If we murdered bankers cartel style with bolitos and shit, and stacked their...

iluvmen
iluvmen

If we murdered bankers cartel style with bolitos and shit, and stacked their 90iq heads in time square, would God even notice? Bank takes your 100$. Bank Lends your 100$ to tyrone. Tyrone pays the bank back 125$. Bank pays you back your 100$ and keeps the 25 for themselves.
WHY ARE THESE FAGGOTS NOT DEAD YET. THEY NEED TO BE DEAD ALREADY.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=HdLhbPBNC2M

Firespawn
Firespawn

Calm down, Jose. Murdering bankers might be the national sport where you come from, but a working, blood-free financial system does provide a lot of benefits.

Just save a portion of your paycheck, use credit cards responsibly, and stop being an overdrafting nigger and you'll be fine.

TechHater
TechHater

Keep digging watson.

Ignoramus
Ignoramus

would God even notice?
God stopped watching a long time ago, user.

Harmless_Venom
Harmless_Venom

miss me yet?

Sir_Gallonhead
Sir_Gallonhead

You forgot the part where people don't pay bank back and bank asks government to print more money for them

happy_sad
happy_sad

banks lend more than a 1:1 ratio

no need to ask, its the system of the century
and rescues with public money (future taxation) is the shtf cancelation tool

you pay it anyways

massdebater
massdebater

This.

bank takes your $100
puts away $10-20
lends to 5-10 Tyrones anywhere from 500-1000$ total
gets back $125 from a 4-7 Tyrones
sells off the remainder of the debt to a collection agency
bank ends up keeping whatever they managed to collect, invest, salvage

Sharpcharm
Sharpcharm

they literally collect real assets even when their debtors go broke, police will kick tyrone's wife and her son out of his house fug :DDD

Firespawn
Firespawn

1. You give bank 100$
2. Bank guarantees you that after a year you get 102$ to compensate for inflation
3. Bank does that by giving money to tyrone
4. Tyrone doesn't pay his debt and fucks off with Jamila to Africa
5. Bank takes money they used from others to compensate for Tyrone

Banks don't make any money from working with small people, investing huge pensions fonds of trillions of dollars, they make [Inflation %] + 1% per year interest

because it's trillions of money, 1% is a fuckton that they made - coke and hookers

meanwhile Mike is mad because he only works for 10$ and blames mad wallstreet for being lazy

SniperGod
SniperGod

stacked their 90iq heads in time square

Implying IQ matters for really anything other than Online dick measuring competitions

kek

TalkBomber
TalkBomber

Also
Bank takes your 100$. Bank Lends your 100$ to tyrone. Tyrone pays the bank back 125$. Bank pays you back your 100$ and keeps the 25 for themselves.

ABSOLUTE KNAWLEDGE of how banks work. Yeah, go kill yourself, you worthless piece of shit who will never achieve anything.

TurtleCat
TurtleCat

Its all fixed game, when u reallize that, you get rich.

The big players do things against the market mainly. Think fed will raise rates? higher or lower than u thought.

dont worry insiders will always profit more than u will. until u understand the plays, you wont make a dime.

StrangeWizard
StrangeWizard

it's called judeocapitalism.

DeathDog
DeathDog

OP has $100
OP lends $100 to Tyrone
Tyrone gives OP $125

Why haven't you done this yet?

Dreamworx
Dreamworx

i need to pay for a service!
let the killing begin!
fuck of commie shit!

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

yeah op clearly doesn't need no banks.

Need_TLC
Need_TLC

Probably because Tyrone isn't a reliable person to loan money to and in order to establish a diverse enough risk portfolio of loans you need a shitload of starting capital.

Lord_Tryzalot
Lord_Tryzalot

Well shit. Guess he'd better hire someone as an intermediary to manage that risk for him.

cum2soon
cum2soon

Yeah I'm sure the majority of people with things like only checking accounts are feeling the full benefit of the banks making money off of their money.

Inmate
Inmate

If only people were free to put there money wherever they wanted, and could change it if they thought their current provider was uncompetitive.

hairygrape
hairygrape

There are plenty of investment options for people who can afford to take risk, or have lockouts of withdrawing money, but lets not pretend like banks give people who have their money with them a fair cut of the money they're making.

Sharpcharm
Sharpcharm

I know it's frustrating they seem to be raking all the goods and leaving everyone else with leftovers, but removing them (by killing or other methods) will be far worse than other solutions.
historical example: zimbabwe. mugabe took all the land from the rich white landownders and redistributed it to the majority black population. these ppl had no idea how to run anything, and you saw what happened. in 1980 a zimbabwe dollar was worth more than a US dollar. in 2008 100 trillion zimbabwe dollars was worth about 30 US cents.

the moral is that these people are competent, even if they're greedy bastards. the true solution is to allow them to make money (which would let them do the good things they do, like run the economy) while holding them back some (regulation, even if everyone hates that term) to keep them from doing the bad things they do (leeching everything during boom time, or speculate and crash the whole system during bust time)

StonedTime
StonedTime

what kind of comparison is that?

we have plenty of educated people capable of running a working system, but the corruption makes it impossible for most of them to get into influential/higher positions

meanwhile zimbabwes population has no real education nor do they even understand the importance of education and still decided to genocide/expell whitey out of madness

you do not understand the real situation and mentality in zimbabwe therefore just stop spreading your "knowledge" please.

GoogleCat
GoogleCat

most banks right now try to downsize their offices and personnel to remain profitable. sure sounds like they are swimming in profits.

Nojokur
Nojokur

Horse shit. Banks have higher net profit than the market average by a significant amount.

Booteefool
Booteefool

i looked at historic data their margin on lending is 2-3% that's pretty shitty they couldn't possibly operate and turn profit on that. if they turn high profit they are doing something incredibly right.

2-3% for me personally is a shit investment even if there are no risks involved.

Harmless_Venom
Harmless_Venom

do you remember what you were taught about nazi germany?

they made sure to cut the influence of all the elites on the system and introduced "gleichschaltung" (which was demonized later).

the real purpose of gleichschaltung was to minimize the inluence of everyone that corrupted germany, especially the ones that used their influence in the weimar republic against its population.

obviously the war economy made the economic miracle possible, but the gleichschaltung got germany out of the commercial crises and is the greatest recovery of an economy documented in history.

tl;dr: gtfo kike

King_Martha
King_Martha

you are so retarded, the bankers that swim in cash are the people who either have trillions of funds and live of the 1% interest OR they are pulling some insane somehow illegal shit

Soft_member
Soft_member

they made sure to cut the influence of all the elites on the system
lemme correct you because you seem to be living in a cloudy dream.
they replaced the elite that controlled the system with it's influence with an other. that's all anyone can do in the end. replace the leeches with his own.

viagrandad
viagrandad

2-3% with zero risk for the last five years years being at shit rates is fine when you're dealing with a significant portion of the population's money

I'm not advocating any significant change to our banking system, but they make 2-3% off lending and they basically pay nothing off of that. No other business has such a stable and low risk business model with no fear of crashing because the nanny state will save them if they fuck up.

I'd have no problems with banking if we had just let the irresponsible ones fail when they fucked up, but we didn't. Which is blatantly unfair to every other business in the world.

SomethingNew
SomethingNew

with zero risk
where the fuck do you get that? you can't lend money with zero risk you can lend money to the state with little risk but everything else is higher than that.

5mileys
5mileys

Do you seriously not understand how the knowledge that you'll just get saved if things fail implies zero risk?

w8t4u
w8t4u

WHY ARE THESE FAGGOTS NOT DEAD YET. THEY NEED TO BE DEAD ALREADY.

Because idiots like you are too financially stupid to save up.

askme
askme

i'm not talking about a bailout situation, if a bank lend money out it rolls the risk of that money never getting payed back. that risk is not zero in fact there is like 10-12% of loans not paid back here if i remember correctly.

nobody bails the banks out so long they can take the hit. bailouts only happen when the banks inability to pay it's own dues threatens the entire interbank lending system.

lostmypassword
lostmypassword

Banks aren't forced to engage in those loans. They (should) only take on a mix of loans that is statistically safe. So in a semantic sense this is a non-zero risk, but it's very low because..

they have no incentive to minimize their "risk", because if it gets large enough the sector knows that they will just reach a bailout point. You cannot deny the fact that their knowledge of the fact the government will do that influences their decision making. I don't blame them for that either, it's entirely sensible.

What isn't sensible is that we're stupid enough to enable it.

Poker_Star
Poker_Star

difference is that those "new" elites were working for their country and mostly not elites, but normal countrymen except for the dictator, gestapo and ss - which were financed with taxes and working as a shadow government/police/army (yet in favor of the population).

Methshot
Methshot

they have no incentive to minimize their "risk"
yeah that is a problem banks are pretty good at institutionalizing their risks.

i'm not saying you don't have a point there, but saying banks will always get a bailout is silly. they can't know that. especially now that the world realized the entire "too big to fail" was a mistake. so there is risk anyhow. also like to point out you can bailout banks so they remain operational in return to shares of ownership. now that is a nightmare the bankers wake up from covered in sweat every night. state simply taking their shitty banks instead of giving them free money. this has happened in my country btw.

TreeEater
TreeEater

There is only one way.

Stop using WWW BEAST BUCKS and stop using ".999" fine.

This is their whole system.

The left and right of money.

Once you transcend that your mind will forget what a banker even is.

All your debt will literally go up in smoke.

Sharpcharm
Sharpcharm

those "new" elites were working for their country
at least they pretended to, and of course got insanely rich and influential in return what their children would have done if it went on long enough is easy enough to guess. in truth they were working for hitler who kept them on their toes with terror. once a system like that gets comfortable tho the dictator is insulated and he can no longer follow who is stealing from the people and who is doing his job or not anymore. those who control his information begin to run the country. and those will be the new elites darling boys.

again you can replace the leeches you can't make them go away. once they are nice big and fat they will start to show economic and political muscle.

Snarelure
Snarelure

You have to think outside their box.

TalkBomber
TalkBomber

If bankers weren't needed in a capitalist system, then they wouldn't exist OP.

youtube.com/watch?v=HdLhbPBNC2M

LuckyDusty
LuckyDusty

Thats a good quote.

CouchChiller
CouchChiller

Pls explain this further senpai.

FastChef
FastChef

Tyrone pays the bank back 125$.
Tyrone pays back

JunkTop
JunkTop

The entire situation just annoys me. They should just fail.

The only thing worse than stupid mixed capitalism that does bailouts is the horror of a government also being the banking sector.

Even if you say something like "They just sell the stock and make their money back" (Ie they wouldn't be the banking sector), you're still having the government influence the price of that stock. That's arbitrarily rewarding everyone who has bought that stock or other fiscal interests in the institution.

Fuzzy_Logic
Fuzzy_Logic

Op here. This is all im saying.
Im a trump supporter by the way. I would have trumps children if i could.

Fried_Sushi
Fried_Sushi

You don't need to declare yourself as OP, this board has IDs.

If you've followed the rest of some of the dialogue in this thread, you know my issue is that this is a fact while the bailout happened and could continue to happen. The interference of government in the market creates an inherent risk imbalance that isn't right.

Announcing yourself as a Trump supporter doesn't clarify anything. The man has very ideologically inconsistent range of economic beliefs that range from Economic protectionism and FDR style infrastructure investment to deregulation of the banking sector.

StonedTime
StonedTime

I think government is the problem not the solution. Bailouts shouldnt have happened. America is all about recounting elections, claiming russia interfered, and telling the losers at goldman sachs that losers still get a consolation piece of the winners trophy

eGremlin
eGremlin

But Hitler privatized the banks.

Nazi Germany was not an economic miracle. It's a popular misconception because it contrasts Hitler as a dictator. Before Nazi Germany was already a highly industrialized nation with a skilled workforce with huge multinationals like Farben. When Hitler came to power the Great Depression just started, which decimated economies worldwide. Hitler chose the Keynes option and initiated large public spending works to stimulate the economy, like the autobahn and rearmmrnt. He racked up huge debts in the process, from 1933-39 (before WW2) the deficit was 50% of government revenu, but managed to get unemployment to near zero and the economy running.

BinaryMan
BinaryMan

Bonds? Bonds are securitised debt. They're mostly corporate but there's Treasuries you can buy at the previailing interest rate. If you want more risk there are junk bonds.

AwesomeTucker
AwesomeTucker

they have no incentive to minimize their "risk", because if it gets large enough the sector knows that they will just reach a bailout point

No. Before the bailout happened there was no idea of a bailout. Bailouts are still not guaranteed. The reason that banks don't have to minimize risk is because accounts are FDIC insured. If they were not insured, then no one would put money in the bank and banks would not exist.

Stupidasole
Stupidasole

do you even history bro?
stop falling for the demonization and read unbiased history

the situation was very clear right before hitler came into power:
people were starving
people had no jobs
economic crises
humiliated by allies for not being able to pay the reparations
communists trying to get into power
communists fighting the population in the streets
absolutely corrupt government
corrupt justice system
corrupt police

hitler didn't need to make the population puppets, but they gladly accepted him as leader for obvious reasons and praised him for cutting the influence of (((them))) in every instance.

the nazis are a drastic example obviously, but it just shows that you can get rid of corruption.

Nude_Bikergirl
Nude_Bikergirl

market imbalance
Are you one of those pure laissez-faire guys? The government only eliminated the risk of total default for some banks. They still paid very dearly, in between the fines, the distressed debt investors picking them clean (eg Buffet's Goldman preferreds), losing large chunks of equity and profit.

Soft_member
Soft_member

But the nazis were horribly corrupt.
made deals with the family owned corporations for war support in return for slave labor
imprisoned and executed political opponents
seized jewish property and belongings

Evil_kitten
Evil_kitten

They still paid dearly

Compared to what alternative? The complete loss of equity they deserved?

Stark_Naked
Stark_Naked

Nazi Germany was not an economic miracle.
You fell for this meme. Because Hitler's economy was not perfect, but it was orders of magnitude better than the Weimar Republic's one

Lunatick
Lunatick

stop falling for the demonization and read unbiased history
that's not it. what i described happened every single time all through history. nazis were no exception. their shit was pushed in fast enough for the rot not to be too apparent to the public. that's all.

corruption comes with power that doesn't answer to the people. the nazi upper class didn't answer to their people at all.

viagrandad
viagrandad

a cursory search on google seem to support the popular view among historians is the third reich was incredibly corrupt much more so than the system it replaced.
i have no researched the subject at depth but i wouldn't be the least surprised if that turned out to be the case.
"power corrupts. absolute power corrupts absolutely"

RumChicken
RumChicken

bank keeps $25 for themselves

How the fuck are they going to run their bank otherwise?

CodeBuns
CodeBuns

bank insures your money so it can't just be stolen or burn down with your house
bank offers you services like checks, money transfers, and even safety deposit boxes
"Waaa, the bank makes profit on my deposits that I don't get"
Grow up.