Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Richard Mori]

The vote to end the oil industry tax breaks failed.  Those politicians who voted to protect those tax breaks have collectively received $23,582,500 in career contributions from the industry.

That about sums it up.

[SalmonGod]

A tasty blow against the Patriot Act and overzealous counter-terrorism policy in general.

Spoiler: This was posted along with the link to the above article. (click to show/hide)

In 2004 an American-born convert to Islam was arrested in Oregon in connection with the train bombings in Madrid. It was found according to the FBI that they had a "100 percent positive" match that placed him at the Madrid..the evidence was "absolutely incontrovertible". So obviously Mr. Brandon Mayfield a Lawyer in Oregon was swiftly detained.

Over the the events that followed Mr Mayfield endured " lockdown, strip searches, sleep deprivation, unsanitary living conditions, shackles and chains, threats, physical pain and humiliation."

Whilst all this was transpiring the Spanish National Police where very incredulous of the FBI's assessment of the matching finger prints. The FBI though relying on "tried and true" fingerprinting techniques would not listen to the fact that prima-face it made no sense that Mr Mayfield was involved.

Ill cut a longer story short...but the Spanish National Police had to force the issue with the FBI ... they intended on keeping Mr. Mayfield locked away...well...forever...besides they had "finger prints" that where a 100 percent match!

Eventually the Spanish National Police found the correct individual that the finger prints ALSO MATCHED (yes that's correct "also matched"). You can read the New York Times article on this below.

But my point here is not political...its more just that people naively believe fingerprints are accurate when actually as is pointed out on Wikipedia:

"In 1995, the Collaborative Testing Service (CTS) administered a proficiency test that, for the first time, was “designed, assembled, and reviewed” by the International Association for Identification (IAI).The results were disappointing. Four suspect cards with prints of all ten fingers were provided together with seven latents. Of 156 people taking the test, only 68 (44%) correctly classified all seven latents. Overall, the tests contained a total of 48 incorrect identifications. David Grieve, the editor of the Journal of Forensic Identification, describes the reaction of the forensic community to the results of the CTS test as ranging from “shock to disbelief,” and added:
'Errors of this magnitude within a discipline singularly admired and respected for its touted absolute certainty as an identification process have produced chilling and mind- numbing realities. Thirty-four participants, an incredible 22% of those involved, substituted presumed but false certainty for truth. By any measure, this represents a profile of practice that is unacceptable and thus demands positive action by the entire community.'"

I could go on about this and how the legal community works to squelch this information in courts...but no need beat on it. I just wanted to share a counter intuitive little fact not many know.

And... more police killing innocent people and walking free for months afterwards, even though multiple recordings of the event by various people caught them acting on an obvious hate/power trip.

[Truean]

Because I don't like the bank I don't like, I'm considering organizing a day where craptons of people open up savings accounts with exactly a dollar. This is the minimum required to open an account under an old rule. This shall be done as politely and perkily as possible. Friday, the day paychecks are received....

Then the next day they shall come back and demand said dollar back and said account closed. This shall be done as hilariously as possible and also as slowly as possible. Monday, the day paychecks are often cashed....

Also, right around the first of the month to catch rent check deposits. It shall be glorious, and primarily out of my not liking bank, for reasons that are probably only vaguely related to many other people's reasons. Primarily, I detest their foreclosure litigation department, who has been upset they cannot trip me up despite repeated attempts to do so. I have immaculate records on eeeeeeeeeverything. You can't say I didn't send you something I was supposed to, because I know everything I ever sent out and when and to whom and what was in it and the exact certified mailing tracking number for everything .

I am professional to a fault until I become vindictive. I'll let you know when that happens.

[Darvi]

Nothing wrong with being a vindictive professional.

[kaijyuu]

I'm certain the guys at the counter, the only ones who will be affected, are incredibly deserving.

[Truean]

I'm certain the guys at the counter, the only ones who will be affected, are incredibly deserving.

Actually if done properly it will make their manager think the bank branch is busier than it is and they might get more paid hours. Moreover, It will effect far more than them. Did you know there are people who track people coming and going from banks? Started out as an anti bank robbery measure until marketing departments got a hold of it. It'll mess them up. It will also effect the customers and make their day harder, which might convince them to change banks. Long lines out the door and around the block will do that. That doesn't even touch the management tracking issues.

Quite frankly, if I really wanted to be terrible, I could cause a run on the bank if I make there be a very very very long line of people outside the bank demanding their money and looking terrified. If I wanted to be a complete dick about it, I could manage to organize it nationally at every single bank branch said bank had and destroy the entire bank. It's happened before in real life, so faking it and making it real is possible. Who the flying crap cares if the bank is solid or not? Are people going to see those books? No. If they were to hypothetically see hundreds of people who look scared shitless and banging outside the bank doors trying to get their money out on the news, they will think it is insolvent. Even if they were competent enough to act quickly and do a massive PR announcement and financial disclosure to dispel the rumors that the federal government was going to freeze every cent in the bank and forcibly take it over, due to impending collapse, the damage would be done.

That is of course, entirely hypothetical.

They won't let them protest peacefully so now they're "customers." You seriously don't know how much chaos I know how to cause....


No no, I wouldn't actually do that. If I wanted the effect to be large, it would be. I'm planning on throttling it down quite a ways more along the level of an annoyance rather than corporate lethality.

[Osmosis Jones]

Note to self;

Never piss off any vindictive professional lawyers with an understanding of financial history.

[mainiac]

Um no.  This is not the 1920s.

Banks are FDIC insured these days.  While you can have a big investor panic like we saw in 2007, you can't have a flight of the small depositors.  Those deposits are all insured by the federal government.  If your bank goes under the government completely backs every cent you deposited up to a quarter million dollars.  After that quarter million dollar there is a whole big complicated world of other security options.  So the small money is 100% safe.  The big money isn't going to care a swallows' fart about your charade.

On the off chance that the bank you select actually is insolvent, all you will have done is made the FDIC move a few days or weeks faster.  You see, if the bank was indeed insolvent then the FDIC would already be preparing to recapitalize them under new ownership.  So even then you'd accomplish nothing but slightly speed up conglomeration.

The only case where the FDIC won't completely neutralize a panic would be some massive bank like Lehman Brothers.  But you literally can't imagine the scale of a panic that you would need to create to cause another Lehman Brothers collapse.  Their collapse was brought about by billions of dollars of losses (and losses are far worse then withdrawls, dollar for dollar) and it took a year to happen.  Just to cause a panic you'd literally need tens of millions of collaborators in a long, coordinated campaign not just against your target bank but against any bank or insurance agency that involves in overnight trading with them.  Good luck pulling that off.

[Heron TSG]

-stuff-

You are a veritable Bat-woman!

Who is apparently an actual thing. Huh, I thought it was Batman and Catwoman. But hey, you have the cat avatar. Whichever it is, you are as a female Batman.

The FDIC insures money, yes, but there's nothing it can do to stop mass withdrawals or account creations. There will still probably be the effect of people leaving the bank en masse, probably taking some other customers with them. The FDIC doesn't just give banks free money; people closing their accounts still loses money for the banks.

[Truean]

Um no.  This is not the 1920s.

Banks are FDIC insured these days.  While you can have a big investor panic like we saw in 2007, you can't have a flight of the small depositors.  Those deposits are all insured by the federal government.  If your bank goes under the government completely backs every cent you deposited up to a quarter million dollars.  After that quarter million dollar there is a whole big complicated world of other security options.  So the small money is 100% safe.  The big money isn't going to care a swallows' fart about your charade.

On the off chance that the bank you select actually is insolvent, all you will have done is made the FDIC move a few days or weeks faster.  You see, if the bank was indeed insolvent then the FDIC would already be preparing to recapitalize them under new ownership.  So even then you'd accomplish nothing but slightly speed up conglomeration.

The only case where the FDIC won't completely neutralize a panic would be some massive bank like Lehman Brothers.  But you literally can't imagine the scale of a panic that you would need to create to cause another Lehman Brothers collapse.  Their collapse was brought about by billions of dollars of losses (and losses are far worse then withdrawls, dollar for dollar) and it took a year to happen.  Just to cause a panic you'd literally need tens of millions of collaborators in a long, coordinated campaign not just against your target bank but against any bank or insurance agency that involves in overnight trading with them.  Good luck pulling that off.

[reads script aloud] "Cynical overconfident college student enters stage right..." Right on time.

No.... I game the system every single solitary day on things people say I can't do. I don't fight fair.

You literally can't imagine what I can imagine and you don't understand the depositor system, period. The FDIC does not prevent bank collapses, it just makes sure if they DO collapse individual depositors don't lose their money. The only possible way the FDIC could prevent a bank collapse is by reassuring people. That's literally it. Your argument is completely illogical. An insurance company can't stop the loss from occurring; it only compensates you after.

1920? It seems you didn't read my post all the way through before you determined I didn't know what I was doing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_mutual That would be 2008. Took 9 days and the FDIC couldn't do jack shit.

I know exactly what I'm doing. I've been screwing with banks long before you started reading about them.

[Lagslayer]

This is why I hate it when any form of insurance is called "protection". It's not, by any definition of the word, protection. It is replacement, or reimbursement. If you want protection, put your money in a safe or a vault. And buy guns.


/end rant

[lordcooper]

This is why I hate it when any form of insurance is called "protection". It's not, by any definition of the word, protection. It is replacement, or reimbursement.

Tell that to the Mafia.

[mainiac]

You literally can't imagine what I can imagine and you don't understand the depositor system, period.

Yes I really can.  You didn't lay out a single coherent channel through which your flash mob actually accomplishes a damn thing.

If you are going to call me a newb, then don't ignore basic history.  The FDIC stopped the bank runs in their tracks.

If what you said were actually possible it would be IMMENSELY profitable to use in a wide range of scenarios.  Yet it doesn't happen despite the fact that people with a lot more resources then you would love to do it.  What does this tell you?

In fact I'll make you an offer.  Pick a small bank, some place with only a few hundred million in deposits.  Arrange for it to go down according to this brilliant plan you have that no one in history ever thought of before.  Give me a few weeks prior notice.  I have some uncles/great uncles with experience in the financing side of mid sized businesses.  They could very easily arrange to make tens of millions of dollars of profit off the collapse of your target bank since you have prior knowledge.  Let's say, 80% of the profits are yours?

There's a catch of course.  You'd need to cover our losses if this shore thing of yours doesn't pan out.  A few millions from you and your collaborators should cover it.

So, what do you say, oh wise one who knows so much more then me?  Want to become a millionaire using this exceptional insight of yours?

[Truean]

You literally can't imagine what I can imagine and you don't understand the depositor system, period.

Yes I really can.  You didn't lay out a single coherent channel through which your flash mob actually accomplishes a damn thing.

If you are going to call me a newb, then don't ignore basic history.  The FDIC stopped the bank runs in their tracks.

If what you said were actually possible it would be IMMENSELY profitable to use in a wide range of scenarios.  Yet it doesn't happen despite the fact that people with a lot more resources then you would love to do it.  What does this tell you?

In fact I'll make you an offer.  Pick a small bank, some place with only a few hundred million in deposits.  Arrange for it to go down according to this brilliant plan you have that no one in history ever thought of before.  Give me a few weeks prior notice.  I have some uncles/great uncles with experience in the financing side of mid sized businesses.  They could very easily arrange to make tens of millions of dollars of profit off the collapse of your target bank since you have prior knowledge.  Let's say, 80% of the profits are yours?

There's a catch of course.  You'd need to cover our losses if this shore thing of yours doesn't pan out.  A few millions from you and your collaborators should cover it.

So, what do you say, oh wise one who knows so much more then me?  Want to become a millionaire using this exceptional insight of yours?

You may have noticed if you ever read anything at all: "No no, I wouldn't actually do that. If I wanted the effect to be large, it would be. I'm planning on throttling it down quite a ways more along the level of an annoyance rather than corporate lethality. " I didn't actually want to do it and that was way before you bothered to show up.

I say you've got a long history of ignoring my posts here and elsewhere and not getting the point. You aren't worth my time. I've got new law grads lining up to learn from me what their ignorant professors don't know. You can respond but I'll never bother reading another word you ever write. Consider yourself ignored.

[mainiac]

Ah yes the grade school taunt.  "I totally could, I just don't want to."  Which has to be followed up by dissing me, for the sake of tradition if nothing else.

But you see...

If what you said were actually possible it would be IMMENSELY profitable to use in a wide range of scenarios.  Yet it doesn't happen despite the fact that people with a lot more resources then you would love to do it.  What does this tell you?

Whether you want to do so or not is irrelevant.  There are plenty of people in the world without your ethics but with a far better understanding of financial markets.