Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should Anglo Irish Bank have been allowed to fail?

Options
  • 28-04-2009 7:40am
    #1
    zootroid
    Registered Users Posts: 784 ✭✭✭


    I'm just wondering what everyone's opinion was on Anglo Irish Bank's nationalisation. Now, I don't know much of the details of what has gone on, but it will have cost the taxpayer at least 1.5 billion. Could this money have been put to better use? Will the nationalisation cost the taxpayer even more in the future?

    As I said, I don't know too much about it, but considering that BOI and AIB are the main high street banks, I think that these should have been the focus of any bailout, and Anglo should have been allowed to fail.

    1.5 billion could be better invested elsewhere, and it would send a signal to the other main banks that the government has a limit as to how much money they will provide to bail them out.

    Anyone else have an opinion on it?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,826 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    So by what means would we have helped the developers then?


  • Options
    #3
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,316 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    kbannon wrote: »
    So by what means would we have helped the developers then?
    By buying their property at boom level prices minus 5% ("So they feel the pain and have a fair valuation"), oh wait...


  • Options
    #4
    snubbleste
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31,117 ✭✭✭✭snubbleste


    Has this not been done to death already before & after the event?


  • Options
    #5
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,316 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    snubbleste wrote: »
    Has this not been done to death already before & after the event?
    Beating a dead horse is much easier then a live one though, the dead one don't run away.


  • Options
    #6
    serfboard
    Registered Users Posts: 4,708 ✭✭✭serfboard


    This might be good as a poll. My vote would be yes.

    However, what would you do with depositors (presuming they hadn't all withdrawn their money)?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Dob74
    Registered Users Posts: 1,049 ✭✭✭Dob74


    serfboard wrote: »
    This might be good as a poll. My vote would be yes.

    However, what would you do with depositors (presuming they hadn't all withdrawn their money)?


    +1
    The despoistors would have been insured up to 100k.


  • Options
    #8
    REDZ
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭REDZ


    not systemic, should have been let fail.
    As for the depositors, Anglo had the best rates, maybe because it was a risky bank.


  • Options
    #9
    eamonnm79
    Closed Accounts Posts: 459 ✭✭eamonnm79


    Dob74 wrote: »
    +1
    The despoistors would have been insured up to 100k.

    Yes! Yes! Yes!


  • Options
    #10
    lmimmfn
    Registered Users Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭lmimmfn


    it should have been left to fail, the money could have been put to better use instead of a stinking endless sess pit.

    Deposit accounts were already guaranteed, there is 0 reason for the government to do what they did other than to hide all the corruption that existed but is now common knowledge anyway


  • Options
    #11
    zootroid
    Registered Users Posts: 784 ✭✭✭zootroid


    snubbleste wrote: »
    Has this not been done to death already before & after the event?

    I took a look back over the Irish economy forum and couldn't find a thread about it. I also think the announcement of NAMA, and the debate of NAMA vs nationalisation might alter peoples opinion on it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    EastWallGirl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 153 ✭✭EastWallGirl


    As Anglo Irish are not a cheque clearing bank, they shoul dof been allowed to fail. But as its cheques were all cleared by AIB...that is probably where the problems started. Was it AIB that went to the goernment and said they had to do something?

    By not allowing the bank to fail it sets a bad precedent to private business.

    On the topic of Anglo Irish did I hear ont he radio correctly that they are sponsoring some opera? Should they not be focusing on other things?


  • Options
    #13
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users Posts: 17,205 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    Should Anglo Irish Bank have been allowed to fail?

    Yes


  • Options
    #14
    ART6
    Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    An analogy (I like analogies!).

    Let's suppose you are a director of a public company, and an important service provider to your company comes to you and tells you that they are in deep financial trouble and will be unable to continue to serve you unless you (a) guarantee their investors funds and (b) take on their bad debts. After questioning you discover that they don't know what their debt level is, but that it is at least equal to your company's annual income and could be several times more. You can imagine two courses of action. You could tell them that you can establish a service provision company in your own group without needing to guarantee anything, and can do it at a fraction of the cost they are suggesting, or you can attempt to rescue them in the way they ask. If you take the latter course you will clearly be acting with such recklessness and irresponsibility as a director that your shareholders will almost certainly sue you and the Registrar of companies will disbar you as a director for years if not life. You might even find yourself a nice comfortable cell somewhere as a guest of the state.

    This is only an analogy because, of course, the Brians are not directors are they? And as politicians they have immunity from prosecution for gross incompetence and only have to listen to their shareholders once every five years.


Advertisement