epiphany   10 #37 Posted November 6, 2011 The mainstream media has long left the public with distorted opinions and no alternatives.  Of course, the holding companies that own or have shares/interests in these media companies are also likely to have shares/interests in the large financial institutions. Naturally, therefore, the media companies would not want to promote any conflicts of interest that would undermine the interests of their stakeholders and benefactors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ANGELFIRE1   10 #38 Posted November 6, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15611429 Suddenly we have £40 billion spare for the IMF. I wonder how people seeing their pensions erroded or those losing their jobs will feel on learning we aren't quite so broke after all.   Aye, Dave Camaroon has declined to give the EU any brass to assist the dead Euro. But has elected to give the IMF £40 billion. One small problem here, the IMF are giving brass to the EU to assist their problem with the Euro. Call me cynical if you will, but isn't boy Dave giving the EU brass by the back door?.  Regards  Angel. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
green   10 #39 Posted November 6, 2011 Brilliant article from todays papers about City of London Mayor using public funds of at least a £100 million which assists greatly a property company, whom he's having a sabbatical from, whilst he is the Mayor. Go figure. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/06/city-property-benefit-developer-mayor Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
donkey   10 #40 Posted November 6, 2011 When you say public ownership do you mean on a decentralised, co-operative basis or full on state-owned nationalisation? There are strong arguments for both, but there is always the chance of successive governments selling back into the hands of private shareholders for a quick buck, which the cynical among us would say will just start the whole destructive process again.  As long as our economy is dominated by banks that operate on the basis of a single bottom line, the problem will never go away and yet more problems will arise. Ethical banks are the future of a sustainable free market economy.  Definitely cop-operative, but you have a point. Any government involvement in the system would only reinforce it and put off the necccessary fundamental reforms even longer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
chem1st   10 #41 Posted November 6, 2011 I object first and foremost to the title of the thread.  Define money.  Money is a means of exchange, a store of value.  The banks have been bailed out with currency. This is not about money. This discussion relates to power and control. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
donkey   10 #42 Posted November 6, 2011 Brilliant article from todays papers about City of London Mayor using public funds of at least a £100 million which assists greatly a property company, whom he's having a sabbatical from, whilst he is the Mayor. Go figure. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/06/city-property-benefit-developer-mayor  No Way!! A senior politician with the fingers of one hand in the til, whilst holding up two fingers from the other hand. I've written to my MP about it, and he says it might be best if we don't rock the boat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
donkey   10 #43 Posted November 6, 2011 I object first and foremost to the title of the thread. Define money.  Money is a means of exchange, a store of value. The banks have been bailed out with currency. This is not about money. This discussion relates to power and control.  Well yes, money is merely the medium by which we are intimidated and exploited. That's evolution for ya! Why bang your chest and howl if you have alpha males in your employ who will do that sort of thing for you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
green   10 #44 Posted November 7, 2011 No Way!! A senior politician with the fingers of one hand in the til, whilst holding up two fingers from the other hand. I've written to my MP about it, and he says it might be best if we don't rock the boat.  We wont let them get away with it anymore.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ElasticMan   10 #45 Posted November 7, 2011 The banks and financial institutions have bent the rules of capitalism so that they cannot lose.  The have privatised their profits, ans nationalised their losses.  This means that the keep their profits (and pay virtually no tax on them), but when they hit problems it is the tax payer who bails them out. No other sector has this luxury. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
I1L2T3   10 #46 Posted November 7, 2011 The banks and financial institutions have bent the rules of capitalism so that they cannot lose. The have privatised their profits, ans nationalised their losses.  This means that the keep their profits (and pay virtually no tax on them), but when they hit problems it is the tax payer who bails them out. No other sector has this luxury.  Not even sure it's really capitalism. It's a framework for theft of public of public money. It's almost like a kleptocracy by proxy (politicians the proxy for the bankers) that also locks in deferred benefits for those who act as the proxy, e.g. Through lucrative city roles later on. Whatever it is it's seriously corrupt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
green   10 #47 Posted November 7, 2011 Not even sure it's really capitalism. It's a framework for theft of public of public money. It's almost like a kleptocracy by proxy (politicians the proxy for the bankers) that also locks in deferred benefits for those who act as the proxy, e.g. Through lucrative city roles later on. Whatever it is it's seriously corrupt.  It isnt capitalism. That died when we bailed them out, and subsidised them every since. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Keith Rich   10 #48 Posted November 7, 2011 Call me stupid, but where are the billions coming from to bail out the banks? Are they borrowing it from the banks?  And if we're just printing it, why can't we print the money, or some of it, to pay our debt?  Mugs like you and me of course:mad: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...