment "advisors" in Canada are actually salespeople — only advisers spelled with an "e" have a legal duty to act in a client's best interest.

'A very disheartening day': Most of Canada's regulators abandon plan to put your financial interests first - Business - CBC News