How America Can Free Itself From Wall Street

Posted by freedomforall 5 months, 3 weeks ago to Business
22 comments | Share | Flag

Local governments have been in bondage to Wall Street ever since the 19th century despite multiple efforts to rein them in. Regulation has not worked. To break free, we need to divest our public funds from these banks and move them into our own publicly owned banks.
SOURCE URL: https://www.truthdig.com/articles/how-america-can-free-itself-from-wall-street/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    From the article

    "Wall Street banks triggered a credit crisis in 2008-09 that wiped out over $19 trillion in household wealth, turned some 10 million families out of their homes and cost almost 9 million jobs in the U.S. alone..."

    From Wiki, the Community Redevelopment Act of 1977, [The CRA] is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to help meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] Congress passed the Act in 1977 to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4][5] ..."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communi...

    The word encourage should be replaced by coerce. The stability of the housing market rested on the 20% down and verifiable income standard. In and around 1993, a Democratic Congress and President turned the screws to the lending industry to abandon that standard. Ayn Rand pointed out several times that in a free society monopolies cannot exist in the absence of governmental force. So the true cause of the meltdown was the Government/ Federal Reserve/Crony Capitalists complex. Upending this complex will probably require a second American revolution
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by chad 5 months, 3 weeks ago
      It wasn't just that the industry abandoned the standard, it was required to abandon the standard with implementation of regulations that demanded the banks make loans to individuals that normally would not have been granted the loans by the banks. When the banks realized they were getting loans that would lower their own credit ratings they developed ways of divesting themselves of these bad credit risks by lumping them together and pretending they were all good and selling the them as credit default swaps. The real trigger of the meltdown was in 2007 when the Federal Reserve began raising the interest rates every month increasing the payments people had to make on their interest only loans and adjustable rate mortgage loans. People who could barely qualify and make their payments were suddenly unable to make their payments and the housing bubble began to unravel.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 5 months, 3 weeks ago
        I agree. You could have added the corruption of the rating agencies as shown nicely in the movie The Big Short. In general, the banking laws have progressed steadily toward Karl Marx's fifth commandment viz. "5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
        The banks have a great deal of control over government actions. They have been playing this same game for a century. They knew what was going to occur and exactly what would happen. They perfected this game overseas and now have brought it to America. We have been bailing out the banks for this same kind of thing for decades. Yet we still allow these scum (banksters, politicians, and bureaucrats) to do it to us.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
      Do you really think the Democrats did anything to the financial laws without the approval of Wall St and banks?
      Wall St has been controlling the Treasury for 100+ years.
      Did government contribute to the problem? Of course they did. They always do, but the guiding hands were from the banksters.
      (BTW, I do not agree with a lot of what the author proposes overall. She is far too trusting in government.)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by j_IR1776wg 5 months, 3 weeks ago
        According to G Edward Griffin in The Creature From Jekyll Island, The 1910 secret meeting was attended by these six men:

        1) Nelson W Aldrich, Republican "whip" in the Senate, Chairman of the National Monetary Commission, father-in-law to John D Rockefeller jr.

        2) Henry P Davidson, Sr. Partner of J P Morgan Company

        3) A Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury

        4) Frank A Vanderlip, President of the National City Bank of New York representing William Rockefeller

        5) Benjamin Strong, head of J P Morgan's Bankers Trust Company, later to become head of the System

        6) Paul M Warburg, a partner in Kuhn, Loeb, & Company representing the Rothschilds and Warburgs in Europe.

        It wasn't the bankers controlling the government, nor the government controlling the bankers. It was a team effort, a successful conspiracy between the Bankers, Socialists, and Crony Capitalists to place a large number of humans on Earth into perpetual debt slavery. The greatest theft in history which continues and will continue until it is stopped.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by mccannon01 5 months, 3 weeks ago
        "(BTW, I do not agree with a lot of what the author proposes..." Thank you for adding that caveat line, freedomforall. I was beginning to think, maybe, you were advocating nationalization of the banking industry or some leftist hacked your account.

        I'd rather say it was time to boot the Jekyll Island Creature back to the infernal regions from whence it came and get the elected representatives of con-gress to pick up their Constitutional responsibilities and get the country back to a real currency. Then let the banks fend for themselves.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    The article is nothing more than a typical socialist hit piece. Not a single fact, no evidence for a multitude of claims. All done to fan the flame. Without getting into hours of debunking each accusation, I have just one question - what exactly is the problem with Wall Street or Wall Street bankers? The accusation has been thrown into the fray on the assumption that bankers have more money than I, thus “sharing” it is good for me, thus I beat myself in the chest with my virtue as an oppressed proletariat and demand the bankers’ scalps, while completely ignoring that the bankers have lend me the money to create all those niceties that we enjoy and the lack of bankers would have resulted in the 3rd and 4th World that surrounds us.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
      The bankers do not lend you money that they have earned as producers. They lend you fiat created from nothing under the infernal Federal Reserve Act which was created by bankers to insure their own wealth, and limit any competition. Bankers aren't risking their own capital in your loan, but they are being rewarded with loot as if they were. It is a complete scam. Please read The Creature From Jekyll Island.
      (I don't agree with the author's "solutions". She is promoting a socialist agenda, but many of her criticisms of the banking system are valid.)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by strugatsky 5 months, 3 weeks ago
        If they had to earn it as producers, they wouldn’t be lending money, but their produce. If you are planning on building an enterprise, like a supermarket, for example, receiving a loan in the form of iron ore wouldn’t be very helpful. I would think that this is self-evident and I am surprised that you’ve stated your argument in this form. Money is the medium of exchange, not a product in itself. An iron ore producer is useless to the economy without a banking system to distribute and exchange the iron ore. Without a banking system we would still be in the Dark Ages, for it was precisely the banking system, as created by the Templars and the Jews that got the Western World moving. In any case, no one is forced to take loans. But it is quite hypocritical to take the loan, spend it, and then complain about paying back. The housing crisis was mostly the result of banks being directed by the government to give loans to people that could not pay them back. Whether the loans were used to buy more expensive houses than they could afford, or Mercedes, or vacations, or cities that financed politically dictated or promised benefits that they couldn’t afford, how convenient it is to blame the bankers. Btw, this is not new; throughout history there were many cases of kings borrowing and then chopping heads off the lenders (usually Jews), with an inevitable result of decades of economic decline or stagnation following. We’ve seen this before.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
          We are not talking about the same thing. As I understand you, you don't like people to default on debts that they have voluntarily taken on. If that is your point, I agree. I also agree that an honest banking system is a good thing, but we system you are defending is not such a system.
          If you want to understand why the banking system we have is a looters abomination please read The Creature From Jekyll Island. It explains it much better than I could even if I had the time to do so. BTW, this isn't about Jews vs the rest of the world. It's about thieves using government to establish a cartel that loots from everyone.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by strugatsky 5 months, 3 weeks ago
            Once again, to emphasize my original point - perhaps the book you've referenced sheds a different light on the banking system, but unless the article is intended for a book club that just read that book, isn't it the author's job to present evidence that the bankers are guilty, or do we assume that automatically?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by strugatsky 5 months, 3 weeks ago
            I haven't read that book; maybe it will change my opinion. I have, however, seen other banking systems in other countries that, compared to the US system, I would call legalized mafia. However, the absence of a banking system, or a very weak one, leads to economic and cultural stagnation wherever it happens. Clearly, no system is perfect, but our is much better than anything else that I have seen. What ticked me off about the article is the author's total lack of acknowledgement that the money was received, enjoyed, spent, and now, as if out of nowhere, the bankers want it back! What nerve! And the solution? To alleviate government-created problems, let have more government regulations. And no less importantly, the author's multiple allegations, no, presumptions of guilt, really, without ever presenting any evidence. This is the typical socialist formula, so well polished by TASS and Pravda, now translated into English.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  DeangalvinFL 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    Ok folks. Nobody nor no locality is obligated to borrow from any bank.
    Hello!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    To blame a bank or a bank system is foolish.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 months, 3 weeks ago
      The average man who wants to provide a safe home for his family has very little choice... unless he wants to completely piss off his wife. There it is. Wives decide and they care more about snuggly safety than liberty. (Yes, I generalize;^)
      You really need to read The Creature From Jekyll Island.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 5 months, 3 weeks ago
    I think that one of the turning points in absurdity happened as Wall Street attempted to make itself into a business by creating all kinds of derivative products they tout as investments, but which are nothing more than pure speculation. Another turning point was when some stocks started being offered with no dividends attached, meaning that there was no real value - only speculation - attached to investment in a company.

    Imagine Tesla or Apple or Microsoft or Amazon if they had to pay dividends on their stock offerings - the price of interest on the use of someone else's investment moneys... I think we'd see a wholesale change in the entire market if stocks went back to being what they should be: investments rather than speculatory instruments. There is a reason why many call the Stock Market gambling - and they are spot on in my opinion.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo