TPS Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Matt Taibi's new Rolling Stone article. I'm sure the usual suspects will shoot the messenger and defend the corrupt system that is. Taibi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Matt Taibi's new Rolling Stone article. I'm sure the usual suspects will shoot the messenger and defend the corrupt system that is. Taibi Problem is that shooting the messenger is the only recourse available when discussing a Taibi article, since he's so completely ignorant it's impossible to discuss the actual subject he writes about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zulu Cthulhu Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Says the guy that didn't even bother to spell the author's name correctly. Yet you are so certain of his ignorance...interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Says the guy that didn't even bother to spell the author's name correctly. Yet you are so certain of his ignorance...interesting. Walks into the room quietly behind Zulu Cthulu, taps him on the shoulder and whispers into his ear, "your bone of contention should be with the original poster who misspelled the author's name." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Says the guy that didn't even bother to spell the author's name correctly. Yet you are so certain of his ignorance...interesting. Misspelling is not ignorance. And above, use "who," not "that." Glass houses and all. Matt Taibi's new Rolling Stone article. I'm sure the usual suspects will shoot the messenger and defend the corrupt system that is. Taibi People don't get fired from government jobs for eff ups of epic proportion. Why the mock outrage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Problem is that shooting the messenger is the only recourse available when discussing a Taibi article, since he's so completely ignorant it's impossible to discuss the actual subject he writes about. Dude you can't really blame the reporter himself. Rolling Stone has a rule that their hippy writers have to be stoned when penning articles. At least it seems that way. The dude is just following those rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share Posted February 20, 2011 (edited) Misspelling is not ignorance. And above, use "who," not "that." Glass houses and all. People don't get fired from government jobs for eff ups of epic proportion. Why the mock outrage? This isn't about effups. The fact is that the same people who "regulate" industry come from those same industries, and they will never bite the hand that feeds them. It's the same thing in every regulatory agency. They go back to making their millions in those same industries when their stints are up. They protect their interests. Wall Street paid for deregulation. Finance accounted for almost 40% of total corporate profits in 2006 and 07. Finance makes money by spinning as much paper as it can. No one worries about the consequences of bubbles, because no one will ever go to jail--except for a few patsies; Madoff in this crisis, Regas and the Worldcom guy in the last one. It's a nice little system. Career politicians do what industry wants; industry finances their elections. When the public gets outraged, the pols pass a psuedo law like the financial reform act last summer. Finance then spends as much as it takes to get the "rules" to conform to their desires. Schumer, Dodd and Frank et al pretend that they did something for the public, but when all is said and done, nothing changes. The "act" is broad legislation, but it's the rules that matter. Industry always gets its way. It allows us to complain about "government" or democrats or republicans and career politicians, when in fact the guys making all the rules are the industry insiders. It's the appointees who matter. For the top finance positions, whoever is elected appoints the CEOs from Citi and GS. I guess these guys only eff up when they are doing their government stints....how can they be so smart when they run a Wall STreet bank, but so stupid when they work for government? But, hey, it's an article by Matt Taibbi; end of story. Rant over. Edited February 20, 2011 by TPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 Says the guy that didn't even bother to spell the author's name correctly. Yet you are so certain of his ignorance...interesting. Says the guy who can't provide any evidence that Taibbi isn't a complete tool, who is so busy trying to snarky that he swings at misses at the big picture, or the point in general, 90% of the time. He is unwatchable on TV, because his need to be "angry" supersedes his ability to be coherent. I am certain of his ignorance, and I can prove it.What can you prove, other than Tom's spelling mistake? (Ok, I'm calling it right now: Zulu is one of conner's sock puppets: joined in 2006, 741 posts, etc.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 The main problem with Taibbi, aside from adopting a bombastic style to push his books is that he's equating unsavory and unethical behavior with breaking the law. I think he's the one who should go to jail for perverting journalism. Hows that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 The main problem with Taibbi, aside from adopting a bombastic style to push his books is that he's equating unsavory and unethical behavior with breaking the law. I think he's the one who should go to jail for perverting journalism. Hows that? Can we send him to Guantanamo or Abu Gharib? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted February 20, 2011 Share Posted February 20, 2011 This isn't about effups. The fact is that the same people who "regulate" industry come from those same industries, and they will never bite the hand that feeds them. It's the same thing in every regulatory agency. They go back to making their millions in those same industries when their stints are up. They protect their interests. Wall Street paid for deregulation. Finance accounted for almost 40% of total corporate profits in 2006 and 07. Finance makes money by spinning as much paper as it can. No one worries about the consequences of bubbles, because no one will ever go to jail--except for a few patsies; Madoff in this crisis, Regas and the Worldcom guy in the last one. It's a nice little system. Career politicians do what industry wants; industry finances their elections. When the public gets outraged, the pols pass a psuedo law like the financial reform act last summer. Finance then spends as much as it takes to get the "rules" to conform to their desires. Schumer, Dodd and Frank et al pretend that they did something for the public, but when all is said and done, nothing changes. The "act" is broad legislation, but it's the rules that matter. Industry always gets its way. It allows us to complain about "government" or democrats or republicans and career politicians, when in fact the guys making all the rules are the industry insiders. It's the appointees who matter. For the top finance positions, whoever is elected appoints the CEOs from Citi and GS. I guess these guys only eff up when they are doing their government stints....how can they be so smart when they run a Wall STreet bank, but so stupid when they work for government? But, hey, it's an article by Matt Taibbi; end of story. Rant over. It's a decent article TPS the trouble is the situation can not really be explained well either in 30 second sound bites or a six page article. William Black, Catherine Austin Fitts, Jane D'Arista, John Perkins, Joe Nocera + Bethany Mclean, and Thomas E Woods JR all do a pretty good job with parts of the mess but there is nothing that is comprehensive- it would probably have to be a 12hour mini-series along with a vocabulary guide to even give you an overview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 This isn't about effups. The fact is that the same people who "regulate" industry come from those same industries, and they will never bite the hand that feeds them. It's the same thing in every regulatory agency. They go back to making their millions in those same industries when their stints are up. They protect their interests. There's two possibilities: you pick regulators who understand an industry (any industry), or you pick regulators who don't. I think we can all agree that regulators who don't understand an industry aren't going to effectively regulate it anyway. So what constitutes your potential pool of regulators who understand an industry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 There's two possibilities: you pick regulators who understand an industry (any industry), or you pick regulators who don't. I think we can all agree that regulators who don't understand an industry aren't going to effectively regulate it anyway. So what constitutes your potential pool of regulators who understand an industry? I guess we'll find out how a clueless regulator functions when Elizabeth Warren gets her new overseer job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 There's two possibilities: you pick regulators who understand an industry (any industry), or you pick regulators who don't. I think we can all agree that regulators who don't understand an industry aren't going to effectively regulate it anyway. So what constitutes your potential pool of regulators who understand an industry? I guess we'll find out how a clueless regulator functions when Elizabeth Warren gets her new overseer job. Effective intelligence in an agent is a benefit to you if they are working for your interest, it is a determent to you if they are working against your interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderweb Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 The main problem with Taibbi, aside from adopting a bombastic style to push his books is that he's equating unsavory and unethical behavior with breaking the law. I think he's the one who should go to jail for perverting journalism. Hows that? Typical right wing spin and attacks throughout the replies here. The message Taibbi spoke of rings true. But, when there are those who take to heart the words of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and the Fox "News" pundits, there becomes little hope left for the middle class. They have been fooled, hoodwinked , betrayed with a sound bit or two, and will one day wake up and wonder how their "boys and girls" let them down. Unfortunately, those of us who actually seek information from multiple sources, comparing as many points of view as possible, and manage to sort it out, realize the right has sold each and every one of us off to the rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 This isn't about effups. The fact is that the same people who "regulate" industry come from those same industries, and they will never bite the hand that feeds them. It's the same thing in every regulatory agency. They go back to making their millions in those same industries when their stints are up. They protect their interests. Wall Street paid for deregulation. Finance accounted for almost 40% of total corporate profits in 2006 and 07. Finance makes money by spinning as much paper as it can. No one worries about the consequences of bubbles, because no one will ever go to jail--except for a few patsies; Madoff in this crisis, Regas and the Worldcom guy in the last one. It's a nice little system. Career politicians do what industry wants; industry finances their elections. When the public gets outraged, the pols pass a psuedo law like the financial reform act last summer. Finance then spends as much as it takes to get the "rules" to conform to their desires. Schumer, Dodd and Frank et al pretend that they did something for the public, but when all is said and done, nothing changes. The "act" is broad legislation, but it's the rules that matter. Industry always gets its way. It allows us to complain about "government" or democrats or republicans and career politicians, when in fact the guys making all the rules are the industry insiders. It's the appointees who matter. For the top finance positions, whoever is elected appoints the CEOs from Citi and GS. I guess these guys only eff up when they are doing their government stints....how can they be so smart when they run a Wall STreet bank, but so stupid when they work for government? But, hey, it's an article by Matt Taibbi; end of story. Rant over. Just a question for you, have you ever worked in the financial service industry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 The message Taibbi spoke of rings true. But, when there are those who take to heart the words of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and the Fox "News" pundits, Funny thing is, the ONLY one in that list I've ever listened to or read is Taibbi. And he's completely ignorant. He has been on virtually every topic he's ever covered that I've read. He tries to cover it with bluster and anger so people (such as yourself) won't notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Typical right wing spin and attacks throughout the replies here. The message Taibbi spoke of rings true. But, when there are those who take to heart the words of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and the Fox "News" pundits, there becomes little hope left for the middle class. They have been fooled, hoodwinked , betrayed with a sound bit or two, and will one day wake up and wonder how their "boys and girls" let them down. Unfortunately, those of us who actually seek information from multiple sources, comparing as many points of view as possible, and manage to sort it out, realize the right has sold each and every one of us off to the rich. Or maybe that I know more about this topic than any of the people you mention, including Taibbi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 Or maybe that I know more about this topic than any of the people you mention, including especially Taibbi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YellowLinesandArmadillos Posted February 21, 2011 Share Posted February 21, 2011 The main problem with Taibbi, aside from adopting a bombastic style to push his books is that he's equating unsavory and unethical behavior with breaking the law. I think he's the one who should go to jail for perverting journalism. Hows that? Agree, completely. This is a civil matter and unfortunately one for the lawyers and it neglects the fact that everyone got involved in this mess. Yes the banks are still complicit and taking their share no matter what anyone does, but that is not new. Check Dennis Kucinich while he was mayor of Cleveland the first time. Great book at a more micro level called Crisis of Growth Politics. It is about power. I happen to agree with the point that the banks are FOS but that is not news. What would be news is if this journalist actually got off his backside and worked to produce some actual useable info in a civil case. But that would take too much work in this day of gotcha journalism without verification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts