A few Questions??

Cazbob

HI all, I read alot on this site and dont say alot. So on this occasion, I would like to ask, one or two silly questions.;) So please be nice

What would happen if we the people decided not to bail out the banks??

Would it mean we would not get any loans ?? (which has already happened and we as a society would have to learn to save and work a little harder, wait a little longer for something which is not a necessity)

I know shop's and other business's use cr to get goods. Why not pay for it as you get it??? Do we really need 50 mars bars looking at us in the face in every little shop we go into ?? Most of the time its the paper, milk and bread. Why Cr??

Why are we putting the health , and eduction of our children, ourselfs at so much risk ?? Is it so we can get a loan for a trip to spain, which will take you 6 months to pay off ?? Why not save it??

I am really confused we have enjoyed the last 10 years, all of us have had a little extra, some might think some more than others, but now we have to think. Do we allow the people (who people voted for) who have spent a long time trying to hide there mistake's, to continue on trying to put things right (if that is what they are doing)?? Which they dont seem to be doing. We will be paying alot more out of our pockets by the end of the year, and what will next year hold for us ??

Myself and my neighbour , looked at each other today, while saying if they do the same next year how do we pay our mortage?? By cutting the shopping bill down to 50 euro a week (oh this is for four people its at 65 now) , and the usal, no phone, no phone watch, no broadband, cut the christmas savings to 5 euro a week. Then we said together,

WHAT CAN WE DO ??? This is the most important question WHAT CAN WE DO?? Do we like typical Irish people say, " sure we will cope" or the latest " sure its everywhere now"

I have never been so ashamed, embarressed of this goverenment.

My 90 year old gran said to me today,

" alot of men and women died to free this country and now alot of free men and women have made us prisoner again"


Thanks xoxo

gurramok

We could of let Anglo Irish go to the wall as they have no importance, just to construction. The others were too big to fail, our economy would have collapsed if they did.
Its terrible but the banks got us by the you know what on this so it looks to me they are trying to add all the bad debts to the national debt which means you and I and our children will pay more in taxes to service that national debt.

What can we do? Balance the public finances and at the same time invest heavily in export oriented services and manufacturing instead of property.

And there is no confidence in that as we have FF along with a poor opposition to try to reinvent our economy.

gnxx

Good points/questions.

I can never understand the concept of creating a "bad bank". Surely they would be better investing in a brand new "good bank".

The banks are private entities, let them sort out their own mess or nationalise them.

I fear that you correctly predict that "hiding mistakes" maybe a strong motivation with the current administration. Why have the Golden Circle remained anonymous. Why have we not seen the various "reports" relating to Anglo and NAMA etc.

With the government, the corruption was bad. The incompetence is worse. You are spot on with your statement -- they are an embarrassment.

BroomBurner

I've been thinking a lot more on the possible collapse of the banks and I have to say, I would have preferred to see a couple of them fail. Just let it happen organically, everything would eventually right itself without the need for government intervention.

It would have been interesting to see a private enterprise that has been living beyond it's means failing. A lot of people here go on about personal responsibility and how those people that borrowed more than they were being paid deserve all they get now that they're in trouble. Shouldn't this be applied to the banking sector also?

The banks borrowed and loaned out mre money than they actually had available. They trusted so hard in the types of funds that were built on nothing. They invested in such complex investment portfolios that when they're explained in normal English, even the most average of Joe Soaps would question the schemes merits and the pitfalls would be obvious.

They f*cked up, so let them fall.

hallelujajordan

BroomBurner wrote: »

I've been thinking a lot more on the possible collapse of the banks and I have to say, I would have preferred to see a couple of them fail. Just let it happen organically, everything would eventually right itself without the need for government intervention.

It would have been interesting to see a private enterprise that has been living beyond it's means failing. A lot of people here go on about personal responsibility and how those people that borrowed more than they were being paid deserve all they get now that they're in trouble. Shouldn't this be applied to the banking sector also?

The banks borrowed and loaned out mre money than they actually had available. They trusted so hard in the types of funds that were built on nothing. They invested in such complex investment portfolios that when they're explained in normal English, even the most average of Joe Soaps would question the schemes merits and the pitfalls would be obvious.

They f*cked up, so let them fall.

While most people will agree with the sentiment (I don't, by the way) . . the argument to let the banks fail is just not realistic. . A failure of the banking sector will result in a failure of the economy . . . will result in a cessation of foreign investment, an inability (on the governments part) to borrow money, an inability to pay public sector salaries (hospitals,schools,gardai???) massive increases in unemployment (both in the public and private sector) and a complete breakdown in Irish society. .

Why are the banks being propped up throughout the world. . . Because it is that important to ensure they dont fail !

Boskowski

There is only one outcome with this NAMA thing. We all know it, the politicians know it, we know they know it and they know we know it. And still we have to do this charade thing in the media where our politicians are trying to tell us that 'we' actually acquired an asset. My arse.

My understanding of this is as follows:
Bank took huge risks by funding massive property developments or making investments in international papers that are also based on same. The property bubble burst and these loans and investments aren't worth a thing. Now the banks are strapped for cash and their refusal/inability to keep the cashflow alive becomes a problem for the economy.
So 'we' decided to buy the toxic papers of them for a ridiculous price so that 'the banks' can go back to their usual business of being parasites. Also we hope that these papers regain some value over time and all these billions aren't lost forever. Ye right.
I think we should have let the banks sit on their toxic waste - seems only fair to me - and let them go bust if needed. The money saved could have been used to fund a state bank that is able to keep the cashflow/economy alive itself. Then the taxpayer ('we') would have acquired real assets instead of rubbish and it would have been a lot cheaper too.

Now we have taken over the risk - which at this point can't be called a risk even - to put the banks back into a position to make real profits again with manageable risks. While we have all the risk and the debt. Should have been the other way around.

If there ever was a time when the proverb 'profits are privatized, losses are nationalized' was a real fit, now is the time. It's the biggest conn job ever and it has been pulled off publicly. Fair play.

hallelujajordan

realcam wrote: »

I think we should have let the banks sit on their toxic waste - seems only fair to me - and let them go bust if needed. The money saved could have been used to fund a state bank that is able to keep the cashflow/economy alive itself..

Question (I don't know the answer . . ) : Your logic is based on this alternative suggestion. . is this real ? Is it really the case that the money being saved could have been used to set up a national bank with no toxic debt . . and that this model could have been used globally ?

Boskowski

hallelujajordan wrote: »

Question (I don't know the answer . . ) : Your logic is based on this alternative suggestion. . is this real ? Is it really the case that the money being saved could have been used to set up a national bank with no toxic debt . . and that this model could have been used globally ?

Ah well, I'm just a big lefty by heart and also I'm not an expert in state economy, but in my opinion while market matters are often made sound very complicated, most of the time they are not. Nobody could actually explain to me yet why exactly these institutions are 'too big to fail'. And I did try to understand using financial market publications/papers etc. It's been thrown out there and it seems nobody dares to question it. Maybe someone here can.

But it's obvious to me (although all our politicians will tell us it's much more complicated ) that we took the bad papers off the banks - this will soil our budgets for many many years - and we get nothing in return but this 'they were too big too fail'. The whole dribble about these 'assets' being assets and the money isn't really lost - who believes that? Do you?

Actually I predict a NAMA tribunal

hallelujajordan

realcam wrote: »

But it's obvious to me (although all our politicians will tell us it's much more complicated ) that we took the bad papers off the banks - this will soil our budgets for many many years - and we get nothing in return but this 'they were too big too fail'. The whole dribble about these 'assets' being assets and the money isn't really lost - who believes that? Do you?

Actually I predict a NAMA tribunal

No I don't believe it and quite agree that the toxic debt will never turn good. . . however I really don't know if there was an alternative. . . could the banks have been allowed to fail without causing a subsequent economic meltdown ?

BroomBurner

Just let it happen, let this "economic disaster" happen. Allow the banks to fail and then rebuild from scratch.