Sunday Read: “Bank of America: Too Crooked to Fail” by Matt Taibbi

If there is one “Sunday” reading article you can read today, this one should be the first one you consider. I only need to quote you the first two sentences:

At least Bank of America got its name right.

The ultimate Too Big to Fail bank really is America, a hypergluttonous ward of the state whose limitless fraud and criminal conspiracies we’ll all be paying for until the end of time.

Read the rest:


Culture clash between the jobless (99ers) and Occupy Wall St (99%ers)

Salon updated its series with its sixth installment. It is full of fail between people. Sorry. The sausage of bottom-up democracy is bitter and tough—however, it shows excellent use of the human microphone as it has been refined over months of use at Zuccotti Park and the General Assembly. If you’re a 99er, for now at least, don’t expect much help from 99%ers, which in themselves can’t decide if they want to reboot/change the State or abandon it. The human microphone, is a great tool for informing people without technology, but it’s still being applied to State-like systems by people unsure what they want to do. If there’s a saving grace for 99%ers, they made their own rules for “never making demands,” which has allowed them to continue their anti-movement indefinitely since there are no expectations (if there are no demands, there’s nothing to move toward).

“Go to Trial — Crash the Justice System”

This was a very interesting idea coming from the NYTimes editorials:

AFTER years as a civil rights lawyer, I rarely find myself speechless. But some questions a woman I know posed during a phone conversation one recent evening gave me pause: “What would happen if we organized thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of people charged with crimes to refuse to play the game, to refuse to plea out? What if they all insisted on their Sixth Amendment right to trial? Couldn’t we bring the whole system to a halt just like that?

Apparently so, since 90% of all criminals currently plea-out instead of having a trial because harsh minimum mandatory sentences have become the rule. We appear to have slowly grown beyond the State’s ability to administer justice “within the system” that defines itself and plea-bargaining has become the defacto-method of saving the State money.  If your mandatory minimum sentence would be 5 years and they’re dangling a plea that “wins” you 2 years, you’re probably going to take it even though you have the “right” to a trial. If no one takes the deal, then everyone must go to trial.  It would be an interesting massive-multiplayer prisoner’s dilemma—do we make it harder for the State to administer justice or force its hand into making itself more efficient and likely, more totalitarian than it ever has been before. That is, until you also teach everyone about jury nullification.  Of course, all bets are off no matter what, because the State always redefines itself away from the people’s control whenever the people attempt to control it.

How Paulson Gave Hedge Funds Advance Word of Planned Treasury Intervention 2008

One of the things I’m sure that most 99%ers would agree is someone should not be able to profit from insider information, especially when its coming from government.  After the Bear Stearns collapse, Paulson tells the mass media one story and then tells hedge fund managers what’s really going to happen with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. One fund manager acted to cover his ass:

The fund manager who described the meeting left after coffee and called his lawyer. The attorney’s quick conclusion: Paulson’s talk was material nonpublic information, and his client should immediately stop trading the shares of Washington- based Fannie and McLean, Virginia-based Freddie. []

Naturally, how to determine if the other hedge funds shorted [another problem with legacy equity systems that I describe in permanent equity] the GSE stocks once they learned this isn’t possible from current financial tracking systems.

How to know if you’re a 99%er.

This thought on interest was sparked after the discussion in Reddit Anarchism for Louis C.K.’s clip “When you’re rich, the bank pays you for being rich.” After sleeping on it, [and in fact, leaving this here as a draft for months until the spark of the Occupy Wall Street movement] I figured out where the hate on interest and debt can be related to anarchism:

Your interest rate on any particular debt is a nameless class in a hierarchy of debts.

Now you might not think you’re one of the 99%ers, maybe you are doing well. Maybe you’re not doing as well as you could be once you see another way to measure your worth against others. I don’t mean how much you earn, but how much your debt costs you in the game I call the “hierarchy of debts.”

Hierarchy of debts? Sure, you’re scored on it constantly. Your credit score is your ranking in the system used to guestimate how well you play their game. Low credit score = higher interest rates.  High credit score = low interest rates.  Every debt you own is a game piece in the hierarchy of debts. Refinance your mortgage from 12% APR to 4% APR? Congratulations, you just converted your pawn into a queen, maybe. Get an auto-loan for 7% APR? Great! You’re doing better than Bob who has to pay 10% APR for his used Hyundai. But you’re still not the owner of the chessboard, where the banks and financial companies get to play with 1%, 0.5%, or even 0% APR interest-money from central banks. The biggest wonder of the game in the hierarchy of debts is the credit score algorithm, the rules of the game, are of course, kept secret from you and changed regularly when you intuitively learn them.

What class are you? The lower your interest rate is, the higher you are in the system of classes. Banks receive the lowest interest rates from central banks when they’re in trouble. In turn, banks lend out money at higher interest rates in order to turn the debts into profits. If you make lots and lots of ridiculous notes to slaves that they can’t pay them back, the government bails you out to protect (you) from them.  How do you become a bank? You have to have money (lots of it, no, really… lots of fucking money) AND political power (enough to convince enough representatives to back you)  to get a charter, naturally. There’s no possible way for any 99%er individual or even a major subset of the 99%er’s to forge their own bank, because it always requires more money&power (mopo) than they have access to. 99%ers are forever barred from entering or influencing what 1%ers have access to.

Take a look at your interest rates, and you’ll know your class in the financial system. If they’re not less than or equal to 1%, you are probably a 99%er, or you’re about to become one when the promotional rates give out.