Awareness
Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Edwird
quote:
ORIGINAL: Awareness
Germany has had problems with Muslim immigration for decades,
No they haven't, none anymore than occasionally bothersome in any case. There were many Turkish migrant workers (Gastarbeiter) in the 1960s-70s because of severe labor shortage, and they were no worse a problem than any other group of migrant workers in other countries, i.e., minimal (and no worse than the Gastarbeiter from Spain, Italy, etc.). Germany encouraged them (because they were needed), and if there had been any serious problems arising from it they would have gone another course, as there were several other sources to chose from. A good many of the third generation from that group can't speak Turkish and don't give a flip about Islam any more than a native German would. Misrepresentation. At the very least, opinion is divided on the matter with a significant Islamist presence amongst the Turkish population a significant portion of which value Islamic law above the law of the land. That would strike a reasonable person as problematic.
quote:
So now the extreme right are Merkel's fault, too. I get the feeling we're ready for takeoff, here ... No, I'm sure social harmony has nothing to do with the German Chancellor. Her job is to just sit there and ignore the country's woes. Perhaps this whole "leading the country" thing means something different to a workmanlike thinker such as yourself.
quote:
What was disastrous was invading and bombing them out of their homes and cities, then one village to the next and chasing them to Europe. I see. All refugees are the fault of the evil West.
quote:
Yeah, that's why I took three semesters of accounting and multiple semesters of business oriented computer programming back in the day, and finance and econ classes for my degree more recently. And read the WS Journal, and FT when I had free access to it
As simpletons go, you're about as simple minded as they come. So you respond to a political statement by trying in vain to impress us with your credentials. None of those things precludes you being an idiot who thinks socialism has the answer. And reading the Journal and the Financial Times doesn't imply you understand half of what they publish. There's probably money to be made in betting you don't.
quote:
Oh my. Well I think you should get in touch with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and inform them of the error of their ways, then, because here is something in one of their working papers on the matter that seems at variance with your (mis)information:
"AIG began originating multi-sector (multi-tranche CDO) CDS in 2003, at a time when the firm was rated AAA." A Credit Default Swap (CDS) is a form of insurance, often on a CDO, but not necessarily. Given AIG was an insurer, it's not unheard of them to sell insurance. There's no indication in that report that their pre-2005 CDS were on a residential mortgage backed security with a sub-prime tranche. None at all. So while I applaud your somewhat desperate attempt to try and win that part of the argument, I regret to inform you that you've failed. Better luck next time, lad.
quote:
In any case your fellow's name is Michael Burry, not Berry, and if I recall, he bought his first CDS sometime around mid-2005, certainly no earlier. Yes. And at the time, nobody was offering CDS on CDO's with a sub-prime tranche.
quote:
It's been amusing watching you trying to play at structured finance, but not entertaining, actually. Time to scoot along now and go find something else to pretend you can understand. Given your failures in the conversation, I can only smile somewhat smugly at the irony of that statement. Would you like some tissues?
The essential point I was making - which I'm sure you're trying to avoid with all your nitpicking (in vain) - is that Deutsche Bank was, and is, an example of the fraudulent financial activity taking place on Merkel's watch with the blessing of German law. The CDO scamming isn't the whole of it - last year they got hit with a US$2.5 billion dollar fine for their part in fixing the LIBOR rate. ( https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/apr/23/deutsche-bank-hit-by-record-25bn-libor-rigging-fine ) and were cited as being obstructive in their response to the investigation. I would've thought someone who claimed to be well-read in finance would know that - but perhaps you missed it in your daily perusal of the Journal. Perhaps the cartoons were more your speed. One can only speculate.
It seems difficult to explain this kind of malfeasance unless you accept the idea that there's a culture of fraud within the bank and a lack of government regulation which might protect investors from that fraud. From that perspective, it's difficult to try and deny that Merkel has nothing to do with this. And indeed, there's a suggestion that her earlier inaction means she's now caught between a rock and a hard place. If she fails to bail them out, Deutsche crashes and potentially starts a chain reaction. If she DOES bail them out, her political career is over as the public are well and truly sick of the whole "privatisation of profit, socialisation of loss" fraud which the "too big to fail" banks have been perpetuating for some time.
Remember that the EU is largely controlled by Germany and so it's German influence which is responsible for the financial controls - or lack thereof - which operate across Europe. And Merkel has been Chancellor for how long? Since 2005? So that would be over a decade under her leadership.
I think claiming she has nothing to do with it is beyond disingenuous. It's more the cry of the simpleton who just doesn't understand.
quote:
Indeed they have, "killing each other like Christians" you might say, You couldn't say, because Christian doctrine - unlike Islamic doctrine - preaches peace and love for your neighbour. There's not a lot of "go kill people" verses. Again, unlike Islam.
quote:
and that is where it stayed all these centuries until after WWI when Britain, France, and the oil companies arbitrarily laid out new borders that had little to do with the natural divisions those people had made for themselves over those centuries, the new borders separating like groups and shoving together disparate groups. Britain and the US' CIA overthrowing Mosaddegh in 1952. Invading temporarily in 1990, then long-term in 2001. Jihadist terrorist attacks in the US and Europe were rare before the last invasion, and only since has there been all this influx of refugees. Sorry boy, but that's the facts. I understand. When Islam invades, that's good. When someone else does it, that's bad. All geopolitical situations can be resolved to white hats and bad hats because your tiny intelligence has trouble with complexity, ambiguity and shades of grey. Your inability to see situations in complex terms is entirely your own problem - it doesn't justify your naive misinterpretations.
quote:
As for what part of troubles Germany did bring upon themselves, you have yet to convince anyone but the mirror that Merkel is even arguably worse in handling troubles in her country than her male counterparts in their respective countries, especially those considered the 'main players.' I'm afraid for that to be true, you'd have to be able to read minds. To say a simpleton like yourself is unconvinced isn't really saying much.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Awareness
She's done a poor job.
quote:
You say that as if your opinion actually mattered. To anyone. It matters enough for you to respond to it. Who exactly are you trying to convince here, besides yourself?
_____________________________
Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.
|
RE: Clinton Supporter Mike Moore demonstrates an insigh... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread