Belly “Col Rouge talks of a spit in the ocean in comparison the Victorian bankruptcy of some years back.”

REALLY?

Please quote where I have ever made diminuating comment to the seriousness of the present world financial meltdown.

I have never ever suggested to make light of the financial crisis, re “spit in the ocean” and I do resent your fraudulent misrepresention of my views as such.

In future, if you want to quote me, quote me verbatim or not at all.

Col
The evidence for my claim is to be found in abundance in your posts. Your vilification of any people less fortunate than yourself gives the lie to your claim that you actually solve any problems for anyone other than yourself.

For example; referring to the women and children who drowned on the SEIV X as “swill” strikes a new low in contempt for others – even for you and helps no-one.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=7899&page=0#125173

BTW calling people names like ‘swill’ or ‘morons’ is hardly the language of the impartial, rational and unemotional – again you condemn yourself by your own words.

Fractelle “For example; referring to the women and children who drowned on the SEIV X as “swill” strikes a new low in contempt for others – even for you and helps no-one.”

You obviously misunderstand me.

I value and support the process of “law and order”, as the fair and impartial basis for regulating everything from some interpersonal to international relations.

I do not single out, as you have done, the “swill” on ther SIEVX boats any different to the “swill” who sell drugs to children or the “swill” who made money by defrauding the policy holders of HIH.

They are all swill and the world would be a better place if they either changed their ways or had been drowned at birth.

But since you feel so entitled as to comment to my character, distinct from my posts, I feel entitled to comment on yours and repeat-

“From reading the content of much of your posts, what you seem to care about is maximising the emotional credit you can extort from any situation, to satisfy your own insecurities.”

Be as self-righteous as you want, it means nothing to me, except to confirm the fragility of cognitive reasoning behind what you bother to post.

Belly “And that greed is controlled.”

And

“Some acts that bought us to this state are criminal and we must see convictions surely?”

That would be the ‘greed’ and the ‘acts’ of those who took loans from banks and treated them as ‘gifts’ or with the fraudulent intent not to repay.

You seem to have a flair for commenting on the bleeding obvious but are light on when it comes to any real suggestions.

footnote... governments 780 billion dollars appears to have made no difference.

I guess I was right when I wrote at the beginning of this thread

"the market and the banks are the "experts",

the government, deploying scarce tax payer funds, it not.

Leave it to the experts.

their mess, let them sort it out."

Can somebody explain to me the difference between persons wanting a plasma screen or a house overextending themselves and losing the lot and a bank or company going bankrupt in the pursuit of ever greater returns in unsustainable ways.

Why are individuals borrowing or investing 'greedy' for seemingly excellent growth when it goes wrong, but corporations not. They were somehow swayed by altruistic reasons on the say-so of politicians. Why are politicians to blame when the markets and the banking industry where ever freer to do what they saw fit under the auspices of Greenspan?

Should there be government regulation on corporations, including banks, to curtail that natural human tendency of greed, the pursuit of ever greater personal profit?

To 'share' or not to take advantage of another for personal gain is not something admired in the hard nosed, unemotional world of business. It is in essence contrary to the value of your business to point out that another entity is paying too much, is being ripped off. That is in the realm of personal responsibility, to say otherwise you are branded as a merit denying socialist, do-gooder or bleeding heart.

By blaming politicians, which is also done by out and out capitalists, is peculiar.

It is those with a more socialistic bent who are far less emotive, who are pretty hard-nosed about the natural avarice of human beings.

Human innovation and creativity needs to be encouraged and rewarded, that is good. But, ethical behaviour and scrupuous honesty is not a given in assessing the 'rightness' of pursuing a certain path when some opportunities arise.

That is where governments must come in. The USA needs more government, not less.

Great post, Anansi.

Col Rouge

"That would be the ‘greed’ and the ‘acts’ of those who took loans from banks and treated them as ‘gifts’ or with the fraudulent intent not to repay."

I'd like to see some hard evidence of this so-called 'fraudulent intent not to pay'.

If you're going to put the boot into people who are already suffering, as seems to be your favourite pastime, at least have the decency to back up your claims.

Bronwyn “I'd like to see some hard evidence of this so-called 'fraudulent intent not to pay'.

Anyone who accepts a LOAN in any form, even a credit card, is issued a list of conditions.

First condition…. agree to the repayment schedule, whatever it may be.

If you accept ANY loan, with the intention of not repaying it, you are perpetrating a fraud.

Banks and lenders know the bad publicity associated with foreclosure, they only pursue people as a last resort, after they have tried everything else.

Subprime loans for instant, the borrower with a less than perfect credit rating will be able to borrow against security but not at 80%+ only at a lesser % where the lender has a higher margin of security over debt. Of course, the interest rates paid are also higher than the rates available to those with ‘good-credit’.

Bluestone and Liberty are two of a number of Australian sub-prime lenders.
Subprime is not the first option but it is a valuable option for those folk who are recovering from some form of financial disaster. Poor credit rating costs them and they are under a stricter discipline than normal borrowers. Of course if they cannot manage the discipline, they should not present themselves to a lender in the first place.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/06/01/ChomPennCross.pdf

As for “If you're going to put the boot into people who are already suffering, as seems to be your favourite pastime, at least have the decency to back up your claims.”

I accept absolute responsibility for my actions. I plan my life and wear the bumps and pitfalls which I live through.

A financial downturn affects me in the same manner as everyone else, except to the extent of the financial resilience I have planned into my borrowing.

I see no difference between me and everyone else.

I expect everyone to exercise similar prudence.

I don’t ask or expect the government to bale me out.

If you think that is “putting the boot in” then I feel sorry for you and what must be an excuse for a life which you live.