The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > 'Occupy' must understand there is nothing fundamentally wrong with banking > Comments

'Occupy' must understand there is nothing fundamentally wrong with banking : Comments

By Mikayla Novak, published 27/10/2011

Bankers, not banking, have let us down.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
The best thing I can do here, I think, is pip Peter Hume to the post and offer a link to the wisdom of Mises concerning banking:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north86.html
There is something dreadfully wrong with a financial system which offers the greatest gains to those who risk the least, and sacrifice absolutely nothing.
It isn't that the system contains a few rogues; the system itself is fraudulent.
Posted by Grim, Thursday, 27 October 2011 9:31:05 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks Julie, interesting piece that I hope some of the "alleged 99%" will read and understand. One thing I note about the bailouts (and I rely on Wiki here for my facts so hopefully they hold) is that the "cost" of the TARP bailouts (I assume the opportunity cost to Government diverting public funds temporarily to take up preferred stock etc. in nearly bankrupt businesses) came in at about $19B, a microscopic fraction of US GDP. Maintaining public confidence in some significant publicly listed (large employer) entities probably never came so cheap.
Posted by bitey, Thursday, 27 October 2011 11:37:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
GN271011
Julie Novak
You say:-
“Perhaps to a great extent some of these hostile feelings towards the financial system might be due to a misunderstanding or lack of comprehension, about the beneficial role of a functioning financial system for economic prosperity”.
Sorry for my misbehavior, Julie.
From now on, as I see my savings eviscerated, I will appreciate the beneficial role of our functioning system for economic prosperity
Posted by skeptic, Thursday, 27 October 2011 4:37:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You state: "Fundamentally, the role of the finance sector in the modern economic system is to connect those in the economy who have saved part of what they earned with those who desire to borrow funds to invest in various ventures.

In other words banks and other financial institutions, when they function normally, play a constructive role in transferring financial assets to more highly valued uses."

Sorry Julie, but banks only need to hold 10% or less of depositors funds. They have the ability, and always do, to leverage additional funds into the system (Ponzi finance) on the remaining 90% or more of the funds and that is why we get debt at the levels we see today.

Correlate that with declining cheap energy (a key ingredient in any functioning growth economy) and you have a disaster in the making.

Mark my words...what we have seen to date is just the tip of the iceberg, the whole global banking and financial sector (growth model) is about to implode. There is not enough energy (cheap oil) in the system to keep the growth economy from stalling and falling into a serious descent.

Econmists externalise energy and do not rationalise it into mainstream economic modelling/practical application. As such, this is why Europe and the U.S. are in terminal decline, it won't matter what governments, financial sector, politicians say or do, the system is a brittle web, a few small shocks can be taken, but as energy declines further, the shocks get greater and the brittle web crumbles.

Why did NAB and Westpac fail to reveal that they had to borrow billions from the U.S. Federal Reserve in 2009/10, because they were technically broke, no mention here in the press about it, or from the Reserve Bank or APRA? If you were a stockholder wouldn't you have liked to know?

The 99% are right, they just haven't worked out how to get a clear message across. The system is rotten to the core and is beyond help.

Growth is dead, get used to it, get out of debt as soon as you can.
Posted by Geoff of Perth, Thursday, 27 October 2011 5:05:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree Geoff of Perth.There is a fundamental flaw in the banking system and that is their power to counterfeit our currencies by the fractional reserve system of banking.

Banks should only be allowed to loan out money that already exists and not create increases in our productivity as debt with the click of a computer mouse.
Posted by Arjay, Friday, 28 October 2011 4:21:12 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Title intriguing, opening questionable. I've followed OWSNYC. Link to someone who covers the world of OWS.

http://armstrongeconomics.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/armstrongeconomics-occupy-wall-st-goes-global-101611.pdf

Where you get information. a certain amount of MSM bias.Check people who go to protests, a different viewpoint than the MSM!

Americans who don't know how it all went wrong but are annoyed.

Independent survey of OWSNWS: 70% are politically independent. US blogs I am at, real people who talk with protestors,Young, old, middle-aged. some damaged by government schools, a spectrum of opinions. Democracy in action.

Your title, article, good theory. I cannot speak for the Australian experience of banking but I do know about banking in U.S. history.

Geoff had it right about two of the "big four", he missed the RBA tapping into TAF.

bitey knows one statistic, is unaware the US Federal Reserve unleashed $16 trillion dollars on the global financial system after GFC. TARP was the least of the interventions.

OWS doesn't need a message, as many call for. That would make it easy for the MSM to marginalise them more that they did. Nor do they need 'a leader'. Same reason.

I recall a YouTube of some young bloke, lecturing on monetary theory, might have been reading from Hayek.

A whole different ballgame. No message, no sound bites. No leader, who needs an empty suit with glib teleprompter skills?

Julie, those "occupiers, with an inherent bias against market capitalism", a subset of the whole. Maybe you've not followed the malfeasance in the US banking system, predatory lenders, MERS scandal, derivatives TBTF spawned and bet against -- the real banking reality.

Regulators that don't regulate, ratings agencies get a fee for AAA on toxic substances, insiders trading with vampire squids. Matt Taibbi's articles, William K. Black interviews, Michael Lewis, half a dozen blogs will tell you about the perfidy of the US banking system. The only factor is corruption.

The only local colour I can add, Why did RBA sell 2/3 of the gold reserves in 1997, in advance of the "Brown bottom"? Was this was a concerted plan ...
Posted by Novista, Friday, 28 October 2011 11:09:07 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Novista,it is all corruption on a monumental scale justified by the scares of environmentalism and over population.It all started in earnest the 1980's when scientists had everyone convinced that environmental destruction would destroy the planet.The elites now had a really good excuse to take control of everything.

By 1995 the evidence no longer supported the theory of AGW but they wouldn't let the facts get in the way of their New World Order of tyranny.
Posted by Arjay, Saturday, 29 October 2011 8:44:37 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Arjay

Quite agree. Corruption compounded with an agenda. The make the world safe from humanity actions have hit here in Queensland with more to come. Creeks offlimits, no access. NO TRESPASSING. State Park, No Admittance, sort of thing.

There's a parade went on 20k from my beach village protesting it. By the time the do-gooders get done, there will be nothing left for outdoor recreation for real people.

On the corruption side, I've had some information that seems to hold up, essentially the securitization process was flawed from the beginning of the Mortgage Electronic Registry System (a private consortium of six biggest banks and lender) so the bottom line technically is: MBS contain NOTHING.This bitter fact had to be kept hidden, thus Paulson and Bernanke scared the congress into the fake save the system, save the world bailout process.

One doesn't know whether to laugh or scream at the ultimate fraud.
Posted by Novista, Saturday, 29 October 2011 5:01:15 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Novista,at least some of us are using our brains.
Posted by Arjay, Monday, 31 October 2011 6:01:04 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The purpose of banking as Julia states is to

"Fundamentally, the role of the finance sector in the modern economic system is to connect those in the economy who have saved part of what they earned with those who desire to borrow funds to invest in various ventures."

If banking did this then it would serve us well. Unfortunately banks do not care what happens to the funds after they are borrowed as long as the funds are paid back. This means funds are only lent to those who have existing assets - not to those who wish to create new assets and new production. This effect of this bias is a system that stifles innovation and efficiency and preserves inefficient existing processes.
Posted by Fickle Pickle, Monday, 31 October 2011 10:39:21 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I added this on another thread because it is most relevant.

Maybe this interview might bring some reason and understanding as to why the protesters are sick and tired of what has been occurring.

http://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?blog=Market-Ticker

More about William Black

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_K._Black
Posted by Opinionated2, Wednesday, 2 November 2011 5:53:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Unfortunately ,putting your money with a credit union will not help much.This will mean our banks will have to borrow more from OS since their leverage from deposits will be reduced.Our overall debt burden will increase.

The way forward is to lobby for Credit Unions to become mutual banks and then they have leverage to create their own new money.Depositors and borrowers then become shareholders.This is one way of breaking their cartel of counterfeiting.
Posted by Arjay, Saturday, 5 November 2011 8:45:16 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arjay, your slip is showing.

>>Unfortunately ,putting your money with a credit union will not help much.This will mean our banks will have to borrow more from OS since their leverage from deposits will be reduced.Our overall debt burden will increase.<<

It actually means exactly the opposite: the Banks will be unable to borrow as much, since their lending powers will be restricted by the prudential reserves they are required to maintain. Fewer depositors = lower reserves = restricted lending. Borrowing from overseas does not count towards those reserves, so the end result will not be to increase our debt burden at all.

Unless of course those sneaky Credit Unions decide to lend money as well, using the additional deposits as leverage...

Stick to conspiracy theory, and steer clear of pontificating about banking. All you do is to show everyone how little you understand it.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 7 November 2011 8:10:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy