No to Nama Protest March this saturday 2pm

schween

schween wrote: »

Right. So instead of paying about €90bn for NAMA, we let the banks collapse and pay €400bn?

No. Firstly, this guarantee needs to end - We can't pay it anyway so it's pretty much an empty promise that any astute investor will be able to see through. Secondly, it will still cost us, but if we nationalise the banks then we will be the ones who control how the money is invested and lent. It will still cost us, but having full control over the banks will get this economy moving again - the banks as it stands have no incentive to start lending.

A few years down the line when the banking sector is back on track (And by back on track I mean everyone at the top now should be fired and there should be investigations into the decisions they've made) we can float the banks and get our money back.

All NAMA says to the banks/investors/developers is that they did nothing wrong in making their terrible, greed-driven decisions and that we, the lower classes, can always be counted on bailing them out so they can keep their big profits at our expense.

Stark

Darragh29 wrote: »

Isn't that exactly what we were told when they introduced the state guarantee for the banks, that it would do all of these things that you are now saying NAMA will do???

They were wrong when they said the state guarantee for the banks would result in credit flowing again to businesses and many many jobs have been lost since... Now we are expected to believe that where the guarantee has failed, NAMA will succeed???

As they were also wrong when they said that capital injections into the banks would get credit moving again.

ninty9er

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Lovely paradox there. You support them lending more to Carroll to keep his companies afloat until NAMA takes over the burden, yet also admit he is a goner - AKA will be unable to pay back squat.

If AIB believes that given 15 years to turn around the group and possibly wind up company 1,2 and 3 then it will lend to the group, I see no issue. Banks do sometimes:rolleyes: make these offers conditional strange as that may seem:rolleyes:.

I'm also assuming that you are correct in saying that banks had agreed to lend to Zoe, I've been too busy with work to be keeping a full track on the Zoe story.

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

No. Firstly, this guarantee needs to end - We can't pay it anyway so it's pretty much an empty promise that any astute investor will be able to see through.

A few years down the line when the banking sector is back on track (And by back on track I mean everyone at the top now should be fired and there should be investigations into the decisions they've made) we can float the banks and get our money back.

The difference between NAMA and defaulting on the guarantee is that defaulting = IMF, NAMA doesn't.

Of course we also have such a great record with stock market floatations despite all of the best advice from economists and every Tom, Dick and Harry.

hobochris

ninty9er wrote: »

The difference between NAMA and defaulting on the guarantee is that defaulting = IMF, NAMA doesn't.

Of course we also have such a great record with stock market floatations despite all of the best advice from economists and every Tom, Dick and Harry.

IMF isn't all bad, granted there are some bad points to it, but it would do the things this government seems to Spinless to do.

no to NAMA

Richard Boyd Barrett gave a good speach today. Here it is on youtube, sorry for poor quality.
Lets hope we have a better turn out next week

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXjbGolD6f4

silverharp

no to NAMA wrote: »

Richard Boyd Barrett gave a good speach today. Here it is on youtube, sorry for poor quality.
Lets hope we have a better turn out next week

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXjbGolD6f4

oh God will popular protests always have to be hijacked by these champagne socialists. Funny I remember Barrett from St Michaels (Ailesbury Road) and Claire Daly from DCU (Accounting and Finance).? <Rant Over>
I just think these protest wll die on the vine if they are led by the fringe left.

cbweb

schween wrote: »

Right. So instead of paying about €90bn for NAMA, we let the banks collapse and pay €400bn?

I like Maths, figures and detail, so I wonder on what basis you give the figure of €400bn?

Lenihan says he will give costing of nationalisation next Wednesday! Given he can't even stand over his own figures until NAMA gets going, in fact until some day in the future the NAMA( Not Another Mess Again ) project is concluded with the sale of all assets, it should be fun to see him compare like for like! http://colmbrazel.wordpress.com latest post I look at some figures.

NAMA is flawed every way you happen to look at it. Its a method to create our very own Lehmans with money wasted from your pocket! Damage to our economy through its inept meddling and lack of business logic will be severe and long term way in excess of €400 billion.

Its an anchor rather than a life boat.

rgds

Colm

Don't forget about the Labour protest planned for 1pm tomorrow outside Leinster House.



Be there or be screwed.

Hope some of you were there today.

And this Saturday again, we will be marching. Meeting at the Garden of Remembrance from 1, marching from 2. I reckon the crowd will be at least twice the size of the last one. So grab a few friends and come on down.


I wonder how bad the news will be after todays Dail...

maynooth_rules

I look forward to the day we act like the French when we are completly and utterly screwed like this by the Government

murfie

when is the vote taking place on NAMA?

noodler

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I speak for people with common sense.

The best economic brains in Ireland have endorsed NAMA.

Some have said it's the best worst scenario but most including Dr Alan Ahearne have said that its the best option.

That's good enough for me.

Apart from the 46 academics from the top institutions across the country who signed the Irish Times letter a few weeks ago?

I think the price we pay should be lower but NAMA or a NAMA-like plan is a necessity. People advocating against it without a prompt alternative are the ones living in la-la land.

Letting the banking situation in this country go on as it is is not economically viable, nor is doing nothing.

noodler

noodler wrote: »

Apart from the 46 academics from the top institutions across the country who signed the Irish Times letter a few weeks ago?

I think the price we pay should be lower but NAMA or a NAMA-like plan is a necessity. People advocating against it without a prompt alternative are the ones living in la-la land.

Letting the banking situation in this country go on as it is is not economically viable, nor is doing nothing.

I have yet to come across someone who actually advocates doing nothing.

Kama

I have, its called laissez-faire or let the markets decide. It used be a very fashionable ensemble, but out of fashion this season...

Thing is, even if Nama or something Nama-like is necessary (I'm not convinced) it cannot be overseen by Fianna Fail.

The 14th century Arab philosopher Ibn Khaldun once wrote that on hiring servants, one should be careful, as there were 4 possibilities; that they could be honest or corrupt, and competent or incompetent. The honest and competent would be hired by greater princes, and the dishonest and corrupt should be avoided or sacked, leaving the choice between honest and incompetent, or corrupt but competent.

FF have had their hegemony in this country on the basis that they might be corrupt, but they were competently corrupt, since the Haughey era of 'sure he's a crook, but you'd need a crook to run this country' at least. This last shower, with their inherited political mantles, don't seem to have this justification. Letting FF do something of this scale, with state money and the property sector, and not expecting graft and 'criminality' reminscent of tribunals seems about as rational as expecting foxes to mind chickens for the weekend.

People advocating against it without a prompt alternative are the ones living in la-la land.

The rhetoric of 'there's no alternative' is what people say when they either can't or won't imagine anything else, similarly [url='http://www.breakingnews.ie/business/chambers-ireland-simply-too-late-for-nama-alternatives-425863.html]it's too late to do anything else'[/url]. Railroad the issue, pretend you're the only game in town, and shut down anyone who even mentions alternatives...


Getting back to the IPU:

Sean Kearns, National Co-ordinator, by email wrote:

To clarify, ·[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]we did not suggest there would be 50,000

·[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]we do not support all the issues of the other groups that participated, as we have no mandate for these.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] ·[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]We have made it clear to one particular group that their conduct was uncalled for, and it will not be allowed happen again.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT] ·[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The primary mandate we have is about NAMA, and we will participate in this Saturday’s 19th March, solely to voice this issue, and to continue to raise awareness of our organisation.

[/FONT]

Prizes for guessing 'particular group'?

SLUSK

I advocate laizzes-faire capitalism. Let it all crash down, and something new and better will rise out of the ashes like a Phoenix.

Kama

Well at least you're consistent, rather than a fair-weather supporter...established property interests whining for welfare after losing their money in a Ponzi scheme reminds me of the quote from Nader's dad, that 'capitalism will never die, because socialism will always be used to save it'.

Insert the prefix 'crony', and it suits the current situation quite appropriately...

SLUSK

Socialism for the rich is what Ireland is all about.

Liam Byrne

SLUSK wrote: »

I advocate laizzes-faire capitalism. Let it all crash down, and something new and better will rise out of the ashes like a Phoenix.

Considering the load of bollox that FF spouted about "not interfering with commercial decisions" in relation to Aer Lingus, IF they were consistent they'd do precisely that.

Better still, a "buy at current market value" approach (hitting the banks for their recklessness while still getting the crap off their books in order to salvage something) would be at least understandable.

But no - FF write blank cheques using OUR money and then make misleading speeches as if we'd been asked and had decided to agree to all this madness.

SeanW

Who is organising the protests tomorrow?

Kama

United Alliance Against the Cuts. Which basically means Swimmers, I'm guessing....

The Demonstration which assembles at the Garden of Remembrance at 1.p.m.on Saturday, is being organised by the United Alliance Against Cuts and is backed by the Unite Union, branches of SIPTU, People Before Profit, Socialist Workers Party, Sinn Fein, Socialist Party, Eirigi, numerous socialist and independent councillors including Clr. Bree, and a large number of community sector organisations and tenants associations.

There's a fair argument that the leftiness puts off the righty protestors, but since they didn't do the organization of making a protest happen, you can't really complain. Can't stand swimmers myself, but they do the legwork.

snollup

ninty9er wrote: »

I am a Fianna Fáil member

Shame on you.

looking forward to the march. Hope for a good turnout.

ei.sdraob

will SF hijack another protest for issues such as Lisbon which are irrelevant to NAMA

lostexpectation

http://pixelpipe.com/item/6fa88ec7-b140-47a4-bcba-af46386e48eb pphoto via @andfewflood about 1200 at parnell sq

lostexpectation

http://pixelpipe.com/item/0d97408e-5637-4d4e-be9f-dc2ab15a8d8f

MikeC101

lostexpectation wrote: »

http://pixelpipe.com/item/0d97408e-5637-4d4e-be9f-dc2ab15a8d8f

Huh, Sinn Fein turned up in uniform for this one.

MikeC101

Kama wrote: »

There's a fair argument that the leftiness puts off the righty protestors, but since they didn't do the organization of making a protest happen, you can't really complain. Can't stand swimmers myself, but they do the legwork.

This is very true. Unfortunately it also has the effect of "diluting" the impact of such marches, because they're easily dismissed as being nothing more than the same fringe that marches about everything out for another protest.

lostexpectation

if theres no nama protest there may well be a lisbon one or some other one

get over it

a cuts protest was organised for today

MikeC101

lostexpectation wrote: »

if thers no nama protest they'd may well be a lisbon one or some other one

get over it

I'll try to get over your lack of ability to use clear English certainly...

I have no idea what you're saying in the above sentence...

If there's no NAMA protest there would be a Lisbon one? Can you clarify what you mean?

What are you saying exactly?

I'm making a point that diluting a No to NAMA protest with the usual stuff that gets wheeled out at every opportunity weakens the impact of the protest, and makes it easier for the government to dismiss. I also suggest it puts off people from joining in who might have done so otherwise. Though maybe the numbers would be much lower without the SWP and assorted placard carriers.

Of course it doesn't matter one bit does it, as long as you get to push your agenda?

lostexpectation

http://img24.yfrog.com/i/rcze.jpg/

lostexpectation

MikeC101 wrote: »

I'll try to get over your lack of ability to use clear English certainly...

I have no idea what you're saying in the above sentence...

If there's no NAMA protest there would be a Lisbon one? Can you clarify what you mean?

What are you saying exactly?

I'm making a point that diluting a No to NAMA protest with the usual stuff that gets wheeled out at every opportunity weakens the impact of the protest, and makes it easier for the government to dismiss. I also suggest it puts off people from joining in who might have done so otherwise. Though maybe the numbers would be much lower without the SWP and assorted placard carriers.

Of course it doesn't matter one bit does it, as long as you get to push your agenda?

or maybe there just no real demand to physicaly protest nama, and your trying to find excuses for low turn out of these protests and blame a few leftwingers rather then the govenment