Fianna Fail's actions are tantamount to murder

Fr0g

MaceFace wrote: »

They asked late one night for a guarantee because if they didn't get it by the opening of business in the morning they fully expected a run on Anglo which would cause the bank to fail.

No bad thing in my opinion they could have covered the other retail banks with the guarantee.

Again none has given a clear and logical reason why Anglo was included and then shortly afterwards nationalized.

Liam Byrne

Denerick wrote: »

Plus the Labour proposal to nationalise the banks would send us hurdling back to the 1980s

Despite the fact that this pretty much happened anyway ?

MaceFace wrote: »

Come on now, you know it didn't happen like this.

How can I possibly "know", when FF didn't bother their arses to record the minutes of the meeting so that we could "know" whether or not everything was above board ?

MaceFace wrote: »

The government were duped by the people whose job this was support to be to know the facts and the details.

If you're "duped" by a salesman in your job, and it costs your company €70 billion (and counting), do you get to keep your job ?

I can't speak for everyone, but I'd much prefer to have politicians who aren't that easily "duped".

Mind you, I'd also prefer to have ones who don't try and do their own "duping".

IrishTonyO

Fr0g wrote: »

How about close the banks for two days and have a good old fashioned think about it rather than be hustled into putting the nation in hock for 400 billion euros.

Contrary to popular belief the guarantee was not well received. Alastair Darling had a fit about it.

!

The reason Alastair Darling had a fit about it was that it would draw depositors from English banks to Irish ones

Fr0g

MaceFace wrote: »

Come on now, you know it didn't happen like this.

Actually it pretty much did

MaceFace wrote: »

Do you honestly think they knew they would end up nationalising Anglo & INBS, and having minority stakes in BOI and possibly majority in AIB?

Yes it had been discussed by many commentators prior to the GFC

MaceFace wrote: »

the auditors went in and examined the books and said that Anglo were only facing something like 2 billion in losses, not the 20-25b that appears more likely today.

Were these the same auditors that looked the other way when Seanie and Fingers were swapping billions back and forth?

MaceFace wrote: »

There was an entire system including the head of the central bank and the financial regulator that allowed this cover up to happen.

True

MaceFace wrote: »

The government were duped by the people whose job this was support to be to know the facts and the details.

Not true. There were enough rumours doing the rounds they would have to have been on another planet not to know what was going on.

Fr0g

IrishTonyO wrote: »

The reason Alastair Darling had a fit about it was that it would draw depositors from English banks to Irish ones

Yes in fact someone (the son a well known banker?) sent an email to a financial institution in England inviting them place deposits in their bank because it would be covered by Irish taxpayers.

Denerick

Fr0g wrote: »

How about close the banks for two days and have a good old fashioned think about it rather than be hustled into putting the nation in hock for 400 billion euros.

Contrary to popular belief the guarantee was not well received. Alastair Darling had a fit about it.

NAMA a logical solution? We are buying debt at a valuation determined by the government with an extra bit added on for LTEV because of course as soon as this little recession is over property prices are going to shoot right back up to where they were in 2006.

The banks are being nationalised by stealth, little by little. In fact when payment came due for the guarantee we were paid with bank shares!

1980's? you wish!

The only reason Darling had a fit about it was because he couldn't do the same to the massive UK banking system and because he worried of a deposit flight to Ireland. Read between the lines mate.

danman

Denerick wrote: »

The only reason Darling had a fit about it was because he couldn't do the same to the massive UK banking system and because he worried of a deposit flight to Ireland. Read between the lines mate.

Did the UK not follow Ireland with a bank guarantee of thier own?

I might be wrong, but did France and Germany gaurantee thier banks too?

IrishTonyO

danman wrote: »

Did the UK not follow Ireland with a bank garantee of thier own?

I might be wrong, but did France and Germany garantee thier banks too?

there was a limit on the amount guaranteed by the UK and no limit in Ireland. I think the limit in the UK was initially 35,000 and then raised to 50,000

Tea drinker

danman wrote: »

Did the UK not follow Ireland with a bank guarantee of thier own?

I might be wrong, but did France and Germany gaurantee thier banks too?

Wasn't Rabo always state guarunteed?

Fr0g

Denerick wrote: »

The only reason Darling had a fit about it was because he couldn't do the same to the massive UK banking system and because he worried of a deposit flight to Ireland. Read between the lines mate.

Yes, I know. I am merely decrying the assertion that the guarantee was met with international approval. Darlings reasons for being against it are irrelevant in this context.

IrishTonyO

Fr0g wrote: »

Yes, I know. I am merely decrying the assertion that the guarantee was met with international approval. Darlings reasons for being against it are irrelevant in this context.

Well besides Darling who was against it as it would hurt British interests who else was against it???

Fr0g

Well at the time Europe was trying to come up with a coordinated approach to the growing problem. Our guarantee kind of scuppered that.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/certainideasofeurope/2008/10/is_this_irelands_idea_of_reven

A new Irish government guarantee of €400bn (£313bn) to protect 100% of savers' funds in big Irish banks has prompted a backlash in Europe.

We forced other countries to follow suit.

http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1223302629.01/

German Chancellor Angela Merkel was one of the move's strongest critics of Ireland's go-it-alone plan.

I think the problem is you are probably listening to Pravda/RTE/FF who promptly declared it to be a stroke of genius that had the rest of Europe struck in awe of the sheer dazzling brilliance that is FF and BL.

I remember the following morning after it was announced Gerry Ryan had Harry Crosbie on talking about it. They actually thought that this move had saved the country and more importantly the property market. They were gushing at BL having saved humanity from certain doom. Harry said he was going call all his mates back from the US and tell them (referring to the property boom) "It's back on!"

I kid you not.

MaceFace

Fr0g wrote: »

Well at the time Europe was trying to come up with a coordinated approach to the growing problem. Our guarantee kind of scuppered that.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/certainideasofeurope/2008/10/is_this_irelands_idea_of_reven



We forced other countries to follow suit.

http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/1223302629.01/



I think the problem is you are probably listening to Pravda/RTE/FF who promptly declared it to be a stroke of genius that had the rest of Europe struck in awe of the sheer dazzling brilliance that is FF and BL.

I remember the following morning after it was announced Gerry Ryan had Harry Crosbie on talking about it. They actually thought that this move had saved the country and more importantly the property market. They were gushing at BL having saved humanity from certain doom. Harry said he was going call all his mates back from the US and tell them (referring to the property boom) "It's back on!"

I kid you not.

Europe come up with a coordinated approach? When has Europe ever reacted with haste on any matter? What were we to do? Shut downt the country for a few months while the bureaucrats debated about what should be done and in the end have a solution that was most suitable to Germany?

And since when are Gerry Ryan and Harry Crosbie the experts in the matter? What does it matter what they think?

Fr0g

MaceFace wrote: »

Europe come up with a coordinated approach? When has Europe ever reacted with haste on any matter? What were we to do? Shut downt the country for a few months while the bureaucrats debated about what should be done and in the end have a solution that was most suitable to Germany?

And since when are Gerry Ryan and Harry Crosbie the experts in the matter? What does it matter what they think?

2 points were made

1 the perception that BL knows what he is doing and has saved the country

2 The bank guarantee was met with approval

I have disproved both points

I did not suggest closing down the country for a few months i said that closing the banks for 2 days was an option that could have given the government room to breathe and come up with a solution. Instead they were hustled into a very last minute kludge. i.e guarantee everything including deposits, debts, bondholders, subordinated bondholders etc. Despite having 2 years to formulate a plan B should the worst case scenario happen.

We will pay for their "ostrich" approach for decades.

I threw in that little anecdote about HC/GR to show how economically ignorant are the people in positions of influence. Like it or not GR does have influence over peoples opinions and he is a mouthpiece for FF. HC and his developer buddies had enough influence to bankrupt an entire country. No mean feat.

It is a lesson not to trust or listen to people with a vested interest. That is all.

bijapos

Fr0g wrote: »

i said that closing the banks for 2 days was an option that could have given the government room to breathe and come up with a solution. Instead they were hustled into a very last minute kludge. i.e guarantee everything including deposits, debts, bondholders, subordinated bondholders etc.

17 March 2008. Banks here closed for a day and were done over on the London Stock Exchange. Anglo's stock fell about 15% on that day alone. Dunno if it would have worked to close them for two days.


This said the decision to guarantee everything was crazy. I agree with you on that. Should have guaranteed depositors up to a certain level and others such as credit unions. But it looks like he was steamrollered and did not take advice from the ECB on this.

We also have to remember that people like McWilliams were in favour, as did FG. Thought it was a crazy idea at the time, remember lying in the bed and hearing it at 7 on Morning ireland, gut instinct was that it was wrong.

Fr0g

bijapos wrote: »

17 March 2008. Banks here closed for a day and were done over on the London Stock Exchange. Anglo's stock fell about 15% on that day alone. Dunno if it would have worked to close them for two days.

True but by 29th Sept 2008 the banks were effectively finished anyway. my point is that they should have let Anglo go. the majority of the bailout money and the loans being transferred to NAMA are Anglo related. Billions of tax payers money shovelled into a bottomless pit for no return and no benefit

We would be in a much stronger position now if we had cut loose the deadwood and concentrated our efforts on saving BOI and AIB and the other retail banks.

Saving Anglo was in effect saving FF and friends of FF. (Quinn is the single biggest depositor in Anglo) it was the developers bank.

While we borrow 20b a year the bankers have gotten their pensions and most have kept their jobs, the quangos are still in place the TDs still have their big salaries. The waste continues. Unemployment still rises businesses are still closing. Brian Lenihan has done nothing about this. His job is to make sure that we can continue borrowing money to maintain the illusion that the country is still afloat. If he can keep doing this until 2012 and keep paying public sector wages he will have done his job and the next government can make all the hard decisions and suffer the fallout of the overwhelming national debt.

By then the bondholders will have decided that the emperor has no clothes and it will all go Greek.

Fr0g

bijapos wrote: »

We also have to remember that people like McWilliams were in favour, as did FG. Thought it was a crazy idea at the time, remember lying in the bed and hearing it at 7 on Morning ireland, gut instinct was that it was wrong.

McWilliams idea was not the same as what was implemented. He was basing it on the Swedish model. They nationalised their banks and flushed out all the banking officials that were responsible for the crisis. This restored confidence at home and abroad. Very different indeed.

Fr0g

This is going slightly OT just to back up the HC/GR connection

The point village is a HC development

http://ireland.archiseek.com/news/2006/000266.html

"Already we are in negotiation with anchor tenants as well as a number of hotel chains. We are planning to start signing contracts with a host of retail chains over the coming months," explained Harry Crosbie, Chairman, Point Village Ltd.

and here is the man himself:

http://www.pointvillage.ie/images/GERRYRYAN2007.jpg

robbed from the Gerry Ryan thread. Gerry loves his double entendres so he does.

jmayo

Everyone always tend to mention Anglo when they talk about which bank should have been let fail but what about Irish Nationwide ?

Now to all those who think the sun shines out of lenny ars* (especially the ffers, the bankers and the would be economists),
can somebody please give me a reason why we are putting billions into IN ?

This is an institution that was run as a personal bank by fingelton for his cronies (stand up ex minister for finance and EU commissioner charlie mcgreedy and take a bow with your 110% mortgage).

Please tell me how systemic it was/is ?

scr123

scr123 wrote: »

Wasnt aware till last November sites like Politics.ie and Boards.ie existed. Logged on as user to P.ie and had three great months taunting the ABFF till they ganged up on had me banned. They give but cannot take it. Then logged on here and made a few posts but was threatened by a Mod for no reason other than retaliating to personal abuse. Have not bothered for a while now as its the same old crapology from people with nothing else but a chronic addiction to hatred of FF. Anyway it get boring boring talking to the wall.
However, this thread is the most disgusting I have come across anywhere in the hatred of FF. Its pointless attacking the ABFF as in the case of P.ie I would surely be banned. Can get around the banning but for goodness sake if free speech is denied to one section of political life whats the point.

Anyway, can I just say I get down on my knees every day and thank the lord the ABFF did not win the 2007 election because for certain we would have 700000 to 800000 unemployed now and the soup kitchens would be all over the country !!

Friday night and the LLS is poor so browsing sites. Just browsed Politics.ie and it has a thread lamenting the lack of balance, essentially its about the lack of FF people contributing. They say its 10 to 1 against FF user numbers, I have no doubt its at least 100 to every one FF user. In last few weeks have noticed the site is extremely boring and all they are doing is carving up the Ministers positions after the next election.
Point I am making of course is that my above post is absolutely correct and more so in that this site for days now has not had the trace of a FF supporter. I honestly think its sad such a situation has arisen and I blame it entirely on that fanatics crushing the interest of those who want intelligent balanced debate. I also have to suspect the Mods on these sites share some responibility. How can people get any sort of satisfaction from preaching to the converted in every post ?

The Volt

scr123 wrote: »

Friday night and the LLS is poor so browsing sites. Just browsed Politics.ie and it has a thread lamenting the lack of balance, essentially its about the lack of FF people contributing. They say its 10 to 1 against FF user numbers, I have no doubt its at least 100 to every one FF user. In last few weeks have noticed the site is extremely boring and all they are doing is carving up the Ministers positions after the next election.
Point I am making of course is that my above post is absolutely correct and more so in that this site for days now has not had the trace of a FF supporter. I honestly think its sad such a situation has arisen and I blame it entirely on that fanatics crushing the interest of those who want intelligent balanced debate. I also have to suspect the Mods on these sites share some responibility. How can people get any sort of satisfaction from preaching to the converted in every post ?

Fianna Fail support has dropped drastically and rightfully so. You want to talk about imbalance then what about the blatant flaming that the Labour Party gets in the media every time they start do reasonably well support wise?

Fanatics crushing the interest of those who want intelligent balanced debate? Tell me this, what about the Fianna Fail government crushing the unity of the ordinary people of this country?

Scofflaw

scr123 wrote: »

Friday night and the LLS is poor so browsing sites. Just browsed Politics.ie and it has a thread lamenting the lack of balance, essentially its about the lack of FF people contributing. They say its 10 to 1 against FF user numbers, I have no doubt its at least 100 to every one FF user. In last few weeks have noticed the site is extremely boring and all they are doing is carving up the Ministers positions after the next election.
Point I am making of course is that my above post is absolutely correct and more so in that this site for days now has not had the trace of a FF supporter. I honestly think its sad such a situation has arisen and I blame it entirely on that fanatics crushing the interest of those who want intelligent balanced debate. I also have to suspect the Mods on these sites share some responibility. How can people get any sort of satisfaction from preaching to the converted in every post ?

A couple of pointers for you may help - first, don't comment on moderation on thread - if you have a problem with moderation, report it. The same goes for problems with other posters - 'retaliation' will only result in infraction or bans.

Second, more substantive contributions to the debate might be better at provoking 'intelligent balanced debate' than complaints about the lack of support for your preferred viewpoint.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Fr0g

jmayo wrote: »

Everyone always tend to mention Anglo when they talk about which bank should have been let fail but what about Irish Nationwide ?

It (INBS) seems to have been flying under the radar with all the attention focused on Anglo. Lenny seems intent on saving all the banks at any cost even if it cripples the economy for decades.

http://www.tribune.ie/business/news/article/2010/apr/04/bailouts-will-cost-taxpayers-12bn-in-annual-intere/

Taxpayers face an ongoing €1.2bn annual interest bill for the money dropped into Anglo Irish and Irish Nationwide