Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

This gives me hope, Karma is a B!tch

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Wonder why some of his former colleagues sneer at him when they see him in the restaurant?
 
To be honest, the greed shown by many of these Wall Street types is partly what got us into this mess to begin with. I have little sympathy as well.
 
Why do you believe this is karma? It looks like he worked pretty hard to get where he was and found a job instead of immediately declaring bankruptcy. I don't see any evil-doing by this fellow to get where he was. Granted, he may have lived a little more frugally and saved a little more money, but who is to say that the news report was accurate that he ate there every night? As fugal as I am, I have taken my wife to a lavish dinner with an expensive bottle of wine. Do I qualify for a karma pay-back for my accomplishments and because I have worked hard to afford to take my wife out?

I think you need to reflect on and concentrate on your own accomplishments rather than being jealous of others' and their hard times. This jealousy or class envy, my friend, has been the root of the fall of several societies over the centuries.
 
To be honest, the greed shown by many of these Wall Street types is partly what got us into this mess to begin with. I have little sympathy as well.
As used as an excuse on the other thread, well "that's their job." I do not go along with the idea that "greed" got us in this mess, although it was a contributing factor and the Press is sure hesitant to blame the real causes:

  • Folks buying houses they could not afford then deciding simply not to pay back the loans (although many have the ability to pay) once the investment went upside down.
  • The government failing to enforce the rules that were on the books, despite repeated warnings. The number of notices the regulators received on Madoff with no action taken is just astounding. That IS the government's job. They simply were too lazy and too incompetent to perform the task.
Frankly, we need ambition to get us out of this mess. We need people to produce, sell and buy with the intent of making money. A socialist government with a communist economic system will work about as well as it has in Russia. For a better reference, look at the change in the Southern Philippines since the Americans left.
 
Why do you believe this is karma? It looks like he worked pretty hard to get where he was and found a job instead of immediately declaring bankruptcy. I don't see any evil-doing by this fellow to get where he was. Granted, he may have lived a little more frugally and saved a little more money, but who is to say that the news report was accurate that he ate there every night? As fugal as I am, I have taken my wife to a lavish dinner with an expensive bottle of wine. Do I qualify for a karma pay-back for my accomplishments and because I have worked hard to afford to take my wife out?

I think you need to reflect on and concentrate on your own accomplishments rather than being jealous of others' and their hard times. This jealousy or class envy, my friend, has been the root of the fall of several societies over the centuries.
+1 :beer:
 
GCD is absolutely right. Guys like the ones in the article were not the source of the problem. Believe me, the majority of those people are still doing just fine. It's always the lower tier who pay the price.

Forget the whole "Wall Street" background of this story. Similar tales are being told everyday from people in different industries who have to tell their kids some very bad news.
 
At least he gets a break to call his daughters. Many times pilots don't get a break to call anybody. And the Republic, Colgan, Mesa F/O's make less than him to boot.
 
Want to know the real problem?

The problem was an over-reliance on the financial sector to provide work for the American public. The financial sector is a wonderful way of allocating capital, but it is important to understand that the financial sector does not PRODUCE any actual output.

Despite the high earnings and dividends for shareholders that makes it seem as though high finance creates wealth, it really collects commission (interest and/or fees) for moving money around.

Consider trading - it is a zero-sum game. At the end of the day, if you made 10% trading, collectively others lost the same amount. There is nothing inherently wrong with trading, but the fact is that it does not produce wealth. This differs heavily from direct investment in a factory, farm, medical company or any other PRODUCER. The over-exuberance for finance went hand in hand with the tech bubble and the housing bubble. When too many people think that a certain type of business will generate excessive profit, they flood into it.

Federal Reserve policy over the last few decades unfortunately helped exacerbate the over-emphasis on the financial sector. Politicians from both parties are very guilty of ignorance on this point.

What is happening now is the blow-off of excessive financial-sector activity. Many people, like the guy in the article will never be able to return to the financial sphere, or at least not anywhere near their previous compensation level.

People waiting for the end of the credit crunch for things to return to the way they were over the last couple decades will be disappointed.


The average American household's balance sheet is in terrible shape, even compared to the late 1970s. Consumers are encumbered with higher debt loads than are sustainable long-term. Since the debt load is unsustainable, it is logical then that it will not be sustained.

Mortgages and credit card debt are being defaulted on at record rates, and commercial real estate is now on track to follow. As a nation, we have passed the point of maximum credit, and now deleveraging must occur.

Recently, the total consumer revolving debt decreased for the first time ever. Households are no longer collectively indifferent to high debt. Personal savings rates are likely to increase substantially over the next several years as households find the joys of having a large savings account outweighs the joys of granite countertops and leased BMWs.

For a long time, the US has taken heat for its excessive (in some peoples' opinions) consumption.

Regardless of which side of that opinion a person is on, I think it is very clear that we have passed the point of peak consumption as well.

Households are rediscovering thrift and economy, and even if it costs us a bad recession to get there, in the end it may be worth it.
 
Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions to Rich People

By Pam Martens, CounterPunch
Posted on June 2, 2009, Printed on June 3, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/140394/



For the past eight months, we have been a nation focused on bailouts and bankruptcies. For the past ten years, we have been a nation ignoring massive wealth transfer and wealth concentration through a rigged Wall Street.

As simple and clear as this picture is, some of the brightest minds in this country are unwilling to connect the cause and effect of wealth in too few hands to bankruptcies and a tanking economy.

Wealth-deprived consumers can't buy the goods and services being produced. This leads to repetitive cycles of layoffs and growing unemployment which leads to more wealth-deprived consumers leading to more overcapacity in production plants, more layoffs, more shrinking purchasing power.

The accompanying, and equally dangerous, problem is that concentrated wealth stifles the very innovation that is necessary to create new industries, new jobs and lead us out of the downward economic spiral.

Let's think about the individuals who tapped into Wall Street's rigged wealth transfer system and what they have done with their ill-gotten loot: typically, they own three or more homes, fancy cars, multiple country club memberships, airplanes, yachts, and numbered offshore bank accounts. The problem is, they just can't buy enough to compensate for the purchases they have deprived hundreds of thousands of other consumers from being able to make.

Goods sit on shelves, new orders get cancelled, leading to production cuts, layoffs, plant closings and bankruptcies.

In a nutshell, it's the $1 Billion that Sandy Weill extracted from Citigroup as its former CEO and Chairman that's the problem; it's the $42 million condo he bought that's depriving 140 other people from having $300,000 to buy a home ready to go into foreclosure for want of a buyer. It's the hundreds of millions Weill is throwing around to plaster his name and his wife's name on buildings that could be in the hands of 10,000 consumers going out to buy Chrysler and GM cars now gathering dust on the lots of dealers about to go bust.

It's also that Sandy Weill and his colleagues of that era on Wall Street did not do anything worthy or smart in exchange for extracting that wealth from the system. They repealed the regulations that had kept the system on a more solid footing, then looted the system and left it a basket case. We have no residual benefits of innovation to compensate for all that missing wealth.

And that is the real and overlooked attendant danger: too many billionaires sitting atop too many billions tied up in mansions and yachts means that millions of budding innovators and entrepreneurs are being deprived of adequate funds to create the breakthroughs that will lead to new industries and future job growth.

And let's not forget about the trillions of dollars of wealth that evaporated in bogus ventures that Weill and his fellow Wall Streeters brought to market on NASDAQ. Add those trillions to the bailout trillions and you're looking at a lost generation of funds for innovation.

What all of this means is that President Obama has precious little time left to stop rewarding failure and bad behavior before his own Presidency is deemed a failure. It was difficult enough to countenance the reappearance in his administration of all those Wall Street faces who failed to rein in the Wall Street abuses or, worse, aided and abetted the actual creation of the opaque system that permitted the looting and pillaging. But this past week's news that the President might be considering a pivotal role for the Federal Reserve in the new regulatory structure planned for Wall Street crosses the line, if true, from hubris to outright contempt for the American people.

The inherent cronyism of the Federal Reserve renders it utterly useless as a watchdog. (Why is it even necessary to have to state that obvious fact when no one can shake loose from the Fed what it's done with trillions in taxpayer dollars or why it failed to police these Frankenbanks in the first place.) The same thing is true of the U.S. Treasury, which can't auction its own debt without the goodwill of its Wall Street primary dealers.

According to March 31, 2009 data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, there are 8,246 FDIC insured institutions with total assets of $13.5 Trillion and domestic deposits of $7.5 Trillion. Four institutions, Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Co. and Citigroup Inc., four institutions out of 8,246, control 35% of all the insured domestic deposits and 46% of the assets according to the March 31, 2009 figures from the FDIC.

Has the Federal Reserve taken steps to reduce this massive concentration since the financial crisis began? Quite the contrary. Bank of America was allowed to purchase the investment bank and brokerage firm Merrill Lynch as well as subprime lender Countrywide Financial; JPMorgan Chase took over the investment bank and brokerage firm Bear Stearns as well as Washington Mutual; Wells Fargo & Co. took over Wachovia.

The Federal Reserve's answer to concentrated wealth is to concentrate it further. The Federal Reserve's answer to unmanageable, dysfunctional banking institutions is to make them more unmanageable and more dysfunctional.

President Obama needs to do three things quickly to get the country back on course: he needs to separate investment banking/brokerage from commercial banks. This will restore risk taking and innovation to where it belongs, in non FDIC insured institutions. He needs to put new faces that Americans can trust in charge of real regulators with real powers. He needs to stop funneling money to zombie institutions that haven't created anything of innovative value in a decade and channel those funds into innovative research and development projects.

President Obama needs to step up to the plate and stop listening to conflicted advisors. The fate of a nation, as well as his place in history, hangs in the balance.

Pam Martens worked on Wall Street for 21 years; she has no security position, long or short, in any company mentioned in this article. She writes on public interest issues from New Hampshire. She can be reached at [email protected]
© 2009 CounterPunch All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/140394/
 
Fractional reserve lending is a big part of the problem, and one that is little understood by most.

The deregulation of the financial sector has been a major reason why so many people are poor.

From the previous post, a home could never even reach $42 million without the financial system we have in place.

The equitable distribution of wealth is another important issue, but without examining the issue of how and where money comes from, it is impossible to correct inequities in the distribution of wealth.

Most people don't know where money even comes from; open up your wallet and take out a $1 bill.

When did that dollar get called into being? Not printed, we can look at the date to find that out.

But when a dollar bill gets printed, it is often replacing an old worn-out one. how about the dollar you have? Is it a replacement, or a new dollar that never existed before?

The way in which the Treasury creates money is the reason why we have so many citizens struggling to get by.

I recommend a paper called "The Mystery of Banking", by Murray Rothbard. It is in .pdf form, and easily found with google.
 
As used as an excuse on the other thread, well "that's their job." I do not go along with the idea that "greed" got us in this mess, although it was a contributing factor and the Press is sure hesitant to blame the real causes:

  • Folks buying houses they could not afford then deciding simply not to pay back the loans (although many have the ability to pay) once the investment went upside down.How is this not "greed". THen ask yourself how they got approved for those mortgages? The answer: Greedy banks/mortgage brokers gave them the loans anyway they could(lie about income etc) then sold the loans in the form of CDO or collateralized debt obligations to unsuspecting countries/investors; but not before morning star lied about the credit rating of these CDO. If that Ain't greed i don't know what is.
  • The government failing to enforce the rules that were on the books, despite repeated warnings. The number of notices the regulators received on Madoff with no action taken is just astounding. That IS the government's job. They simply were too lazy and too incompetent to perform the task. Madoff and Standford weren't greedy either than? What is your point?
Frankly, we need ambition to get us out of this mess. We need people to produce, sell and buy with the intent of making money. A socialist government with a communist economic system will work about as well as it has in Russia. For a better reference, look at the change in the Southern Philippines since the Americans left.

By reading your last paragraph I can now see you are a Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh butt buddy. Please carry on, sorry I wasted my time on you........You can go back to fox news.
 
By reading your last paragraph I can now see you are a Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh butt buddy. Please carry on, sorry I wasted my time on you........You can go back to fox news.

And you back to the fractionals forum.
But please, do stop back when you have less time! I'm sure the guys/gals at flops are waiting for you!:rolleyes:
 
Max powers-

It was a failure on the part of congress for years to stop the imbalances, both parties were at fault.

And I'm not sure that saying that we need to become a manufacturing powerhouse again is all that partisan of a comment. Manufacturing gives a nation's currency its value.

And some level of free markets is needed to encourage business. Should businesses operate without intent to make a profit?
 
Max powers-

It was a failure on the part of congress for years to stop the imbalances, both parties were at fault. True everyone should take their blame. But don't forget who was in charge the past 8 years. I know where the buck stops in this country. W - pushed hard for deregulation of the financial banking world. W, much to the chagrin of democrats, allowed CDOs in the mortgage backed securities world.

And I'm not sure that saying that we need to become a manufacturing powerhouse again is all that partisan of a comment. Manufacturing gives a nation's currency its value. I never said " we need to become a manufacturing powerhouse again". Lets be honest those unskilled labor jobs are forever lost to China and Viet Nam. Do we really want our citizens making nikes behind a sewing machine? No we want our children and citizens making high tech hard to build components.

And some level of free markets is needed to encourage business. Should businesses operate without intent to make a profit? What is your point here?????? Whenever have I said I'm not for the free market? Even Adam Smith was for regulations and taxes.

.........
 
Max powers-

First, you didn't say he needed more manufacturing, the other fellow did.

No one is suggesting that we earn a living sewing together blue jeans, but if manufacturing is not increased in the US, what productive output are we going to have to balance trade? We can't all be stockbrokers and airline pilots. And it is hard to export service output.

Without exportable goods or commodities, we are in trouble. The US has been artificially carried for years by exporting financial products, whether that it Treasury debt or securitzed debt. The rest of the world's insatiable demand for these products is ending now, and the US will need to find a trade-balancing export. Now, much of what the US exports is intellectual property, such as software and entertainment. Those sectors, however, are not large enough to sustain the kind of trade imbalances that we have been running to date.

You mention that you want to see increased tech sector output, which I agree with. Is that sector large enough to carry the day on trade? Maybe.

I do believe that some lower-level manufacturing work will need to return to the US, because of wage-deflation the issue of low technical competency in the US.

I know a Russian software engineer and a Mexican electrical engineer, and both say that their companies are having a hard time finding US citizens with the necessary qualifications.

The only other solution to the trade deficit is for the US to drastically reduce imported goods and consume mainly domestically produced goods. (Personally, I can live with whichever way we go.)

But even if we do it that way, we will need to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US, since we don't have the facilities to manufacture a lot of the day-to-day consumer goods like microwave ovens or computer parts.

If we DON'T increase either our manufacturing or have some other exportable good or service, why should other nations continue to give us their productive output?

Productive output is what gives a nation's currency its value. If the nation produces very little, there is little to buy with that currency and the currency loses value. Look at Iceland. The demand for their financial products (which used to be VERY high) went to zero almost overnight, leaving only aluminum smelting, fish, and wool as output. And that was reflected in the exchange rate of their currency, which has taken a terrible beating.

Americans may not LIKE the message that many of us will have to return to the factories and leave the service economy, but that is likely the case.

How do you think that China wound up with almost $2 trillion in US financial assets? They did so to keep their exports cheap and build their manufacturing base. That cash has been building up in their accounts now for a long time. Why do they need any more dollars? The only reason they do is so that they can land their economy gently instead of having the US's sharp consumer pullback crash their production completely.

Here's what IS going to happen:

Prepare for very lean times for quite a while. This will be independent of who you elect, and independent of what policies they enact. That factor will only determine relative wealth among Americans. But we blew most of our wealth in the dotcom debacle and the housing bubble. Total US debt is unsustainable at this level and now must be paid off or defaulted on. So either we live lean and pay it off, or we default and live lean because no one will lend to us.

It's checkmate for consumerism.



With regard to the politics:

Bush did an awful job regulating the financial sector. Clinton did just as bad a job. The repeal of glass-steagall occurred on his watch, which was a major element in deregulating the financial sector. Additionally, Clinton and Bush also both failed to do anything about the growing derivatives monster. Bush has less excuse though, because it was obviously becoming a bigger problem.

Any attempt to make one party or other the perpetrator here is laughable - most of congress is bought and paid for by large companies. Until these large banking interests financially implode, they can continue to push for the legislation they want.
 
Last edited:
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=7111098&page=1

Heres another one, deserved what he got. Screw USA, save no money, overspend, you deliver pizza


Amazing. What a story of hubris and greed.

He will never, of course, return to that lifestyle. He's just whistling past the graveyard on this. But he'll find out soon enough.

Interesting that he thinks someday he'll be able to make a large charitable contribution to someone else who is in need. Somehow, I doubt he will ever be in that spot again.
 
Whatever happened to living below your means? Majority of people are either in debt up to their eye balls or spend every cent they make.
 
Whatever happened to living below your means? Majority of people are either in debt up to their eye balls or spend every cent they make.


One only needs to look at the attitudes and lifestyles of the Wall Street cronies.... why Americans continue to look the other way while these guys rape the Treasury is amazing...
 
Why do you believe this is karma? It looks like he worked pretty hard to get where he was and found a job instead of immediately declaring bankruptcy. I don't see any evil-doing by this fellow to get where he was. Granted, he may have lived a little more frugally and saved a little more money, but who is to say that the news report was accurate that he ate there every night? As fugal as I am, I have taken my wife to a lavish dinner with an expensive bottle of wine. Do I qualify for a karma pay-back for my accomplishments and because I have worked hard to afford to take my wife out?

I think you need to reflect on and concentrate on your own accomplishments rather than being jealous of others' and their hard times. This jealousy or class envy, my friend, has been the root of the fall of several societies over the centuries.

Well said!
 
The hedge fund guy delivering pizzas I have more sympathy for. He made some dumb decisions but wasn't directly hurting anyone else.

The oil trader guy however...I'm sure he was equally sympathetic to us when he was pulling down $200K per year while driving up our oil and gas prices.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom