Log in

View Full Version : Capitalist Religous Man wins Nobel



Capitalist Lawyer
16th October 2006, 19:20
Communists reported upset.....


Mullen: Peace Prize winner brings hope
By Holly Mullen
Tribune Columnist
Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:

A war plods on in Iraq. North Korea toys with a nuclear weapon. Here in our backyard, Democrats and Republicans slug it out for 24 more days in a prizefight for Congress.
What a relief it is to breathe in, tune out that violence if only for a few minutes, and consider the healing power of the Nobel Peace Prize.
As to this year's winner - Muhammad Yunus - Utahns who know the Bangladeshi economist and humanitarian have waited patiently for his turn to come. Yunus and his bank's influence reach all the way to Utah, and quite significantly. The quiet American-educated Muslim is a close friend of academics and social activists.
"I've waited for years for this man to win the Nobel Prize," says Scott Leckman, a Salt Lake City surgeon, 2000 Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate and longtime advocate for the poor. His voice breaking with emotion, Leckman said Friday: "Yunus is one of the great souls of the planet. This is truly about a nice guy finishing first."
Yunus, 66, shares the Nobel with the Grameen Bank, which he founded in a desperately poor village in Bangladesh in 1976. The concept of microlending ($50 to $100 U.S. currency per loan) fuels Grameen's engine. The bank lends money to the poorest of the poor, with no collateral requirement.
In 30 years, the microlending model has caught on in poor neighborhoods in Chicago, Los Angeles, and even with a group of struggling Latino businesswomen in Utah County. BYU students have been schooled in the concept by Marriott School of Entrepreneurship Dean Ned C. Hill and Warner Woodworth, professor of social entrepreneurship.
Yunus began his odyssey after watching a woman named Sophia weave a bamboo stool. She told him she earned 2 cents a day. She recounted how the women in her village had to buy bamboo from a trader who took the stools to market at a price he fixed. Yunus loaned Sophia and 41 other women $27 of his own to build a business. And so it went.
Conventional wisdom held that the poor are lazy, stupid and, certainly, unreliable credit risks. Yunus believed that access to credit would build the poorest person's self-worth. In turn, the money would be paid back. If it sounds like rusty old socialism, hang on. His genius lies in blending concepts of various economic models. The bank loans money on an individual basis, but only if the borrower joins a group of four or more. No one can be blood-related and each must agree to help the others succeed.
The loan repayment rate is nearly perfect. According to the Grameen Web site, 6.6 billion entrepreneurs have borrowed from the program. Ninety-four percent of the bank belongs to the borrowers; 97 percent of them are women. The government owns the remaining 6 percent. Borrowers operate under rules they imposed on themselves - a constitution, if you will - meant to instill social and economic discipline. It's called "The Sixteen Decisions."
Those guiding principles might strike the average wage-earning American as quaint, almost cute. But the rules are life-affirming to the mostly female borrowers (whom Yunus observed pay their loans off more quickly than men. They also tended to spread their prosperity among their entire family, while men tended to spend it on themselves).

Among the Sixteen Decisions:

"Prosperity we shall bring to our families."
"We shall not live in dilapidated houses. We shall repair our houses and work toward constructing new houses as soon as possible." We shall not take dowry at our sons' weddings, nor shall we give any dowry at our daughters' weddings."

"We shall build and use pit latrines."

Yunus' last visit to Utah was in July 2005. He networked with BYU students and with Utah members of RESULTS, a worldwide grass-roots organization determined to end poverty and hunger.
"Yunus is changing the world, and it started with one small observation from a woman weaving a stool," Leckman said.
So there it is. We live in a world where money too often goes hand-in-hand with bloodshed, fraud and conflict. What a concept Muhammad Yunus offered: That money can also bring peace.

Rhyknow
16th October 2006, 19:47
Egads! A capitalist doing something beneficial for humanity... well bugger me with a tentpeg and call me charlie! Pat yourself on the back, a capitalist turned out to be human after all

Whitten
16th October 2006, 20:04
Originally posted by patton+Oct 16 2006, 04:57 PM--> (patton @ Oct 16 2006, 04:57 PM)
[email protected] 16 2006, 04:48 PM
Egads! A capitalist doing something beneficial for humanity... well bugger me with a tentpeg and call me charlie! Pat yourself on the back, a capitalist turned out to be human after all
I know 99.9999999% we just rob the poor now we got this guy giving us a capitalsit a bad name. [/b]
Dont worry, we wont bring it up.

JazzRemington
17th October 2006, 01:59
Who ever said that capitalists wouldn't be philathropists?

izquierda80
17th October 2006, 02:05
The problem isn't individual capitalists, who can actually be good natured human beings and are not necessarily working against the interests of workers, but actually the system itself and its practical consequences for the world at large and how it degrades the value of human life.

Individuals can be respected, but the system deserves nothing of the sort.

black magick hustla
17th October 2006, 02:07
rockefeller was the biggest american philantropist ever

that didnt mean he didnt deserve a bullet in the temple though

AlwaysAnarchy
17th October 2006, 04:11
well if this ONE dude is doing something good for humanity then good for him!

That doesnt change anything about capitalism as the SYSTEM though. But whatever, to each his own...

Orange Juche
17th October 2006, 18:58
Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 09:05 PM
The problem isn't individual capitalists, who can actually be good natured human beings and are not necessarily working against the interests of workers, but actually the system itself and its practical consequences for the world at large and how it degrades the value of human life.

Individuals can be respected, but the system deserves nothing of the sort.
Kind of like what Chomsky said in "The Corporation," that while these individuals could be really good people, their institutional role is still abhorrent.. like a slaveowner who was a nice guy and treated his slaves well... his role in society was still abhorrent.

Guerrilla22
17th October 2006, 19:29
What that guy was doing is simply refomism, handing out/loaning money to the poor will change nothing, real change can only happen when the working class are the ruling class.

Capitalist Lawyer
22nd October 2006, 21:57
Originally posted by [email protected] 17, 2006 06:29 pm
What that guy was doing is simply refomism, handing out/loaning money to the poor will change nothing, real change can only happen when the working class are the ruling class.
Nothing will change eh?


their institutional role is still abhorrent

A corporation that provides food or technology to people is still considered evil in your eyes, right?

thisguyisatotaljerk
23rd October 2006, 11:57
Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2006 06:47 pm
Egads! A capitalist doing something beneficial for humanity... well bugger me with a tentpeg and call me charlie! Pat yourself on the back, a capitalist turned out to be human after all
He was just an aberation.

Personally, If I were him, I would be sure to charge a hefty interest rate like 65% like Brutus did and reduce my debtees to a state of perpetual peonry. I would then use the proceeds of their labor to buy a massive estate and commence lording it over everyone.

See, I am the reason your communism cannot work!

Ol' Dirty
23rd October 2006, 17:43
There are wonderful people of all ideologies, be they liberal, communist, conservative or even (ghasp! :o ) fascist.

MKS
23rd October 2006, 21:32
The noble winner actually established small "micro" banks from which the poor could draw small loans in order to procure farming tools, food, etc. He actually expanded capitalism, in my opinion he did nothing to actually solve the problem which is Capitalism, therefore he's not deserving of any recognition. Like most "philanthropists" or charity workers they never ask why the situation is they only try to heal the victims, which to me is self-serving and actually perpetuates the greater crime. It is the difference between treatment and cure. But what should we expect from the Capitalist elite; of course they will reward their own.

Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor
24th October 2006, 01:23
Oh my. The Nobel Peace Prize. Certainly all one has to do is look at the past recipients to know the quality this man must possess ... or rather, the lack of it.

Vinny Rafarino
24th October 2006, 04:50
Originally posted by [email protected] 16, 2006 11:47 am
Egads! A capitalist doing something beneficial for humanity... well bugger me with a tentpeg and call me charlie! Pat yourself on the back, a capitalist turned out to be human after all
What?

Being "human" is loaning money to individuals that will only be able to pay the interest on the loan every month?

Face it, no one sets up a savings and loan company out of the "goodness of their heart"; they do it to make money. That being a fact, I personally find it intolerable to feast of the poor's sense of pride and guilt to ensure those monthly cheques make it right to the this fat bastard's wallet.

If this pile of shit really wanted to "help the poor" in Bangladesh he would have given them the million plus dollars he received for winning the Nobel "peace" prize.

Fat chance, I'm sure that cash is neatly tied up in other "investments".

A little company called "Ferrari" comes to mind. :lol:

That and the local strip clubs of course.

colonelguppy
24th October 2006, 04:54
hell thats what i'd spend it on. actually no, strip clubs are lame i'd probably just get a shitload of guitars.

theraven
24th October 2006, 05:09
chances are a good portion of the moeny he won will go to his bank.

thisguyisatotaljerk
24th October 2006, 10:29
Originally posted by Vinny Rafarino+October 24, 2006 03:50 am--> (Vinny Rafarino @ October 24, 2006 03:50 am)
[email protected] 16, 2006 11:47 am
Egads! A capitalist doing something beneficial for humanity... well bugger me with a tentpeg and call me charlie! Pat yourself on the back, a capitalist turned out to be human after all
What?

Being "human" is loaning money to individuals that will only be able to pay the interest on the loan every month?

Face it, no one sets up a savings and loan company out of the "goodness of their heart"; they do it to make money. That being a fact, I personally find it intolerable to feast of the poor's sense of pride and guilt to ensure those monthly cheques make it right to the this fat bastard's wallet.

If this pile of shit really wanted to "help the poor" in Bangladesh he would have given them the million plus dollars he received for winning the Nobel "peace" prize.

Fat chance, I'm sure that cash is neatly tied up in other "investments".

A little company called "Ferrari" comes to mind. :lol:

That and the local strip clubs of course. [/b]
:lol: Ah that's a good one.

This guy is gonna get really really rich on the interest generated from lending some poor fool $20 to buy a donkey and mule.


If this pile of shit really wanted to "help the poor" in Bangladesh he would have given them the million plus dollars he received for winning the Nobel "peace" prize.

Actually, welfare doesn't work as there is never any incentive to invest it wisely. One of the reasons this guy got the prize was that he realised if you loan money based on reputation you build self-esteem and an enterprising spirit and that money actually gets used to do something productive.

Capitalist Lawyer
24th October 2006, 17:47
Face it, no one sets up a savings and loan company out of the "goodness of their heart"; they do it to make money.

Naww, really?

And because of this "greedy bastard's" desire to "make money" for himself and his enterprise, he is advertantly (and inadvertantly, i.e. the "invisble hand") helping others to make money for themselves.

It's the pillar of capitalist thought of course.

An individual's pursuit to improve his own self-worth will end up improving others' as well.

Vinny Rafarino
24th October 2006, 20:07
Originally posted by Confused Jerk+--> (Confused Jerk)Ah that's a good one.

This guy is gonna get really really rich on the interest generated from lending some poor fool $20 to buy a donkey and mule.[/b]

No you ignorant little scab, the cat is going to "get really rich" lending thousands upon thousands of "poor fools" money to buy a "donkey and a mule".


white trash trucker

And because of this "greedy bastard's" desire to "make money" for himself and his enterprise, he is advertantly (and inadvertantly, i.e. the "invisble hand") helping others to make money for themselves.


Now you're being a bit more honest.

So we agree that this prick's true objective here is to produce interest based revenue from individuals that don't even have a pot to piss in.

How very white of him. :lol:

In any case this is really an old scam you're latching on to here my mulleted trucker friend. Amadeo Giannini did the very same thing with the individuals that no San Fransican bank would even dream of lending money to, poor immigrants and such, and turned Bank of Italy into Bank of America; all on the interest gained from using guilt to get poor people to repay the loans they got to purchase their "mules and donkeys".

Capitalist Lawyer
25th October 2006, 04:29
No you ignorant little scab, the cat is going to "get really rich" lending thousands upon thousands of "poor fools" money to buy a "donkey and a mule".

Oh the horrors! Lending people money so that they can buy things that are of necessity?!

What's your advice to them? Have them steal from others?


white trash trucker)


mulleted trucker friend.

I'm not necessarily white, not necessarily trash, defintely not mulleted, and I'm not a trucker.


So we agree that this prick's true objective here is to produce interest based revenue from individuals that don't even have a pot to piss in.

No douchebag, they do now have a "pot to piss in" and many other means for survival and opportunities thanks to this prick in question.


; all on the interest gained from using guilt to get poor people to repay the loans they got to purchase their "mules and donkeys".

Yes, that's how the banking industry survives and thrives.

Glad to see that you're catching on.


Now you're being a bit more honest.

Honesty has nothing to do with it, it's all about stating the facts.

Individual gain serves the common good.

Janus
25th October 2006, 08:12
Yes, that's how the banking industry survives and thrives.
Right, it's still a business; that means if the loans are not profitable, the bank will cut them off. So there's only a small chance that a borrow is going to make much out of it.

thisguyisatotaljerk
25th October 2006, 12:52
Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2006 07:12 am

Yes, that's how the banking industry survives and thrives.
Right, it's still a business; that means if the loans are not profitable, the bank will cut them off. So there's only a small chance that a borrow is going to make much out of it.
Vinny Rafarino


No you ignorant little scab, the cat is going to "get really rich" lending thousands upon thousands of "poor fools" money to buy a "donkey and a mule".

No he's not. Some of his loans are a little as $1. But let's say he makes thousands of loans for $20. Let's also assume 10% interest.

5000loans*$2=$25,000

Jeez, he's really rich making a hypothetical 25 grand a year! What a Robber Baron! I mean this guy might just be able to rent a flat for that kinda dosh! Speaking of Robber Barons, I feel I have another thread up my expensive suede sleeve...

Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor
25th October 2006, 15:01
You're white, Capitalist Laywer. Don't try and pretend you aren't since it comes through quite clearly in your posts.