http://clatl.com/freshloaf/archives/2012/04/10/occupy-atlanta-fights-forclosures-in-vine-city Comments On: Occupy Atlanta fights foreclosures in Vine City by Joeff Davis en-us Copyright 2013 Creative Loafing Atlanta. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Creative Loafing Atlanta readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Creative Loafing Atlanta. wil@desert.net (Creative Loafing Atlanta Webmaster) Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:00:01 -0400 Wed, 19 Jun 2013 02:45:00 -0400 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss

http://www.sadtrombone.com/
Posted by America, eff yeah!]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:05:26 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Let's leave aside the questionable accounting aspect of it for a moment, and take at face value that banks returned the funds plus a little more.

The analogy of a drunk gambler is very fitting:
Imagine a majority of his losses in a risky card game HE DESIGNED were made whole by an outside patron.
Posted by Voxpopuli]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 13:02:14 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Once again AA makes some sense
As usual Eric # 3 makes most noise and fills the airtime
Overall Centennian wins today - on the basis of sense per airtime.

On protests:

A wise man once said that "if your tents are smelly, you'll rarely impress people with the quality of your canvas"
Posted by Evolution or Cretinism?]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:17:18 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
but contractually binding agreements!!!
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 02:48:29 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Most of the worlds largest religions would disagree with that statement. The modern US banking system is not morally justifiable under their religious texts, and are in fact negative in nature.
Posted by Voxpopuli]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:52:01 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
what the hell else do you expect an entire group of people to do when they have very little hope of ever being able to work their way up the ladder? extrapolate that to every american born after 2020 and that's what i fear most in my old age
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:47:09 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
i mean we should punish the top-dog bankers who made the decisions which fucked over society but when i say bankers i don't mean the rank-and-file folks just trying to earn a paycheck like everyone else

"In full disclosure, if you're going to try and chastise a bank for taking bailout funds, you should make it clear that they returned those funds at a premium."

yeah, but have they exacerbated the problem while returning the bailout funds?
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Thu, 12 Apr 2012 01:40:05 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Ohhh...so you meant punishing banks and not bankers. Gotcha.

The comment about returning those taxpayer dollars at a profit to the taxpayer was directed at your "hand the banks sacks of taxpayers dollars" comment.
Posted by Realist]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:15:05 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
ok neither of those have anything to do with punishing the banks, i don't think you understand the concept

if i say "the banks should be punished with fines and legislation" and you say "but they make a lot of money!" that is what we call a non sequitur, or a nonsense response

"However, banks have created a lot more wealth an improved the lot of a lot more people, during the course of their existence, than sitting on your ass "occupying" something has."

ok sure but we're not talking about how nice the banks are, we're talking about how the banks fucked up and continue to fuck up and how for some reason they're not really being held accountable.
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:38:30 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
Sure, banks fuck up.
Posted by Realist]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:00:21 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta Posted by AtariHero]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:11:40 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
yeah, i must be an unemployed welfare queen just because i believe that banks are fallible

i mean it's not like there is a substantial recent history of banks fucking up or anyth- oh shoot

http://www.propublica.org/article/excerpt-…

and certainly nobody except a drug-addled hippie should ever want to actually assist someone who could lose their house through no real fault of their own

"And no, freeloaders are those who can't carry their own weight in this world and have to advocate for things like reneging on a contractual obligation and support from others to provide the basic necessities for themselves."

man i really wish i could live in your immensely privileged world nothing bad ever happened.
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:02:29 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta Posted by AtariHero]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:01:44 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
And no, freeloaders are those who can't carry their own weight in this world and have to advocate for things like reneging on a contractual obligation and support from others to provide the basic necessities for themselves.
Posted by Realist]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:30:57 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
you're purposely ignoring the possibility that we could have bailed out the banks and punished them for irresponsibility at the same time, rather than just handing them sacks of taxpayer money
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:27:11 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta Posted by Realist]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:16:52 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
freeloaders are just people who preference human lives over the profit motive
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:15:28 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
well we all know that you don't think helping people is a valuable affair but that's because you've well established yourself as a gordon gekko wannabe

helping keep people in their homes, not as valuable to AA as squeezing every last dime from someone in distress.
Posted by for certain purposes]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:14:47 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta "Yes, it's considered stealing when you make people pay an amount that they are contractually obligated to pay...because those people signed the contract. It's such an issue when contractual rights get in the way of freeloading."

Sort of like a Collateralized Debt Obligation?
Posted by Voxpopuli]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:07:00 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta Posted by Realist]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:56:22 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
could you bee a bigger a-hole?
Posted by wesleywhatwhat]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:30:30 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta  
@ Centennian - That's not true, and it's completely illogical.  Why would a bank solicit to someone who was "likely to end up in foreclosure".  Even if the banks were ultimately packaging and selling these loans, that still doesn't incentivize them to specifically target people who were "likely to end up in foreclosure".  If you want to argue that banks were lowering their credit standards to provide loans to people who couldn't afford them, that would be a better argument.  However, the people at the bottom of the mortgage food chain (i.e. local bank branch underwriters) are stupid enough to believe the same BS that they peddle.  Higher up the chain ibanks, funds, etc. is where people were smart enough to at least recognize that what they were selling was shit, but they were making a pretty penny doing it.  Frankly, if you have a willing counter-party, and you disclose all of the information about what you're selling, I don't think there's anything wrong with doing that either.  They disclosed all the information to the rating agencies, and the agencies rated them.  They disclosed all the information to the bond buyers, and the bond buyers bought them.  Caveat emptor.  If I sell you a busted up, nearly broken down car, but I tell you about all its problems and you ignore me, or hear me and buy that car anyhow, that's your problem.
 
@ Eric Johnsa - Thanks for helping prove my point - most of the occupiers are unemployed.  Also, thanks for being a stain on our city, and the rest of the hard-working community.  You sat outside in a tent, advocating for jobs to be kept that were part of a division that is largely irrelevant in today's society (land-line telephones).  Then, when AT&T announced that they were going to re-train some of these employees (which is far cheaper than laying them off and hiring new ones), and when they announced that they cut the comp of their CEO (which was related to a significant decline in EBITDA and a failed merger), you claimed victory.  You camped out for a month, and claimed victory over something you had absolutely no effect on.  You're a parasite.

Posted by Realist]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:26:47 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta Posted by Eric Johnsa]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:02:06 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta Posted by Eric Johnsa]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:51:28 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta
AA, can't agree with you totally on this being an issue of someone freely entering a contract.
Posted by Centennian]]> Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:39:57 -0400 Creative Loafing Atlanta