3 ms·

They crash at the convenience of banks. Everyone except banks hurt in 2008. Banks then went in buying everything cheap. The people could not buy at all, since

They crash at the convenience of banks. Everyone except banks hurt in 2008. Banks then went in buying everything cheap. The people could not buy at all, since everyone was robbed. But banks were bailed out, so they had the money to buy cheap stocks around the world after the crisis they themselves created. Is it not obvious? The crashes and the pumps are architected by banks. The people who lost homes got hurt, but banks didn't. Banks made trillions of $ from the 2008 crisis.

pmorici 9y ago
69% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings. If you are in debt inflation is a benefit to you so long as your wages keep pace with inflation.
- dropit_sphere 9y ago
  >so long as your wages keep pace with inflation. That's a big if, though, depending on your (or "you" in aggregate) market power. And if you've got less than $1K in savings, you probably don't have a lot.
swendoog 9y ago
If you're left wondering how banks simultaneously caused but benefited from the great recession of 2008... take note of the fact that bankers OWN Washington. Then as now. From Clinton, to Bush, even Obama (who had RECORD numbers of ex Goldman Sachs executives in the executive cabinet during his presidency). People should be infuriated about what happened in 2008. But it seems like the wool has been pulled over the eyes of the public. As long as we have our smartphone beeping away with people liking our pictures, then never mind the disturbing truths of our reality - that wealth is being siphoned away from the public, into the hands of an increasingly small group, at a record pace.
- mythrwy 9y ago
  It could also be that former big bankers are in the executive cabinet because the financial system is pretty important and they understand it. The concerns about conflict of interest are certainly valid but maybe just maybe it's not a big conspiracy.
  - vkou 9y ago
    There's too much money at play for there to not be a conspiracy - of some sort. I think it's pretty hard to argue that our economy is not highly skewed towards protecting the wealth of the very rich.
  - swendoog 9y ago
    I understand that perspective and I don't disagree. That certainly is the case; Many are there because they understand the financial system better than anyone else. I don't mean to suggest that there is a grand organized conspiracy. That said, I do believe there is a strong network of bankers that promote their self interest.
toast0 9y ago
In 2009, I bought a house from a bank for $50k less than the balance they foreclosed on, and I expect they had no recourse against the borrower. In aggregate, there were a lot of bank losses. Banks didn't expect the downturn either, or they wouldn't have made so many loans with essentially no standards. (Admittedly, they also weren't expecting to keep loans on their own books for very long)

pmorici 9y ago

69% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings. If you are in debt inflation is a benefit to you so long as your wages keep pace with inflation.

dropit_sphere 9y ago
>so long as your wages keep pace with inflation. That's a big if, though, depending on your (or "you" in aggregate) market power. And if you've got less than $1K in savings, you probably don't have a lot.

swendoog 9y ago

If you're left wondering how banks simultaneously caused but benefited from the great recession of 2008... take note of the fact that bankers OWN Washington. Then as now. From Clinton, to Bush, even Obama (who had RECORD numbers of ex Goldman Sachs executives in the executive cabinet during his presidency). People should be infuriated about what happened in 2008. But it seems like the wool has been pulled over the eyes of the public. As long as we have our smartphone beeping away with people liking our pictures, then never mind the disturbing truths of our reality - that wealth is being siphoned away from the public, into the hands of an increasingly small group, at a record pace.

mythrwy 9y ago
It could also be that former big bankers are in the executive cabinet because the financial system is pretty important and they understand it. The concerns about conflict of interest are certainly valid but maybe just maybe it's not a big conspiracy.
- vkou 9y ago
  There's too much money at play for there to not be a conspiracy - of some sort. I think it's pretty hard to argue that our economy is not highly skewed towards protecting the wealth of the very rich.
- swendoog 9y ago
  I understand that perspective and I don't disagree. That certainly is the case; Many are there because they understand the financial system better than anyone else. I don't mean to suggest that there is a grand organized conspiracy. That said, I do believe there is a strong network of bankers that promote their self interest.

toast0 9y ago

In 2009, I bought a house from a bank for $50k less than the balance they foreclosed on, and I expect they had no recourse against the borrower. In aggregate, there were a lot of bank losses. Banks didn't expect the downturn either, or they wouldn't have made so many loans with essentially no standards. (Admittedly, they also weren't expecting to keep loans on their own books for very long)