Max Keiser: Irish govt slaves to IMF terror machine!

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber

The banksters are responsible for the real terrorism around the world too - through the CIA.

gizmo

How are the CIA involved?

On a side note, I again asked this question in another thread which has still yet to be answered. I'd be interested to see if anyone would give it a go...

digme

gizmo wrote: »

How are the CIA involved?

On a side note, I again asked this question in another thread which has still yet to be answered. I'd be interested to see if anyone would give it a go...

I'll answer it for ya.
Coca cola, McDonalds,Monsanto etc are all scum of the earth.Don't be asinine.

gizmo

digme wrote: »

I'll answer it for ya.
Coca cola, McDonalds,Monsanto etc are all scum of the earth.Don't be asinine.

And Ryanair?

As for the other companies, despite both Kaiser's or your own personal feelings regarding them, it still doesn't give him the right to engage in the same predatory techniques he's now decrying.

digme

Taking down a country is financial terrorism, boycotting a company doesn't even come close to what your saying,that's just hyperbole.

sligopark

execute seanie? why not the other governmental economical traitors?

gizmo

digme wrote: »

Taking down a country is financial terrorism, boycotting a company doesn't even come close to what your saying,that's just hyperbole.

Karmabanque had nothing to do with "boycotting" a company in the traditioanl sense of the word, it was a hedge fund whose purpose was to profit from the decline in equity-value of companies which are susceptible to boycott from environmental groups. It did this by short-selling the targetted companies while, at the same time directing said profits into environmental and other pressure groups whose aim was to to drive the price down further.

Therefore the manner in which he carried out these Robin Hood-esque attacks is remarkably similar to the ones which he decries. The problem I have with this, at least in the context of the original question, is that Ryanair, an Irish company, was one of those targeted. Now, you may not like O'Leary's attitude but surely you wouldn't condone these actions when they put thousands of Irish jobs at risk?

ascanbe

There's nothing 'conspiracy theory' about what Keiser is saying; it's pure, unmitigated truth.

Brown Bomber

gizmo wrote: »

How are the CIA involved?

They do the dirty work for the corporations. Drugs,weapons, terrorism, war and money all go hand-in-hand.

gizmo wrote: »

On a side note, I again asked this question in another thread which has still yet to be answered. I'd be interested to see if anyone would give it a go...

I'd love to oblige but it's the first I've heard of it tbh. Just looked it up on Wiki - financial activism rather than financial terrorism surely? I see where you're coming from though. Playing the bastards at their own game; quite clever.

Have to say though, I'll be eternally sceptical of anyone who is ex wall street and/or gets any MSM attention. Have to say though this Keiser chap seems to tackle the real issues. Ill be keeping an eye on him.

gizmo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

They do the dirty work for the corporations. Drugs,weapons, terrorism, war and money all go hand-in-hand.

Limited to US based banks then?

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I'd love to oblige but it's the first I've heard of it tbh. Just looked it up on Wiki - financial activism rather than financial terrorism surely? I see where you're coming from though. Playing the bastards at their own game; quite clever.

Well it's the manner in which it's done that I'm most interested in really. The Robin Hood analogy is quite apt I think however the fact that they could do serious damage to a company which employs a considerable number of people in Ireland is what what caught my attention initially.

I also consider it quite like the college bans on Coca Cola on campuses across the country. Whether or not a product is boycotted is a personal decision and not one which should be made for us. Similarly with this, if I have a problem with a company I simply won't use them but I don't agree with any group taking matters into their own hands, especially when they're doing so under such dubious circumstances.

digme

gizmo wrote: »

Karmabanque had nothing to do with "boycotting" a company in the traditioanl sense of the word, it was a hedge fund whose purpose was to profit from the decline in equity-value of companies which are susceptible to boycott from environmental groups. It did this by short-selling the targetted companies while, at the same time directing said profits into environmental and other pressure groups whose aim was to to drive the price down further.

Therefore the manner in which he carried out these Robin Hood-esque attacks is remarkably similar to the ones which he decries. The problem I have with this, at least in the context of the original question, is that Ryanair, an Irish company, was one of those targeted. Now, you may not like O'Leary's attitude but surely you wouldn't condone these actions when they put thousands of Irish jobs at risk?

Ryanair in my opinion was wrong other than that i think there's no comparison.I don't blindly follow people,but i do admire this man and i think he is doing more good than bad.I'm sure you'd agree.He's one of the very few who speak the truth.

meglome

digme wrote: »

Taking down a country is financial terrorism, boycotting a company doesn't even come close to what your saying,that's just hyperbole.

I hate to be the one to state the obvious but no one forced us to borrow this money. There's an awful lot of screaming in here about us being forced but the really sad thing is we did this to ourselves. We bent ourselves over and shoved it right up there. We should be screaming at the Irish people generally for the corrupt fools there were happy to elect. And no, not all politicians are exactly the same, some are better than others.

Brown Bomber

meglome wrote: »

I hate to be the one to state the obvious but no one forced us to borrow this money. There's an awful lot of screaming in here about us being forced but the really sad thing is we did this to ourselves. We bent ourselves over and shoved it right up there. We should be screaming at the Irish people generally for the corrupt fools there were happy to elect. And no, not all politicians are exactly the same, some are better than others.

Who's better then?

They're all crooks as far as I can see. Why blame the people? They're the ones who were conned and they're the ones who fought for our soveriegnity for hundreds of years only to see it lost in a short few to EU/International criminals.

namloc1980

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Who's better then?

They're all crooks as far as I can see. Why blame the people? They're the ones who were conned and they're the ones who fought for our soveriegnity for hundreds of years only to see it lost in a short few to EU/International criminals.

There are so many factors that have brought Ireland to this situation: a Government that fanned the flames of a property bubble by giving huge tax breaks etc., poor control by the planning authorities allowing massive over-development of the country, banks that were trying to outdo each other in a high risk Russian roulette property game and then of course the hundreds of thousands of Irish people who bought into it all and paid massive amounts of €€€€€€€'s for shoeboxes all over the country.

But people must face up to reality...the country is bust. If we don't get outside help there will be no money to pay for welfare / wages / services come Feb/March next year. That is the reality.

digme

meglome wrote: »

I hate to be the one to state the obvious but no one forced us to borrow this money. There's an awful lot of screaming in here about us being forced but the really sad thing is we did this to ourselves. We bent ourselves over and shoved it right up there. We should be screaming at the Irish people generally for the corrupt fools there were happy to elect. And no, not all politicians are exactly the same, some are better than others.

You keep saying us and we.I had nothing to do with this,so keep your we and your us to yourself.I didn't leverage my loan book 40x, did you?

ascanbe

meglome wrote: »

I hate to be the one to state the obvious but no one forced us to borrow this money. There's an awful lot of screaming in here about us being forced but the really sad thing is we did this to ourselves. We bent ourselves over and shoved it right up there. We should be screaming at the Irish people generally for the corrupt fools there were happy to elect. And no, not all politicians are exactly the same, some are better than others.

'We' didn't borrow this money; our banks did.
They were lent this money by other banks; banks who lent them this money in order to make a profit.
Our banks then lent this money to some Irish people; in order to make a profit.
The banks that lent money to our banks did not practice due diligence; they were lending money to our banks who, not practicing due diligence, were then lending money to people in an unsustainable economy who would, ultimately, have no chance of paying it back.
So that should be their lookout; they gambled their money, screwed up and lost.
Yet, we are being burdened with their losses.
This is the antithesis of free-market capitalism; it's thievery.

meglome

digme wrote: »

You keep saying us and we.I had nothing to do with this,so keep your we and your us to yourself.I didn't leverage my loan book 40x, did you?

Nope I have basically no debts at all. For years I'd tried to tell people that we were in a property bubble and they shouldn't buy. Now I run a business so I'm not negative as a rule but the property situation didn't make any sense. People would actually agree with a lot of my points and still go out and buy a house. Those people have to take responsibility for that. There's lot's of talk about debt forgiveness for home-owners since the banks were bailed. The problem is that would cost at least another 10billion which the taxpayers would have to pay. And I'll be fúcked if I have to pay for that stupidly as well. We elected shítty politicians, worse we continually elected them and we're reaping what we as a nation sowed. We don't have a great set of politicians to choose from but some are worse than others.

meglome

ascanbe wrote: »

'We' didn't borrow this money; our banks did.
They were lent this money by other banks; banks who lent them this money in order to make a profit.
Our banks then lent this money to some Irish people; in order to make a profit.
The banks that lent money to our banks did not practice due diligence; they were lending money to our banks who, not practicing due diligence, were then lending money to people in an unsustainable economy who would, ultimately, have no chance of paying it back.
So that should be their lookout; they gambled their money, screwed up and lost.
Yet, we are being burdened with their losses.
This is the antithesis of free-market capitalism; it's thievery.

No I think you'll find we did borrow the money and the banks in turn borrowed money to facilitate that. Large numbers of people borrowed more than they should have, more money than was remotely sensible, the banks also facilitated that. The banks went after short term gain over any sense, but at the same time I would expect that when someone has access to a gun they won't play Russian roulette with it.

Run_to_da_hills

namloc1980 wrote: »

But people must face up to reality...the country is bust. If we don't get outside help there will be no money to pay for welfare / wages / services come Feb/March next year. That is the reality.

Who says when this shower takes over the country that welfare / wages / services of certain departments will last after Feb / March next year?.

There will be a lot of crows flying from the chimneys in all departments.

Those on the dole better keep their fingers crossed.

digme

meglome wrote: »

Nope I have basically no debts at all. For years I'd tried to tell people that we were in a property bubble and they shouldn't buy. Now I run a business so I'm not negative as a rule but the property situation didn't make any sense. People would actually agree with a lot of my points and still go out and buy a house. Those people have to take responsibility for that. There's lot's of talk about debt forgiveness for home-owners since the banks were bailed. The problem is that would cost at least another 10billion which the taxpayers would have to pay. And I'll be fúcked if I have to pay for that stupidly as well. We elected shítty politicians, worse we continually elected them and we're reaping what we as a nation sowed. We don't have a great set of politicians to choose from but some are worse than others.

Well someone had to buy the houses.The banks knew exactly what they were doing,they just got greedy.But it doesn't matter as when you go bust,you just buy back in and on the lunacy goes.But the people can't buy back in and that's why it's insanity to give your slave driver the weapons to kill you .
What I don't understand is why do people give their weekly hard earned cash to the banks each week?Max keiser needs to be on 6/1 news every fcking day till the dumb asleep masses get it through their thick skulls to stop giving the banks your bloody wages,

meglome

digme wrote: »

Well someone had to buy the houses.The banks knew exactly what they were doing,they just got greedy.But it doesn't matter as when you go bust,you just buy back in and on the lunacy goes.But the people can't buy back in and that's why it's insanity to give your slave driver the weapons to kill you .
What I don't understand is why do people give their weekly hard earned cash to the banks each week?Max keiser needs to be on 6/1 news every fcking day till the dumb asleep masses get it through their thick skulls to stop giving the banks your bloody wages,

No someone didn't 'have' to buy the houses people wanted to buy the houses against all sense, at almost any price. I rented and am perfectly happy. People used their free will to enter into a contract with the banks and borrow a pile of money. If people are slaves to the banks it because they asked or it, as stupid as that turned out to be. If they don't pay it back then the rest of us will have to pay it back.

ascanbe

meglome wrote: »

No I think you'll find we did borrow the money and the banks in turn borrowed money to facilitate that. Large numbers of people borrowed more than they should have, more money than was remotely sensible, the banks also facilitated that. The banks went after short term gain over any sense, but at the same time I would expect that when someone has access to a gun they won't play Russian roulette with it.

No, i think you'll find you're wrong.
Let's bring this back to basics.
Just say i, a private citizen, as these are private institutions, decide to lend you 10 euro, on the agreement you will pay me 15 euro back next week.
I did so in order to make a profit; if you, for whatever reason, squander this money and cannot pay me back either my initial investment or the interest we agreed, can i then bill the state for my losses?
No, of course not; i screwed up and lost my money.
As the banks did; it's not the states responsibility.
The government made it our responsibilty with the blanket guarantee; this should now be ended, no more money should be given to these gamblers and the IMF/EU 'loan', in reality another bail-out for foreign banks that will mire us even futher in debt, should be refused.

hinault

I've a lot of time for Max and Karmabanque.

But Max needs to redirect his anger in this instance to this country's policy makers who have brought about the situation whereby we have the IMF and ECB in here and have surrendered our economic sovereignty.

meglome

ascanbe wrote: »

No, i think you'll find you're wrong.
Let's bring this back to basics.
Just say i, a private citizen, as these are private institutions, decide to lend you 10 euro, on the agreement you will pay me 15 euro back next week.
I did so in order to make a profit; if you, for whatever reason, squander this money and cannot pay me back either my initial investment or the interest we agreed, can i then bill the state for my losses?
No, of course not; i screwed up and lost my money.
As the banks did; it's not the states responsibility.
The government made it our responsibilty with the blanket guarantee; this should now be ended, no more money should be these gamblers and the IMF/EU 'loan', in reality another bail-out for foreign banks that will mire us even futher in debt, should be refused.

I don't agree with the blanket guarantee either. However since our banks borrowed money internationally to give to us (the Irish people) they will expect it back. There's no way the international community, who loaned our banks, is going to allow us to walk away scot free from debt they we took on. And why should they, if you loaned someone a shít load of money would you expect it back?

hinault wrote: »

But Max needs to redirect his anger in this instance to this country's policy makers who have brought about the situation whereby we have the IMF and ECB in here and have surrendered our economic sovereignty.

Indeed. And we need to look at who elected them.

hinault

meglome wrote: »

I don't agree with the blanket guarantee either. However since ours banks borrowed money internationally to give to us (the Irish people) they will expect it back. There's no way the international community, who loaned our banks, is going to allow us to walk away scot free from debt they we took on. And why should they, if you loaned someone a shít load of money would you expect it back?

Correct.

Irish banks borrowed billions in the wholesale money markets.
They then lent this money to property developers, property gamblers, and frankly naive mortgage applicants.

Irish banks were totally irresponsible both in their borrowing and lending policies.

And Joe Public should not be expected to fund any rescue of the Irish Banks.

ascanbe

meglome wrote: »

I don't agree with the blanket guarantee either. However since ours banks borrowed money internationally to give to us (the Irish people) they will expect it back. There's no way the international community, who loaned our banks, is going to allow us to walk away scot free from debt they we took on. And why should they, if you loaned someone a shít load of money would you expect it back?

The international community didn't loan 'us' any money.
International banks, private institutions, loaned money to our banks, also private institutions.
Our banks then lent this money, entered into agreements, with some private citizens of this state; it's between them and its the banks problem if these people can't pay it back.
The Irish state should have no responsibility.
Banks have control of their own money; they use/gamble it in order to make a profit.
If they invest it unwisely, that's their responsibility; they should suffer the same consequences as any other private business that invests unwisely.

meglome

hinault wrote: »

Correct.

Irish banks borrowed billions in the wholesale money markets.
They then lent this money to property developers, property gamblers, and frankly naive mortgage applicants.

Irish banks were totally irresponsible both in their borrowing and lending policies.

And Joe Public should not be expected to fund any rescue of the Irish Banks.

Okay... There are 789,000 private residential mortgages in this country to a value of 177.4 billion Euro. 40,492 of these are in at least 90 days of arrears to the value of 7.8 billion Euro. And a large number of the 789,000 are in negative equity. So this isn't a few "property gamblers, and frankly naive mortgage applicants", this is a large number of the households in this country. Joe Public took these loans out of their own free will.

ascanbe wrote: »

The international community didn't loan 'us' any money.
International banks, private institutions, loaned money to our banks, also private institutions.
Our banks then lent this money, entered into agreements, with some private citizens of this state; it's between them and its the banks problem if these people can't pay it back.
The Irish state should have no responsibility.
Banks have control of their own money; they use/gamble it in order to make a profit.
If they invest it unwisely, that's their responsibility; they should suffer the same consequences as any other private business that invests unwisely.

The banks gave that money to the Irish people i.e. us. If the banks fail, all the people with savings lose them and internationally we couldn't borrow the price of a postage stamp. The money we borrowed is owed to sensible country's like Germany, which might cause their economy to fail or get into trouble, from what we as a nation did. Why should other nations suffer from what we did?

Run_to_da_hills

hinault wrote: »

Correct.

Irish banks borrowed billions in the wholesale money markets.
They then lent this money to property developers, property gamblers, and frankly naive mortgage applicants.

Irish banks were totally irresponsible both in their borrowing and lending policies.

And Joe Public should not be expected to fund any rescue of the Irish Banks.

It should also be up to the Government to regulate all this and make sure nothing could get out of hand but instead they did the opposite and by fanning the flames of this bubble by lying in bed with property developers, promoting tax breaks and encouraging people to buy etc etc.

hinault

meglome wrote: »

Okay... There are 789,000 private residential mortgages in this country to a value of 177.4 billion Euro. 40,492 of these are in at least 90 days of arrears to the value of 7.8 billion Euro. And a large number of the 789,000 are in negative equity. So this isn't a few "property gamblers, and frankly naive mortgage applicants", this is a large number of the households in this country. Joe Public took these loans out of their own free will.

I was arguing that there were three categories of borrowers from the Irish banks.

1.Property developers
2.Property gamblers (as distinct from property developers)
3.Naive first time mortgage applicants.

hinault

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It should also be up to the Government to regulate all this and make sure nothing could get out of hand but instead they did the opposite and by fanning the flames of this bubble by lying in bed with property developers, promoting tax breaks and encouraging people to buy etc etc.

+1.