[kj] Killing joke and Communism

[Brendan]

I see your strong disagreement about my use of the word rape etc and I
raise you, I vehemently disagree with your strong disagreement. I am
currently winning in the disagreement stakes, I'd also like you to know
that, however much you disagree, please add 150% and that's as much as I
will disagree, to infinity. I disagree so much a big vein in my forehead
is throbbing ready to burst and I'm frothing at the mouth.

Seriously, Pete what you're saying is correct on paper, and I thought it
was the case too, but in the real world it's just not happening:

http://cbs5.com/30minutes/local_story_266005029.html

People borrowing as much as they like regardless of repayment ability is
not feasible in the real world, works fine in an Ayn Rand wet dream maybe
(the omnipotent market will self correct, yay!), but the worldwide ecomony
is suffering from the fallout of it right now...not to mention the poor
people whose lives are turning upside down because they are losing their
houses and going bankrupt...with new laws in the US apparently that mean
you will be liable for the money beyond bankruptcy...? May be wrong on
that...

It's all very well saying tough shit if you're that dumb that you got
yourself into too much debt, but that's pretty fucking harsh...not
everyone is as aware / intelligent / healthily skeptical as we are...but
that doesn't say anything about their character. Surely that's important
too?

As George Carlin points out..."You know how DUMB the average person is?
Well by definition half of the people are DUMBER than that"

He actually means median but you know...


> I strongly disagree with your use of the word " rape" to describe a

> business transaction between two willing partners , the person who is

> seeking the loan initiated the move , they approached the bank , so using

> the word "rape" is inappropriate .

>    In the UK there are strict regulations about how much banks can loan

> people , the people must prove that they can repay the money , and

> banks will not loan anyone more than three and a half times their

> annual salary , so no one is "conning " anyone . I believe that people

> should be able to borrow as much as the like , it should be down to the

> individual to be responsible for deciding how much he can pay back and

> so how much he can borrow , and if hes so stupid to borrow more than he

> can pay back, then thats his problem.

>   Loans are a business transaction between two willing parties , there is

> no "conning" , "raping" or "premeditated moves" and so no one needs to

> be held accountable if any party  defaults on their responsibilities .

>

>

>

> ========================================

> Message Received: Aug 23 2007, 01:19 AM

> From: "Brendan"

> To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)"

> Cc:

> Subject: Re: [kj] Killing joke and Communism

>

> The irony however is that at the end of the day the 'consumers' are paying

> to bail out the organisations that raped them financially in the first

> place...as I said before, I personally see the chance that this was a

> premeditated move...the big fish know they will be bailed out because

> otherwise they would take the economy down with them.

>

> Yes it's a good thing for the Fed to bail out the banks WHEN you're

> already in that situation, agreed, however the big picture is: how the

> hell did they get away with selling those loans to people in the first

> place? And you can spout all the 'consumer freedom' or 'personal freedom'

> stuff you want, but no one should be able to be conned into a loan that

> they will never be able to afford and will bankrupt them...and shaft the

> whole economy. 'Ignorance of the law is no excuse' so to speak, BUT...out

> of the two parties in these loan agreements...one of them was aware that

> they weren't feasible, and that was the banks / lenders! They should be

> held accountable.

>

> Another conspiracy theory: the contraction of the economy is a desired

> outcome to corporations who profit from this mess, who saw it coming (and

> / or helped engineer it), because when they profit and the economy

> contracts, their total share of the country's wealth, and hence their

> power, increases...

>

>> Greg : The U.S Government was correct to bail out the banks . If the

>> banks

>> would have gone bust , then it would have been peoples savings and

>> pensions that were lost . And the Governments tax money was made by the

>> people paying taxes . The U.S Government is there to protect the

>> interests

>> of U.S. citizens , not another Countries citizens .

>> I would be very unhappy if my government were giving money away whilst

>> at the same time my savings were being lost because of a bank going

>> bust.

>>_______________________________________________

> Gathering mailing list

> Gathering at misera.net

> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering

>