Guess whos the worlds biggest debter??

jdpl28

as a ratio of GDP

http://www.cnbc.com/id/30308959?slide=1

Sea Sharp

that's been discussed in depth before.

jdpl28

well excuse me!!!

sorry just blew my mind when i saw it there... Felt I just had to share it with people.

Time Magazine

I have almost no interest in financial economics, but that figure is closer to "wrong" than "misleading" as far as I know.

Toiletroll

It is a mis-leading and inaccurate report.

eamonnm79

It was not incorrect.
The external debt figure matches exactly with the CSO figures.
However due to Irelands massive base of multi national hedgefunds and other multinational institutions in the IFSC it makes our external debt per head look massive.
According to many on this site the IFSC debts are not covered by the government guarantee however that has been disputed by others.

So we can say about half of the external debt should never have to be repaid by Irish citizens. In saying that, even at half of that figure, its still massive (boarderline bankrupt)

It would be more interesting to see what country has the largest levels of personal dept per capita.
I have a feeling we would be fairly close to the top of that list too however.

Time Magazine

http://www.tribune.ie/business/news/article/2009/may/03/anger-over-cnbc-survey-that-exaggerated-irish-debt/

Blackjack

eamonnm79 wrote: »

According to many on this site the IFSC debts are not covered by the government guarantee however that has been disputed by others.

IFSC debts are definetly not covered by the Government Guarantee.

eamonnm79

Blackjack wrote: »

IFSC debts are definetly not covered by the Government Guarantee.

A poster called amacca made the following comment that was not refuted.
"but does the older deposit protection scheme (ie. deposits guaranteed up to 100k or is it 40k) not apply to some foreign owned banks with operations here.

I thought banks like halifax (hbos/bosi) and ulsterbank (rbs) came in under older irish deposit protection scheme which is still in operation.

I know that NIB (danske bank) comes in under the danish deposit protection scheme but was sure the older deposit protection agreement with banks was also still valid in the case where an institution is not part of the guarantee scheme that protects all deposits not matter what the amount."
If anyone wants to do so now please feel free.
In other word there are some doubts as to which banks foreign banks are covered and to how much they are covered.

As someone else pointed out later however if it actually came to that the game would already be up.

brianwalshcork

I'd imagine that the main message that CNBC want to get across from this is that, by this particular measure, there are 14 countries in a worse position than the US.

It's meaningless without proper analysis, it might as well be a tabloid headline.

Blackjack

eamonnm79 wrote: »

A poster called amacca made the following comment that was not refuted.
"but does the older deposit protection scheme (ie. deposits guaranteed up to 100k or is it 40k) not apply to some foreign owned banks with operations here.

I thought banks like halifax (hbos/bosi) and ulsterbank (rbs) came in under older irish deposit protection scheme which is still in operation.

I know that NIB (danske bank) comes in under the danish deposit protection scheme but was sure the older deposit protection agreement with banks was also still valid in the case where an institution is not part of the guarantee scheme that protects all deposits not matter what the amount."
If anyone wants to do so now please feel free.
In other word there are some doubts as to which banks foreign banks are covered and to how much they are covered.

As someone else pointed out later however if it actually came to that the game would already be up.

Please confirm what exactly it is you mean then by IFSC Debts.
Do you mean the Deposit Guarantee Scheme or the Government Guarantee Scheme for Credit Institutions.

There are 6 Banks who's deposits are guaranteed by the Government's guarantee scheme. Allied Irish, Bank of Ireland, Anglo Irish Bank, Irish Life and Permanent, Irish Nationwide Building Society and the Educational Building Society.

No other banks or debts are covered, other than those listed above.

amacca

Again not entirely sure but I think the older deposit protection scheme I was referring to related only to a list of high street banks and therefore would not be relevant to institutions like state street, citi bank, bank of new york who administer funds from the ifsc concerning mainly overseas investors. (who Im sure wouldnt be here at all if it wasnt for our low low business tax)

So if we are liable for one of these going bust I dont think it will be because of the older guarantee. Having said that though the bank of new york outfit is a joint venture between themselves and AIB so maybe the scheme does apply there?

Presume though, with these operations there is an ivestor compensation scheme the investment bank is signed up in its home country to in the event of it not being able to meet its liabilities if it goes bankrupt that has nothing to do with the irish government. I would be interested if anyone could clarify?

Obviously though Im not talking about compensating investors if the value of their shares go down, (dont want to spark any outrage, they took the risk with their money and they can enjoy the upside and put up with the downside) just a scheme to compensate investors if the whole outfit winds up and their investment is still worth something.

eamonnm79 wrote: »

A poster called amacca made the following comment that was not refuted.
"but does the older deposit protection scheme (ie. deposits guaranteed up to 100k or is it 40k) not apply to some foreign owned banks with operations here.

I thought banks like halifax (hbos/bosi) and ulsterbank (rbs) came in under older irish deposit protection scheme which is still in operation.

I know that NIB (danske bank) comes in under the danish deposit protection scheme but was sure the older deposit protection agreement with banks was also still valid in the case where an institution is not part of the guarantee scheme that protects all deposits not matter what the amount."
If anyone wants to do so now please feel free.
In other word there are some doubts as to which banks foreign banks are covered and to how much they are covered.

As someone else pointed out later however if it actually came to that the game would already be up.

nesf

eamonnm79 wrote: »

It was not incorrect.
The external debt figure matches exactly with the CSO figures.
However due to Irelands massive base of multi national hedgefunds and other multinational institutions in the IFSC it makes our external debt per head look massive.

It's misleading/incorrect simply because while institutions in the IFSC do have large debts extrapolating this into Ireland as a nation being in debt is disingenuous. These companies aren't part of the clearing system of banks in this country, aren't covered by the guarantee and they could collapse without bringing down the "system".

eamonnm79

nesf wrote: »

It's misleading/incorrect simply because while institutions in the IFSC do have large debts extrapolating this into Ireland as a nation being in debt is disingenuous. These companies aren't part of the clearing system of banks in this country, aren't covered by the guarantee and they could collapse without bringing down the "system".

Misleading perhaps in so far as much of our external debt is not guaranteed by the tax payer. Much of the external debt of other nations are not either and therefore it is interesting to measure external debt per capita. But it was 100% factually acurite as per the CSO figure on our national external debt. and therefore was factually correct.

I for one do not see a huge difference between external debt and internal debt. They both have to be paid. So the comment above about the motives from brian walsh are probobly spot on.

ionix5891

eamonnm79 wrote: »

Misleading perhaps in so far as much of our external debt is not guaranteed by the tax payer. Much of the external debt of other nations are not either and therefore it is interesting to measure external debt per capita. But it was 100% factually acurite as per the CSO figure on our national external debt. and therefore was factually correct.

I for one do not see a huge difference between external debt and internal debt. They both have to be paid. So the comment above about the motives of the article are probobly spot on.

paid by whom?

eamonnm79

ionix5891 wrote: »

paid by whom?

The people/entity in debt, unless they default/file for bankruptcy

ionix5891

eamonnm79 wrote: »

The people/entity in debt, unless they default/file for bankruptcy

you do know that "debt" on alot of these entities books is nothing more than an accounting double entry trick

the personal mortgage/credit card and the governemnt debts are what matter to us the citizens of the state

all these companies washing money from Ireland or placing $large_amounts on the value of the Intellectual assets nothing to do with us

as many people pointed out this article is very shallow and and paints a wrong picture of what actually is happening

nesf

eamonnm79 wrote: »

Misleading perhaps in so far as much of our external debt is not guaranteed by the tax payer. Much of the external debt of other nations are not either and therefore it is interesting to measure external debt per capita. But it was 100% factually acurite as per the CSO figure on our national external debt. and therefore was factually correct.

Here's the issue, Ireland's external debt is horribly "biased" by the size of our financial sector relative to the rest of the economy. It's factually accurate to say our external debt is very large but it is misleading to present it without explaining where most of it coming from (i.e. one small section of the economy employee wise is responsible for a large proportion of our external debt).

eamonnm79

nesf wrote: »

Here's the issue, Ireland's external debt is horribly "biased" by the size of our financial sector relative to the rest of the economy. It's factually accurate to say our external debt is very large but it is misleading to present it without explaining where most of it coming from (i.e. one small section of the economy employee wise is responsible for a large proportion of our external debt).

Agreed.
However even if our number was only half of the $540k ($270K) per person its still a very high very worrying number.
I believe I remember you saying Iceland was bankrupt at $300k per person.
The way the CSO bundle the external dept into catagories it is difficult to makke out our actual external debt ie the debt per capita without the multinational enron style accounting exersizes thrown in.