Man gives homeless bum $100 and then follows him.

[Thales of Miletus]

This must piss a lot of people off.

What is wrong with the poor and the homeless?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiWxrpikWgs

[heavyfuel]

I stopped watching soon as he said, "I couldn't work"

[sr20s14zenki]

Ok... Did you watch the whole video. Spoiler everybody. The guy thinks the homeless guy goes to buy liquor with the 100$but he actually buys food and gives it out. Have a little compassion for fuck sake. Sometimes people get screwed in life and it's hard to get back up. You'll never know until you're there. It's easy to call somebody useless without knowing their story.

[GTS4tw]

The guy is an actor. Youtube views = $$$$. This is like reality TV all over again and people are unbelievably gullible.

[Redlined_8000]

I still don't get why he went into a liquor store to buy food.

[ercchry]

Robin Goodfellow's alter-ego for sure

[BensonTT]

Staged 100%

[BensonTT]

Originally posted by Redlined_8000
I still don't get why he went into a liquor store to buy food.

Makes for good drama..

[Seth1968]

Sooo set up.

Further to that, even if it wasn't faked, how is one particular video on the matter enlighten us to anything?

Also, when a family member is ill, you quit your job? How the fuck does that make any sense?

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by Seth1968
Sooo set up.

Further to that, even if it wasn't faked, how is one particular video on the matter enlighten us to anything?

Also, when a family member is ill, you quit your job? How the fuck does that make any sense? You quit your job, to care for them 24/7. Because they aren't sick enough to be in a hospital, but not well enough to care for themselves?

I thought it was a good video about judgement.

In Alberta, many of the homeless that you see, are people with mental health issues. I would suggest that a large percentage of people who are in that position are there because of a failure of social investment.

But it is something that I would be willing to debate.

[themack89]

The merit in reducing inequality is no longer a debate--soon it will fully become conventional wisdom.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cana...bank-1.2847027

Here you have the PRIVATE SECTOR telling the GOVERNMENT to reduce inequality. Never thought I'd see the day.

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by themack89
The merit in reducing inequality is no longer a debate--soon it will fully become conventional wisdom.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cana...bank-1.2847027

Here you have the PRIVATE SECTOR telling the GOVERNMENT to reduce inequality. Never thought I'd see the day.

The part of the private sector that is interested in long term returns.

But in reality corporatism goes against the free market philosophy.

In regard to the Canadian banks, we should be praising Paul Martin for preventing the Canadian banks from investing in Credit Default swaps like they wanted to. Because of Martin's efforts, Canadian banks came out of the 2008 meltdown in a healthy condition while all of their American counterparts were crippled.

In regard to corporatism, To quote Nader. "Can there be a free market without freedom of contract? Corporatism has stripped consumers of freedom of contract with fine-print standard-form contracts that become more dictatorial every decade. They now often take away consumers rights to go to court for their grievances via compulsory arbitration clauses. They stipulate that the vendors can change the contract anyway they want – called unilateral modification – which takes away the last vestiges of consumer bargaining power. An example is the unilateral changes in what you have to pay in penalties, late fees or any hundreds of fees hidden in the fine print. And you can’t shop around because companies don’t compete over the fine print."

[samo147]

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/h...-a-fresh-start

wow they raised a lot of money for this dude

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by samo147
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/h...-a-fresh-start

wow they raised a lot of money for this dude

It is great to see that there are still so many caring people in this world.

I was taught to "never look down on a person unless you are helping them up". It makes me happy to see that some people here think the same way.

[themack89]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


The part of the private sector that is interested in long term returns.

But in reality corporatism goes against the free market philosophy.

In regard to the Canadian banks, we should be praising Paul Martin for preventing the Canadian banks from investing in Credit Default swaps like they wanted to. Because of Martin's efforts, Canadian banks came out of the 2008 meltdown in a healthy condition while all of their American counterparts were crippled.

In regard to corporatism, To quote Nader. "Can there be a free market without freedom of contract? Corporatism has stripped consumers of freedom of contract with fine-print standard-form contracts that become more dictatorial every decade. They now often take away consumers rights to go to court for their grievances via compulsory arbitration clauses. They stipulate that the vendors can change the contract anyway they want – called unilateral modification – which takes away the last vestiges of consumer bargaining power. An example is the unilateral changes in what you have to pay in penalties, late fees or any hundreds of fees hidden in the fine print. And you can’t shop around because companies don’t compete over the fine print."

When you frame it with the interest in long term returns, then virtually no publicly listed company is going to fit that criteria; at least, not at first glance. The most important thing to majority of shareholders (or traders and algorithms, if you will) seems to always be the now--never the tomorrow. Considering this, then, management of these publicly listed companies are going to have conflicting incentives to manage a certain way. Like your typical North American democracy, the voters only have weak and indirect control; the cost of organization makes something akin to an impeachment very difficult...Which makes me believe that management of any company trying to push for long term returns will succeed.

This is a round-about way of saying success of the business drives the stock, not necessarily the other way around. Although, granted, it is sometimes tough to discern.

Are you confusing Credit Default Swaps with the mortgage bundles? It is the CDS's that caused a massive transfer of wealth paying out to those who were betting on certain institutions and/or companies to collapse. They are bets on bankruptcy. The only issue I see with investing in CDS's is if the respsective issuers are unable pay out (what did AIG have to dish? over $80bil?), in which case THEN it is a saving grace to not have invested in them at that particular time.

I have always been under the impression Canada's brilliance WRT to the 2008 crisis was their tight ass lending regulations...Which has made Canada a sort of role model to the world; relinquish upside for downside protection.

[Robin Goodfellow]

Originally posted by ercchry
Robin Goodfellow's alter-ego for sure

It's dark times when compassion is seen as a negative.

[Robin Goodfellow]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus


In Alberta, many of the homeless that you see, are people with mental health issues. I would suggest that a large percentage of people who are in that position are there because of a failure of social investment.

You nailed it. Lacking proper medical treatment or medication for their treatment, these folks end up on the streets, medicating themselves with the only medicine available: Alchohol.

This desperate stop-gap cure becomes then mistaken for the disease.

[Robin Goodfellow]

Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

never look down on a person unless you are helping them up

QFTW.

[M.alex]

Originally posted by BensonTT
Staged 100%

Fake videos on youtube? no wai

[Thales of Miletus]

Originally posted by themack89




Are you confusing Credit Default Swaps with the mortgage bundles? It is the CDS's that caused a massive transfer of wealth paying out to those who were betting on certain institutions and/or companies to collapse. They are bets on bankruptcy. The only issue I see with investing in CDS's is if the respsective issuers are unable pay out (what did AIG have to dish? over $80bil?), in which case THEN it is a saving grace to not have invested in them at that particular time.

I have always been under the impression Canada's brilliance WRT to the 2008 crisis was their tight ass lending regulations...Which has made Canada a sort of role model to the world; relinquish upside for downside protection.

The Freddie Mac debacle was created by those mortgage bundles. How the creators of those bundles did not end up ion jail, is a salute to the absolute corruption of the American political system. Standard and Poors rated those bundles as good, yet Standard and Poors is a creation of the companies that sold the bundles. Hypocrisy indeed.

imo Regulation protects capitalism from itself. Capitalism, without regulation would eat its children.

You obviously have a good understanding of the 2008 meltdown. The Joe Cassano's and the other culprits. Yet in the latest funding bill, the United States returned to the same policies that created the 2008 meltdown.

What do you expect to happen next?