Posts by Sam Ruiz60

Charles Ramos7 said:What money are you talking about? In the US, there's trillions sitting in savings; how are car salesmen supposed to know which specific dollars someone is using to buy a vehicle? Besides, back in the day, people were still buying cars even before consumer credit became this huge thing. So much for the idea that they're "pushing" them on us through debt.

That level of savings is actually just a direct byproduct of debt.
If we hadn't pumped money into the system through borrowing and manufactured growth, wouldn't at least 90% of those savings simply not exist?
On the flip side, you have a massive group of both companies and individuals who, by some miracle, managed to cover their unpayable debts using those very savings. Meanwhile, the rest of the crowd—the ones we might call the establishment types—are just spending off new debt that Lalovac keeps handing out every other day.

As for the car situation during the old era, this explains it quite well:

Jeffrey Jackson9 said:Oh, so Germans produce things!!!
So Germans work!!!!
What's so bad about that!!!!
That's exactly why they can "dump" whatever they make onto anyone else!!!
And what exactly are we producing!?!?

Everything would be fine if they were offloading products on us using money we actually earned, rather than money taken on credit. We're talking about funds that artificially inflated our economy, creating this illusion of progress and a higher standard of living—making everyone feel like they can spend like a billionaire just because they have a loan.

If that money had never actually entered the system, there wouldn't be any credit, there wouldn't be all this spending, and people wouldn't be buying expensive German cars. Our standard of living would stay low, sure, but at least we wouldn't be drowning in debt.
As it stands, our quality of life will remain low, and the country will end up sold off piece by piece.

ruggedgull36 said:Yeah, because we need some brutal cuts to the public sector and the government... and without the IMF, it’s just not going to happen.

We could have handled this ourselves, but clearly, we haven't done a damn thing. The finger-pointing just keeps going, while the national debt is pushing toward 100% and the economy is basically in freefall...

Our interest payments are way higher than Greece's, and our debt maturity is shorter too. Right now, we're essentially the riskiest country in the EU—aside from Greece—that isn't even properly accessing the markets.

With zero percent growth, interest rates are going to slowly start drowning us... and once the Fed hikes them up, the tidal wave is coming.

Slashing the size of the state is only one piece of the puzzle; we need to fix the entire tax system and everything else...

And all of that would be fine, except... there's a massive "except."
When you realize that almost every country in the world—including America—is essentially screwed regarding their debt levels, with no intention of ever paying it back, and they've all enriched themselves by selling products to now-impoverished markets just like Germany does, you really have to ask: who is actually playing whom?
Besides, why even bother paying off the debt? Why doesn't the ECB just fire up the printing presses, print whatever amount is necessary, and clear the debts for every nation? That seems to be what they do constantly anyway.
We should just commit fully to the Euro if we're part of the European Union; if we aren't, then what's the point of being in the EU at all?

Charles Ramos7 said:What are you getting at? That we should have banned German cars (while simultaneously voting to join the EU)? And again, what "dumping" are you talking about when anyone can just go out and buy the car they want?

We shouldn't have just outlawed borrowing by decree. If credit hadn't been available, people wouldn't have had any way to afford expensive cars in the first place.

Harold Martin10 said:Right, because what we really need is a powerful state deciding exactly how citizens should manage their own property. Sounds just like North Korea, doesn't it? 👏

Americans coming out of the post-war era didn't have much to work with either.
Then, there was this rush to chase a fake standard of living built entirely on debt. It wasn't even necessary; things could have been built up gradually, step by step.
The problem is, once you sell off your country—your most precious assets—you're left completely stranded if you don't manage to buy them back.
In the end, the banks—specifically foreign interests—ended up owning huge chunks of American land through that whole era of exploitation.

Charles Ramos7 said:"Quote:"

Exactly. You buy German stuff because your neighbors have it, not because you're obsessed with Germany. So why blame the Germans for that?

The real issue lies with the corrupt politicians who allowed this to happen. But was there corruption coming from foreign power centers? We could have lived quite comfortably off tourism and domestic manufacturing if we hadn't piled up massive debts immediately after gaining independence and chased a fake standard of living based entirely on imports.
We wouldn't be facing such significant debt today.
Foreign entities shouldn't play the victim and pretend they didn't know what they were doing. They knew exactly which politicians they were dealing with and who they needed to bribe to walk in here and treat us like mindless cattle, leading us straight toward ruin.

Harold Martin10 said:I actually think the IMF is a solid option. It provides cheaper credit, and they insist on those structural reforms that we really need to push through anyway. If you ask me, the real problem isn't the loans—it's the corrupt political cronies and bureaucrats. They're the ones saddling future generations with massive interest rates while suffocating the healthy parts of our economy with endless red tape and high taxes.

Those political cronies serve one specific purpose: they take the money borrowed through national debt and spend it at foreign-owned big-box retailers. Even someone like Ivica Todorić isn't really the main player here; the banks are the true architects, and he’s just an intermediary. Essentially, these people facilitate the outflow of capital through the banking system. When they buy things at a mall or pick up a new car, they are supporting the banks and foreign interests, all while paying taxes that simply go toward servicing the national debt. We are left with nothing but crumbs.
If it weren't for these well-paid bureaucrats, many of these shopping centers would have to close their doors because the average citizen is living right on the edge.
In a sense, these cronies are reliable taxpayers, which makes them indispensable to a system designed to milk the American people dry.

Charles Ramos7 said:Who's telling you what to buy? Since when is it forbidden to pick up a Japanese car or shop at Walmart instead?

If they were offering it to you, you’d probably end up buying a Mercedes or a Honda.
Well, obviously a Mercedes—because with those price tags, owning one becomes a status symbol, and that's exactly what they're banking on.
People get hooked. They play on basic human impulses just to turn a profit, exploiting fears of shortages or promises of sudden prosperity. Now, everyone's chasing this idea of "the good life." They see a neighbor driving a Mercedes and think, "Why should I settle for less?" Even if it means taking out a massive loan. And thank God, banks seem to sprout up everywhere like mushrooms after a rainstorm, specifically popping up just to offer these endless auto loans.
People land jobs, start businesses, spend money they don't have, and pile up mortgages and car loans.
Then, once the banks decide to tighten the screws, they seize the real estate and the Mercedes vehicles. On top of that, you have a government that borrowed heavily just to fuel consumption, forced to take out even more loans and liquidate assets as if the group that came in specifically to fleece us hasn't already taken enough.
And then, to top it all off, they have the nerve to lecture us through the IMF.

wearytrucker22 said:Obviously, government spending has to be slashed. We need to cut pensions by 20-30%, drop civil servant salaries by 20-30%—except for healthcare, strictly because those people can just move abroad—and cut transfers to various civic associations, etc.
Public sector wages really ought to be 20% lower than what you'd make in the private sector with the exact same degree. You have to account for the fact that a government job is inherently more secure.

There's no need to cut anything; everything could be handled much more painlessly through the depreciation of the dollar.

Charles Ramos7 said:Germany:



Greece:



America:

We could just flip the script and imagine a world without Greece or America, couldn't we?

Think about it—people buying overpriced Volkswagens and Mercedes, or filling their carts at Walmart and Lidl with German goods because their own domestic industries were systematically dismantled by central planning.
The Germans would be left with absolutely nothing.

They don't have raw materials, and they don't even have a climate suitable for large-scale agriculture.
All they really have is what they manufacture, which they then offload onto other nations, often using the IMF and similar tactics to pull the wool over everyone's eyes.
Of course, people go along with it. I mean, who wouldn't choose the path of least resistance when there are plenty of people willing to do all the heavy lifting for them? But does that mean we owe anything to such manipulative players after they've used us?

wearytrucker22 said:What's the big deal with the IMF? They should have been here ages ago.

The IMF is nothing more than a pack of vultures. Honestly, I’ve got nothing but contempt for them and Linić for actually listening to their demands. It was a smart move by Milanović to kick him to the curb; maybe he finally did something right.

In times as tough as these, when money is tight for everyone, you inevitably run into people who think someone is just going to hand them a gift out of the blue.
I received a flyer claiming I’d won one of the major or consolation prizes, provided I sent over my personal details.
Of course, those details can be used for any kind of marketing imaginable. And what does that actually mean? It probably means this company will send you a bill for "processing fees" or force you to buy something just to claim your prize.

A sensible person looks at this and asks: first, who on earth is going to give you something for nothing these days? Out of pure charity? Is some billionaire suddenly looking to spread joy to strangers??
Second, there isn't a single mention of the official contest rules or where they can even be found. Is it an illegal sweepstakes? Apparently, they don't care.

It reminds me of those old scammers back in Little Rock—there was that clinic, though I can't quite recall their former name.

Ultimately, does a struggling family deserve to be preyed upon just because they might be lured by greed? I don't think so. They aren't thinking clearly because they're dealing with desperate financial situations, and then thieves like this come along and take their very last cent.




There is actually some information online about these types of crooks:

Honestly, who cares about banks or the IRS? If they’re just going to print dollars like it’s cheap toilet paper anyway, why shouldn't they just print enough to cover their own taxes instead of squeezing it out of us? I find myself wondering, what is even the point of taxation at this stage?

They already know everything—they don't even need your questions or answers to figure out which credit score you’re carrying or if your accounts are in the red. They ask those questions just to see if you'll keep lying to them. And let's be honest: once someone starts lying, they start stealing. At that point, these companies will just find a way to screw you over and ensure you aren't some sucker paying off a loan religiously while they take advantage.

Scott Barrett43 said:It’s been a massive disappointment dealing with State Farm—even after winning my court case, they still haven't coughed up the money. It was a similar headache when I dealt with GEICO, too.
The trick is to pay as little as possible, because these big insurance giants are nothing more than glorified scammers. They’ll promise you the moon just to pad their numbers and get you signed up... but once they have your cash in hand and something actually goes wrong? Good luck—you'll be left chasing them in circles.

http://www.seebiz.eu/america-osigura...kuna/ar-98333/

Is the liquidation of Goldman Sachs a matter of creating a bad bank or facing full bankruptcy? We should finally have a definitive answer by the end of the month.
The Secretary of the Treasury, Angela Merkel, hasn't ruled anything out—including bankruptcy, which would unfortunately result in massive losses for investors.
However, there are two major hurdles standing in the way of establishing a bad bank..
Moody's has already warned that if bankruptcy occurs, it could trigger widespread chaos across the entire US banking system (think JPMorgan Chase or Bank of America)
reposted from :

wiredtinker11 said:Well, there you have it—read it and weep. They’ve pushed the deadline for the sale out to mid-2015, so all this mass panic is honestly a bit much.

I hear you. They sold off their Austrian branch to an Indian firm for next to nothing, so it makes you wonder—if they can't find a buyer for our local branches here in the States, what's the endgame?

Quincy:

Charles Ramos7 As requested: When you look at bank acquisitions, it isn’t really about chasing ghosts from the past. Why dwell on what happened years ago? It's all about the present reality—securing immediate access to a new market or instantly expanding a client base. That is where the true value lies.☕

What would you personally do if you were considering buying a bank that was currently under investigation? Personally, I wouldn't touch it.

wiredtinker11 said:The thieves will end up behind bars, the bank will be sold off, and that'll be that. But hey, I guess some people just live to spread panic—whatever.

But really, who would want to deal with a European Union branch that has such a murky history? These kinds of investigations and the resulting bad press certainly don't help their case.

Timothy Kim9 said:The question was whether bank savings are actually safe here in the States.
At least, that’s how I took it. So I laid out a worst-case scenario—the kind of thing that
has actually happened before during those old currency crises back in the day.

Honestly, it surprises me that the Austrians haven't jumped all over the European Union yet, using the excuse:
"It's just not right that the branches get to live large while Austria picks up the tab."🙂

unless this was actually setting the stage for this:

If I were in their shoes, I'd be looking for the nearest exit... liquidating my CDs and getting out of town.