Re: Stevie Re: Adam 1 clearly this much more evil than
"..... that were then fraudulently represented as solid investment vehicles...." Yeah, another Indymedia "reader"? Believe me, with the amounts involved and the large number of bloodthirsty lawyers in New York, if there was a grain of truth in that statement then it would have been proven in court many years ago.
"....Then said banks colluded to work an insurance scam under the blanket term Credit Default Swap...." Nice conspiracy theory, do you have any verifiable proof of that libelous statement (ahem, El Reg mod, you may want to check Stevie's claim before leaving it on your forum thread)?
".....what they did was unethical...." Ooh, "unethical"! What's next, you're going to accuse them of being "unfair"? Ethics, as with the price, is set by the market. No-one was complaining when those funds were making a profit, including the millions of people that were happy when the funds were increasing in value, and definitely not the people that got houses and mortgages they should not have had.
"..... and downright stupid...." No, more of risky than stupid. The stupid people were the ones that put politics before economic advice, namely the Democrats that blocked reforms. The markets operate inside the rules set by the politicians, and the Democrat politicians just loved the idea of giving mortgages to people that simply couldn't afford them (of course, that has nothing to do with trying to influence how they might vote....).
"....But if you want me to believe that "President" Bush (does anyone believe he was the one running the country rather than the old guy with the oversized safe in his office?) had a grasp of the financial situation his ship of state was sailing, I'm going to need to be administered some very strong drugs....' Actually, I'd just suggest some actual factual reading to
fill in the gaps in your knowledge. Maybe you were too busy taking said drugs to actually do any research?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
