Occupy Wall Street (2 Viewers)

[pantagrapher]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

 

[TobiasFunke]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

Beats me. I'm not the one who said it. I'd guess maybe it's the extent of their charitable giving or how they use their wealth and influence to affect policy, but who knows? I was just pointing out that Jewell thought he was highlighting some sort of obvious hypocrisy when in fact he was simply pointing out that he hadn't bothered to read the whole sentence.

 

[Steeler]

I just looked at the list of Ben and Jerry flavors... and there is an actual flavor called "What a Cluster"

 

[Steeler]

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

Beats me. I'm not the one who said it. I'd guess maybe it's the extent of their charitable giving or how they use their wealth and influence to affect policy, but who knows?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

So the assumption is that peeps on the left are more charitable that peeps on the right; and I doubt that is true. In addition, it's up to peeps on the left to determine how "worthy" someone is to keep their own wealth... awesome!

 

[TobiasFunke]

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

Beats me. I'm not the one who said it. I'd guess maybe it's the extent of their charitable giving or how they use their wealth and influence to affect policy, but who knows?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

So the assumption is that peeps on the left are more charitable that peeps on the right; and I doubt that is true. In addition, it's up to peeps on the left to determine how "worthy" someone is to keep their own wealth... awesome!

No, the assumption is that when people give their criteria for making a certain decision you shouldn't call them out for what you perceive as hypocrisy while only considering some of the criteria.You seem hell-bent on making everything about left vs. right. Are you a Fensalk alias?

 

[pantagrapher]

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

Beats me. I'm not the one who said it. I'd guess maybe it's the extent of their charitable giving or how they use their wealth and influence to affect policy, but who knows?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

So the assumption is that peeps on the left are more charitable that peeps on the right; and I doubt that is true. In addition, it's up to peeps on the left to determine how "worthy" someone is to keep their own wealth... awesome!

WAT2

 

[guderian]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

My guess is that it comes down to how the wealth was obtained. I'll bet that any groups that are typical left-wing political donors are going to be left off the list.

 

[guderian]

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

Beats me. I'm not the one who said it. I'd guess maybe it's the extent of their charitable giving or how they use their wealth and influence to affect policy, but who knows?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

So the assumption is that peeps on the left are more charitable that peeps on the right; and I doubt that is true. In addition, it's up to peeps on the left to determine how "worthy" someone is to keep their own wealth... awesome!

No, the assumption is that when people give their criteria for making a certain decision you shouldn't call them out for what you perceive as hypocrisy while only considering some of the criteria.You seem hell-bent on making everything about left vs. right. Are you a Fensalk alias?

Says the guy who's apparent purpose is to nit pick any post that isn't left leaning in a political thread.

 

[Jewell]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

Or I'm acknowledging that the decision of which millionaires to protest is likely framed around their hard left bias. Kind of like every argument that you make, Tobias.

Here's a read

 

[guderian]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

I'd like to occupy this one's underpants.

Doubt she's wearing any.

Hello

#occupymydonger

 

[urbanhack]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWSvsTP-1.jpeg

 

[flufhed]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWSvsTP-1.jpeg

This nails it.

 

[Zeff]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Are you really going to question how informed a group is after posting twice consecutively about what you "guess" about them?Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

 

[guderian]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

The planned route, for which the marchers do not have a police permit, would bring the protest past the homes of News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch, JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, oil magnate David Koch, New York Private Bank and Trust chief Howard Milstein and hedge fund manager John Paulson.

I guess they aren't using your criteria. I know that Koch has donated close to $1 billion to charitable causes.

 

[Zeff]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

The planned route, for which the marchers do not have a police permit, would bring the protest past the homes of News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch, JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, oil magnate David Koch, New York Private Bank and Trust chief Howard Milstein and hedge fund manager John Paulson.

I guess they aren't using your criteria. I know that Koch has donated close to $1 billion to charitable causes.

Too precious.

 

[Jewell]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWSvsTP-1.jpeg

This nails it.

 

[guderian]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Are you really going to question how informed a group is after posting twice consecutively about what you "guess" about them?Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

I absolutely question how informed they are until we get a single cogent thought, issue or proposal out of them. Until then it's a mere hippie tantrum from a demographic that put Obama (who you say they hate) into office. Once we have anything formal out of them, then we won't have to guess anymore.

 

[Steeler]

Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

my guess ( ) is the lazy mob is upset because he's not doing enough redistribution of wealth.

 

[Jewell]

Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

There is a lot of truth to the bolded. I personally saw Occupiers march to the White House to demand a Beer Summit with Obama.

 

[Reaper]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Are you really going to question how informed a group is after posting twice consecutively about what you "guess" about them?Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

Lot of Lefties coming out of the woodwork.

 

[guderian]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Are you really going to question how informed a group is after posting twice consecutively about what you "guess" about them?Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

Lot of Lefties coming out of the woodwork.

After they dominated the government for two years and shared it for the past seven, they're apparently unhappy with the results.

 

[KiddLattimer]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWSvsTP-1.jpeg

This nails it.

Well done sir

 

[TobiasFunke]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Are you really going to question how informed a group is after posting twice consecutively about what you "guess" about them?Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

Lot of Lefties coming out of the woodwork.

After they dominated the government for two years and shared it for the past seven, they're apparently unhappy with the results.

Someone could say the same thing about the "Righties" and the Tea Party after they "dominated the government" for six years and "shared it" for fourteen. And they'd be just as wrong as you are for categorizing every single thing as either on one side or the other.Here's a crazy idea: maybe not every group of people or political movement can be shoved into one of two ridiculously broad categories that we either blindly support or blindly oppose? I consider myself left of center, and I agree with almost nothing these people are complaining about.

 

[Gr00vus]

So are we getting closer to a French revolution type thing? Who gets to be Napoleon?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

 

[Jobber]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWSvsTP-1.jpeg

This nails it.

Well done sir

Yep

 

[Widbil83]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

Really? I haven't seen any anti-Obama signs or heard any of the protesters saying bad things about him in any of the interviewss I have watched. Seems most of the Move.org and Union type people there are his biggest supporters.

 

[Gr00vus]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

But gosh darn it TGunz, they just deserve that money!

 

[TobiasFunke]

I'm guessing it's pretty quiet down by these protests as they're likely studying todays proposed regulations under the Volcker rule and it's impact on bank trading activities. I'm guessing there's a decent chance this ends the occupation.

Lot of righties losing their #### in here. Which is odd. Since in the three occupations I've now visited, there is no single person coming under attack harder in the group discourse than Barack Obama. The rank and file of this movement hates the Dem in Chief.

Really? I haven't seen any anti-Obama signs or heard any of the protesters saying bad things about him in any of the interviewss I have watched. Seems most of the Move.org and Union type people there are his biggest supporters.

I googled Occupy Wall Street Obama and on the first page of results I got (along with a bunch of articles about the political impact of the protests and a bunch of crazies with conspiracy theories about how Obama is behind it all) one clip of and one article about protesters railing against Obama. Nothing anywhere about them supporting Obama in any way.

 

[flufhed]

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/OWSvsTP-1.jpeg

This nails it.

Well done sir

Yep

I don't get it.

 

[Don Quixote]

The DC protestors have apparently decided to sit in the road blocking the major road out of DC to VA, at the start of rush hour. I currently see a line of cars from my office window (that is much worse than usual). Between this and shutting down the Air & Space Museum, whoever is advising them on how to get sympathy for their cause, yeah, they should fire that person.

 

[quickhands]

not to go to inside baseball but when the detroit free press and detroit news unions struck about 15 years ago. They tried a tactic of having 4-5 cars drive side by side on freeways during rush hour. All driving about 20 mph. It really helped them win the hearts of metro detroiters.

 

[bueno]

This thing looks like Spiderman's PJ's, so I'll keep this brief and retire for the evening. Suffice to say we have different opinions of what it would mean to break up the banks that are too big to fail. I see it as a positive thing if the commercial side was kept separate from the investment side. It just makes sense. As does a partnership requirement as per what was mentioned earlier in the thread. The real big players that the US banks would compete with would still be European banks like UBS, not any Canadian Banks (who should be commended for coming away from the subprime crisis largely unscathed). Look where UBS is now? Do you think they are in any greater position than our restructured mega-banks would be after having to eliminate nearly 20,000 jobs and instituting a new payment structure that significantly pared down pay, stock incentives and variable compensation? Ask Peter Kurer.I also believe credit needs to be approached in a more rational manner and come under control for individual consumers as well as corporations and governments. People are slowly waking up to this. I'll leave the predictions for the future to others, but I can see some big changes coming in this regard. Technology and the internet, if left uncontrolled by corporate interests, will go a long way towards this... we'll see.

Thank gods that dog's breakfast is gone!What suffices to say, is that I think you lack an international perspective as to what breaking up our banks would mean to our ability to compete in global credit markets. This is perfectly clear, as you don't realize what a large player the Bank of Montreal is in the international markets. i wasn't referring to the home mortgage business. No offense really. Most Americans lack that perspective.One could argue, and I would agree, that breaking out Merrill Lynch from Bank of America (i.e. getting banks out of the financial adviser/broker business) might be a net positive, but I'm not sure that would be sufficient to prevent another derivative bubble. Still, Bank of America would be too big to fail. So what else would you do? Maybe Slapdash can weigh in on that. However, if you weaken our banks, then you will see more branches of HSBC, Scotia Bank, UBS, etc. take their place in the niches our banks are forced to abandon. You will be other banks surpass ours in the global investment banking industry. And yes, I think UBS will be stronger for the reorganization that they are going through now. I also don't believe you have the perspective as to what getting our banks out of the investment market would do to their ability to compete in the world market with regard to investing in capital projects rather than just lending money. As to personal credit, beware of unintended consequences. Putting a cap on credit card interest will have farther-reaching negative effects than you think it does.

 

[pantagrapher]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

I'm not sure how anyone can look at that and not see that they've figured out an effective way to suck money out of the economy and they are gradually perfecting it. What they're doing is good for nobody but them. Vampire Squid indeed.

 

[bueno]

To me, this whole thing is just another example of the latent racism in the Democratic Party. A million black people march on the capital, and a few people hug and stuff and then we all forget about it. But a million white dirty hippies, and this is some serious business. A movement if you will.

And friends, somewhere in Washington enshrined in some little folder, is a study in black and white of my fingerprints. And the only reason I'm singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a situation like that there's only one thing you can do and that's walk into the shrink wherever you are ,just walk in say "Shrink, You can get anything you want, at Alice's restaurant.". And walk out. You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both ######s and they won't take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said fifty people a day walking in singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may think it's a movement.

I met Arlo once. Neat church. And it is absolutely hysterical that you use this example, seeing as it is really an "anti-stupidity song" and given the story behind it.

 

[Christo]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

R

 

[Christo]

“[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City,” the organizers said in a release, “specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%.”

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

I'd say it's accruing immense wealth and not contributing a proportionate amount of that wealth into maintaining the social conditions that allowed you to accrue it.

And how would any of these grubby ne'er-do-wells be able to make that determination appropriately?

 

[bueno]

This ought to be fun.

http://idealab.talki...use.php?ref=fpb

Wall Street protesters are planning a march to the New York City homes of millionaires like News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch and conservative billionaire and tea party backer David Koch.

Protesters, currently camping out in Zuccotti Park in lower Manhattan, will take the subway to 59th street and 5th avenue, and march to the homes of the fat cat-iest of fat cats in New York City, including Murdoch, Koch, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, real estate developer Howard Milstein and hedge fund manager John Paulson.

The march is scheduled to begin around 12:30PM on Tuesday, and is being organized by groups like the Working Families Party and New York Communities for Change.

"[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City," the organizers said in a release, "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%."

"Ninety-nine percent of the residents of New York are going to suffer from this tax giveaway so the 1% who already live in absolute luxury can put more money in their pockets," said Doug Forand, who is among the march's organizers.

I hope they turn firehoses on them.

So do they.

Beats bathing in the East River

 

[bueno]

"[T]he tour will visit homes of some of the most well-known millionaires in New York City," the organizers said in a release, "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99%."

Holy ####! Mayor Bloomberg, The Clintons, and Whoopi Goldberg should hire some extra security at their residences.

I see you missed the "specially chosen for their willingness to hoard wealth" part. That's OK. Sometimes I stop at commas too. It's hard to read whole sentences!

What qualifies someone as being a "hoarder of wealth"?

SQUIRREL!

 

[guderian]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

The following part didn't cheer you up?"The sector employs just 12 percent of the city’s work force, but accounted for one out of every three jobs lost in the recession."

Maybe one day you'll put them all out of work and inflicted a requisite amount of pain on them, in your eyes. Happy day for America, indeed.

Of course, according to this report the state of NY would lose 14% of it's tax revenues, but this isn't about economics, it's about scapegoating and retribution.

 

[BoneYardDog]

Nancy Pelosi is a huge supporter... Really Nancy...

 

[tommyGunZ]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

The following part didn't cheer you up?"The sector employs just 12 percent of the city’s work force, but accounted for one out of every three jobs lost in the recession."

Maybe one day you'll put them all out of work and inflicted a requisite amount of pain on them, in your eyes. Happy day for America, indeed.

Of course, according to this report the state of NY would lose 14% of it's tax revenues, but this isn't about economics, it's about scapegoating and retribution.

That's what you take from the chart I linked?

 

[davidbostonsbicepsfan]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

The following part didn't cheer you up?"The sector employs just 12 percent of the city’s work force, but accounted for one out of every three jobs lost in the recession."

Maybe one day you'll put them all out of work and inflicted a requisite amount of pain on them, in your eyes. Happy day for America, indeed.

Of course, according to this report the state of NY would lose 14% of it's tax revenues, but this isn't about economics, it's about scapegoating and retribution.

That's what you take from the chart I linked?

.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

How do they compare to doctors and lawyers?

 

[jon_mx]

Oprah salary vs. everyone else

Fixed.

 

[DrJ]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

How do they compare to doctors and lawyers?

I imagine any group that lumps jobs where you're competing with illegals for employment hasn't fared well in comparsion to those that don't. Or jobs where you're competing against someone in China or India.

 

[Road Warriors]

Bankers salaries vs. everyone else

How do they compare to doctors and lawyers?

Not sure, but those bankers look like pikers next to baseball players.

 

[Fensalk]

OWS should marginalize the democratic party and allow the GOP to claim the political center. Let's conduct a study of partisan trends since we are still in the early stages of OWS. I'll bump this once in a while with updates as we track the collapse of the donkeys. We will look at long longer term trend over the next 12 months heading into the election.

Rasmussen - Party ID

Oct 2nd, 2011: GOP 33.9%, dem 33.7% GOP +0.2

Rasmussen generic congressional ballot

Oct 9th, 2011: GOP 43%, dem 38%, GOP +5

Oct 2nd, 2011: GOP 44%, dem 38%, GOP +6

I'll work on adding more polls later.

I can't decide what's more annoying: your need to turn every single discussion no matter the subject into your own opportunity to play cheerleader for the GOP, or the fact that you post in a tone that makes it sound like you think you're a condescending college professor lecturing his students. "We will look at the long term trend over the next 12 months?" Really? Thanks for letting us know.

That'll be detention every day for the rest of this week, kid. Keep it up and I'll rap your fingers with this ruler.

 

[Neofight]

This thing looks like Spiderman's PJ's, so I'll keep this brief and retire for the evening. Suffice to say we have different opinions of what it would mean to break up the banks that are too big to fail. I see it as a positive thing if the commercial side was kept separate from the investment side. It just makes sense. As does a partnership requirement as per what was mentioned earlier in the thread. The real big players that the US banks would compete with would still be European banks like UBS, not any Canadian Banks (who should be commended for coming away from the subprime crisis largely unscathed). Look where UBS is now? Do you think they are in any greater position than our restructured mega-banks would be after having to eliminate nearly 20,000 jobs and instituting a new payment structure that significantly pared down pay, stock incentives and variable compensation? Ask Peter Kurer.I also believe credit needs to be approached in a more rational manner and come under control for individual consumers as well as corporations and governments. People are slowly waking up to this. I'll leave the predictions for the future to others, but I can see some big changes coming in this regard. Technology and the internet, if left uncontrolled by corporate interests, will go a long way towards this... we'll see.

Thank gods that dog's breakfast is gone!What suffices to say, is that I think you lack an international perspective as to what breaking up our banks would mean to our ability to compete in global credit markets. This is perfectly clear, as you don't realize what a large player the Bank of Montreal is in the international markets. i wasn't referring to the home mortgage business. No offense really. Most Americans lack that perspective.One could argue, and I would agree, that breaking out Merrill Lynch from Bank of America (i.e. getting banks out of the financial adviser/broker business) might be a net positive, but I'm not sure that would be sufficient to prevent another derivative bubble. Still, Bank of America would be too big to fail. So what else would you do? Maybe Slapdash can weigh in on that. However, if you weaken our banks, then you will see more branches of HSBC, Scotia Bank, UBS, etc. take their place in the niches our banks are forced to abandon. You will be other banks surpass ours in the global investment banking industry. And yes, I think UBS will be stronger for the reorganization that they are going through now. I also don't believe you have the perspective as to what getting our banks out of the investment market would do to their ability to compete in the world market with regard to investing in capital projects rather than just lending money. As to personal credit, beware of unintended consequences. Putting a cap on credit card interest will have farther-reaching negative effects than you think it does.

Fácil tigre! I did not know you were French. I wasn't really limiting my scope to the mortgage markets, amigo, but if you say so...Just so the class understands; you are talking about BMO, yes? The third largest bank in all of the empire of Canadia? With something on the order of $400 billion (with a "B") in total assets? This is who you fear for the sake of our little ol' banks? Isn't the RBC something like twice the size of BMO? Why not worry about them? Didn't they almost get swallowed by RBC before those Socialists up north stepped in and they had to settle for a merged credit processing solution in Moneris? Perhaps this behemoth is what we should all be up late at night worrying about!Honestly man, this is tripe. I went so far as to ask my buddy David V., who not only has boatloads but also experience in int. finance, if your suppositions held any weight and he basically asked why I was bothering him with this Bank of Montreal nonsense (full disclosure: the man is from Toronto, so maybe it's a civic pride/rivalry thing). He is a good deal smarter than me (and possibly even as smart as you, though doubtful). When pressed he offered that you were either fear mongering or perhaps had some other reason to be fearful, but either way were "talking out of someplace other than his mouth." I offered that you could be fishing but that one went over his head. He did text me later though with a thought to share with you: "Tell him to hide all his money... if they actually go through with it!"... Perhaps he would fit right in around here.So which is it: are you BS-ing or are the hippies getting to you?