ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND WARNING

MOFO64 said:
NEWSFLASH

ALL banks are corrupt (or are owned by larger corrupt banks).

ALL "money" is fiat.

Precious metals are the only store of wealth.

EVERYONE with money in the bank/mortgage (death-grip) etc is going to lose atleast 80% of it.
Click to expand...

Precious metals are the only store of wealth. - until we start mining asteriods lol.
 
MOFO64 said:
Seriously? Are you a complete fool?

Gold has intrinsic value, and has been increasing in it's value for more than 1000 years, a two month lull while market manipulators force the price down 1% means nothing. The same thing is happening to the silver market. Do you have ANY idea of how this **** works?

How much was gold valued at (per ounce) when you were born compared to now?

This is precisely why the banks run riot, people don't have a ****in' clue about the real world :(.
Click to expand...

Gold is an interesting one, the majority of its "intrinsic value" is because it's shiny and makes for nice jewellery. While it is used in some electronic components and astronauts visors (amongst other things) it's not actually a good metal for use in most applications and that's not just because it's so expensive.

I'm not arguing about it appreciating in value but essentially what I'm saying is that it has an intrinsic value because we as a species prize it for the fact it's shiny.

MOFO64 said:
RBS "stole" peoples savings and investments through corrupt deals and lies. They payed themselves huge bonuses for "losing" billions of pounds of customers money. They then beg for bailouts from the govt (which means the taxpayer) with the excuse "you can't function without us....too big to fail" which is financial terrorism. Their friends (accomplices) in the govt then permit the bailouts (because they get bungs and next years re-election donations from them) and then proceed to give themselves MORE bonuses & still fail to stimulate the economy. Then they introduce fee's/financial penalties and yet MORE derivitives based on colateralised debt obligations. Then when the fictitious profits (which haven't even been earned yet) are tallied they make an electronic stroke and "BOOM...........we've repaid you all that money in less than 3years!!!"
Click to expand...

It might be worth pointing out here that if RBS had been allowed to fail it would have affected thousands, if not millions, of taxpayers who would have lost large amounts of their savings. The FSCS would compensate the first £85,000 per contributor but anything after that and you're on your own, this cost would also have to be weighed against how expensive it was to bail them out, how many jobs are dependant on RBS and what the knock-on effect to the wider economy would be.

As it is the bank was kept as a going concern and has now paid back the loans it received - if you want to argue that the profits it makes are excessive then I might have a certain amount of sympathy but businesses exist to make a profit, it's one of the things that goes into the definition of being a business.

MOFO64 said:
Perhaps if RBS "alone" can pay £163 billion back in under 3 years "THEY" should be payin' back the $27,000,000,000 in bailouts worldwide. Then with all their parasitic sister companies they can start makin' a dent in the 1.4 QUADRILLION they "fraudulently" created.

That way the govt can leave my bins/street lights/local services/pensions/disability benefits/rent/gas/electric/fuel/food/savings and my cancer suffering terminally ill mother ALONE!

:(
Click to expand...

If RBS have paid back £163 billion (that's £163,000,000,000) then it's already paid back more than the $27 billion you've said was the figure for worldwide bailouts even without allowing for conversion to dollars - although given RBS borrowed the equivalent of $84 billion from the US alone I suspect you've underestimated the worldwide bailouts by a significant amount.

I remain to be convinced that they (or indeed anyone else) should be held accountable for debts they didn't create. Let's take a small scale example - should you be responsible for the debt of your brother despite providing no guarantees regarding them and having no say in how he incurred his debt?
 
I dont know if yous are joking but if they went under another bank would buy all their assets (including your loans) for very cheap, then extract the money from you.

If it got so bad to the point where you weren't having to pay back loans your money would probably be useless by then anyway.
 
MOFO64 said:
Wake up and smell the coffee, the world you live in at your PC is NOT the REAL world.

You'd have to be a complete simpleton with no knowledge of fiscal matters to even contemplate spouting such a load of utter nonsense.
Click to expand...



You are a crazy person. I had a much more in depth and detailed post but I believe everything can be covered in a much simpler statement.

Finance is confidence, numpties running their mouths off and causing a panic drop confidence and bring on the issue they were concerned about.
 
semi-pro waster said:
Gold is an interesting one, the majority of its "intrinsic value" is because it's shiny and makes for nice jewellery. While it is used in some electronic components and astronauts visors (amongst other things) it's not actually a good metal for use in most applications and that's not just because it's so expensive.

I'm not arguing about it appreciating in value but essentially what I'm saying is that it has an intrinsic value because we as a species prize it for the fact it's shiny.
Click to expand...

Obviously, if man didn't exist gold would be "worthless", that has little bearing on this scenario though. Precious metals are the only real stores of wealth available because everything else gets it's value based on those. Silver has many more uses than gold and looks just as nice if you ask me yet is valued at much less since there is much more in existence. JP Morgan artificially and fraudulently keep the price of silver low through market manipulation (as others are doing with gold).


If RBS have paid back £163 billion (that's £163,000,000,000) then it's already paid back more than the $27 billion you've said was the figure for worldwide bailouts even without allowing for conversion to dollars - although given RBS borrowed the equivalent of $84 billion from the US alone I suspect you've underestimated the worldwide bailouts by a significant amount.
Click to expand...

I meant $27 trillion in worldwide bailouts yeah, most of which were supposedly given to european banks (PMSL). Yet Bernanke can't tell congress which banks received what? Now the Euro banks are falling one by one again (shock horror).

Banking is a giant ponzi scheme and anyone with a brain knows it.
 
Last edited:
Here........watch this weeks episode from Max and broaden your understanding.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dfCLVcagxo

In this episode, Max Keiser and co-host, Stacy Herbert, discuss naked short selling by Goldman Sachs and piling on JP Morgan all while being hounded by a Fox News helicopter. In the second half of the show Max talks to Francine McKenna of reTheAuditors.com about Jamie Dimon, London whales and MF Global.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom