Wait a second... you want to blame ME for the financial crisis?

ARFCOM GD Board ^ | 03/22/2009 | Austrian

[gieriscm]

The author has given permission for his rant to be used in its entirety for non-commercial purposes. I have made changes to remove a few f-bombs; the original is at the source link.

If other folks in the financial sector feel the same way this guy does, BHO has truly damaged the US economy.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

“...BHO has truly damaged the US economy. “

Really? Is there any QUESTION from ANY quarter that he’s not mucking it up big time.

BUMP! Nice rant. I’ll re-read it over morning coffee. Thanks. :)

[Tzimisce]

Unfortunately, a bunch of people in the Financial sector GAVE MONEY TO THE PEOPLE THEY NOW ARE PISSED OFF AT.

So after a bunch of liberal bankers gave the rest of us this complete a$$ f**king, they’re all going to leave?????????????

NEW YORK IS A BLUE STATE.

I don’t know who to be more mad at: our Congress or their rich enablers. :(

[trtdenver]

These guys need to form a union, then they will be golden. I really wish they would buy 30 minutes of prime time to explain this to the sheeple. Throw it right back where it belongs...the cesspool in D.C.

[kanawa]

Digg it

[Centurion2000]

bump

[blam]

"I don’t know who to be more mad at: our Congress or their rich enablers. :("

Congress...they're the real SCUMBAGS!

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Thanks for this post. Going to read it tomorrow.

[OneLoyalAmerican]

Greetings gieriscm:

Awesome! Post of the year?

Cheers,
OLA

[Mr. Jeeves]

UBS, with the support of the Swiss Government, is offering 10 year permits to execs and their families who relocate to Switzerland, not to mention the ability to negotiate your personal tax rate for the next 10 years up front in some Cantons.

That's a great deal - the kind of thing we ought to be doing. But who (other than net benefit recipients) wants to relocate to the USA under this kind of President, who is only a step or two less Marxist than Hugo Chavez?

[Intolerant in NJ]

Starting back in the 1970s Congress addressed discrimination in mortgage lending (which was really a serious problem)...BS - it's not now and never has been "discrimination" to deny loans to those who are at high risk of not repaying them - and this includes those who are "poor", "unemployed", and "uneducated" - it's simply the way the system should work without interference from the do-gooders who've brought the system down.....

[grey_whiskers]

*PING* to an EXCELLENT rant.

Cheers!

[Tempest]

uhhh don’t take government money and cry?

[SirJohnBarleycorn]

Congress addressed discrimination in mortgage lending (which was really a serious problem)

Um, no.

It was said to be a serious problem. And then the Boston Fed did a landmark statistical study which purported to support the accusations of discrimination.

And based on that study, the social engineers decided that financial institutions should make loans regardless of sound credit standards, in order that more minorities could get expensive mortgages.

But it turns out the Boston Fed study used invalid statistical methods to arrive at its conclusion. Using valid methods, no discrimination was shown. See: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5814/is_n1_v36/ai_n28704420 "A re-examination of their preferred statistical approach leads to the simple conclusion that no evidence for discrimination exists in these mortgage markets when all of the relevant variables are included."

When the flawed methodology was discovered, it was ignored. The social engineers had already achieved the power they wanted.

[neverdem]

thanks, bfl

[Tempest]

you know this is essential such a false arguement and a red herring. Blame the other guy not me.

Don’t blame Wall street, blame the government or so that the popular brainwashing arguement around here the past few days.

I wonder how people would feel if I said don’t blame the homeowners that took loans they couldn’t afford, but blame the government. of course I already know what the reaction would be...

Are people really so easily lead around by the nose?

[gieriscm]

RIF - his firm took no gov’t $$$, but is being threatened (like all the other solvent financial orgs) by BHO with the same onerous regs and caps on pay/bonuses as those that did.

[Tempest]

1. Which regs are “onerous”.

2. If this guys firm didn’t take any gov’t dollars he won’t be facing any caps.

[SAJ]

Camel's nose, m'friend. This chap sees quite clearly that, if the goobermint can unlawfully regulate the salaries of ANY persons, then sooner or later it will be regulating the salaries of everyone.

Whether their firm accepts ''federal'' money or not.

[Tempest]

Strawman.