|
Occupy Toronto (pg. 40)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Endlesswave |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
I would suggest researching the topic yourself rather than letting Hollywood paint the picture for you. the film doesn’t name anyone, so you have no way to judge the veracity of the plot. |
The film names a lot of people man. Hell, the executive board of Goldman Sachs were brought to congress for their crimes, it did all but give them a slap on the wrist but ok.
I mean it's obviously biased but the question is, is it true??
For me the question isn't how people themselves took whatever loans were offered, it's the responsibilty (or lackthereof) these big companys to protect those investments and not play around with people's money without a conscience. I mean hell it's not their money what do they care. |
|
|
| FunkyCrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by Endlesswave
The film names a lot of people man. Hell, the executive board of Goldman Sachs were brought to congress for their crimes, it did all but give them a slap on the wrist but ok.
I mean it's obviously biased but the question is, is it true??
For me the question isn't how people themselves took whatever loans were offered, it's the responsibility (or lack-thereof) these big companies to protect those investments and not play around with people's money without a conscience. I mean hell it's not their money what do they care. |
I have a feeling he mixed up the movies? |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by FunkyCrew
I have a feeling he mixed up the movies? |
Yeah my apologies, you’re right. I was thinking of the other one…whatever that was called.
| quote: | Originally posted by Endlesswave
For me the question isn't how people themselves took whatever loans were offered, it's the responsibilty (or lackthereof) these big companys to protect those investments and not play around with people's money without a
conscience. I mean hell it's not their money what do they care. |
whilst I agree that the biggest piece of the “responsibility pie” lies with the financial institutions, the ironic thing is it was attempts by these companies to manage their risk that ultimately destroyed the financial markets. And it should also be noted that the biggest losses by the biggest companies had nothing to do with them “playing around with people’s money”, and everything to do with people voluntarily choosing to invest with these companies. We need to acknowledge the difference between mortgage lenders and securities firms. |
|
|
| Endlesswave |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Yeah my apologies, you’re right. I was thinking of the other one…whatever that was called.
whilst I agree that the biggest piece of the “responsibility pie” lies with the financial institutions, the ironic thing is it was attempts by these companies to manage their risk that ultimately destroyed the financial markets. And it should also be noted that the biggest losses by the biggest companies had nothing to do with them “playing around with people’s money”, and everything to do with people voluntarily choosing to invest with these companies. We need to acknowledge the difference between mortgage lenders and securities firms. |
How did they try manage the risk exactly? As far as I understand it their way is by making changes so that if their investments went in the ter (sub prime mtgs as was the case in the movie) these companies bet against those so that when they did fail they still made money.
Not to mention NO regulation with the derivatives market...how is that fair?
As for people voluntarily investing their money, what choice do you have if you want a house if the majority of these institutions choose policies that are in their benefit and ONLY their benifit instead of both being in their benfit of the public trust? |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Endlesswave
How did they try manage the risk exactly? As far as I understand it their way is by making changes so that if their investments went in the ter (sub prime mtgs as was the case in the movie) these companies bet against those so that when they did fail they still made money. |
More or less. That’s risk management.
| quote: | Originally posted by Endlesswave
Not to mention NO regulation with the derivatives market...how is that fair? |
Well, im not sure that “fair” is important, it’s what works. Clearly a lack of regulatory oversight didn’t work with derivatives.
| quote: | Originally posted by Endlesswave
As for people voluntarily investing their money, what choice do you have if you want a house if the majority of these institutions choose policies that are in their benefit and ONLY their benifit instead of both being in their benfit of the public trust? |
I’m not exactly sure what you’re trying to say here. I was referring to people that freely invested in mortgage backed securities (or other financial tools), not those that bought houses (though the criticism could be levelled against both). Again, be careful not to conflate lenders (bank of America) and securities firms (lehman bros). you can regulate markets, but you can’t prevent people from making poor decisions with their finances. |
|
|
| FunkyCrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
but you can’t prevent people from making poor decisions with their finances. |
+1
personal debt is personal choice and therefore personal responsibility
in the related news:
Occupy London becomes first Canadian camp forcibly evicted by police
| quote: | Police in London, Ont., have apparently become the first in Canada to forcefully evict a group of Occupy protesters, moving in during the early hours of Wednesday morning.
Aspokesman for the London police confirmed officers went to Victoria Park in the city around 12:40 a.m. local time on Wednesday to “enforce the bylaw.”
Protesters have spent more than two weeks at the park — one of numerous encampments across the country and the United States protesting a range of issues, including perceived financial inequalities in society.
The city issued an eviction notice this week, citing bylaws against erecting structures in the park and against being there overnight.
Const. Dennis Rivest of the London police said no one was injured during the police action Wednesday morning, but he would not say whether all the protesters had been successfully evicted.
The city’s police chief was to hold a news conference later Wednesday morning.
“You can arrest us but you’re not going to stop this movement,” a man identifying himself only as Eric said in a video posted on the Occupy London Ontario group’s Twitter site before police moved in, as sirens could be heard in the background.
Media reports said police waited until several hundred supporters, who had shown up in light of the eviction notice to stand with the Occupy protesters, had left for the night.
Tensions have been rising over the Canadian Occupy protests in recent days.
In Vancouver, two police officers were bitten by protesters this week and a bucket of urine was dumped on a City of Victoria worker.
Vancouver police Chief Jim Chu said Tuesday it is time for the protesters to leave their encampment outside the Vancouver Art Gallery peacefully, warning that it has been “infiltrated by a violent element.”
“We have seen the black masks and others who are intent on violence,” Chu told reporters.
Vancouver officials have asked the B.C. Supreme Court to allow them to clear the campsite of tents, tarps, personal belongings and other materials. The court has adjourned until Wednesday to allow protesters to hire lawyers to oppose the injunction against the camp.
The protesters argued they have a constitutional right to protest and have been steadfast in saying they will not leave their camp.
In Victoria, meanwhile, bylaw officials served Occupy Victoria protesters in Centennial Square on Tuesday with copies of the city’s petition for a court order to clear the area.
The city applied late Monday to B.C. Supreme Court for an order to remove tents and structures. A hearing has been scheduled for Nov. 15.
Meanwhile, Calgary politicians offered a clearer picture of how they intend to deal with the Occupy protesters’ camp in their city Monday, as city councillors endorsed an “action plan” to rid Olympic Plaza of tents even as protesters vow to stay put without shelter.
In Montreal, protesters are getting frustrated that political activism has taken a back seat to dealing with day-to-day problems managing the camp.
Activist Felix Saint-Laurent said he now spends most of his time “preventing a homeless guy from fighting with a schizophrenic who hasn’t taken his pill.”
“At the moment the problem we have to solve is the drug and alcohol use in the camp which are not related to the Occupy movement,” Saint-Laurent said. “But they are part of our society and we are in this society. So we have no choice.”
Occupy Ottawa is headed for a showdown with the National Capital Commission, which is set to hold the Winterlude winter festival in the downtown park where protesters have set up their camp.
In Manitoba, Occupy Winnipeg is no longer welcome at the legislative building, a move protesters suspect is the province’s way of getting them to pack up and go home.
Over the past few days, the protesters who’ve sent up camp in Memorial Park across the street have been denied access to the building’s washrooms, a luxury compared to the porta-potties they have in the park, and to use the building as a place to warm up. |
LINK |
|
|
| samhouse |
What makes me sick is that some of these morons have taken this as an excuse to setup camp and get ing high....overdose....really???
Disrespectful morons.... |
|
|
| FunkyCrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by samhouse
What makes me sick is that some of these morons have taken this as an excuse to setup camp and get ing high....overdose....really???
Disrespectful morons.... |
i think it's a big sign that these peeps need to go.. it's lost its credibility by now and the fact that locals are already opposing their presence says a lot!
for once, I'm with Ford on this one. |
|
|
| GGM |
| quote: | Originally posted by samhouse
What makes me sick is that some of these morons have taken this as an excuse to setup camp and get ing high....overdose....really???
Disrespectful morons.... |
From my understanding a big part of the problem in all major cities that have the occupy "camps" setup is that homeless people and drug addicts have found a spot to dwell. When the occupiers themselves are camping on city property they can't really evict these people. The most they can do is have some kind of addiction support on site but that doesn't make a dent in the problem really.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Whilst I agree that the biggest piece of the “responsibility pie” lies with the financial institutions, the ironic thing is it was attempts by these companies to manage their risk that ultimately destroyed the financial markets. And it should also be noted that the biggest losses by the biggest companies had nothing to do with them “playing around with people’s money”, and everything to do with people voluntarily choosing to invest with these companies. We need to acknowledge the difference between mortgage lenders and securities firms. |
I'd say the biggest up on the institutions part was the dishonest packaging of mortgages to sell as investments which ultimately involved mortgage lenders, investment firms, rating agencies and regulatory firms to some degree or another. You're absolutely right in that the consumer played a part by giving their money for things like this but imo you should be able to hand your money to a professional and expect them to manage it with integrity. I wish I could say this blowup would help people learn to do more research and be more cautious but human nature is to forget in 15-20 years, get greedy again and make the same mistakes.
It's all a matter of opinion but the biggest fault lies on the governments the way I see it. We give them taxes to protect us from many things such as war, illnesses, criminals etc. and shady financial dealings at this level should be on that list. Governments and their regulations were the only difference between Canada and the States and the main reason it didn't happen here. |
|
|
| jon jon |
 |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by GGM
I'd say the biggest up on the institutions part was the dishonest packaging of mortgages to sell as investments which ultimately involved mortgage lenders, investment firms, rating agencies and regulatory firms to some degree or another. You're absolutely right in that the consumer played a part by giving their money for things like this but imo you should be able to hand your money to a professional and expect them to manage it with integrity. I wish I could say this blowup would help people learn to do more research and be more cautious but human nature is to forget in 15-20 years, get greedy again and make the same mistakes.
It's all a matter of opinion but the biggest fault lies on the governments the way I see it. We give them taxes to protect us from many things such as war, illnesses, criminals etc. and shady financial dealings at this level should be on that list. Governments and their regulations were the only difference between Canada and the States and the main reason it didn't happen here. |
Agreed on all points, except I think it is hard to expect governments to prevent/mitigate any and all events, especially in instances like this where people weren’t actually breaking any laws (for the most part). That definitely provides scope for regulatory improvement of course, and Australia too was protected from the worst of it due to our regulations. Hopefully lawmakers have learned from this (ha fat chance!). |
|
|
|
|
