Let me get this straight...

People invest in Wall Street expecting a decent return on their investments. Wall Street takes said money and gambles with it, including the practice of betting against the people's investments in hopes that they will fail for their own gain. This practice, among others, have destroyed our economy and the people have lost trillions. Wall Street gets bailed out by the people and continues the same practices. Now the people are on Wall Street protesting said practices. But the people are labeled greedy/selfish/lazy while Wall Street gets a pass.

How can anyone defend Wall Street and not the people? Why are the people labeled greedy and not Wall Street? Can anyone help me explain the logic in all of this???

 

I suggest taking a basic Business or Eco course. Duh...

 

Very substantive response, thank you.

I'm assuming you are defending Wall Street. Please explain why.

 

You have placed in a nutshell what every Republican suspects to be the truth but will deny to their dying day.

 

Can you (yourself) answer, for the benefit those who don't have such a "course" convenient to them, or might make the mistake of 'believing' you have an answer to the question that was presented?

 

I tend to agree.

 

Well said...

 

Your are looking at the symptoms and not the source, which is the level of debate common today. Why was the housing market inflated? Why were there so many mortgages to securitize? Why were high risk assets created?

 

Lack of regulation on Wall Street which incentivized risky behavior and speculation most recently fueled by the the Commodity Futures Modernization and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Acts of 1999-2000.

 

I don't defend Wall Street but what I don't understand is how you can leave government out of the equation. You have little power over Wall Street and I don't see anyone exercising what power they do have (not buying the products of the companies you see as abusive, not investing, not playing the game). You have more power over government but where is the outrage over the corruption in government? Why didn't you stand up with the TEA party and oppose the bailouts? Why weren't you outraged when people from the same companies that took bailouts and received big bonuses ended up in the Obama administration? I agree with some of what Occupy Wall Street is saying and I will defend to my death their right to say it. To me it's not a left vs. right issue. Corruption and abuse is surrounding us in government, business and individuals. Think, investigate, understand, protest, discuss, listen -- that's what makes democracy work.

 

Time to get "money" out of government period. I'm sure enough that 'money' led the government to MANY of the stupid places it surely gravitated to.

Get rid of money in elections and lobbyists using money ALTOGETHER.

 

I admire someone who can write nonsense and follow with a plea for someone to explain the logic to him. Good luck.

 

I like this article for the nut and bolts on how they do it.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wall-streets-bailout-hustle-20100217

 

Thanks for the reference.

 

How about getting government out of money?

 

The two are married to each other. That's why the whole system is corrupt and cancerous. Wealthy interests OWN the government. The supreme court has said so.

 

I agree with most everything you said and I do agree that government does deserve some of the blame. My issue is that I hear so many criticizing the protestors while defending Wall Street, saying the people are lazy and want something for nothing...

 

Lack of education and mental illness are probably the culprits. There is no logic to it.

I think people who feel disempowered sometimes side with the most powerful entities they can find even if those entities are ruining their lives. You see it with abused wives in domestic situations who keep going back and trying harder to please their violent husbands and you see it with half the nation supporting economic policies to transfer larger and larger parts of their household income to the uber-rich. I have no idea why really, but it can't be too heatlhy and it certainly isn't rational. This leaves only irrational reasons available as choices.

 

So exactly what role does an extremely skewed market timing mechanics play in your mind, seeing as how consumption was encouraged by the government and the Fed through interest rates?

 

People invest in Wall Street expecting a decent return on their investments.

Oh really? Who or what is this nebulus 'Wall Street'? The investors I know purchase stocks or bonds from either certain select corporations or money market funds - which details the corportations that it invests in.

Wall Street takes said money and gambles with it, including the practice of betting against the people's investments in hopes that they will fail for their own gain.

Again with this mythical entity 'Wall Street'.

If you purchase stocks - YOU are essentially making the 'gamble' - epecially with high-risk investments. Now if you 'go long' YOU are purchasing a position in a security, such as a stock or a bond, and will profit if the price of the security goes up. In contrast, a short position in a futures contract or similar derivative means that the holder of the position will profit if the price of the futures contract or derivative goes down. If the security does not move up or down as YOU thought - you lose money. This is basic Eco 101 stuff. Jeez.

This practice, among others, have destroyed our economy and the people have lost trillions. Wall Street gets bailed out by the people and continues the same practices. Now the people are on Wall Street protesting said practices. But the people are labeled greedy/selfish/lazy while Wall Street gets a pass.

Actually - what caused our economy to implode was the housing bubble caused by Congressional mandates on providing loans to poor credit risks.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RZVw3no2A4"]Burning Down The House: What Caused Our Economic Crisis? Bombshell [/ame]

How can anyone defend Wall Street and not the people? Why are the people labeled greedy and not Wall Street? Can anyone help me explain the logic in all of this???

Why hasn't anyone in the Government who profited from their association with Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac been proscecuted?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs"]Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam[/ame]

Where is the outrage against Obama who has raked in more donations from Wall Street brokers then any other President?

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh really? Where did the SCOTUS say that? Link please.

 

Are you about to use your logic and outsmart the supposed outsmarter?

 

The 'greedy, selfish lazy' people are not the folk who invested and lost. They are not out marching. The greedy selfish lazy folk are the folk who did not invest BUT think the more successful folk who did should give the greedy, selfish lazy folk money for doing nothing more then whining.

 

The actual numbers disagree with your assertion. Instead of glossing over the information below, how about you actually take the time to verify the information for yourself? Your mantra of 'blame government for everything' is nauseating.

Wall Street Led the Toxic Market

Facts You Should Know About Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Fact: The GSEs were prohibited from buying subprime mortgages.

Fannie and Freddie could not guarantee or securitize subprime mortgages because subprime loans were outside the prescribed GSE guidelines. All subprime mortgage-backed securities were created by Wall Street firms—not the GSEs.

Fact: Although the GSEs did purchase subprime mortgage-backed securities as investments, they never did so in a volume that matched Wall Street’s

The GSEs’ investment in subprime mortgage-backed securities was far less than Wall Street’s.

Fact: The GSEs eventually guaranteed and created investments with “Alt-A” loans—which were not affordable housing loans

Alt-A loans went to relatively wealthier borrowers with higher credit scores, though often these loans had risky features such as limited documentation.

Fact: Mortgage loans purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—including loans to lower-income borrowers—are performing better than the private market

As of June 2010, about 13% of GSE loans to borrowers with credit scores under 660 were 90+ days delinquent or in foreclosure. By comparison, the serious delinquency rate for subprime loans was over 28%.

Fact: Affordable housing loans were not the problem. The GSEs’ losses were caused by risky mortgages that generally went to borrowers with higher incomes

The GSEs’ financial losses stem primarily from Alt-A mortgages, which are not connected to affordable housing. Abusive loan terms, rather than risky borrowers, bear the greatest responsibility for the foreclosure crisis. Studies show that “risky borrowers” who received sensible loan terms had significantly lower foreclosure rates than those who received dangerous subprime loans made by non-bank lenders.

Fact: The vast majority of subprime loans, 94 percent of them, were made by lenders who were not subject to the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The CRA covers banks and thrifts, which didn't make many subprime loans

http://www.responsiblelending.org/mo...annie-mae.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_...nsible_Lending

 

Maybe you should pay more in club dues and they'd let you in too?

Money is free speech and cannot be limited. The more unlimited, the more free speech. You never heard of that huh?