Occupy JPMorgan Chase

So JPMorgan Chase has been gambling with our money. And losing.

We bailed them out. And now they’re engaged–again–of course–in the same exact practices that got them into trouble back in 2008.

I say: fuck them. JPMorgan Chase should be nationalized immediately. And turned into a non-profit. No more checking account fees. No more bounced check fees. No more interest above the Fed funds rate.

It’s a criminal enterprise. Arrest their top officers and take the whole thing.

19 Comments.

  • aaronwilliams135
    May 11, 2012 4:55 PM

    Well said, Sir. Arrest and nationalize. While we are about it, why not throw Exxon Mobil and others (health insurers, etc.) into the mix?

  • alex_the_tired
    May 11, 2012 5:25 PM

    aaron,

    That will never fly. Doing it all at once is a recipe for revolt from the wealthy — and by God, they’ll do a lot more than play hackysack in Union Square.

    Yes, JPMorgan Chase has demonstrated they can’t be left alone with other people’s money, so go in, shut them down. I’m watching the Romney campaign coalesce. And they’re building up the GWB plotters and a nice, shiny Reagan Teflon coat. What’s Obama’s got going on? He took the single most progressive issue around — gay marriage, and, eventually, decided, after reading all the polls, that Biden’s support of the issue was wrong, but not really, but it was, and in either case, Obama was always for gay marriage, except when he wasn’t. I think.

    Romney is helped by every indecisive action of Obama. Obama’s failure to grasp a “gimme” of a social issue like gay marriage continues a trend in which Obama kinda stands for some things, sort of, I guess, but I’m not certain, so don’t hold me to that, I think. And Romney on the other hand stands for several things. Mainly — and this is the take-home point — Romney stands for Republican things: money for the wealthy, the screwing of a lifetime for everyone else. That’s one of the ways you get people to follow you, even if it’s to your doom: you sound confident, you make decisions quickly, and you act on them.

    There was nothing nuanced about the gay marriage issue. And Obama was in a perfect position to refute it. Instead, he just stood there like a chump in the headlights.

  • exkiodexian
    May 12, 2012 12:51 PM

    Sure Ted. Occupy will get right on that. Just as as soon as the reassemble after the harsh winter (oops, it’s almost June, my bad). Then, they’ll cause real fear with a “Hey Hey Ho Ho Jamie Dimon’s got to go!”. That ought to create change you can believe in. Soon to follow that intense display will be Michael Moore on MSNBC calling for calm and non-violence, because … you know …. Gandhi, and all that. Mike can then count his many millions while dressing like common slob with a baseball cap.

    Did anyone read Taibbi’s new piece on how the elite constantly deter democracy? Nah. Of course not. Too many words. Also, progressives, liberals, Occupy, etc … they like things just the way the are. In fact, one could quote Jack Nicholson: “Liberals WANT Jamie Dimon running that bank. They NEED Jamie Dimon running that bank.” In short, they just like to whine and cry about the Jamie Dimons when in the end they need him so they can have all the amenities that go with being an American. You know, like having 24/7 access to 30 different types of cheeses.

  • Just let ’em go broke. If they can afford to do it without taxpayer money, let ’em. But I sure don’t want to pay for it again.

  • alex_the_tired
    May 12, 2012 3:24 PM

    bruce,

    That’ the rub. You pay for whether you want to or not. It’s like this: say the banks need a billion dollars. Two things can happen, the government can loan the banks the money. Or, the government can raise taxes immediately. OR, the government can try to raise taxes and be blocked by the electorate. In the first case, you end up paying later. In the second case you end up paying immediately. In the third case, the money comes from other services (roads, infrastructure, schools, etc.). That yields a hybrid. You pay for it now in that you lose services, and you pay for it later because that lose of services compounds problems later on (example: crummy schools leads to more crime. The $100 saved in school funding in 1985 is eaten up multiple times over by the criminals that have to be incarcerated 20 years later).

  • So Alex, what is the critical difference between “revolt from the wealthy” and our paying for it whether we want to or not?

  • alex_the_tired
    May 13, 2012 12:51 PM

    The difference between “revolt from the wealthy” and paying it whether we want to or not?

    When Nelson Muntz shakes down Springfield grade schoolers for their milk money, they give it up, whether they want to or not. Once in a while, however, someone resists Nelson. So Nelson has to stop for the merest of moments, beat that person up, collect that person’s money, and then move along. That hiccup, with the beating, is the wealthy version of revolt.

    Right now, any one of us can be picked up, held by the police (thank you, preventive detention), and have our lives ruined as an example to the others. The working and the poor have no sense. And in a way, we deserve all the things that are happening to us. We let the politicians sell us down the river every time, and we then argue that it is imperative that we continue to re-elect those politicians. Or we commit an idiotically pointless gesture and “write-in” Elmo or something else as a form of “protest.”

  • aaronwilliams135
    May 13, 2012 2:00 PM

    @ Alex and Exkio, yes gents, things suck all over and there is no shortage of reason to be critical, pessimistic and depressed. I am all of these. However, I do take some joy in theorizing what we should do. What would be the optimal solution to our various crises? Whether we can get there or not, it pleases me to come up with new ideas. This is why I love Ted. He goes there, and it makes me happy. For instance the syndicated column he did a while back about the need to provide payments enough to citizens to support a decent life, whether they are employed or not. Is this going to happen any time soon or ever at all? No. Is it the right answer? Yes. Thanks Ted.

  • $2 billion? Pocket change.

    But, as our esteemed Presidents Bush, Jr., on the right of centre, and Obama, on the left of centre, both acknowledged, if the loss of that $2 billion means a cut in JP Morgan bonuses of 0.5%, this would cause the complete collapse of the US economy, so the government MUST reimburse JP Morgan. Or else.

    If we could (but of course we can’t) read the history of the 21st century US from 500 years in the future, will the US still be the ‘nation on the hill’ or will it be an inept analogue of a certain central European nation in the middle of the 20th century?

    Inquiring minds would like to know, but mortality means that they can’t.

  • alex_the_tired
    May 14, 2012 1:20 AM

    michaelwme,

    Let me start with a working definition of a democracy. A democracy is a country in which the people are not afraid of their government. They might be pissed off at their government, they might think their government is a bunch of freeloading blowhards, etc., but they are not actually in fear of their government as a collective.

    Every democracy I’m aware of functions because a working middle class exists. But the middle class — everywhere — is being whittled away. And as more and more jobs are eliminated, outsourced, or in whatever way, restructured so that they no longer support a middle class, the world sorts itself into two groups: the Haves and the Others. With a lot of luck, I will see the end of my life as still one of the (very marginal) Haves. I no longer have dreams of doing well or being successful, but I still cling to a hope that I will arrive at the end with my dignity intact, a roof of some sort over my head, enough food to eat, etc.

    But the entire Middle Class structure that keeps this country ticking over as a democracy is entering a terminal phase. The tricks the gummint can use to keep us all duped are running out. The whole lie about unemployment figures is becoming less and less believable to more and more people every year. Young people are discovering the absolute nightmare of having to move back in with their parents. So you go from a 26-year-old living in a rental with some friends, having parties and sex, to moving back into his or her room at home. I don’t care how freewheeling your parents are, the likelihood of them being okay with you bringing some one-night-stand home from a bar, is almost certainly zero. Welcome to hell.

    I am confident that whatever historians still exist in 500 years will point to the 40 year period that straddled the new millennium as the point at which America fell apart, permanently.

  • exkiodexian
    May 14, 2012 1:36 PM

    “However, I do take some joy in theorizing what we should do. What would be the optimal solution to our various crises?”

    @aaronwilliams135: The optimal solution is the one Ted endorses, which he has discussed at length. The notion that we live in democracy is absurd. To cut right to the chase, average Americans don’t seem to understand a basic fact. Namely, the elite control everything and they do so knowingly, with structure and intent. In fact, if somehow by accident some common people actually interfere and cause some changes to happen, the elite react with tremendous force. This deterring of Democracy has been documented again and again, most recently by Matt Taibbi’s piece on how Wall Street killed financial reform.

    Knowing that, do you think the solution is to chat about things? To make up a sign and take it to a protest? Chant “hey hey ho ho”? Or perhaps you think these anti-democratic cretins can be reasoned with. If only you (or Michael Moore) could have a one-on-one chat with Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein, you could help them see the light of true democracy. Is that it?

    There’s only one solution. The Greek people now know it. Too bad Americans never will. They’re more than happy to allow the elite to control every aspect of their lives, provided they can have 24/7 access to 40 different types of cheese – just like the mice they are.

  • aaronwilliams135
    May 14, 2012 2:19 PM

    @ Exkiodexian: I don’t need, and I don’t want, you to explain anything to me. I certainly don’t need you to tell me what I think. You are boring, and a bully. You have not said one original thing in any of your comments. You are no closer to bringing about a solution than any of the rest of us, so get off your high horse.

    I made a general, positive, comment about Ted’s piece. I was talking to Ted. You rudely addressed me directly. You told me my idea “would never fly”. I responded, trying to explain where I was coming from. You rudely addressed me directly again, accusing me of being some weak-kneed protester or naive “if only we could all talk and work things out” guy. You are wrong on both counts. In any case, you don’t know me, and you don’t know what I think, and I don’t care what you think; so please, rant at someone else.

  • @alex

    If we follow Romney off a cliff simply because he strides boldy and confidently off the cliff, then we truly are an evolutionary dead end and deserve the massive die-off a Romney presidency will bring. I don’t see it happening. Look, I’ll be the first person to tell you the human race is stupid, even deeply stupid, but suicidally stupid? Not so far, and I’ve got no reason to think that’s going to change.

    @aarron

    Aww, you’re being too hard on the poor little plant. He’s just upset because he can’t deliver the “Gwoious Wevolution” his right wing masters long for. See my point above about the human race not being terminally, suicidally stupid.

  • alex_the_tired
    May 14, 2012 11:37 PM

    Whimsical,

    To use your analogy of following Romney off a cliff…

    Obama’s standing there at the edge of the road, right next to Romney. “Come on,” Obama’s urging. “You can walk down it pretty easy.” And there’s the path down to the ground. The path is covered with thorn bushes, wasp nests, cacti, and so forth. It’s pretty slippery, so people end up going off into the bushes and such if they aren’t careful and lucky.

    Obama has taken a helicopter down to the ground. His daughters and wife are with him. They arrive at the ground perfectly safely. Don’t worry about them. But rest assured, they are really, really worried about you. There’s one of the girls riding a horse. Can’t you see the frown of worry about how you’re doing on a path filled with rattlesnakes?

    Anyway, half of the people take the Obama path, arguing that, heck, it’s the lesser of two evils. Those who voice concerns are told to stop complaining. “Do you want to wait for an escalator? This is the best we can get under the current system. You have to learn to compromise.”

    The other half of the people turn to Romney. He tells them to take a running jump off the edge of the road, over the guard rail, and down about 30 feet to the ground below. Romney straps on a parachute, jumps, and lands gently on the ground, right next to the Obama family, which has already started putting out a picnic lunch with five settings (they knew Romney would be joining them).

    The Romney group jumps. Many of them are severely injured. But a few, by luck, quick reflexes, etc., are not harmed. “What are you, a frickin’ maniac?” they scream as he takes a shrimp canape from Mrs. Obama. “Many of us are horribly injured from your stupidity.” And the few able-bodied surround him quickly, and he runs off.

    Meanwhile, about 20 years later, some of the Obama crowd makes it to the ground. But it takes years and years. They’ve spent so long on the path, coping with each surprise and each injury, that they’re completely worn out. They’re cut up all over, festering wounds, broken bones. And there’s Obama, having a Diet Coke (with lemon).

    The Obama people look over at a plaque near them. It was left by the Romney survivors. It tells of how, after seeing the horrible injuries that befell their group so suddenly, they rebelled against Romney.

    The Obama crowd look at each other for a while. A couple of them make some vague comments about perhaps, maybe, drafting a strongly worded letter or something. “Oh, I’m too tired to care,” one of the others mumbles, and they all shuffle off as Obama smirks and laughs at their retreating backs.

    Give control to Romney, and the pain and suffering will be quick. Keep giving control to Obama and the other compromise-presidents, and we’ll arrive at the same ground floor, only it will be after years and years of ever-increasing hardship and misery, and we’ll be too tired, with too much of the infrastructure of the country gone — people will be used to prisons with millions of prisoners, people will be used to schools where no one learns anything, people will be used to their being no hospitals, people will be used to the police harassing them — to do anything about it.

  • exkiodexian
    May 15, 2012 1:10 AM

    whim·si·cal/ˈ(h)wimzikəl/ Adjective:
    1. Playfully quaint or fanciful.
    2. Acting or behaving in a capricious manner.
    3. Ignorant beyond belief.
    4. A really dumb fuck.

    I mean, there’s dumb. There’s dumber. There’s Whimsical. I’m serious too. Just so dumb it’s painful to read. Not an original thought, not a moment of quiet contemplation in this idiot Whimsical’s entire life. Not one. Just cliche after cliche, moronic repetition of talking points, and blah blah blah.

    Seriously sweetie, do the world a favor and eat a bullet. Please.

  • Exki, your personal attacks on Whim are a complete waste of my time as a reader of these forums.

    A lot of you are taking this much too personally but I think you are the worst.

  • alex_the_tired
    May 15, 2012 8:20 AM

    aaron,

    In the interest of accuracy, I was the one who told you that your “idea ‘would never fly.'”

    I apologize for replying to a comment you made in an open forum.

  • @alex

    I see it very differently.

    I see the people who share your viewpoint pushing the majority of the people over the clif, whether they want to go or not, and most of them don’t want to.

    A small handful attempt to make their way down the path, but it takes a lot longer than they imagine, and when their sons and daughters reach the bottom they are met, not by a plaque, but by a group of armed guards.

    The armed guards eyes widen, as they recogonize the descendants of the people who threw the country off a cliff, and there’s the telltale sounds of safetys being clicked off machine guns as they herd the descendants of those who threw the country over a cliff off into a little group on the side.

    “You. You’re responsible for this,” they say, gesturing to a statue of a man in a top hat and monacle with one foot on a heap of dead bodies. You look closer and see a plaque: “This statue celebrates the permanent victory of the deserving over the great unwashed masses, starting when Mitt Romney won the office God wanted him to have.”

    They then further divide the group into Romey supporters who didn’t know any better, and those who deliberately supported Romney in order to make things worse.

    Gesturing to the rest of us they point to the first set of Romeny supporters and say “You’re all going to spend your life in the corporate slave camps, in part thanks to these dumbasses, so we’re prepared to look the other way for ten minutes before we take you there. But first, ” and they swing their guns around to point at those who threw their fellow citizens over the cliff whether they wanted to go or not.

    “You’re traitors. You could’ve stopped all of this. You could’ve at least had the common decency to go down fighting. You doomed this country to permanent status as a fascist theocracy. You made it possible for the 1% to rule forever. And your betrayal of your fellow citizens and everything this country stands for is so unforgiveable, I’m going to deny my programming and take the only revenge left to me in this sorry remnant of a once great nation- in the name of what could’ve been, if not for you.”

    And they open fire.

    I think that’s MUCH more likely.

    “Give control to Romney, and the pain and suffering will be quick.”

    There’s no Earthly reason to believe this. The pain will be permanent (or at least 5 generations or so, which is close enough to permanent on a practical level as to make no difference), unceasing, and bourne by those least able to bear it. Stand and fight, and we have a chance to turn this around; as long as the left ignores plants and gets a clue about tactics, anyway.

    Lets go back to the cancer analogy: Yes, America has a cancer. But its still treatable, and even if it wasn’t, the quality of its life has not degraded anywhere CLOSE to the point where a bullet in the brain is a viable alternative. And a Romney presidency is exactly that.

  • @ex

    Silly little plant. I have an awesome life, but even if I didn’t, the thought of continuing to deny your rightwing masters the “Gwoious Wevolution” you’re trying so desperately to gin up would make me rise each and every day with a song in my heart and a smile on my lips.

Comments are closed.

css.php