1. the american taxpayer has committed to pay extra tax for next N 
decades so the federal reserve (a conglomerate of bankers) can loan the 
government, with interest, money to give back to them (a conglomerate of 
bankers) under a different name, so they can loan it to the american 
taxpayer with interest....

eh? isn't there an extra unnecessary step in there?

2. the bankers keep all their huge profits through dodgy dealing, when 
the hype is up, yet get to nationalise all their losses when the 
inevitable happens and hype is realised as just hype?

"FriarTuck"  wrote in message 
news:4KLFk.2428$Cd6.1697@newsfe11.ams2...

> 2. the bankers keep all their huge profits through dodgy dealing, when
> the hype is up, yet get to nationalise all their losses when the
> inevitable happens and hype is realised as just hype?

The problem here is history.In 1929 the US government decided to let 
capitalism 'red in tooth and claw' run things.

They then has ten years of depression and the US economy didn't get properly 
sorted out until WWII,  although he rest of the world managed to sort their 
mess out somewhat more quickly.

So,  you either bail out the banks or you trash your economy for a decade 
and more and have a couple of million people 'on the road' with no money and 
nowhere to go.

Except...

These days the American poor got guns on a scale never before envisaged.

Read up on the automobile bandits,  especially Dillinger and the bits about 
him being an Anarchist


-- 
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time,  like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 15:13:04 +0000, FriarTuck wrote:

> 1. the american taxpayer has committed to pay extra tax for next N
> decades so the federal reserve (a conglomerate of bankers) can loan the
> government, with interest, money to give back to them (a conglomerate of
> bankers) under a different name, so they can loan it to the american
> taxpayer with interest....
> 
> eh? isn't there an extra unnecessary step in there?
> 

I mean... at least one extra unnecessary step...

> 2. the bankers keep all their huge profits through dodgy dealing, when
> the hype is up, yet get to nationalise all their losses when the
> inevitable happens and hype is realised as just hype?

and 

3. looking at "schwarze"negger wanting a bailout, seems a way to prop up 
failing republican states as well....