Thank you. I am usually flamed when I post stuff like that.:O:

Not in this case. I agree with you, but also Osmium. Many of the smaller community banks are responsibly and prudently run.

Group hug!

I'll make Tea Partiers out of you two yet. :O:

The ship is rocking again..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/f...isis-live.html

Ugh.... All I can say is...ahhh bugger! :oops:

All I'll say to you both atm is.....I'm not a fan of the EU....the UK is an island nation and as such we have always stood alone in the past.

Yes, the EU supporters claim that pulling out of the EU will harm our economy but if you have anything of worth that is wanted by a consumer they will find the means to trade.

Take it to a referendum of the British nation...funny how neither of the big two political parties fail to do that...I wonder why?

Why do you think both your parties prevent a referendum? They know exactly that - if I project a correct estimation from reading your press - at least two thirds of the British population, maybe even more?!, seem to prefer turning their backs on the EU, and pulling out. Politicians however do not care for the will of those who voted them into office, but care more for the powerinterests of their parties, which also reach beyond the national context . So they do not ask your people.

Same betrayal over here. If the Germans would be asked over the Euro, a majority already would have voted for abandoning it, in fact a majority never wanted it, and many insiders and experts of various fields who were independent from the parties warned against it from all beginning on.

Politicians. Most bankers. Economic lobbyists. Clerics. They all are just four different arms of this one kraken called "organised crime".

+1 :nope:

I am just a dumb, uneducated person, I had only one class of economics, so I don't understand the whole thing.

If I would lend money to the shady guy behind the central train station, who asks me and promises to pay me back with interest, it would be my own risk and my own stupidity.

Why are the banks treated different? Are they so important to our economic system, like Merkel & the rest of the bunch wants to tell us? In her last interview, she somehow acted like our financial system is god-given.
What kind of system do we have anyway? Free-market, when the banks called to be untied from the restrains the government put on them? Or do we have a solidarity principle, when we have to help those poor buggers who wagered with their money?
:06:

I am a little of both.

While I consider myself liberal in my nature to want to help the weaker (who is helping themselves). I find myself agreeing with alot of conservative beliefs about letting the weak, and un-helpable sink.

A country is as strong as it treats its weakest members. But we should cut off the "gravy train" folks who exploit the benefits.

There are people who earned those benefits (by paying into the system) who may need them, but will have them taken due to exploiters.

I'm with you Jim but I think that pulling out of the EU without arranging a steady exit would be disastrous for the UK, particularly in terms of trade tariffs. Our industries are simply not competitive enough to compete on an even level with the likes of China and the Far East, and unfortunately it is partly the EU that is the cause of this. If we want to leave the EU then it must be done gently so that our economy doesn't collapse and send us over the edge into Greek territory. We have an advantage over most of the EU nations because we've never really been fully in the EU, so it'll be easy to extract ourselves from the mire, but just jumping out would be, IMHO anyway, the worst possible thing we could do in terms of the stability of our economy.

The snag is, the UK even making moves to leave the EU right now would also send a massive shockwave across the financial sectors of Europe and screw over the economy even more. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. This is probably why no referendum has been done, because we are so far down in this hole that there is no way out, so we just keep digging and hope we reach Australia rather than the molten lava of the Earths core.

Blessed are the colour-blind, they shout "The blue lagoon!", get out of their cloathes and jumpo into it - happy, smiling and expecting the best.

Yeah, western nations do seem to have the self-preservation instincts of the average lemming when it comes down to money...little wonder voter apathy is on the rise. Still, as the old saying goes "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."

the name of the system is simple: internalizing all profits, externalizing all costs: the gains for the profiteers, the burdens for the tax payer; the chances for the profiteers, the risks for the tax payer.

And economics is no science. You need more psychology than economic classes to understand it.

Since some time, I am no longer convinced of this. It seems it solves not much, compared to for example a feudal system. It seems to always create corruption on big big big scale.

You can favour dfe,mocracy if people would vote reasonable, respionsibly people into offices, but it seems that doesn'T happen often. On the other hand, you can happen to end up with a a reasonable and responsible guy in rule in a feudal system, too. So the only thing that democracy seems to make different opver a feudal system is that by voting results it gives proof for the stupidity of the crowds who vote for those they then complain about. In a feudal system, ther stupidity of the crowd has the charm of never being proven beyond the level of rumour, assumption and mere claim.

The ancient citizens of Athens already were desperate over their democracy not solving the issue of corruption that they hoped to get rid of by introducing corruption. They had a lottery to force random citizens into offices. They said: if our votes cannot counter the threat of corrupt people gaining offices, then at least we can include an element of chance and hopefully achieve a normal, more balanced probability-distribution for people being corrupt and not beign corrupt ending up in power. But it did not work. Most random-chance office holders were incompetent to fulfill their new dfuties, or found it impossible tpo feed their families and fill the office'S duties at the same time. So they payed members of a self-forming, self-declaring "elite" to govern in their place and take the burden of freedom and responsibility away from them again. And so - corrupt elites snkeaked back into power, through the backdoor, but still - with an intended invitation in their hand.

The only way to fight corruption in government is to have no government and maybe indeed having an anarchic system. But that would open door and gate for jungle law of the strongest, and uncountered monopolism. So even this "solution" is just illusive.

Honstely said, I have no idea how to solve this probvölpem. It seems to be part of human nature and dualistic conceptions of what life and world are. And where there is light, you have darkness as well, and every force has an equal opposite force.