View Poll Results: Should this be ILLEGAL?

Voters
14. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    7 50.00%
  • NO

    6 42.86%
  • OTHER, please explain.

    1 7.14%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Should this be illegal?

  1. #21
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,282

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug View Post
    Because you have those of us thinking rationally about the matter. Your quest and zeal to hold banks to a different standard than other entities is starting to fall apart on you mainly because of a lack of understanding of how so many players in the Oil commodity can do what you claim the banks could do.

    The simple truth is regulation for this would be laughably absurd and completely ineffective.

    On the contrary, it has only been legal for banks to do this since Billy Clintoooon's de-regulation. The banks are leading the war charge against labor in our Nation. Now, Unions definitely misused their power to the detriment of the Nation and their members, nevertheless they began with a useful function and moral high ground. Corporate charters used to be narrowly defined to prevent overlap into sections that allowed monopolistic practices, but since Corporate Crime just gets fines and no criminal punishment, then it is automatically legal to do anything they want because there is no punishment, and that is where we are and what is happening. JPMorgan Chase (JPMorgan was bought out by David Rockefeller's Chase Manhatten Bank that was built with StandardOil/Exxon monies) pays a $13 billion fine but no criminal prosecutions and it is just the tip of the iceberg. It has always been a Corporate/Labor War in the USA and that is why Charlie Chaplin was blackballed in the USA, and Corporate has won since they managed to purchase the SCOTUS ( Citizens United) as it appears.

  2. #22
    Guru
    soot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    04-25-17 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug View Post
    It would be extremely foolish to suggest banks owning these things makes them more prone to "manipulation" or some other suspect intentions vs. when they are owned by other business entities or individuals.
    I agree.

    JPMorgan is certainly no worse than OPEC.

    The last thing we need is yet more regulations and business limits, when will you people learn those things come with more consequence than good?
    I disagree.

    I think that scrutinizing the banks' (that are involved in commodities holding) capital reserves against systemic risk potential in the event of catastrophic loss is a legitimate social concern.

    If the SIFIs involved can take the hit without shaking the system then I have no opposition to their being involved with investment in any sector they feel will net a profit.

    But if they aren't in a financial position (insurance plus reserves) to take such risks they don't have any business putting the American taxpayer on the hook (again) for their negligence.
    “Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,
    For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and he weareth the Christian down;
    And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,
    And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

  3. #23
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    08-08-17 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,860

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug View Post
    Because you have those of us thinking rationally about the matter. Your quest and zeal to hold banks to a different standard than other entities is starting to fall apart on you mainly because of a lack of understanding of how so many players in the Oil commodity can do what you claim the banks could do.

    The simple truth is regulation for this would be laughably absurd and completely ineffective.
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    On the contrary, it has only been legal for banks to do this since Billy Clintoooon's de-regulation. The banks are leading the war charge against labor in our Nation. Now, Unions definitely misused their power to the detriment of the Nation and their members, nevertheless they began with a useful function and moral high ground. Corporate charters used to be narrowly defined to prevent overlap into sections that allowed monopolistic practices, but since Corporate Crime just gets fines and no criminal punishment, then it is automatically legal to do anything they want because there is no punishment, and that is where we are and what is happening. JPMorgan Chase (JPMorgan was bought out by David Rockefeller's Chase Manhatten Bank that was built with StandardOil/Exxon monies) pays a $13 billion fine but no criminal prosecutions and it is just the tip of the iceberg. It has always been a Corporate/Labor War in the USA and that is why Charlie Chaplin was blackballed in the USA, and Corporate has won since they managed to purchase the SCOTUS ( Citizens United) as it appears.
    Now you are adding in new subjects here to cloud the issue.

    Read what I said again, you are still wanting to hold banks to a standard all the while ignoring that other players in Oil trading can do. And you add in verbiage on banks being against labor in our nation. No matter if that is or is not true, you still have not addressed that there is plenty of commodity price manipulation going on but you want the focus to be on one potential player. That is a huge problem, all because as a "conservative" you suggest what the business model should be for social benefit.

    On top of all that you seem to be wanting to talk about corporate crime, bringing up fines associated with the financial collapse of 2008. One, that does not involve oil manipulation. Two, JPMorgan is not unique in paying these fines. And lastly, the government went to many of these institutions in a panic to save other dying institutions only to turn around a few years later and extort fines from these same institutions run by people who were not in charge during the questionable practices bringing about these fines. JPMorgan being built on many things, including oil, does not mean that any manipulation that might have occurred means something to the fines they are paying.

    Then to cap it off the Citizens United ruling, which has nothing to do with bank oil price manipulation, suggests nothing but continued attempts ignore the issue you opened the thread on.
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  4. #24
    Sage
    jet57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    not here
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    24,668

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    When a Bank Owns 100 Oil Tankers, It Can Mess With the Price of Gas - Truthdig

    "A two-year Senate investigation of the financial sector has found that banks can meddle with the economy in new and frightening ways.
    The investigation was led by Carl Levin, D-Mich., and looked specifically at the impact of investments on the prices of certain commodities—things like oil and uranium.
    Deregulation made it possible for firms such as Goldman Sachs to outright buy commodities and commodity suppliers. For instance, Goldman owns a coal mine in Colombia. And that fleet of 100 oil tankers? It belonged at one time to Morgan Stanley, which also held 55 million barrels of oil storage. JPMorgan Chase, according to The New York Times, once owned 31 power plants."

    When a Bank Owns 100 Oil Tankers, It Can Mess With the Price of Gas - Truthdig

    Could some large energy Corporations actually be major stockholders of these same banks?

    If you have billions of dollars, what do you do with it?

    Are all billionaires actually bankers because of the nature of money?

    Bankers buy huge oil positions to control OIL prices, do they market wars to control weapons contracts?

    Why do Corporations, specifically "Fictitious entities" have more power than taxpaying citizens?

    These are the "Too Big To Fail" banks that we bailed out.

    We bail them out and they use our money to put the screws to us.

    Is banking at all levels totally crooked? Or just the Big Banks?

    Is this the kind of thing we should write our Congressman about?

    SHOULD THIS BE LEGAL?

    Well, you conservatives like the deregulated free market don't you? That's what you get with one.
    “The people do no want virtue; but they are the dupes of pretended patriots” : Elbridge Gerry of Mass; Constitutional Convention 1787

  5. #25
    A sinister place...
    OrphanSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta
    Last Seen
    08-08-17 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,860

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by soot View Post
    I disagree.

    I think that scrutinizing the banks' (that are involved in commodities holding) capital reserves against systemic risk potential in the event of catastrophic loss is a legitimate social concern.

    If the SIFIs involved can take the hit without shaking the system then I have no opposition to their being involved with investment in any sector they feel will net a profit.

    But if they aren't in a financial position (insurance plus reserves) to take such risks they don't have any business putting the American taxpayer on the hook (again) for their negligence.
    I understand that as a position to have, and it has nothing to do with bank owned assets for the purpose of oil price manipulation. Capital reserve requirements have nothing to do with the regulation the OP is suggesting, the OP is suggesting asset ownership limitations to prevent something that so far no one has proved actually happened in a manner consistent with the OP article.

    And "too big to fail" for banks is purely our fault. It was not a lack of regulation, it was the wrong regulation. Banks (really investment houses) were in a position where their actions caused enough problem that government bailed them out. Now I do not agree with the bailout anyway, there is an economic remedy to financial organization poor decision making. But that said, still has nothing to do with oil assets ownership (or other commodity assets and energy assets) for the purpose of price manipulation.
    "Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people." - Penn Jillette.

  6. #26
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,282

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug View Post
    Now you are adding in new subjects here to cloud the issue.

    Read what I said again, you are still wanting to hold banks to a standard all the while ignoring that other players in Oil trading can do. And you add in verbiage on banks being against labor in our nation. No matter if that is or is not true, you still have not addressed that there is plenty of commodity price manipulation going on but you want the focus to be on one potential player. That is a huge problem, all because as a "conservative" you suggest what the business model should be for social benefit.

    On top of all that you seem to be wanting to talk about corporate crime, bringing up fines associated with the financial collapse of 2008. One, that does not involve oil manipulation. Two, JPMorgan is not unique in paying these fines. And lastly, the government went to many of these institutions in a panic to save other dying institutions only to turn around a few years later and extort fines from these same institutions run by people who were not in charge during the questionable practices bringing about these fines. JPMorgan being built on many things, including oil, does not mean that any manipulation that might have occurred means something to the fines they are paying.

    Then to cap it off the Citizens United ruling, which has nothing to do with bank oil price manipulation, suggests nothing but continued attempts ignore the issue you opened the thread on.
    I was tying the asset manipulation to historical manipulation by the same agencies/Corporations that were involved in the 1920's fiasco. What is good for Corporate is usually bad for humans. Pretty simple really. Congressional investigation has already confirmed the asset manipulation, but I don't think they will do anything about it because of the nature of the Corporate/Labor War being won by Corporate. I don't think this jsut happened in the last few years, it's just more blatant.

  7. #27
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,282

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by OrphanSlug View Post
    Now you are adding in new subjects here to cloud the issue.

    Read what I said again, you are still wanting to hold banks to a standard all the while ignoring that other players in Oil trading can do. And you add in verbiage on banks being against labor in our nation. No matter if that is or is not true, you still have not addressed that there is plenty of commodity price manipulation going on but you want the focus to be on one potential player. That is a huge problem, all because as a "conservative" you suggest what the business model should be for social benefit.

    On top of all that you seem to be wanting to talk about corporate crime, bringing up fines associated with the financial collapse of 2008. One, that does not involve oil manipulation. Two, JPMorgan is not unique in paying these fines. And lastly, the government went to many of these institutions in a panic to save other dying institutions only to turn around a few years later and extort fines from these same institutions run by people who were not in charge during the questionable practices bringing about these fines. JPMorgan being built on many things, including oil, does not mean that any manipulation that might have occurred means something to the fines they are paying.

    Then to cap it off the Citizens United ruling, which has nothing to do with bank oil price manipulation, suggests nothing but continued attempts ignore the issue you opened the thread on.
    Here is the Senate report.

    Senate Report: Scale of Wall Street Holdings Are

    "Last Thursday, the U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Senator Carl Levin, released an alarming 396-page report that details how Wall Street’s too-big-to-fail banks have quietly, and often stealthily through shell companies, gained ownership of a stunning amount of the nation’s critical industrial commodities like oil, aluminum, copper, natural gas, and even uranium. The report said the scale of these bank holdings “appears to be unprecedented in U.S. history.”
    snip
    "Morgan Stanley held “operating leases on over 100 oil storage tank field[s] with 58 million barrels of storage capacity globally and 18 natural gas storage facilities in US and Europe.” Morgan Stanley also had “over 100 ships under time charters or voyages for movement of oil product, and was ranked 9th globally in shipping oil distillates in 2009.” The company also owned 6 domestic and international power plants.

    JPMorgan had a “significant global oil storage portfolio (25 [million barrel] capacity) … along with 19 Natural Gas storage facilities on lease.” It also reported that JPMorgan had acquired “Henry [B]ath metals warehouse (LME certified base metals warehousing/storage worldwide),” and that JPMorgan’s “total base metal inventory was as high as $8 [billion]” during the first quarter of 2012.

    Bank of America had “23 oil storage facilities and 54 natural gas facilities…leased for storage.”

    Goldman Sachs had four tolling agreements and a wholly-owned subsidiary, Cogentrix, with ownership interests in over 30 power plants; owned “Metro Warehouse which controls 84 metal warehouse/storage facilities globally” and qualified as a London Metals Exchange storage provider; had acquired a Colombian coal mine valued at $204 million, which had also included associated rail transportation for the coal. The report also found that Goldman Sachs had conducted “a uranium trading business that engages in the trading of the underlying commodity.”

  8. #28
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,214

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by lifeisshort View Post
    I don't think a bank should own anything except the bank.
    Banks need to invest money somehow and should be able to own commodities, stocks, etc. but never controlling interests.

  9. #29
    Sage
    Lord of Planar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portlandia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,214

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Well, you conservatives like the deregulated free market don't you? That's what you get with one.
    But didn't this happen with Obama et. al?

    Anyone see what bills deregulated this, or is this speculation?

  10. #30
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Should this be illegal?

    The SEC is tasked with policing this sort of thing. Of course they are controlled largely by the POTUS.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •