Financial Crisis: The Philippine Version

**tidus1203** · October 29th, 2008 03:06 PM

No one is perfect. Even the best can make mistakes, its a question of it being fatal enough. If they make a big mistake resulting to their failure then let them fail.

**uls** · October 29th, 2008 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by jpdm

Thus, even those who have killer instinct succumb to their folly right?

That they are in fact vulnerable too. That they have a weakness too.

That's why they need help right?

Now, do you think the US Federal government is right in helping AIG and other ailing banks in the US?

Do you think the US made a mistake a socialist like method of solving the financial crisis?

Yes, even predators compete with other predators for food.

Just because you have killer instinct doesnt mean there arent others with the same killer instinct as you.

---

First, the Fed did not exactly bail out AIG.

the Fed lent money to AIG so AIG could pay its obligations to counterparties who won in the derivatives bets.

in effect, the Fed is protecting the counterparties, not AIG.

The Fed loans are actually very very punishing on AIG... to the point napilitan ang AIG magbenta ng ari-arian.

It's clear naman who the Fed is favoring. And it's not AIG.

---

Yes, the US is bailing out financial institutions.

here's where survival of the fittest applies:

If u are just a small ailing bank, the FDIC shuts u down.

If u are a small business or just an individual, and you get in trouble, nobody is gonna bail u out.

To get a bailout, u have to be big. As in very very big. Super interconnected with everyone...

So big that if u fail, u take the whole world down with you.

That's when u get bailed out.

So nag survive ka coz u got too big.

Survival of the fittest parin.

---

You're thinking kasi pag na-bail out ka ng govt or pag nakialam ang gobyerno, di na nag aaply ang survival of the fittest.

Remember, the govt is PART of the biosphere. Part sya ng environment. So players or competitors use links to the govt as a survival strategy.

Kaya meron lobbyists diba?

Kaya meron campaign contributions tuwing election campaigns diba?

It's a survival advantage if u got connections.

**jpdm** · October 29th, 2008 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by uls

First, the Fed did not exactly bail out AIG.

the Fed lent money to AIG so AIG could pay its obligations to counterparties who won in the derivatives bets.

in effect, the Fed is protecting the counterparties, not AIG.

The Fed loans are actually very very punishing on AIG... to the point napilitan ang AIG magbenta ng ari-arian.

It's clear naman who the Fed is favoring. And it's not AIG.

Well, its still a bailout. Who got the money, AIG. Thus, they are protecting AIG.

And it seems, I think no other company will provide AIG with that kind of money except the US government, immediately.

So, AIG was still rescued by the money provided by the US govt.

Applying the "survival of the fittest" principle on the otherhand would mean letting AIG just go under....as what the American public is talking about as to why the US govt will use US taxpayers'money in saving inefficient and abusive firms.

What happened therefore with the bailout, the "killer" became a softy under the strict supervision of the government. Kung sobrang galing ng AIG and the rest like the powerful Lehman di sila magkakaganyan.

Thus, AIG and others with the killer instincts afterall depends also on something more powerful than them...

Yes, the US is bailing out financial institutions.

here's where survival of the fittest applies:

If u are just a small ailing bank, the FDIC shuts u down.

If u are a small business or just an individual, and you get in trouble, nobody is gonna bail u out.

To get a bailout, u have to be big. As in very very big. Super interconnected with everyone...

So big that if u fail, u take the whole world down with you.

That's when u get bailed out.

So nag survive ka coz u got too big.

Survival of the fittest parin.

Either big or small business, the moment they ask for help from somebody or ask for a bailout, are not species "with a killer instinct."

Big business, just what happen in the US, are no different from those small and "weak" business that needs help also.

In fact a dominant specie that is ailing is worse that a weak specie because it entails alot of costs.

madaling salita, mas pabigat keysa sa maliliit...

So pareho lang ang dominant and weak specie na softy if they rely on others for help.

Darwinian Theory on natural selection which can be summarized by this principle " survival of the fittest" talks about dominant species and weak species in nature alone.

Thus, there is no government that will act as counterbalance...sort of a thing that maintains equilibrium...

Nature do not directly intervene in the order of things..

But the government does in human society...

The state which was created by man also is now the dominant force in any society.

The presence of a machinery that directly intervenes will the "natural balance of things" in human society cancels that principle of "survival of the fittest"

because the government represents the aspirations of all humans not only the dominant ones...

When the US bailed out these "killers" (of the economy and ordinary people for their ineptness)..

The US per se is not protecting this killers turned into lemons but protecting all us taxpayers that will surely be affected by the financial contagion..

If the champion of Free enterprise succumbed to an ideology that they professed to hate to high heavens...it only shows that ' purest free enterprise or pure capitalism with the survival of the fittest as one of its principles according to you ULS and TIDUs is simply a folly.

Everyone needs each other.
---

You're thinking kasi pag na-bail out ka ng govt or pag nakialam ang gobyerno, di na nag aaply ang survival of the fittest.

Hindi talaga.

Remember, the govt is PART of the biosphere. Part sya ng environment. So players or competitors use links to the govt as a survival strategy.

Biosphere means living, nature. The government is a machinery a creation of man..

You mean the government evolve naturally also?

"As in spontaneous creation"

Isa yan sa weakness ng theory ni Darwin.

Everything that was created has a purpose.

Kaya meron lobbyists diba?

Kaya meron campaign contributions tuwing election campaigns diba?

It's a survival advantage if u got connections.

Walang kinalaman yan sa biosphere.

**True Faith** · October 29th, 2008 10:31 PM

Bullseye and well said sir jpdm!:clap1::cheers:

**uls** · October 30th, 2008 12:19 AM

What i meant about "biosphere" is the environment businesses operate in.

i couldnt find a better word, and i used that word coz we were talking about survival of the fittest like in nature. I thought u were smart enough not to take the meaning of that word literally when i used it in our topic.

Government exists in the same environment businesses operate in.

Like here in the Phils., All businesses exist in the same environment Malacanang exists in. So Malacanang is part of the "biosphere" ok?

If a businessman is close to someone in Malacanang, and he is able to get his goods out of customs without paying proper taxes, then he has a competitive advantage over a businessman who has no connections in Malacanang coz he has to pay full taxes.

so that makes the businessman with connections is "fitter" than the other businessman. Gets?

Or if a company that is engaged in a certain industry lobbies the govt not to allow other companies to compete with them in that same industry, then that is their survival advantage.

That happens all the time here.

Diba u are the one who is always saying meron oligopoly dito sa atin?

well, how is that oligopoly being maintained?

The top businessmen in the country have friends in the highest places in govt.

They exist for mutual benefit. I make you rich, u make me rich.

That's the survival advantage of the top businessmen in the country. They are connected to the highest govt people in the land.

And the top politicians in the country have a survival advantage coz pag election time, their campaigns are funded by the richest people in the land.

Now do u get it?

U cannot exclude the govt from the ENVIRONMENT. it's part of it.

---

Naka focus ka kasi sa AIG. Look, AIG is a loser. AIG screwed up. Now it got bailed out and it is now a "softy".

So that makes AIG no longer fit

But Mr. JPDM, naka focus ka dun sa loser.

You failed to look at who benefitted from the AIG bailout.

Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs is a large counterparty of AIG.

AIG owed billions to Goldman in derivatives bets.

AIG was bailed out so Goldman would get paid.

The fitter one, the winner is Goldman Sachs.

Somebody very powerful is looking after Goldman.

Know who he is?

I know. Tidus knows.

**jpdm** · October 30th, 2008 03:24 AM

Originally Posted by uls

What i meant about "biosphere" is the environment businesses operate in.

i couldnt find a better word, and i used that word coz we were talking about survival of the fittest like in nature. I thought u were smart enough not to take the meaning of that word literally when i used it in our topic.

Government exists in the same environment businesses operate in.

Like here in the Phils., All businesses exist in the same environment Malacanang exists in. So Malacanang is part of the "biosphere" ok?

At least Im smart enough to know the real meaning of the word biosphere.

Cmon, after you using a wrong term, ikaw nang-insulto?

i think you are the one who is confused here. Biosphere? You said that, right?Environment pala gusto mong sabihin.

So if you want your explanation clear, make use of the right term/s. You are confusing your reader.

If a businessman is close to someone in Malacanang, and he is able to get his goods out of customs without paying proper taxes, then he has a competitive advantage over a businessman who has no connections in Malacanang coz he has to pay full taxes.

so that makes the businessman with connections is "fitter" than the other businessman. Gets?

That's not being the "fittest". Thats being a leech, a parasite. Feasting on the vulnerability and strength of the others..Without the host, they are nothing...

Now, If a business survive in a level playing field, we can call it the dominant business.

Usually ang business na gumagawa ng kabalastugan e mahina, inefficient and unstable...parang mga crony business nuong araw. Without screwing other people and screwing the government, they are screwed.

Or if a company that is engaged in a certain industry lobbies the govt not to allow other companies to compete with them in that same industry, then that is their survival advantage.

That happens all the time here.

Twisted application of the theory of natural selection. The government is still there.

Without the corrupt guys in the government "the fittest" you admire are nothing.

Ulit, without the government, they will be exposed as weak business organization. Dinadaan sa lobby. Hindi kayang lumaban ng sabayan. Weak yan.

Diba u are the one who is always saying meron oligopoly dito sa atin?

well, how is that oligopoly being maintained?

The top businessmen in the country have friends in the highest places in govt.

They exist for mutual benefit. I make you rich, u make me rich.

Again the same thing. An oligopoly will last if the regulators tolerate it. But if the regulators crack the whip thru the strict application of anti-trust laws or thru deregulation tapos ang oligopoly...

Again, without the govt being robbed dry by people in higher places together with their dirty businessmen gang these guys are nothing but weaklings also...

That's the survival advantage of the top businessmen in the country. They are connected to the highest govt people in the land.

still dependent on a host--a dominant machinery --the government.

And the top politicians in the country have a survival advantage coz pag election time, their campaigns are funded by the richest people in the land.

Now do u get it?

U cannot exclude the govt from the ENVIRONMENT. it's part of it.

I never excluded the government with the environment.

Again for the nth time, take away the host, the benefactor. They are dead.

Now, we are talking here of nature (natural world) because you keep on harping this "survival of the fittest principle of Darwin. As other forumers mentioned, you should not apply this principle on human society.

Again, If you include the government, its not natural, its already man made.Get it?

Thus, the theory of NATURAL SELECTION IS NOT APPLICABLE.

PS.

Nga pala,

why are rationalizing and justifying these shenanigans in the government?

---

Naka focus ka kasi sa AIG. Look, AIG is a loser. AIG screwed up. Now it got bailed out and it is now a "softy".

So that makes AIG no longer fit

Sabi mo ang galing nung boss nun, bakit bumigay?

well, "'the fittest"' like the rest of them will be screwed up especially if they dont have any benefactor in human society.

But Mr. JPDM, naka focus ka dun sa loser.

You failed to look at who benefitted from the AIG bailout.

Of course! AIG is a classic example of a company with a killer instinct and now killed by its own (greedy) instinct.

Sino pa e di ang AIG and their clients.

AIG is a giant before, but not anymore. You cannot be on top all the time no matter how you screw everybody no matter how you violate every single moral dictum.

Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs is a large counterparty of AIG.

AIG owed billions to Goldman in derivatives bets.

AIG was bailed out so Goldman would get paid.

The fitter one, the winner is Goldman Sachs.

Somebody very powerful is looking after Goldman.

See, you Goldman Sach is not a dominant specie. Its like a parasite, a weakling that depends on the dole outs of someone...

Mayroon din benefactor. In other words, its a lemon also.

Know who he is?

I know. Tidus knows

really now.

I really dont care. For me in time these guys will screw each other too.....

and thats the problem with a dog eat dog mentality of businessmen.

Eventually, in the end, they will cancel each other.

**Gen. Miting** · October 30th, 2008 04:34 AM

Originally Posted by tidus1203

No I don't. I care about my love ones but only them. To hell with the guy on the street if he dies of hunger. People buy my products for my products but not because of me, so as long as my products are top notch people will buy. There will always be people who will have the money and it might not be my neighbor. I may sound cold, but the world is cold.

really? have you at least done one act of random kindness to anybody less important and observed what happened next?

try it bro, hindi ka magsisi. if you're fortunate enough you'll realize that the world is not all about money and value and returns.

i'm not saying you feed every starving guy in the street, just one act of random kindness ... you'll see the rewards are far greater than monetary or material returns.

that's why hindi ako makasakay sa survival of the fittest, every man of for himself scenario na pilit nyo dalawa ni *uls bine-brainwash sa'min dito.

business or the world in general is nothing like that.

**Bench19** · October 30th, 2008 04:38 AM

what about us..

**Gen. Miting** · October 30th, 2008 05:08 AM

Originally Posted by jpdm

So corruption and this financial contagion can be explain by your Darwinian Theory on Capitalism and Corruption....

*jpdm, i believe you're just being confused here by *uls

. survival of the fittest per se is not bec. one is smarter than another, or one is healthier than another. ika nga urban jungle, as most writers like to call it.

but in reality, it's never like that. I like to believe that the "fittest" that *uls is referring to are those who are willing to go beyond boundaries to get what they really really want. if *uls calls it the Darwinian natural selection theory, i can associate something similar: the secret law of attraction.

anyway, i will not explain the secret law anymore here kasi O.T. na but the thing is ganito: you know why militants or complainers always fail or seem to be always at the bottom of the food chain. bec. they cant seem to get their minds focused/fixated on the prize. classic case of pessimism taking over optimism. lahat tayo meron nitong dalawa ito. the difference however, ano ang mas malakas per individual. some pessimists even go on worse path, they start blaming to hide their failures.

we can't deny that those people that we see on the top today have so much optimism inside kahit na the odds are almost a 100% against them. they still prevail.

actually ito lang naman yun game ng buhay natin ngaun. a lot of people (whether rich/powerful or media or politician or person of authority) feed on the negative to filter out the negative people. at first broadcast, filtered out kagad ang 70 to 80%. and sino 'to mga ito, yun ang masa. and what do the masa always do, they complain but seat back in the sidelines. what can this change really?

but there are those who have the same optimism as those who are corrupt and greedy and powerful. that's why, hindi naman all the time, the rich and powerful stay at the top. but there are those people who are really "blessed" to stay forever at the top. to me, they just did their homework. they just know when to let go and take when it's due.

**tidus1203** · October 30th, 2008 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Gen. Miting

really? have you at least done one act of random kindness to anybody less important and observed what happened next?

try it bro, hindi ka magsisi. if you're fortunate enough you'll realize that the world is not all about money and value and returns.

i'm not saying you feed every starving guy in the street, just one act of random kindness ... you'll see the rewards are far greater than monetary or material returns.

that's why hindi ako makasakay sa survival of the fittest, every man of for himself scenario na pilit nyo dalawa ni *uls bine-brainwash sa'min dito.

business or the world in general is nothing like that.

I am not brainwashing you guys, its up to you what you want to do and its up to me what I want to do.