OCW - No, thanks.

Hippies, high school dropouts and ass-crack exhibitionists have all gathered on Wall Street to protest socio-economic inequality, corporate greed,  and judging by some of the pictures I've seen, proper hygiene.

First off, protesting economic inequalities on Wall Street is kind of like protesting McDonald's fast food industry monopolization when you're in Somalia, seeing as how the average stock broker makes roughly $40 grand a year and have absolutely nothing to do with the 2008 bailouts or the recession.
Sure the banks that received the bailouts are mostly located on Wall Street, but it's Treasury that gave them the money.
And seeing as how banks are in the business of making money, and the Treasury's job is to manage government revenue for the people, we can easily establish that everyone participating in this movement are to compare to those who smear themselves with their own shit in an insane asylum while wearing their grandmas panties as headgear.

Lightweight metaphor: would you punish a child for eating ice cream before dinner, or  the parent that gave it to the child? (Child = banks, Parent = Treasury)

You cannot expect the child to choose to not eat the ice cream the same way you cannot expect the banks to not want a bailout, why? Because the people who run the banks (the board of directors) are not elected according to how responsible they are, but rather by how good they are at making money, no matter the moral hazard.
Treasury is however elected by the people, for the people and are therefore expected to act moral and on behalf of the average American citizen.

So who is the problem? The private institutions that practice moral hazard or the public institutions that indulge, and reward their behavior?

If you just answered private institutions I've got some bad news for you pal, your brain may very well contain less substance than Arnold Schwarzenegger balls (No, not his metaphorical balls, his actual balls, I'd imagine his metaphorical balls are quiet sizable).

You see, moral hazard, while being the actual problem, is still only a symptom caused by the MAIN problem, that is Treasury's inability to not act like a y-chromosome cliche.
If Treasury hadn't allowed the bailouts, the banks that practice moral hazard would go bankrupt immediately and there would be no more moral hazard. (there also would be less jobs, but hey, you can't have everything)


Of course, no matter how hard you regulate and no matter how many bailouts you deny there will always be private institutions that practice MH since there will always be smurfdicked Americans of extremely questionable sanity that are willing to take 30% interest loans on worthless shit that costs $12.99, and there will always be US soldiers (glorified welfare-queens) who use $50 000 Stinger missiles on lone snipers, pump up the military spending by a couple of billion dollars and then return home and wonder why the economy is in the shitter.



I guess my point is that just because you're mom won't buy you a gold-plated diamond decorated iPad for your 13th birthday doesn't mean you should start running around Wall Street pointing fingers, and blaming other hard working, often successful institutions for the mess that you helped create when you decided to vote for shitty candidates, and start giving birth to drooling, screaming little pizza delivery Jr's like you're trying to carpet bomb this world and the few resources we have with your disgusting seedlings whose every fart dribble and squeak is applauded like it's a fucking Oscar nominated Quentin-Bay movie with enough violence and explosions to give a Somalian pirate posttraumatic stress disorder.

Fck.