Silent Coup d'etat

[OHCHUTE 0]

Manipulate from behind, never hold office at first.
Put idiots in office who don't have a clue they're being manipulated.
Control who is allowed to make money and holding on to it. No you don't have a banker broker dealer license nor lobby do you.
Control mass communications
Paint anyone who speaks out against injustice a lunatic and destroy their reputation. Develop and brand derrogatory names to label such people
Create scapegoats
Use disasters to twist things to achieve objectives in taking rights away.
Or even, create a disaster to ensure public opinion is twisted favorable in your direction.
Offer incentives to people to come to your side
Own the lawyers and judges
Own the military
Own LEO
Own the prison system

Having money is key..

Slowly take away their right to defend themselves, because once they find out they're owned financially or otherwise via restrictive laws, they'll not be too happy and will want to revolt.

Increase laws which will be easy to break, or where public won't adhear to, so that they can be handed tickets, or be arrested.

Publicize those arrested and the punnishment they get, again re-inforcing the public not to break the law.

Provide rewards to family members to help catch bad guys.

Increase more laws.

Confisations of property, illegal seizures, illegal arrests, illegal detentions, no due process.

Imprisonments to get rid of insurgents
The killing of insurgents, or properly labeled terrorists as they continually disobeyed the laws of the state in lashing out.
Get them for supposedly being a part of an undesirable group made up or fictious group at that.

Keep them drunk watching silly sports games while having your hand in their pocket obeying their laws.

Then.

The person who sided with the majority ended up being enslaved by the same who they looked up to. They ended up dead or walking through rubble of what was once homeland.

And the process is repeted time and time again.

Be weary of your government and their motives as groups of people can move in directions that no one on earth could have control over. Keep a clear mind and hold on to as many rights that are available to you, even though you might not care too much about specific rights personally as those rights will keep you a free nation.

Don't let yourself be owned. Vote away anyone who further diminishes your rights that your forefathers died for.

Keep America strong. Keep a strong mind. Don't become influenced by detractors who want to take your rights away for the sake of your security.
Don't buy into militarization of LEO as that will only work against you.
Don't buy into fighting for a nations freedom when all your fighting for is for someone to make money off your blood.
Be weary of excessive taxation to get you to give up rights, living in a place where you want to live, or own something you think you have a right to own.

Keep these words as thoughts. Don't forget it's We the People and we can do togother what no one person can do: Live as free people, but in order to do so, we must push back on any attempt to take rights away, when we should be working to get more rights.

[yoink 321]

Wait.

Are you saying my tinfoil hat isn't protection enough anymore?


RUN FOR THE HILLS!

[skinnay 0]

Cool story bro.

[Rick 67]

Not the hills that's the first place they'll look

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[Gravitymaster 0]

You forgot.

Plant thermite in the World Trade Center and tell them it was terrorists who flew planes into them.

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

You forgot.

Plant thermite in the World Trade Center and tell them it was terrorists who flew planes into them.

Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you.

Looks like NY is pushing back on new proposed gun laws.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/usworld/article/295062/6/Cuomo-ratings-drop-after-NY-gun-law

http://online.wsj.com/article/APdd33997445624680886e79b5bd351a4e.html

At least someone is pushing back. Horrah for the Plantiffs.



Guess why college tuition rates for college middle class go up 8 percent per year. Should we talk about behind the scenes making money on the money college debt securities slim bag business that keep you strapped. Only if you are paying your kids way through college.

Sock it to the middle class so the kabal can make money.

So far the only terriorists caught in the US since 911 aside from the guy who shot up the military base were given fake bombs by the FBI. What does that tell you. Sounds like FBI job security to me.

[weekender 0]

>"Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you. "

it means nothing because the SEC doesnt regulate banks. they regulate securities. SEC is an acronym for the Securities and Exchange Commission. its right there in the title. Banks are regulated by the FDIC and Fed Reserve Board mostly.

I say this for others reading and their edification. the OP is clearly gone. SEC's responsibility is very narrow, much more narrow than most people realize. they are not a giant finance police force.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

the OP is clearly gone.

We like to think of it as "tuned to a different frequency". Who knows what's out there that he receives?

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

>"Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you. "

it means nothing because the SEC doesnt regulate banks. they regulate securities. SEC is an acronym for the Securities and Exchange Commission. its right there in the title. Banks are regulated by the FDIC and Fed Reserve Board mostly.

I say this for others reading and their edification. the OP is clearly gone. SEC's responsibility is very narrow, much more narrow than most people realize. they are not a giant finance police force.

Here is the article saying what I just said:
It includes no longer having to report to SEC
So you allegation is wrong.

Here you go. It could mean something to some people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/100-banks-end-reporting-to-sec-under-new-law/2013/01/30/bf15226e-6b00-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

>"Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you. "

it means nothing because the SEC doesnt regulate banks. they regulate securities. SEC is an acronym for the Securities and Exchange Commission. its right there in the title. Banks are regulated by the FDIC and Fed Reserve Board mostly.

I say this for others reading and their edification. the OP is clearly gone. SEC's responsibility is very narrow, much more narrow than most people realize. they are not a giant finance police force.

Here is the article saying what I just said:
It includes no longer having to report to SEC
So you allegation is wrong.

Here you go. It could mean something to some people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/100-banks-end-reporting-to-sec-under-new-law/2013/01/30/bf15226e-6b00-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html

you do not understand the article you are quoting. and that does not disprove my comment. they no longer have to file their financials with the SEC because its expensive and serves no benefit. they are still regulated by the gov't in reference to running their business. the financials are disclosed for shareholders or potential shareholders.

My point stands that it means nothing to me. the banks are regulated by the gov't and the SEC regulates securities. the fact they no longer have to go through the hassle of filing with SEC is of no consequence to me. they still offer them to anyone who cares to ask.

my bank is small and private. we get request for our financials every day. its very normal and common.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>"Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you. "

it means nothing because the SEC doesnt regulate banks. they regulate securities. SEC is an acronym for the Securities and Exchange Commission. its right there in the title. Banks are regulated by the FDIC and Fed Reserve Board mostly.


I say this for others reading and their edification. the OP is clearly gone. SEC's responsibility is very narrow, much more narrow than most people realize. they are not a giant finance police force.

Here is the article saying what I just said:
It includes no longer having to report to SEC
So you allegation is wrong.

Here you go. It could mean something to some people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/100-banks-end-reporting-to-sec-under-new-law/2013/01/30/bf15226e-6b00-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html

you do not understand the article you are quoting. and that does not disprove my comment. they no longer have to file their financials with the SEC because its expensive and serves no benefit. they are still regulated by the gov't in reference to running their business. the financials are disclosed for shareholders or potential shareholders.

My point stands that it means nothing to me. the banks are regulated by the gov't and the SEC regulates securities. the fact they no longer have to go through the hassle of filing with SEC is of no consequence to me. they still offer them to anyone who cares to ask.

my bank is small and private. we get request for our financials every day. its very normal and common.

I guess you were not around during the savings and loan crisis.
Here is a quote from the article

"Still, critics of the new thresholds say the more information, the better. They’re worried because banks have a history of issuing partial or distorted data to their shareholders. The SEC is uniquely positioned to demand internal auditing controls."

With relaxed rules, same as no rules for banks that created the most recent crisis, time will tell.

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

>"Better yet SEC told small banks they didnt have to report to them any more. What does that mean for you. "

it means nothing because the SEC doesnt regulate banks. they regulate securities. SEC is an acronym for the Securities and Exchange Commission. its right there in the title. Banks are regulated by the FDIC and Fed Reserve Board mostly.


I say this for others reading and their edification. the OP is clearly gone. SEC's responsibility is very narrow, much more narrow than most people realize. they are not a giant finance police force.

Here is the article saying what I just said:
It includes no longer having to report to SEC
So you allegation is wrong.

Here you go. It could mean something to some people.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/100-banks-end-reporting-to-sec-under-new-law/2013/01/30/bf15226e-6b00-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html

you do not understand the article you are quoting. and that does not disprove my comment. they no longer have to file their financials with the SEC because its expensive and serves no benefit. they are still regulated by the gov't in reference to running their business. the financials are disclosed for shareholders or potential shareholders.

My point stands that it means nothing to me. the banks are regulated by the gov't and the SEC regulates securities. the fact they no longer have to go through the hassle of filing with SEC is of no consequence to me. they still offer them to anyone who cares to ask.

my bank is small and private. we get request for our financials every day. its very normal and common.

I guess you were not around during the savings and loan crisis.
Here is a quote from the article

"Still, critics of the new thresholds say the more information, the better. They’re worried because banks have a history of issuing partial or distorted data to their shareholders. The SEC is uniquely positioned to demand internal auditing controls."

With relaxed rules, same as no rules for banks that created the most recent crisis, time will tell.

The Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act was an initiative of the Reagan administration, and was largely authored by lobbyists for the S&L industry. The official description of the bill was "An act to revitalize the housing industry by strengthening the financial stability of home mortgage lending institutions and ensuring the availability of home mortgage loans."

Direct result - S&L crisis needing taxpayer bailout.

1999: Sen. Phil Gramm (R) put forward the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This Act passed out of the Senate on a party line vote with 100% Republican support.

This act repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act. The gist of it is that Glass-Steagall was put in place in 1933 to control the rampant speculation that had helped cause the collapse of banking at the outset of the depression, and to prevent such consolidation of the banks that the nation had all its eggs in one fiscal basket.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley reversed those rules, allowing not only more bank mergers, but for banks to become directly involved in the stock market, bonds, and insurance. The S&Ls failed because they didn't have the regulations that protected banks. After Gramm-Leach-Bliley, banks didn't have that protection either.

Gramm (R) wasn't done. The next year he was back with the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which was slipped into a "must pass" spending bill on the last day of the 106th Congress. This Act greatly expanded the scope of futures trading, created new vehicles for speculation, and sheltered several investments from regulation.

Among other things this allowed Enron to engage in the behavior that eventually led to its downfall, and set the stage for the the great recession.

CFMA sheltered from regulatory scrutiny the "credit default swaps" by placing them in a state where they were not only unregulated but almost perfectly opaque. Credit default swaps were turned into the perfect vehicle to fuel a Wall Street feeding frenzy. No one had any idea what these things were actually worth, they were traded "over the counter" without being administered by any exchange, and even the SEC could monitor their existence only indirectly.

Who supported a financial instrument that was a combination of the invisible with the incomprehensible?

More recently, instruments that are more complex and less transparent--such as credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligations, and credit-linked notes--have been developed and their use has grown very rapidly in recent years. The result? Improved credit-risk management together with more and better risk-management tools appear to have significantly reduced loan concentrations in telecommunications and, indeed, other areas and the associated stress on banks and other financial institutions.
--Alan Greenspan, 2002

Who thought them a BAD idea?
"In my judgment, the risk of this regulatory approach is simply unacceptable for America's investors."
--Arthur Levitt, SEC chairman, 1999

Numbers from 2008:

The value of the entire U.S. Treasuries market: $4.5 trillion.

The value of the entire mortgage market: $7 trillion.

The size of the U.S. stock market: $22 trillion.

The size of the credit default swap market the previous year year: $45 trillion.

Then it all collapsed, and the taxpayers were on the hook yet again while the greed-mongers walked away with fortunes.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[OHCHUTE 0]

They'll use guns as an excuse to levy more taxes against property owners to deal with perps in the city. Right now they are compromising the whole higher education industry by flim flaming college debt securities which will soon put college tuition rates beyond most American's reach. The next bubble. Also enslaving kids to life long indebtness as you can't declare bankruptcy on college debt. It's forever.

[DougH 270]

Your barking up the wrong tree if you think Professor over there cares about the life long debt of students. He is well entrenched in the big business of education.

Big business, big education, big medicine.

All structured to take extract wealth from the overall population and concentrate it into the hands of the top tiers.

They are no more noble than the blood sucking CEO's they rally against.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Your barking up the wrong tree if you think Professor over there cares about the life long debt of students. He is well entrenched in the big business of education.

Big business, big education, big medicine.

All structured to take extract wealth from the overall population and concentrate it into the hands of the top tiers.

They are no more noble than the blood sucking CEO's they rally against.

I agree

It's all about stock companys, and selling stock. The non stock firms are going away fast. Just drive though Georgetown in DC. There was once hundreds of mom and pops. Now all the franchises, stock firms are there and you'll find this in most cities.

[weekender 0]

Quote

They'll use guns as an excuse to levy more taxes against property owners to deal with perps in the city. Right now they are compromising the whole higher education industry by flim flaming college debt securities which will soon put college tuition rates beyond most American's reach. The next bubble. Also enslaving kids to life long indebtness as you can't declare bankruptcy on college debt. It's forever.

Mostly by accident because you are completely clueless about finance, but you have a point. College loan debt securities exist and are considered by most as pretty speculative right now. Bubble talk is starting to be said about them. They will not bring down a major bank like the mortgage securities because they are not as common or as widely held. For those who care or know the difference, they are Asset Backed Securities and private. Not gov't backed securities as they once were. Most likely because they preferred to be less regulated. Which adds to their risk.

So my point is they exist and are probably in trouble but will not bring down a major bank. So unless your long them, no need to worry much. just my 2cents and worth about that.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

They'll use guns as an excuse to levy more taxes against property owners to deal with perps in the city. Right now they are compromising the whole higher education industry by flim flaming college debt securities which will soon put college tuition rates beyond most American's reach. The next bubble. Also enslaving kids to life long indebtness as you can't declare bankruptcy on college debt. It's foreve

Quote

Mostly by accident because you are completely clueless about finance, but you have a point. College loan debt securities exist and are considered by most as pretty speculative right now. Bubble talk is starting to be said about them. They will not bring down a major bank like the mortgage securities because they are not as common or as widely held. For those who care or know the difference, they are Asset Backed Securities and private. Not gov't backed securities as they once were. Most likely because they preferred to be less regulated. Which adds to their risk.

So my point is they exist and are probably in trouble but will not bring down a major bank. So unless your long them, no need to worry much. just my 2cents and worth about that.

Oh here we go again Mr. Banker. I'm clueless but I have a point you say. So hence, I'm not clueless. Your buddy CEO of Goldman is over there meeting with Obama today.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

They'll use guns as an excuse to levy more taxes against property owners to deal with perps in the city. Right now they are compromising the whole higher education industry by flim flaming college debt securities which will soon put college tuition rates beyond most American's reach. The next bubble. Also enslaving kids to life long indebtness as you can't declare bankruptcy on college debt. It's foreve

Quote

Mostly by accident because you are completely clueless about finance, but you have a point. College loan debt securities exist and are considered by most as pretty speculative right now. Bubble talk is starting to be said about them. They will not bring down a major bank like the mortgage securities because they are not as common or as widely held. For those who care or know the difference, they are Asset Backed Securities and private. Not gov't backed securities as they once were. Most likely because they preferred to be less regulated. Which adds to their risk.

So my point is they exist and are probably in trouble but will not bring down a major bank. So unless your long them, no need to worry much. just my 2cents and worth about that.

Oh here we go again Mr. Banker. I'm clueless but I have a point you say. So hence, I'm not clueless. Your buddy CEO of Goldman is over there meeting with Obama today.

no you are still clueless on the topic as evidenced by your next comment about "stock companies." An entity similar to "ad men" and "front end paper", that only exist in your head. Not knowing the difference between public and privately traded companies, makes you clueless on finance. making up your own words for a conversation makes you clueless on the English language.

you made a point and i gave you credit. of course, being clueless you missed the greater context, which is that there is not enough student loan securities to cause a bigger problem.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[OHCHUTE 0]

***no you are still clueless on the topic as evidenced by your next comment about "stock companies." An entity similar to "ad men" and "front end paper", that only exist in your head. Not knowing the difference between public and privately traded companies, makes you clueless on finance. making up your own words for a conversation makes you clueless on the English language.

you made a point and i gave you credit. of course, being clueless you missed the greater context, which is that there is not enough student loan securities to cause a bigger problem.***

A trillion is not a problem? You are hilarious. All the debt graduates face combined with not being able to find work upon graduation is not a problem? Most Americans feel it is a problem.

I guess you are over with Obama and Blankfein today. They need more immigrant to go to college so to sell more debt. The same thing they did with the minorities with mortgages. Jeesh you don't have clue. The reason this country is owned.

Here's the problem with college debt and the securities the flim flamers are dealing in.

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans[url]
http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans

[kallend 2,113]

Quote

Your barking up the wrong tree if you think Professor over there cares about the life long debt of students. He is well entrenched in the big business of education.

Big business, big education, big medicine.

All structured to take extract wealth from the overall population and concentrate it into the hands of the top tiers.

They are no more noble than the blood sucking CEO's they rally against.

If you really have a problem with the way higher ed. is structured in this country, then place the blame where it is due - on politicians.

Of course, if fewer kids took "Womens' Studies", History and Psychology and more took Engineering and Math there wouldn't be so many graduates who can't pay their college loans.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[weekender 0]

Quote

***no you are still clueless on the topic as evidenced by your next comment about "stock companies." An entity similar to "ad men" and "front end paper", that only exist in your head. Not knowing the difference between public and privately traded companies, makes you clueless on finance. making up your own words for a conversation makes you clueless on the English language.

you made a point and i gave you credit. of course, being clueless you missed the greater context, which is that there is not enough student loan securities to cause a bigger problem.***

A trillion is not a problem? You are hilarious. All the debt graduates face combined with not being able to find work upon graduation is not a problem? Most Americans feel it is a problem.

I guess you are over with Obama and Blankfein today. They need more immigrant to go to college so to sell more debt. The same thing they did with the minorities with mortgages. Jeesh you don't have clue. The reason this country is owned.

Here's the problem with college debt and the securities the flim flamers are dealing in.

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans[url]
http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans

you are confusing two things. student loan debt with student loan debt instruments. you implied there was going to be a problem with the latter. i pointed out i do not agree. if you want to change the subject, fine but do not imply i am the clueless one. i would agree with you that student loan debt is a big issue. one that i feel people should be concerned with.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Quote

***no you are still clueless on the topic as evidenced by your next comment about "stock companies." An entity similar to "ad men" and "front end paper", that only exist in your head. Not knowing the difference between public and privately traded companies, makes you clueless on finance. making up your own words for a conversation makes you clueless on the English language.

you made a point and i gave you credit. of course, being clueless you missed the greater context, which is that there is not enough student loan securities to cause a bigger problem.***

A trillion is not a problem? You are hilarious. All the debt graduates face combined with not being able to find work upon graduation is not a problem? Most Americans feel it is a problem.

I guess you are over with Obama and Blankfein today. They need more immigrant to go to college so to sell more debt. The same thing they did with the minorities with mortgages. Jeesh you don't have clue. The reason this country is owned.

Here's the problem with college debt and the securities the flim flamers are dealing in.

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans[url]
http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans

you are confusing two things. student loan debt with student loan debt instruments. you implied there was going to be a problem with the latter. i pointed out i do not agree. if you want to change the subject, fine but do not imply i am the clueless one. i would agree with you that student loan debt is a big issue. one that i feel people should be concerned with.

OH when students stop paying loans, or kids cut back on going to college due to cost of tuition (a direct result of the back side slimey "instruments" business you're refering to) you don't think the loan debt instruments business will suffer? Substitute college debt instruments for "mortgage backed securities" and you'll have your answer. DOH, people stop paying on the front side the back side blow up.

Why do think Blankenfeild is over with Obama talking about immigration.... he wants the bodies so that the paper can be created. All those illegals need to go to college. More paper, more debt, more instruments with which to deal. Same as they did in writing mortgages. Flim flam, one paper business to the next. When one side fails the otherside fails. Same a ponzi. I though you knew about finance.



You are out of it. Like most. Can't connect the dots.

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

***no you are still clueless on the topic as evidenced by your next comment about "stock companies." An entity similar to "ad men" and "front end paper", that only exist in your head. Not knowing the difference between public and privately traded companies, makes you clueless on finance. making up your own words for a conversation makes you clueless on the English language.

you made a point and i gave you credit. of course, being clueless you missed the greater context, which is that there is not enough student loan securities to cause a bigger problem.***

A trillion is not a problem? You are hilarious. All the debt graduates face combined with not being able to find work upon graduation is not a problem? Most Americans feel it is a problem.

I guess you are over with Obama and Blankfein today. They need more immigrant to go to college so to sell more debt. The same thing they did with the minorities with mortgages. Jeesh you don't have clue. The reason this country is owned.

Here's the problem with college debt and the securities the flim flamers are dealing in.

http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans[url]
http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/2012/10/03/student-debt-affects-generations-of-americans

you are confusing two things. student loan debt with student loan debt instruments. you implied there was going to be a problem with the latter. i pointed out i do not agree. if you want to change the subject, fine but do not imply i am the clueless one. i would agree with you that student loan debt is a big issue. one that i feel people should be concerned with.

OH when students stop paying loans, or kids cut back on going to college due to cost of tuition (a direct result of the back side slimey "instruments" business you're refering to) you don't think the loan debt instruments business will suffer? Substitute college debt instruments for "mortgage backed securities" and you'll have your answer. DOH, people stop paying on the front side the back side blow up.

Why do think Blankenfeild is over with Obama talking about immigration.... he wants the bodies so that the paper can be created. All those illegals need to go to college. More paper, more debt, more instruments with which to deal. Same as they did in writing mortgages. Flim flam, one paper business to the next. When one side fails the otherside fails. Same a ponzi. I though you knew about finance.



You are out of it. Like most. Can't connect the dots.

Yes i cannot connect the dots. good job exposing my ignorance in finance.


you are assuming, because you are clueless, that all the debt is used to create debt instruments. it is not. so its not dollar for dollar as you imply. it is a very small market and not widely held. being clueless, i am confident you do not even understand what i'm saying but thats ok, i am posting for the edification of the others reading

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[OHCHUTE 0]

Of course the instrument would't equal the net of the debt. Why would anyone buy debt instrumnet at face value of the debt dollar for dollar? I see you're not getting this.

[weekender 0]

Quote

Of course the instrument would't equal the net of the debt. Why would anyone buy debt instrumnet at face value of the debt dollar for dollar? I see you're not getting this.

You missed my point which means you doot even understand the argument you are trying to make. Very little student loan debt is securitized into a debt instuments. Unlike the mortgage debt where a large amount was securitized. its been established you are clueless on this topic but now I'm doubting your reading comprehension. My point was not at all complicated.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante