Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[cem_devecioglu]

Yea...once I've seen a short cartoon about how the bank system is working. Have you ever known that neither of our countries have the right of money printing? This right is owned by a closed financial group all around western world and they can do anything they want.

And a cartoon it was. M2 money supply is controlled by governments. Here in the UK, Quantitative Easing is a direct mechanism by which more cash is injected into the system and was authorised by the government. It is precisely what you talk of: printing money. Only central banks print money.   
 

not in America..FED is not a central bank..its private
 
and also may I remind Bank of England was nationalised in 1946.     and there are more interesting details
 
http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2010/02/who-owns-bank-of-england.html

[Kevin Wood]

The main problem, IMHO, is that the banks have grown so large that it matters to us how they operate their business.

Taking nickbat's shopkeeper analogy, if a shopkeeper decides to operate his business in a risky manner, he'll either get rich or go out of business. We wouldn't care either way because there are plenty of other shops. Some might see the Bentley parked outside and shop elsewhere.  Another shopkeeper will be more prudent and make a modest living, but survive in business through thick and thin. Either way, diversity means there'll probably be a shop when I need one.

We all (personally, and as a state) have so much at stake with huge banks that they can't be allowed to suffer the consequences of their actions - so, you can't be allowed to go out of business. What do you go for? modest or rich?

There is, of course, another issue that we have surrounded ourselves with politicians who are only interested in lining their own pockets. We can only hope that they haven't got such a foothold yet that they can be removed by non-violent means. Doing so would require the general populus to wake up and smell the coffee, though.

[cem_devecioglu]

I take this passage from my link above as its really important..
 
"the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole"

[albitz]

Fair point about the problem of "too big to fail " banks Kevin. Problem is though, they are global organistaions,so its hard to see how that problem can be addressed.We have morons like Cable saying he will break them up etc. and solve the problem but he is just grandstanding,playing to the gallery etc. I assume he isnt stupid enough to believe his own words,although you never know.....
Globalisation is probably the biggest problem in the practical sense,as banks in any given country are leveraged to banks in most other countries.One country sneezes,alll the others catch a cold.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Interesting thread. Broadly speaking, I agree with Cem........and disagree (as usual ) with Albs and Nickbat.

[albitz]

So the answer is ?....................

[Dishevelled Den]

So the answer is ?....................

That's the disturbing thing son - I don't think there's a ready answer, sadly.

[albitz]

Thats the thing Den.Capitalism is far from perfect.Its been very imperfect recently,but if the alternative is socialism - its a no brainer imo.

[Dishevelled Den]

Thats the thing Den.Capitalism is far from perfect.Its been very imperfect recently,but if the alternative is socialism - its a no brainer imo.

Yes, I'm inclined to agree with you son,  it's very easy to bitch about the present arrangements and where we presently sit but in reality, there's little to adopt as an alternative at the moment.

[cem_devecioglu]

 
 
socialism depends on who applies it.. if its bend, its not socialism.. that said, it depends highly on the community applied and
its culture, past history, industry , economic conditions etc etc..  for example you cant apply socialism easily on a half feodal , non industrialized, religious state (many 3rd world countries) ..and you cant apply this also on a old imperial state which have strong historical capitalist ties and relations with whole out the world..if someone or some party claims that its applicable, I just smile..  
 
 

[albitz]

It defies human nature Cem - the desire to improve your personal circumstances by working harder than the next man and making best use of your individual talents,it requires everyone to live at the same average level, it negates the basic human need to progress,in short it removes individuality,and thats why it has never worked and never will.

[cem_devecioglu]

It defies human nature Cem - the desire to improve your personal circumstances by working harder than the next man and making best use of your individual talents,it requires everyone to live at the same average level, it negates the basic human need to progress,in short it removes individuality,and thats why it has never worked and never will.

it worked and still working..
 
I must add though , its also applicable to capitalist states but problem is leading elites will never permit that without big fights/wars..
 
remember , when the crisis start to show its head they immediately shift to socialist state precautions   but these are whole measures , must be applied completely..

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

It defies human nature Cem - the desire to improve your personal circumstances by working harder than the next man and making best use of your individual talents,it requires everyone to live at the same average level, it negates the basic human need to progress,in short it removes individuality,and thats why it has never worked and never will.

it worked and still working..
 
I must add though , its also applicable to capitalist states but problem is leading elites will never permit that without big fights/wars..
 
remember , when the crisis start to show its head they immediately shift to socialist state precautions   but these are whole measures , must be applied completely..

[albitz]

Its still a matter of debate among capitalists whether or not the govts. should have got involved in bailouts etc.Cem. Its done now,so no point wondering what might have happened if they had taken the other route.
I dont know where this place is where socialism is currently working ? It failed in USSR,China,Cuba - where else is left ? 
If you worked in a bodyshop as a highly skilled paint sprayer earning,say £500 per week and there was a guy who sweeps the floor and makes the coffee who earns £150 per week,would you be happy for the govt. to decide that you both earn £325 per week ? 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

It defies human nature Cem - the desire to improve your personal circumstances by working harder than the next man and making best use of your individual talents,it requires everyone to live at the same average level, it negates the basic human need to progress,in short it removes individuality,and thats why it has never worked and never will.

Some of what you say here, I actually agree with, Albs. But who bailed out the capitalist banking system when things went tits up?...Ah yes, it was good old "Nanny Socialist" who came to the rescue. Exactly what sort of  capitalism is that?