« previous   misc   next »

Hedge Fund Druckenmiller says Old Steal from the Young, Diverting Their theft


By bgamall4   Follow   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 1:53am PST   1,276 views   45 comments
Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (2)   Dislike  

http://www.recourse-loans.com/2013/03/hedge-fund-druckenmiller-says-old-steal.html I am sorry, but the international bankers who divide rich from poor while they steal from us are sickening traitors. So is the author, IMO. She fawns over hedge fund folks like they are gods. Well, they aren't.

« First     « Previous     Comments 6-45 of 45     Last »

mell   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 12:41pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 6

Maybe you know about any fraudulent activities the Druckenmiller fund has participated in and have proof, I would like to see that so that I can take their words with a couple of grains of salt. But so far it just seems like a rant against that statement, I definitely don't want my children to inherit all that debt and think it's unethical (yes, there are plenty of other things that are unethical, but let's stay on topic).

bgamall4   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 1:00pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 7

mell says

This is ridiculous, there are plenty of small to mid-sized hedge funds who have nothing to do with these practices.

If he is not involved in the evil he knows exists in the hedge fund community all the reason NOT to divide the populace from itself instead of focusing on excess speculation. This guy should forever be known as F***enmiller.

bgamall4   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 1:07pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 8

mell says

Maybe you know about any fraudulent activities the Druckenmiller fund has participated in and have proof,

These funds operate in secret. They are not public and they do not have to disclose much. Your children will inherit debt because gasoline is $1.50 per gallon more than it should be. Food is more than it should be. Cars cost more than they should because of the inflated commodities.

The only commodity that is not subject to speculation because of horrendous market forces is nat gas, and they are trying like hell to export it and get the price up there too.

There are two commodities that are banned from speculation. One is onions, which spike a lot but fall back to the mean, and movie box office bets that are forbidden because the movie industry knew Cantor Fitzgerald and friends would screw them with talk about the movie in question, if you know what I mean.

Cramer said he did the same, talk up or talk down stocks. He didn't admit that he lied at times. But we know hedge funds float phony news a lot.

The point is, there is massive speculation. One guy on Seeking Alpha estimated, based upon market forces, that the natural price of oil is 70 dollars a barrel, not close to 100.

And we pay every day this tax to the speculators. So we fail to pay down personal debt, which means the government has to spend to make up for the loss of discretionary income.

mell   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 1:28pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 9

Ok, so you're basically saying that without betting and speculation we would not have a debt problem. Would be nice if it were that easy ;) Btw. communist countries often disallow speculation and fix most prices, doesn't seem to work that well for them either.

bgamall4   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 1:45pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 10

mell says

Ok, so you're basically saying that without betting and speculation we would not have a debt problem.

I am saying the debt problem would be massively smaller. Half the debt was added in the housing bubble alone. The housing bubble was a Wall Street speculation, but they had main street do most of the speculation by adding massive amounts of easy money lending that artificially pushed up the price of housing. Then they took their money and loans off the table as the banks found it hard to securitize the lying loans towards the end of the bubble, and it crashed, causing a credit crisis which led to mass layoffs and lack of revenue for the government.

Now the arsewipes who planned the scam get their houses back, guarantees on the loans, and they want to start the securitization markets again. But first they want austerity, because it is easier to blow a bubble when the population is desperate.

And #bullcrapben Bernanke has telegraphed the housing bubble as I wrote here, thanks in part to Mike Whtney: http://www.recourse-loans.com/2013/02/bullcrap-ben-bernanke-has-telegraphed.html

mell   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 1:55pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 11

bgamall4 says

I am saying the debt problem would be massively smaller. Half the debt was added in the housing bubble alone. The housing bubble was a Wall Street speculation, but they had main street do most of the speculation by adding massive amounts of easy money lending that artificially pushed up the price of housing.

And most of the participating institutions were either on the brink of bankruptcy or in for a serious haircut in their size and power.. If it hadn't been for the bailouts. This problem is absolutely self-limiting when not bailing out failing institutions.

bgamall4   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 2:08pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 12

mell says

And most of the participating institutions were either on the brink of bankruptcy or in for a serious haircut in their size and power.. If it hadn't been for the bailouts. This problem is absolutely self-limiting when not bailing out failing institutions.

The institutions threatened to stop lending to one another, which would have caused contagion and a flight of capital from our financial system. They seemed to have us over a barrel. I want you to read this Mell. It is not that easy of a read. I do not know all the places banks park their collateral in order to get funded for speculative purposes. I am thinking about posting this sometime here at Patrick if it would make things clearer about the way banks are intertwined and why they continue to seek out risky collateral. http://www.recourse-loans.com/p/simple-primer-on-international-banking.html

mell   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 2:16pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 13

bgamall4 says

The institutions threatened to stop lending to one another, which would have caused contagion and a flight of capital from our financial system. They seemed to have us over a barrel. I want you to read this Mell. It is not that easy of a read. I do not know all the places banks park their collateral in order to get funded for speculative purposes. I am thinking about posting this sometime here at Patrick if it would make things clearer about the way banks are intertwined and why they continue to seek out risky collateral. http://www.recourse-loans.com/p/simple-primer-on-international-banking.html

I'll read it. I'm not saying it would have been pretty, but nothing a pair of handcuffs and federal pound-me-in-the-ass-prison couldn't fix, there is enough proof of fraud. They are powerful, but there is no institution that governs the whole world, it is way too chaotic. So it is on the people to effect change. If they keep banking with the same scumsters and digging all the cheap credit they can get, they are complicit. I think the resulting crisis would have been far more tolerable overall than they made you think. Similar to the sequester, the sky was falling until today, the stock market barely flinched and the airports are still running ;) It will be a dud.

bgamall4   Fri, 1 Mar 2013, 2:42pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 14

mell says

I'll read it. I'm not saying it would have been pretty, but nothing a pair of handcuffs and federal pound-me-in-the-ass-prison couldn't fix,

I totally agree with you. But they have become too powerful, and the world banking system too interlinked. I updated the article in a way that may interest you. Sorry. :) The issue is guaranteed collateral, and bankers will do everything within their power to have perfect collateral, no matter how risky the underlying loan, hence the need for the government to guarantee the loans.

That is why the Bernanke backstop is so wicked. Even if the GSE's are unwound, Bernanke's plan is to guarantee all loans anyway. Wells Fargo has threatened to do away with the 30 year mortgage if this guarantee does not happen because investors will no longer buy the bonds and Wells does not want to hold the paper. Same with all the TBTF banks.

It is a cabal that is running roughshod over government and government is powerless to stop it.

marcus   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 12:06am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 15

marcus   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 12:07am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 16

Actually what we have here is:

Conspiracy theories and hyperbole.

CaptainShuddup   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 12:26am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 17

The Old don't steal from the Young, these people were scumbags in the 70s and 80s and they are scumbags now. These were the same assholes that were called Yuppies back then. They were part of the top tier society in Regan's trickle down economy.

I wish my Mom was stealing from the poor, then I wouldn't have to send her money every other week. For the first time in over 20 years that she has lived on a fixed income. She is struggling under Obama, she never lived comfortable or lavish by any means. But now she's short across the board. SS payments barely pays her rent and utilities now.

bgamall4   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 1:33am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 18

CaptainShuddup says

SS payments barely pays her rent and utilities now.

Exactly. I bet Druckenmiller earns more than 100 million per year. It has to come from someone's hide. It comes from mainstreet's distress.

bgamall4   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 1:36am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 19

marcus says

Actually what we have here is:

Conspiracy theories and hyperbole.

If he were the only bankster to ever say these things you could say that. Unfortunately, this has been the bankster mantra for sometime. When you see orchestrated articles in Mainstreammedia MSM, that all put a wedge between old and young you know they are coming from the bankers.

And remember, all the metaprogramming phrases come from the central bankers, glass half full, restoring confidence, resiliency, green shoots, etc. They are disseminated by CNBC, the mouthpiece of the central banks, the Fed in the case of the USA.

Will Rogers was onto this language in the last credit crisis, the Great Depression.

Blurtman   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 1:42am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 20

Why doesn't anyone describe that corporations are also being saddled with future US debt? Corporations still pay taxes. I know individuals pay the lions share, compared to corporations, but still.

futuresmc   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 1:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 21

CaptainShuddup says

The Old don't steal from the Young, these people were scumbags in the 70s and 80s and they are scumbags now. These were the same assholes that were called Yuppies back then. They were part of the top tier society in Regan's trickle down economy.

I wish my Mom was stealing from the poor, then I wouldn't have to send her money every other week. For the first time in over 20 years that she has lived on a fixed income. She is struggling under Obama, she never lived comfortable or lavish by any means. But now she's short across the board. SS payments barely pays her rent and utilities now.

Your mother's declining financial situation is due to market speculation of commodities, not Obama's policies or mere existance in the White House. This is why you need sensible regulation of markets and timely (and unyielding) prosecution of fraud and other financial crimes. The market shouldn't be micromanaged by government, but it can't be trusted to run itself. Someone or a group of someones is always pulling the strings. If government doesn't make and enforce the basic rules, other self interested parties will, and people like your mother will be the ones loosing purchasing power or outright cash through a shifting of tax burdens.

bgamall4   Sat, 2 Mar 2013, 4:21am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 22

futuresmc says

Your mother's declining financial situation is due to market speculation of commodities, not Obama's policies or mere existance in the White House. This is why you need sensible regulation of markets and timely (and unyielding) prosecution of fraud and other financial crimes. The market shouldn't be micromanaged by government, but it can't be trusted to run itself.

This point of view cannot be stressed enough. There is a huge private tax extracted by the bankers upon everyone else. Gasoline, food, building materials are all bid up beyond an intrinsic worth. They are bid up based upon cornering of the markets by big finance.

marcus   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 3:45am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 23

bgamall4 says

Gasoline, food, building materials are all bid up beyond an intrinsic worth. They are bid up based upon cornering of the markets by big finance.

This is such utter BS. Not only that, if you and others somehow convinced enough people that this is true, what would be your solution?

As far as I can tell you are a mouthpiece for those who would truly manipulate prices. You would take all the speculators away, and what you would be left with is a market that is FAR FAR FAR easier to corner and or to manipulate.

OR maybe you are deep down a marxist who thinks that a totalitarian state where some dictators set fixed prices on commodities, is the route to go.

I don't want to say you are the most clueless person on this forum. But the spread between your confidence in what you know versus reality is higher than anyone's.

Gee, I wonder whether you've ever been burned in a commodity futures trade.

bgamall4   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 4:22am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 24

You should read this, and understand that, as in the stock market, the TBTF banks and the traders they fund operate on a whole different level in stocks and commodities than you do. They control the direction of the markets and you don't. They even, as this link shows, hide toxic assets in order to keep this ponzi going:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-10/big-banks-hide-risk-transforming-collateral-for-traders.html

marcus   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 8:53am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 25

Any large extremely well capitalized trader or trader with resources behind him or her has an advantage, but where you are wrong is that they control the market. With their larger size comes larger risk. And when they want to get out of a losing position, when their position is huge, they can not get out easily and quickly as a small trader can. They have to move the market against themself to get out.

And the bigger their position (that is if they were trying to control the market), the more true this is.

Way too much emotion, ignorance and lack of reasoning in your commentary.

marcus   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 9:00am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 26

bgamall4 says

They even, as this link shows, hide toxic assets in order to keep this ponzi going:

AS usual, you exaggerate. They didn't say toxic assets. Banks will temporarily loan Treasuries, in place of lower rates securities, so that traders can meet new tougher requirements for collateral behind trades. You can be sure the banks will make sure that the values are appropriate. Lower rated securities are discounted and the banks will make the adjustment. They aren't going to loan say a million dollars worth of bonds while holding securities that are worth way less than that. The point was that the new rules require treasuries be used for collateral.

SOunds like a total non-story to me.

gsr   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 10:29am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 27

futuresmc says

Your mother's declining financial situation is due to market speculation of commodities, not Obama's policies or mere existance in the White House

Who is providing free liquidity to speculators? Where do you think the money is coming from?

bgamall4   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 10:46am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 28

gsr says

Who is providing free liquidity to speculators? Where do you think the money is coming from?

The money is coming from the banksters, who take crap assets from the traders, and then fund them for speculation. They also give crap assets to pension funds, and get nice treasuries back in return. And the criminal enterprise continues.

marcus   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 10:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 29

The stupidity is getting to me. Especially when there are intelligent arguments that can be made against the banks.

thomaswong.1986   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 11:04am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 30

bgamall4 says

The funded the SIVs that pumped up housing prices so that they crashed, leaving the masses with worthless real estate.

No it was main street buyers were the ones who kept pumping up prices higher and higher...

what is even more laughable is what you call lower priced homes as being "worthless".

sounds like your more interested in seeing highly inflated home prices...

bgamall4   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 11:48am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 31

marcus says

You would take all the speculators away, and what you would be left with is a market that is FAR FAR FAR easier to corner and or to manipulate.

No, IKe suspended onions futures trading precisely because the futures traders cornered the market on onion. Why would you say the exact opposite of reality like you are an expert when it simply is not the truth? What is in it for you to lie?

bgamall4   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 11:56am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 32

marcus says

Especially when there are intelligent arguments that can be made against the banks.

I will let someone else make it since you aren't being honest in this conversation.:

http://www.globalinvestormagazine.com/Article/3131048/Uncertainty-over-collateral-upgrade-trades.html?ArticleID=3131048

and

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-09-10/big-banks-hide-risk-transforming-collateral-for-traders.html

The banks are worried that as a lack of good collateral becomes scarce, they will be forced to take on bad collateral to keep trading desks speculating.

bgamall4   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 11:57am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 33

And the bankers even plan to do that very thing, use, and even hide bad collateral while giving traders good collateral.

swebb   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 12:58pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 34

bgamall4 says

The funded the SIVs that pumped up housing prices so that they crashed, leaving the masses with worthless real estate.

Hold on there, cowboy...Who was forced into buying overpriced houses, for one, and which of those houses are worthless? Some idiots in desert and swampland lost 40-60%, and Elkhart and Detroit got screwed...but by and large people didn't end up with worthless real estate...

bgamall4   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 1:21pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 35

swebb says

Hold on there, cowboy...Who was forced into buying overpriced houses, for one, and which of those houses are worthless? Some idiots in desert and swampland lost 40-60%, and Elkhart and Detroit got screwed...but by and large people didn't end up with worthless real estate...

First of all partner, I am not a cowboy, although you, being from Denver, might be. However, what is clear is that the amount of easy money loans were offered in such massive quantities, that they pushed up the price of housing to unsustainable levels. The collateral of bonds was so crappy, and the underwriting so foul, that investors in the mortgage backed bonds got out, leaving the market to crash.

That is fact. You can deny the fact, and I have been to Denver and live in Las Vegas, and I can tell you that Denver sucks.

thunderlips11   Sun, 3 Mar 2013, 11:55pm PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 36

The value of "Speculators" in regulating prices is vastly overblown. Seems to me they more often cause crisis than help resolve them. Case in Point: Enron and California. Speculators love price spikes, and try to cause them anyway they can.

I didn't know speculating on Movie Profits is banned.

bgamall4   Mon, 4 Mar 2013, 1:39am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 37

thunderlips11 says

I didn't know speculating on Movie Profits is banned.

Yes, originally, Cantor Fitzgerald was going to establish a market, but the film makers said no way. Obama signed the bill banning these futures. Cantor had already pulled out of the scheme prior to Obama signing the ban.

CaptainShuddup   Mon, 4 Mar 2013, 3:35am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 38

It's not Stealing, they are just charging RENT.
futuresmc says

Your mother's declining financial situation is due to market speculation of commodities, not Obama's policies or mere existance in the White House. This is why you need sensible regulation of markets and timely (and unyielding) prosecution of fraud and other financial crimes. The market shouldn't be micromanaged by government, but it can't be trusted to run itself.

Have we met? Sure it's not Obama's policies, but people's biggest complaint about Obama is that he is a continuation of Bush's policy to the letter.
Fixing the shit doesn't even rate on Obama's things to do. He's just focused on raising taxes, under the guise of taxing the rich. Like the rich wont pass the costs along to the consumer, and just compound the situation.

We're not fucking stupid, we get what Obama want's to do. But it's Obama and the Liberal ilk that doesn't get the ramifications of those actions without first addressing the commodity speculation. That already has people stretched beyond their limits.

If Obama would exhibit one single thing that was a smashing success, then it would be a lot easier to get those same people that believe Obama is a continuation of Bush to have more faith in him. But all Obama manages to do, is booger up every damn thing he touches.

bgamall4   Mon, 4 Mar 2013, 3:56am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 39

CaptainShuddup says

Like the rich wont pass the costs along to the consumer, and just compound the situation.

That is only if you tax corporations. The rich individuals can't pass along squat.

Obama wants bonds to fix infrastructure. You don't see the Republicans shouting out their support do you, while our bridges and roads and airports disintegrate.

CaptainShuddup   Mon, 4 Mar 2013, 6:05am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 40

bgamall4 says

The rich individuals can't pass along squat.

If I were making 20 million from my lucrative corporation and I get taxed to the point that I can't maintain my lifestyle. Then perhaps I need to make 40 million.
I was selling widgets for $10.00 a pop, now I need to sell them for $20.00 a pop.
Increased profits = increased bonus

swebb   Mon, 4 Mar 2013, 8:44am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 41

bgamall4 says

However, what is clear is that the amount of easy money loans were offered in such massive quantities, that they pushed up the price of housing to unsustainable levels. The collateral of bonds was so crappy, and the underwriting so foul, that investors in the mortgage backed bonds got out, leaving the market to crash.

That is fact. You can deny the fact, and I have been to Denver and live in Las Vegas, and I can tell you that Denver sucks.

Investors in MBS lost money because the ratings agencies weren't doing their jobs...some of the loss you can chalk up to the risk you take in an investment, but a lot rests on the the ratings agencies, poor (fraudulent) underwriting, and lack of oversight. Agreed. But the people who bought the overpriced houses and lost money because of that -- most of them made a bad choice and got burned by it. There is some personal responsibility there, no?

If someone buys a house and ends up paying significantly more in a monthly payment for a mortgage than it would cost to rent a similar place, they probably overpaid -- isn't that their fault? If they stretched their budget to the limit to do it, isn't that their fault?

As far as the bit about Denver sucking, where did that come from? I'm not asking you to like it, and I don't care if you do or not -- in fact, please spread the word. We have enough people moving here already. If you want to discuss Denver vs Las Vegas, start a thread and I will participate. I think there are a lot of good things about Denver, and I like it here quite well.

mell   Mon, 4 Mar 2013, 9:55am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 42

swebb says

Investors in MBS lost money because the ratings agencies weren't doing their jobs...some of the loss you can chalk up to the risk you take in an investment, but a lot rests on the the ratings agencies, poor (fraudulent) underwriting, and lack of oversight. Agreed. But the people who bought the overpriced houses and lost money because of that -- most of them made a bad choice and got burned by it. There is some personal responsibility there, no?

If someone buys a house and ends up paying significantly more in a monthly payment for a mortgage than it would cost to rent a similar place, they probably overpaid -- isn't that their fault? If they stretched their budget to the limit to do it, isn't that their fault?

Exactly. This is not a conspiracy by some "speculators" behind the curtain, this is just more of the same and every American wants to jump on the gravy train while it's good! The landlords on patnet love rising rents and property prices, and why not, everybody makes their own bets. And why shouldn't gasoline and food rise with rents and house prices? It's only logical. Whether there is a real recovery going on or not, inflation is part of it. Just don't bail anyone out when (not if) the train stops again, return to the rule of law and prosecute fraud (on all sides) and the problem is solved.

bgamall4   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 4:52am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 43

swebb says

Investors in MBS lost money because the ratings agencies weren't doing their jobs...some of the loss you can chalk up to the risk you take in an investment, but a lot rests on the the ratings agencies, poor (fraudulent) underwriting, and lack of oversight.

The ratings agencies were bought off. Either they rate the bonds AAA or go find another job. swebb says

As far as the bit about Denver sucking, where did that come from? I'm not asking you to like it, and I don't care if you do or not -- in fact, please spread the word. We have enough people moving here already. If you want to discuss Denver vs Las Vegas, start a thread and I will participate. I think there are a lot of good things about Denver, and I like it here quite well.

Sorry about discing Denver. There is a lot of beauty in the Rocky Mountains and also in the Sierra Nevada range. But that beauty doesn't really make up for long term cold weather for many of us. Sorry again.

As far as personal responsibility, there was never full disclosure of what was happening to the market as people got loans. It was a scam, and Americans were ripped off by the trillions.

bgamall4   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 5:01am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 44

mell says

This is not a conspiracy by some "speculators" behind the curtain,

Actually, while the people were the speculators, Wall Street set up the speculation and enabled it. Without the absence of underwriters, this never could have happened. But the underwriters were not necessary, because the banks could lie and pawn off the loans to unsuspecting investors. When they found out, the banks had to gorge themselves with bad paper. The Fed is taking that bad paper off the bank books, and may not be able to pay the interest back to the treasury as it has been doing.

http://www.businessinsider.com/fed-remittances-to-treasury-to-decline-2013-3

BWT, there is a shortage of quality bonds. That is deflationary. Just FYI.

taxee   Tue, 5 Mar 2013, 5:27am PST   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike     Comment 45

mell says

return to the rule of law and prosecute fraud (on all sides) and the problem is solved.

That would be a good start but those guys pay protection money to the enforcers.
Our other problem is our illustrious business leaders have been cavorting with slave plantation owners outside our boarders to bring us cheap crap that we are stupid enough to buy.

« First     « Previous comments    

bgamall4 is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email

home   top   share   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net