And while we have our attention elsewhere

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by jms62

http://www.theguardian.com/money/201...-next-meltdown

The big money that controls the narrative aka the media has us all focused on a race war while nothing has been said about them changing the rules once again to allow banks to gamble house money (taxpayer) while we absorb their losses. Imagine if your paycheck was a percentage of what you brought back Trading but you had no consequnces if you lost and your funds were unlimited and not your own. What kind of bets would you make?

The cutting of pensions really gets me. It's not a gift; people took less money during their working years in order to have some security during their retirement years. It's no different from stealing money right out of their savings accounts- which, apparently, the banks can now do, too. Merry Christmas! (weeps)

[dellinger63]

It's a game of three card monte showing the bank/pension and race card while hiding the social security fund card.

Imagine if the banks had lost $2.7 TRILLION, not on bad bets but simply embezzled it? You know like the government has done. And then imagine being forced to continue paying 12% of everything you make so the one who embezzled the money can make good on it.

ALL Ponzi schemes eventually end and when this one does it will be very ugly.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

It's a game of three card monte showing the bank/pension and race card while hiding the social security fund card.

Imagine if the banks had lost $2.7 TRILLION, not on bad bets but simply embezzled it? You know like the government has done. And then imagine being forced to continue paying 12% of everything you make so the one who embezzled the money can make good on it.

ALL Ponzi schemes eventually end and when this one does it will be very ugly.

Would it have been a Ponzi scheme if it wasnt looted but invested and simply acieved market returns?

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

Would it have been a Ponzi scheme if it wasnt looted but invested and simply acieved market returns?

Absolutely not. Imagine if it had been invested in gold? Even if it had been put into a holding account earning no interest imagine what would have been saved not paying interest on the $2.7 trillion now owed essentially to us.

And Ponzi scheme may not be a valid description as it involves deception in order to recruit new investors to pay old ones. He also never required investors to pay the interest on the IOU's owed to them.

Extortion is more like it as investors have no choice but participate in order to pay older investors. And as fast as the new money comes in it goes out paying not only to older investors but for everything else only to be replaced by Treasury IOU's, completing the cycle.