Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
1929crash

Presstitutes And Jp Morgan

Recommended Posts

Those familiar with Gerald Celente (and Paul Craig Roberts) will no doubt be familiar with the term 'presstitute.

Zerohedge has a short article this morning with a stunningly funny interview featuring Rolling Stone journalist Matt Taiibi.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-10-02/matt-taibbi-cnbc-presstitutes

Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog

The top definition of presstitute according to Urban Dictionary is:

1. presstitute

A member of the media who will alter their story and reporting based on financial interests or other ties with usually partisan individuals or groups.

It has become abundantly clear in recent years that the mainstream media can not be identified as anything other that a collective of mediocre, corporate/government ass-kissing presstitutes. Different media outlets cater to different special interests, but the end result is all the same. MSNBC for example is essentially a straight up PR outlet for the Democratic Party, while Fox News represents the neo-con arm of the Republican Party and the military-industrial complex generally.

CNBC has a special position in the presstitute media hierarchy. They basically defend Wall Street at all costs. The station represents the most important media gatekeeper for the financial oligarch, crony class.The following video is an interview on the daily political talk show Majority Report, hosted by Sam Seder. In this episode, he discusses with Matt Taibbi the recent appearance of Salon’s Alex Pareene on CNBC in which Maria Bartiromo unabashedly presstitutes herself out for Jaime Dimon and JP Morgan in an utterly embarrassing manner.

The clip is a little over 16 minutes, but well worth your time. Sam Seder is pretty hilarious and his rapport with Taibbi is excellent.

It really is worth readers taking the time to view the video. The discussion of the activities that led to JP Morgan being fined £16 Billion is truly surreal - very much along the line of "What did the Romans ever do for us?"

Now, I wouldn't want to suggest that a BBC report on the criminal activities of JP Morgan would have prevented Stephanie Flanders getting a £400,000 job with the firm, but others may think differently. :lol:

Edited by 1929crash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The press are hopeless. Did Stephanie Flanders ever report anything of note in her entire time with the BBC?

Jamie Dimon has been given a complete free ride by the press. He was completely lying about the London whale affair (he personally supervised the traders involved, yet publicly claimed to not know about them). What he did was securities fraud. Telling the shareholders of a public company something that you know to be both false and significantly material is a serious criminal offense. Yet no one questions it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The press are hopeless. Did Stephanie Flanders ever report anything of note in her entire time with the BBC?

Jamie Dimon has been given a complete free ride by the press. He was completely lying about the London whale affair (he personally supervised the traders involved, yet publicly claimed to not know about them). What he did was securities fraud. Telling the shareholders of a public company something that you know to be both false and significantly material is a serious criminal offense. Yet no one questions it.

I guess the problem is that no one complained when everything was booming and people were raking it in. Now that the capitalist business cycle is reversing everyone blames the banks. Doesn't everyone know that we borrow money from ourselves and pay the banks to distribute it for us? That's been the model for quite a while...any economics text book will tell you the way the bank of england, government and banks operate. As asset owners if you want to keep control of the great unwashed you need to make people believe in a system which you ultimately can control. A bank's assets are not like real companies. They can choose to take losses when they want to or the government can suspend mark to market rules to prevent them failing to prevent their system of control failing. They are privledged in society as they are meant to be the smart people who allocate capital to productive uses to generate more capital for the asset owners. That is why they are paid more than average wages to perform a utilitarian job. In no other industry can you make that kind of money as a simple employee just doing your day job without taking any risk yourself. So, simplistically, you are meant to be betting with other people's money! Its the system, and to prevent fraud society rewards bank employees well. The problem comes when you take the previous partnership model (where partners risked their own cash) and payments of bonuses. The alignment of short term goals will never be the same between employee incentives and long term owners of a business (especially when its the owners cash and reputation on the line!)

At the heart of all of this is one set of individuals trying to control another set.

If people want to understand the system the simplest video I have seen is from bridgewater capitial (the largest and most consistent hedge fund in the world) - take a look at http://www.economicprinciples.org/ - The economy must go through periods of deleveraging - cycles will always exist because of human nature. We build up a picture of assets performing better than expected, inevitably that doesn't happen and then we become pessimistic before the next wave of euphoria arrives. The cycles will always exist. The trick is to either ignore them and enjoy your live come what may and get by or try and spend your life trying to judge the peaks and troughs. For the latter, not sure you would believe this would be a good use of your 75 years on the planet. - its rare that anyone has managed to actually forecast multiple peaks and troughs. We only notice when they are occasionally right but forget about all the times they were wrong. Human beings' bias is fairly easy to see and control. Governments and advertisers do it everyday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the problem is that no one complained when everything was booming and people were raking it in. Now that the capitalist business cycle is reversing everyone blames the banks. Doesn't everyone know that we borrow money from ourselves and pay the banks to distribute it for us? That's been the model for quite a while...any economics text book will tell you the way the bank of england, government and banks operate. As asset owners if you want to keep control of the great unwashed you need to make people believe in a system which you ultimately can control. A bank's assets are not like real companies. They can choose to take losses when they want to or the government can suspend mark to market rules to prevent them failing to prevent their system of control failing. They are privledged in society as they are meant to be the smart people who allocate capital to productive uses to generate more capital for the asset owners. That is why they are paid more than average wages to perform a utilitarian job. In no other industry can you make that kind of money as a simple employee just doing your day job without taking any risk yourself. So, simplistically, you are meant to be betting with other people's money! Its the system, and to prevent fraud society rewards bank employees well. The problem comes when you take the previous partnership model (where partners risked their own cash) and payments of bonuses. The alignment of short term goals will never be the same between employee incentives and long term owners of a business (especially when its the owners cash and reputation on the line!)

At the heart of all of this is one set of individuals trying to control another set.

If people want to understand the system the simplest video I have seen is from bridgewater capitial (the largest and most consistent hedge fund in the world) - take a look at http://www.economicprinciples.org/ - The economy must go through periods of deleveraging - cycles will always exist because of human nature. We build up a picture of assets performing better than expected, inevitably that doesn't happen and then we become pessimistic before the next wave of euphoria arrives. The cycles will always exist. The trick is to either ignore them and enjoy your live come what may and get by or try and spend your life trying to judge the peaks and troughs. For the latter, not sure you would believe this would be a good use of your 75 years on the planet. - its rare that anyone has managed to actually forecast multiple peaks and troughs. We only notice when they are occasionally right but forget about all the times they were wrong. Human beings' bias is fairly easy to see and control. Governments and advertisers do it everyday.

Yes but these waves are becoming unacceptably large.

Reducing short term (ie annual) bonuses on multi-year products would be a good starting point to level them out somewhat. Bonus schemes need to be weighted to quality rather than quantity. Commision clawbacks would also create more stability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the problem is that no one complained when everything was booming and people were raking it in. Now that the capitalist business cycle is reversing everyone blames the banks. Doesn't everyone know that we borrow money from ourselves and pay the banks to distribute it for us? That's been the model for quite a while...any economics text book will tell you the way the bank of england, government and banks operate. As asset owners if you want to keep control of the great unwashed you need to make people believe in a system which you ultimately can control. A bank's assets are not like real companies. They can choose to take losses when they want to or the government can suspend mark to market rules to prevent them failing to prevent their system of control failing. They are privledged in society as they are meant to be the smart people who allocate capital to productive uses to generate more capital for the asset owners. That is why they are paid more than average wages to perform a utilitarian job. In no other industry can you make that kind of money as a simple employee just doing your day job without taking any risk yourself. So, simplistically, you are meant to be betting with other people's money! Its the system, and to prevent fraud society rewards bank employees well. The problem comes when you take the previous partnership model (where partners risked their own cash) and payments of bonuses. The alignment of short term goals will never be the same between employee incentives and long term owners of a business (especially when its the owners cash and reputation on the line!)

At the heart of all of this is one set of individuals trying to control another set.

If people want to understand the system the simplest video I have seen is from bridgewater capitial (the largest and most consistent hedge fund in the world) - take a look at http://www.economicprinciples.org/ - The economy must go through periods of deleveraging - cycles will always exist because of human nature. We build up a picture of assets performing better than expected, inevitably that doesn't happen and then we become pessimistic before the next wave of euphoria arrives. The cycles will always exist. The trick is to either ignore them and enjoy your live come what may and get by or try and spend your life trying to judge the peaks and troughs. For the latter, not sure you would believe this would be a good use of your 75 years on the planet. - its rare that anyone has managed to actually forecast multiple peaks and troughs. We only notice when they are occasionally right but forget about all the times they were wrong. Human beings' bias is fairly easy to see and control. Governments and advertisers do it everyday.

I agree that there's a systemic issue, but, more simply, a lot of these people are just plain old criminals. I used to work for a bank, and I know quite a few people in the hedge fund world. A lot of people in finance are just trying to do their job (i.e. distribute capital to socially-useful projects) but some people in the industry are nothing more than low-life criminals in business suits, and it isn't that hard to figure out which are which. Jamie Dimon committed securities fraud. Most hedge funds are not about investing -- they're just a front for insider trading. People know this, yet the press and regulators just sit back and let it happen (usually hoping to get hired on to the gravy train as soon as possible).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   289 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.