Irish Spring

Francis Murtagh

kupus wrote: »

Deluded. Seriously
Talent getting work. Seriously
Easily replaced. Seriously


real insightful, can you explain why the graduated are leaving in droves, can you explain the lost tax revenue that has to be made up by ......wait for it......
You.

Lets remove this yoke so that business will flourish, jobs will be created, tax revenues will increase.
I hate to think of anyone being forced to leave this country.
Do we all throw up our hands in the air and do nothing.?
Lets do something. A simple walk through the city can be a beginning.

jmayo

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I agree this is a great little country. But i believe the most vulnerable are being squeezed to make repayments on a loan which is not theirs.

But who exactly are the most vulnerable ?
Are they the ones in massive debt that they can never pay back ?
Are they the ones who are in massive debts that they feel they shouldn't have to pay back because banks were reckless in lending to them and besides their property is no longer worth what they borrowed for it ?
Or are they actually the ones who continue to try repay their debts ?
Or are the ones who are meant to face higher charges, taxes, etc because they are meant to cough up for the ones who can't be ars*d trying to repay their debts ?

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

That is why we should rise up. If this not apply to you,great. But this loan is stifyling growth in the Economy and more importantly it is squeezing the life out of probably a million people in this country through increased taxes and cuts in vital services.. Maybe the better off could see this and be willing to support them in their plight. WE will all benefit. People first, then businesses and finally Government.

What are you on about ?
Do you think that there is some loan that we can magically get rid of, yet continue to overspend and continue as if nothing has happened.
You should never have entered business if you don't grasp that one cannot continue borrowing to cover day to day spending.

Even if we never bailed out a single bank, we had to tackle our current spending deficit.
The bank debt makes our repayments long term unachievable and makes us a poor bet for borrowing on the open markets.
But with or without bank debt this country has had to cut it's overspending.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I agree. But the banks are a business like any other. I am only saying that they should take responcibility for their loans and not force the people of ireland to pay for there mistakes.

Isn't that statement flying in the face of the fact you want the individual borrowers to not take any responsibility for their loans ?
So to paraphrase your argument, the banks should pay for their mistakes in borrowing to lend, but the individuals shouldn't have to pay for their borrowing mistakes.

Are you saying that all the fault lies with the banks and by some miracle they should write off all the bad debts and lo and behold everyone lives happily ever after ?

Except you seem to fail to grasp one little bit of reality.
Because we, the Irish taxpayers present and future, now own most of our indigenous banks you are looking for the people of Ireland to pay for mistakes of other Irish people.
In my mind basically you are asking my kids to pay for your mistakes.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

And if we are being forced to pay, the least the Banks and the Government should do is write off all homeowner loans by the same amount.

Grand then, but please explain what recompense are you going to give to the taxpayers who don't have a homeowner loan to avail of this writeoff ?

I know I will be accused of me feinism, but why should my kids and I suffer so someone else gets to live in a fashion they can no longer afford ?
You are asking my kids to forego a future so that someone else can continue as if nothing happened.
Thanks.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

Take the case of a homeowner who took out a loan of 200,000 e and now finds themselfs in serios financial difficulties.
Thir Bank applies and gets a bailout of 100,000 euros from UCB etc. Maybe im simple, but that 100,000 euro is sitting in the bank as money has changed hands.( Or in a paper form )
The initial stress test indentified this loan. Why on earth does the bank not now writedown that loan to 100,000 and allow that housholder to keep their house and remorgage the balance of 100,000.
But no, that housholder is hit on the treble.
. Firstly the bank is refusing any level of dept forgivness and the housholder is stressed out of their head and living under the fear of re-possession.
Secondly that bailout of 100,000 is sitting in the bank, which the bank is using for its own end-and is not even lending it out.
Thirdly that housholder is being hit at every turn to pay for this bailout with stealth-taxes, increased rates of income tax, savage cuts in essencial area, especially in health.
And on top of this the Mean man in Bank of Ireland shows utter contempt in the Dail recently.
Time for us to say No!

One question.
Who is on the hook for that 100,000 that the bank got from the ECB ?
Who covers it's repayment or does it just magically get repaid by some mythical banker ?

BTW that fooker in Bank of Ireland should never have got the CEO's job.
The moron advised a property developer that blowing 400 odd million on property in D4 Dublin was a good idea even though any eejit could see he would never get the planning for the skyscraper he needed to build to ever hope to pay back the loans.
He is a prime example of how our much vaunted private education establishments can produce morons with little class.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

Thank you for your feedback. My situation in Fanore is a small part of who i am and sometimes experiences in life shape who you are. Sometimes you make mistakes in life but you never set out to do so.
The case i am making is dept forgiveness for stressed householders. This is not about me. I enclosed my own personal details for the sake of integrity and especially to show that i have no vested interest in this campaign.
That can be thrown at me, and will be. So be it. This is me.
In the end people will want to march to the Dail on Saturday week because they have something to say, just as you have something to say.. They are not following me. They are walking for themselves.
I do not believe i am on a rant. Every day i pick up the papers i see letters to the Editor, i see articles by respected economists saying the same thing. I am sorry but i think everyone is saying the same thing. That is why i have become frustrated. Even the Farming section in the Independent speaks of the same frustration.
We are unwittingly falling into the principal of "divide and conquer". We are all divided, all saying the same thing, but we are not coming together as one voice.All we need to do is "get together, right now" as the old John Lennon song goes! Seriously, that is what i am about. Can we all get together on Saturday week and show our Government and to the Troika that we have has enough.

No I am fitting into the category of looking after my own patch because no other fooker will.
If you and some of the other proponents of debt forgiveness have their way my kids will be paying for the house you own, all the while they won't have a chance in this country.

I did not borrow during the bubble, even though one institution claimed with my savings I could buy numerous rental properties with interest only leveraged loans.
The fact that some young fellow offered this caused me to wonder if most bank employees were shyters or complete eejits.

As for listening to economists I can drag out their musings from 5 or 10 years ago to show how deluded most of them were.
Granted some of them were warning of doom, but I still don't trust people who are pushing for debt forgiveness Irish style.

And as for the media, I always note how many of them have invested heavily in the property sector and thus have a vested interest in protecting or resurrecting some of that investment.

There is debt forgiveness and debt forgiveness.
The definition I believe you and most of it's proponents put on it, is that a portion of your debts are written off and you continue to enjoy the ownership of the asset/property.
Well for most of us who are the ones who didn't rush headlong into massive debt, but yet are expected to pay for this largesse that is a hard pill to swallow.
What incentive is their for a family who are paying off their debts to continue to bother if their next door neighbour gets to walk away from half of theirs all the while maintaining ownership of their property ?

For every hard pressed unlucky householder in massive debt, I bet I can show you one who either borrowed like a mad eejit for more property, rolled in other forms of debt into their mortgage, borrowed based on exaggerated earnings and bubble wages or has just refused to bother trying to pay back their debts.

Francis Murtagh

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

So basically you want the rest of us to take over your debt for you, whilst you continue to live in what is apparently your house.
And you want us to march on the Dail in support of this idea?

Lets get this firmly out of the way.
My motivation for doing this has nothing to do with my personal situation. This is who i am. I have been straight with you in that. How could i be so stupid to think that i would do this to have my own personal loan written off.?
The most obvious thing would be to say nothing of my own personal situation. But i feel it is important to be open about myself. People can judge me in that. And i am happy to let that happen. That information is in my first post, so people can judge me in that.
Thank you for your straightness.
But honestly it didn't even enter my head. I have provided this information for the sake of integrity.
You can judge me on that or not.
I am not asking anyone to march to get my loan written off.
People will march because they feel disenfranchised. Because they are not being listened to.
But my own situation has given me insight and empathy and provided life experiences that have shaped who i am. This includes my own experience with the Banks. This experience with the banks enabled me to say the things i say and gives me authority to speak the things i speak. Because it flows from my own experience and so i have this opinion which i have shared with you in my original post.
So i say,
say no to being saddled with this unjust yoke of 64,000,000,000 euro loan and all the emotional and financial effects this is having on the poorest of this land.

ArmaniJeanss

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

Lets get this firmly out of the way.
My motivation for doing this has nothing to do with my personal situation...

I do commend you as well for being so straight in your opening post, and giving so much pertinent information ; quite often this has to be wangled out of people.

But whilst you are not directly looking for your own loan to be written off, isn't it true that this would be a side affect of what you want? As I understand it you want the banks (effectively the rest of us) to write off the loans of people who made purchases/investments during the bubble, and now post bubble, are struggling for whatever reasons to maintain the repayments.
You would be a benificary of this yes?

Idbatterim

we are so broke that its predicted the Irish will once again be the top Christmas spenders in Europe this year!

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/well-be-europes-biggest-spenders-this-christmas-3287036.html

But who exactly are the most vulnerable ?
Are they the ones in massive debt that they can never pay back ?
Are they the ones who are in massive debts that they feel they shouldn't have to pay back because banks were reckless in lending to them and besides their property is no longer worth what they borrowed for it ?
Or are they actually the ones who continue to try repay their debts ?
Or are the ones who are meant to face higher charges, taxes, etc because they are meant to cough up for the ones who can't be ars*d trying to repay their debts ?

or is it the poorest households as according to Bernardo's today?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1114/barnardos-budget-poverty.html

Generalisation here, but the Irish having wealth and dirt cheap credit was like welcoming a famine village to a buffet!

JustinDee

kupus wrote: »

real insightful, can you explain why the graduated are leaving in droves

Thats actually quite easy to answer, although I don't think you'll like the answer. You can compare to an equally high time for emigration in the 1980s to see why (clue: too many)

Francis Murtagh

jmayo wrote: »

But who exactly are the most vulnerable ?
Are they the ones in massive debt that they can never pay back ?
Are they the ones who are in massive debts that they feel they shouldn't have to pay back because banks were reckless in lending to them and besides their property is no longer worth what they borrowed for it ?
Or are they actually the ones who continue to try repay their debts ?
Or are the ones who are meant to face higher charges, taxes, etc because they are meant to cough up for the ones who can't be ars*d trying to repay their debts ?



What are you on about ?
Do you think that there is some loan that we can magically get rid of, yet continue to overspend and continue as if nothing has happened.
You should never have entered business if you don't grasp that one cannot continue borrowing to cover day to day spending.

Even if we never bailed out a single bank, we had to tackle our current spending deficit.
The bank debt makes our repayments long term unachievable and makes us a poor bet for borrowing on the open markets.
But with or without bank debt this country has had to cut it's overspending.



Isn't that statement flying in the face of the fact you want the individual borrowers to not take any responsibility for their loans ?
So to paraphrase your argument, the banks should pay for their mistakes in borrowing to lend, but the individuals shouldn't have to pay for their borrowing mistakes.

Are you saying that all the fault lies with the banks and by some miracle they should write off all the bad debts and lo and behold everyone lives happily ever after ?

Except you seem to fail to grasp one little bit of reality.
Because we, the Irish taxpayers present and future, now own most of our indigenous banks you are looking for the people of Ireland to pay for mistakes of other Irish people.
In my mind basically you are asking my kids to pay for your mistakes.



Grand then, but please explain what recompense are you going to give to the taxpayers who don't have a homeowner loan to avail of this writeoff ?

I know I will be accused of me feinism, but why should my kids and I suffer so someone else gets to live in a fashion they can no longer afford ?
You are asking my kids to forego a future so that someone else can continue as if nothing happened.
Thanks.



One question.
Who is on the hook for that 100,000 that the bank got from the ECB ?
Who covers it's repayment or does it just magically get repaid by some mythical banker ?

BTW that fooker in Bank of Ireland should never have got the CEO's job.
The moron advised a property developer that blowing 400 odd million on property in D4 Dublin was a good idea even though any eejit could see he would never get the planning for the skyscraper he needed to build to ever hope to pay back the loans.
He is a prime example of how our much vaunted private education establishments can produce morons with little class.



No I am fitting into the category of looking after my own patch because no other fooker will.
If you and some of the other proponents of debt forgiveness have their way my kids will be paying for the house you own, all the while they won't have a chance in this country.

I did not borrow during the bubble, even though one institution claimed with my savings I could buy numerous rental properties with interest only leveraged loans.
The fact that some young fellow offered this caused me to wonder if most bank employees were shyters or complete eejits.

As for listening to economists I can drag out their musings from 5 or 10 years ago to show how deluded most of them were.
Granted some of them were warning of doom, but I still don't trust people who are pushing for debt forgiveness Irish style.

And as for the media, I always note how many of them have invested heavily in the property sector and thus have a vested interest in protecting or resurrecting some of that investment.

There is debt forgiveness and debt forgiveness.
The definition I believe you and most of it's proponents put on it, is that a portion of your debts are written off and you continue to enjoy the ownership of the asset/property.
Well for most of us who are the ones who didn't rush headlong into massive debt, but yet are expected to pay for this largesse that is a hard pill to swallow.
What incentive is their for a family who are paying off their debts to continue to bother if their next door neighbour gets to walk away from half of theirs all the while maintaining ownership of their property ?

For every hard pressed unlucky householder in massive debt, I bet I can show you one who either borrowed like a mad eejit for more property, rolled in other forms of debt into their mortgage, borrowed based on exaggerated earnings and bubble wages or has just refused to bother trying to pay back their debts.

Look i agree with a lot you have to say. It is unfair that those who did not borrow are now paying for the misdeeds of others. Maybe an extra tax allowance could be given to those like you. That would be just. But this is the mess we are in today. We will hopefully learn from out mistakes but i think there is no point looking back- we need to look at the mess we are in and do something about it. More reason i think to make a case that it is totally unacceptable for you to pay back this loan through increased taxes etc to the Banks. As i said, it is not your loan. What am i on about ? I'm trying to provide a means where people like you can protest about the unfairness of the present situation.
What alternative have you to offer? Do we just continue as we are, fumbling along with 460,000 out of work and the Economy about to go into recession again because the fiscal policies in Europe can only speak one language, and that is austerity.
That is what i am on about. That is what the French Prime Muinister is on about.
I totally agree that we need to look at the expenditure side, and in my own business, as you so rightly point out, when expenditure exceeds income your in serious bother. That is unless you can get loan approval to cover you through the cash flow problem. This country is no different. The management of our economy is a disaster. We are living beyond our means. We should only be relying on Bank loans to cover emergency situations, not for day to day spending. That surely should be the goal. Tighten up the ship for the storm. Make priorities on the spending side, cut everywhere there is wastage in the system. and there is plenty. Put peoples needs as the priority. And look at new ways to raise finance without depressing the economy further. Yes the Bank loan is not the only issue depressing the economy but it is the one which is most unjust. Yes it is taxing those who do not own it. In any other country that cause a revolution.
This is just my thing. I believe that with strong public support that something could be done that will make a difference on that 64,000,000,000 euros. For me that is to march and say, " I have had enough. "

hyperborean

kupus wrote: »

Deluded. Seriously
Talent getting work. Seriously
Easily replaced. Seriously


real insightful, can you explain why the graduated are leaving in droves, can you explain the lost tax revenue that has to be made up by ......wait for it......
You.

Can you provide me with the proof that graduates are leaving in their droves? Most of the emigrants I know were non graduates coming of the construction gravy train and headed for Oz or Canada to continue their profession.....

The total number of irish emmigrants 2006 to 20011 was 128,000. thats 25,00 a year. How many were graduates?

in 2009 less than 10% of graduates (circa 40,000) left our fair country, thats more than 90% of graduates staying.........

Myrddin

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

Id be very grateful for any feedback on this good or bad.

We're a far too lazy, greedy, selfish, ignorant & begrudging society to ever have a 'spring'.

Head The Wall

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

The case i am making is dept forgiveness for stressed householders. This is not about me. I enclosed my own personal details for the sake of integrity and especially to show that i have no vested interest in this campaign.
That can be thrown at me, and will be. So be it. This is me.

Sorry to burst your bubble but you do have a vested interest!

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

It is unfair that those who did not borrow are now paying for the misdeeds of others.

More reason i think to make a case that it is totally unacceptable for you to pay back this loan through increased taxes etc to the Banks. As i said, it is not your loan. What am i on about ? I'm trying to provide a means where people like you can protest about the unfairness of the present situation.

No you are trying to provoke a situation where people who didn't get caught up in the lending/easy credit scenario will end up paying for it even more than they already are as debt forgiveness doesn't make debt disappear it just moves it elsewhere and in Irelands case that means the taxpayer

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I totally agree that we need to look at the expenditure side, and in my own business, as you so rightly point out, when expenditure exceeds income your in serious bother. That is unless you can get loan approval to cover you through the cash flow problem. This country is no different. The management of our economy is a disaster. We are living beyond our means. We should only be relying on Bank loans to cover emergency situations, not for day to day spending. That surely should be the goal. Tighten up the ship for the storm. Make priorities on the spending side, cut everywhere there is wastage in the system. and there is plenty. Put peoples needs as the priority. And look at new ways to raise finance without depressing the economy further. Yes the Bank loan is not the only issue depressing the economy but it is the one which is most unjust. Yes it is taxing those who do not own it. In any other country that cause a revolution.

So you state here that you believe that the govt is spending too much and should cut it's costs but at the same time you want to lump even more costs on via debt forgiveness, it's twisted logic.

There's two sides in this discussion there's the people that have mortgages and loans hanging over their head and there are people that don't. I have yet to speak to someone in Ireland who didn't lose the run of themselves that thinks debt forgiveness is a good idea, everyone unequivocally agrees that it is a bad idea.

kupus

hyperborean wrote: »

Can you provide me with the proof that graduates are leaving in their droves? Most of the emigrants I know were non graduates coming of the construction gravy train and headed for Oz or Canada to continue their profession.....

The total number of irish emmigrants 2006 to 20011 was 128,000. thats 25,00 a year. How many were graduates?

in 2009 less than 10% of graduates (circa 40,000) left our fair country, thats more than 90% of graduates staying.........

^^FFS do I really have to answer this......

hyperborean wrote: »

more than 90% of graduates staying.........

Staying for what???

kupus

JustinDee wrote: »

Thats actually quite easy to answer, although I don't think you'll like the answer. You can compare to an equally high time for emigration in the 1980s to see why (clue: too many)

:rolleyes:Sarcasm dude, sarcasm

frankosw

kupus wrote: »

^^FFS do I really have to answer this......



Staying for what???

The dole?

Francis Murtagh

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I do commend you as well for being so straight in your opening post, and giving so much pertinent information ; quite often this has to be wangled out of people.

As you say any dept forgiveness has to be paid by you the taxpayer. So why are you just lying down to this and accepting it.? Why do you not say no to this. Come out on the street to protest on Saturday week. Why are you agreeing to bail out stressed home owners? You can do something, we can all do something. Listen, the Banks owned these loans, even the Banks which have been taken over. They still pay themselves obscene salaries..taken from your pocket. Come out and say no!
We bailed out the EU and they should be giving us major cuts in the capital and in the interest. The brainwashing in this country is unbelievable. I just want to give people an opportunity to speak their mind and most people on these boards feel to oppose me. Why ? I find it hard to believe. I suppose that explains why none are marching at present. But wait until an adverage of 3000 euros is taken from each household in the next budget. Then it will be too late. If we start now , we can i believe make a difference.
Anyway i am a romantic at heart, and i have a vision to see us making a difference by taking to the streets. That still burns within me.


But whilst you are not directly looking for your own loan to be written off, isn't it true that this would be a side affect of what you want? As I understand it you want the banks (effectively the rest of us) to write off the loans of people who made purchases/investments during the bubble, and now post bubble, are struggling for whatever reasons to maintain the repayments.
You would be a benificary of this yes?

No i do not want the "rest of us" to pay back this loan through increased taxes. I want the Government to put the greatest pressure on the Troika to reduce the burdens of this 64,000,000,000 euro loan. A loan which was taken out to save the EU at that time. This loan was taken out to protect the Bondholders of German and other European banks who at the time were quiet happy to bet on Ireland. That horse fell. So should those bondholders. At least they should have taken a hit.
And now we are paying the highest price with the highest interest on this Bailout. The least the Troika should do would be to apply a zero interest on the Loan, and write off a sizable part of this in recognition that we effectively bailed out the EU at that time.
Hello.
It will not happen unless we make serious noise.
Did you see the news tonight with a least 20,000 marching in Madrid. Did you see riot police bashing innocent people with batons protesting at the austerity measures. Will the Troika take that into consideration. Of course they will. Because if they continue with their austerity measures there will mass rioting and anarchy in the streets. Do i want that / No.
But civil right marches succeed. The Troika will be soft on these countries and continue to pat our Taoiseach on the head..Unless we take to the streets.We should be taking to the streets to say No too.

Someone mentioned that my bubble was burst. Sorry i am still very much alive
and well and more determined than ever. WE need people on the streets to say no.
Move on to the Dail to express your anger.
AS for my own personal loan, it peters into insignificance compared to the 64 billion Euros. And say we were to get a saving of 20 billion and a zero rate of interest on the balance repaid over say 40 years..that would be a deal worth fighting for. Would you march for that.?
I have been refused dept forgiveness. Would i be a benefit if dept forgiveness was allowed? I don't think so. As i say i have been refused. Mine is a commercial loan.
This is not about me. I feel i can do some little thing for my country.
Its about empowering those who are suffering under these unjust taxes to stand up and say NO. And in the process reduce the Troika Loan.

Head The Wall

Did you build your home with a commercial loan?

gerryo777

Head The Wall wrote: »

Sorry to burst your bubble but you do have a vested interest!




No you are trying to provoke a situation where people who didn't get caught up in the lending/easy credit scenario will end up paying for it even more than they already are as debt forgiveness doesn't make debt disappear it just moves it elsewhere and in Irelands case that means the taxpayer




So you state here that you believe that the govt is spending too much and should cut it's costs but at the same time you want to lump even more costs on via debt forgiveness, it's twisted logic.

There's two sides in this discussion there's the people that have mortgages and loans hanging over their head and there are people that don't. I have yet to speak to someone in Ireland who didn't lose the run of themselves that thinks debt forgiveness is a good idea, everyone unequivocally agrees that it is a bad idea.

The only people who seem to deserve a 'bailout' or 'debt forgiveness' in this country are bankers, developers and speculators.
As soon as it's mentioned for Joe Public the moral hazard brigade seem to be up in arms.
Now, that's twisted logic.
Punish the masses to look after the few!
A proper banana republic.

Godge

yore wrote: »

Your own experience with banks is a microcosm of the greater system. And no, I'm sorry but I think that there should be no debt forgiveness of people with assets. Because that means people with nothing are paying for others to have something for "free"

I am of the same mind. Debt forgiveness is ok if it is the residual left i.e. if the person sells their house, hands over their savings and investments and is still in debt, then there is the possibility of debt forgiveness, the alternative is bankruptcy.

Too many people think they can keep their big house with the designer kitchen and the big tv and get the rest of us to pay for it.

I don't begrudge anyone a big house or a Merc or a 56" plasma tv, just don't expect me to pay for it.

NIMAN

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I agree this is a great little country. But i believe the most vulnerable are being squeezed to make repayments on a loan which is not theirs. That is why we should rise up. If this not apply to you,great. But this loan is stifyling growth in the Economy and more importantly it is squeezing the life out of probably a million people in this country through increased taxes and cuts in vital services.. Maybe the better off could see this and be willing to support them in their plight. WE will all benefit. People first, then businesses and finally Government.

We are all being squeezed, and I hate this term 'the most vunerable'.

I and my wife both work and we are being squeezed with every Budget. We earn decent enough money, but the last 4 or 5 yrs since this crisis began we have seen a large reduction in take home pay. But thats ok if it helps the country get out of the mess its in.

But would you class us as 'the vunerable'? We are probably part of that group called the 'squeezed middle classes' who are reckoned to be taking the biggest hit in Ireland at present. If you get your loans written off, then more than likely it will be the likes of us who will be hit again to cover the cost. Debts don't just evaporate into thin air, they have to be repaid to someone somewhere. This 'debt forgiveness' term is a nonsense, debt is never forgiven, someone else just has to pay it, so you can understand why I am not mad to have tens of thousands of loans/mortgages all written off, because I will end up paying for them in some form or other.

If someone would be kind enough to pay off a part of my mortgage then I'll go out and spend more to help the economy, but no way I will get a write-down on my debt, as (God forbid) I was sensible and only took on debt I could manage, rather than turn myself into some sort of property mogul like many in this country.

Francis Murtagh

Head The Wall wrote: »

Did you build your home with a commercial loan?

No, but I gave it as security.

Scortho

NIMAN wrote: »

Can you give us a quick summary of how you expect the country to function with no money?

How will we pay the Gaurds, the doctors and nurses, the teachers, and all the other civil servants?

What do we do about all those thousands in this country who have to pay back money they willingly took from the banks to buy houses and now they can't afford to repay?

Ah sure we can barter.
Oh yeah I forgot, barter isnt used for a reason because they realised it was easier to carry a few coins around with you instead of a cow!

I think the OPs dream is to set up some kind of hippy Utopia where we sit on our arses all day and get stoned

Francis Murtagh

gerryo777 wrote: »

The only people who seem to deserve a 'bailout' or 'debt forgiveness' in this country are bankers, developers and speculators.
As soon as it's mentioned for Joe Public the moral hazard brigade seem to be up in arms.
Now, that's twisted logic.
Punish the masses to look after the few!
A proper banana republic.

I agree the banks use the excuse of "moral hazard" for not giving some degree of debt forgiveness. they use this excuse to wash their hands of the banking problem..I still say that the banks should give some degree of debt forgiveness for householders in a serious financial situation. I am not talking about speculators, but people who took out a loan to buy their home.

NIMAN

But how do you differentiate between those who took out a loan to buy a home and those who took out a loan to buy a property to live in for a short time and then hope to sell it on and make a killing?

and Francis, could you also answer my question as to who you think the 'most vunerable' in society are?

Scortho

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

The Government income is low because people are not spending which is another fallout of the bank's failure to give out loans.Also, people area afraid to spend because of the fear of further taxation caused directly by these same bank loans.There needs to be tight reins on expenditure,my comments on bankers and politicians pensions and salaries is the tip of the iceberg.

People arent spending to the same extent as they were BUT they are still spending money. During the BUBBLE people spent crazy amounts of money because their house had just increased in value by a hundred grand and they thought that they were rich as a result.
In order for tight reins on expenditure to take place, where do you propose we start?
Our two largest departments, spending wise Welfare and Health absorb virtually all of our taxation. So what do you propose we cut? Consultant wages while high, dont account for a massive amount of the health bill, when you take the entire into account.
So where do you propose we get 3.5 billion this year and next year, as this is required to close the current budget deficit.

Scortho

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I agree the banks use the excuse of "moral hazard" for not giving some degree of debt forgiveness. they use this excuse to wash their hands of the banking problem..I still say that the banks should give some degree of debt forgiveness for householders in a serious financial situation. I am not talking about speculators, but people who took out a loan to buy their home.

So who pays for this. As someone has to get their money back. As we own AIB and PTSB surely if we renegotiate these mortgages the tax payer will have to fund the difference.
Also out of curiosity during the boom, were you calling for the capital gains to be taxed on principal private residences during the boom?
After all surely this would be fair considering you now want the consenting adult purchaser to get a write down!

AlmightyCushion

Scortho wrote: »

So who pays for this. As someone has to get their money back. As we own AIB and PTSB surely if we renegotiate these mortgages the tax payer will have to fund the difference.
Also out of curiosity during the boom, were you calling for the capital gains to be taxed on principal private residences during the boom?
After all surely this would be fair considering you now want the consenting adult purchaser to get a write down!

He's going to say it should come from the bailout money even though that isn't what the bailout money is for

@Francis Murtagh - You should really read this post by Scofflaw (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81641894&postcount=30), it's a good read and should clarify a few things for you.

Idbatterim

So where do you propose we get 3.5 billion this year and next year, as this is required to close the current budget deficit.

I would be for surgically cutting welfare and bringing far more into the tax net... Pretty much undo everything spending wise that Fianna Fail did to buy each election!

Scortho

Idbatterim wrote: »

I would be for surgically cutting welfare and bringing far more into the tax net... Pretty much undo everything spending wise that Fianna Fail did to buy each election!

I'll kiss youre arse if this or any government would have the balls to do that.

Idbatterim

I'll kiss youre arse if this or any government would have the balls to do that.

no, not a chance in hell, unless things seriously deteriorate and they are left with no other option! they have waited long enough for power and will cling to it whatever the cost, the electorate are a mere inconvenience. Wouldnt be too shocked to see a FG / FF coalition next time round...

poeticseraphim

washman3 wrote: »

Excellent post Francis. As you can already see the main opposition are ourselves. many people have been completely and utterly brainwashed into believing T.I.N.A (there is no alternative)
Expect many attacks here from the various vested interests and government apologists who scan these forums, in an organised manner, for topics like this with the prime motive being to ridicule the poster.
Good luck with your brave campaign.

The main opposition is the lacking of economic literacy within ourselves.

The OP has to have a sense of humor. The post hardly meets the standards set out in the charter. And these days there are too many trying to rally a crowd for their own financial gain or rescue.
I don't apologize for the previous govt or this one. But this behavior is beyond silly.

Debt forgiveness is a last resort to ensure people don't fall into an insurmountable situation, the hole they cannot get out of.It is a tool to be used wisely. Or it makes matters worse.

As far as i know the money is used by the banks as collateral to keep them solvent. It likely the official amount needed is not accurate so they may be under collateralized. I don't know..Irish banks don't have a lot of SPARE credit to give. The banks are mostly paying depositors ..erm us....

The money is simply paying us out and the extra is used to keep the bank in the pink ..

meh I am no banker but at least i know my strengths.

Francis Murtagh

Idbatterim wrote: »

I would be for surgically cutting welfare and bringing far more into the tax net... Pretty much undo everything spending wise that Fianna Fail did to buy each election!

I would simply refuse to pay that 3.5 billion repayment to Troika. This is part 2 of a Loan taken out to stop Anglo , yes Anglo, going bust on that famous night.
Hello!
If our gov had the ba... To say No to this, there would be no need to have a budget next month.
We need to wake up and take to the streets and say
No to 3.5 billion of our money being paid over.
And No to the increased taxes we are all paying as a result.
This can be part one of our strategy .

If so one was to break into your house and steal 3.5 billion of your money, what would you do?
Would you drive the van for them as we'll.
Because that is what we are doing , driving the van for them, without even a fight.
Wake up! Speaking to myself!
Saturday week in O Connell street at 2pm can be a means where you begin to say no.
That is all I am saying since I put up this post ..

hyperborean

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I would simply refuse to pay that 3.5 billion repayment to Troika. This is part 2 of a Loan taken out to stop Anglo , yes Anglo, going bust on that famous night.
Hello!
If our gov had the ba... To say No to this, there would be no need to have a budget next month.
We need to wake up and take to the streets and say
No to 3.5 billion of our money being paid over.
And No to the increased taxes we are all paying as a result.
This can be part one of our strategy .

If so one was to break into your house and steal 3.5 billion of your money, what would you do?
Would you drive the van for them as we'll.
Because that is what we are doing , driving the van for them, without even a fight.
Wake up! Speaking to myself!
Saturday week in O Connell street at 2pm can be a means where you begin to say no.
That is all I am saying since I put up this post ..

Even without the banks lending to poor innocent lambs and then having the cheek to want a bailout when the lambs scatter and stop repayments on said loans we would still have a massive deficit?

The economy is not strong enough to support generous welfare and high PS pay and pensions.

Francis Murtagh

Godge wrote: »

I am of the same mind. Debt forgiveness is ok if it is the residual left i.e. if the person sells their house, hands over their savings and investments and is still in debt, then there is the possibility of debt forgiveness, the alternative is bankruptcy.

Too many people think they can keep their big house with the designer kitchen and the big tv and get the rest of us to pay for it.

I don't begrudge anyone a big house or a Merc or a 56" plasma tv, just don't expect me to pay for it.

I agree !

JustinDee

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I would simply refuse to pay that 3.5 billion repayment to Troika. This is part 2 of a Loan taken out to stop Anglo , yes Anglo, going bust on that famous night.
Hello!
If our gov had the ba... To say No to this, there would be no need to have a budget next month

You need to "have a budget" every year, the same as banks are actually necessary for a domestic economy to function. Note current stagnation? That's because there is no credit as Ireland is quite correctly nudged out of the banking industry. The country has a lot to prove now and if it wants back in, it has to show its worth and ability.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

We need to wake up and take to the streets and say
No to 3.5 billion of our money being paid over.
And No to the increased taxes we are all paying as a result.
This can be part one of our strategy .

If so one was to break into your house and steal 3.5 billion of your money, what would you do?
Would you drive the van for them as we'll

Your analogies are off, in my opinion. You would be more correct in saying comparing to somebody lending you money when you were in strife, then looking for you to show that a) you don't gamble it away any more and b) you'll stick to agreed repayment plan. If not then expect the bailiffs to enter the scene.

Saturday week at 2pm in town will be busy with a rugby international against Argentina, by the way.

Godge

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I would simply refuse to pay that 3.5 billion repayment to Troika. This is part 2 of a Loan taken out to stop Anglo , yes Anglo, going bust on that famous night.
Hello!
If our gov had the ba... To say No to this, there would be no need to have a budget next month.
We need to wake up and take to the streets and say
No to 3.5 billion of our money being paid over.
And No to the increased taxes we are all paying as a result.
This can be part one of our strategy .

If so one was to break into your house and steal 3.5 billion of your money, what would you do?
Would you drive the van for them as we'll.
Because that is what we are doing , driving the van for them, without even a fight.
Wake up! Speaking to myself!
Saturday week in O Connell street at 2pm can be a means where you begin to say no.
That is all I am saying since I put up this post ..

What 3.5 billion loan from the Troika?

Let us be realistic here. We have a budget deficit of 8.9% budgeted for this year. The only people willing to lend us money at anyway decent rates are the Troika.

If we tell the Troika to sing for their money, we have one option and one option only. Close the 8.9% gap overnight. That would require 20-30% cuts in public service pay and social welfare overnight. It would require a 10% increase in both rates of income tax and a reduction in personal tax credits.

The economy would take a hit as multi-nationals would reassess the reliability of our government's promises on corporation tax and IDA support. If we are not willing to pay our legal debts, why would we keep our promises to them would be their thoughts? No amount of reassurance would remove the doubts our actions created. So there would be a large hit on the economy.

jmayo

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

Look i agree with a lot you have to say. It is unfair that those who did not borrow are now paying for the misdeeds of others. Maybe an extra tax allowance could be given to those like you. That would be just.

How can you have a tax allowance on the one hand and yet use even more taxes to gift to people in debt ?
Forgive me, maybe I am a bit dim but if you spend more it usually means you have to gain more revenues.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

But this is the mess we are in today. We will hopefully learn from out mistakes but i think there is no point looking back- we need to look at the mess we are in and do something about it.

I am looking forward and I don't see why my kids should pay for someone elses fooking mess.
I don't mind if the tax hikes are used to keep schools open, to keep hospital beds open, to keep Gardaí on the street.
Note I did not mention the salaries and wastage in those services.

But I do mind when someone is basically suggesting I pay more tax so that some people, who for the most part over borrowed during a bubble, get both to walk away from their debts and keep their assets.

To my mind you are asking that my kids pay so someone else gets to keep their house, all the while probably making sure my kids never get a chance to get a house of their own in this country.

That is exactly what the public sector unions have ensured is going to happening in the public sector, where the cushy position of the older staff is ensured all on the backs of the new and future recruits.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

What alternative have you to offer? Do we just continue as we are, fumbling along with 460,000 out of work and the Economy about to go into recession again because the fiscal policies in Europe can only speak one language, and that is austerity.

This is a Europe/Eurozone wide issue and we are hopelessly screwed until someone in Germany cops on.

But we do need to streamline on own spending.
It is a bit rich to ask the German taxpayer to take a hit for us, all the while we continue to pay our public servants more than theirs.
Imagine asking a German doctor to pay more tax so that his Irish counterpart can continue to enjoy the priviledge of their higher salary.
And AFAIK that same situation exists across a lot of our publicly funded system all the way from Enda Kenny to a porter in a hospital.

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

I totally agree that we need to look at the expenditure side, and in my own business, as you so rightly point out, when expenditure exceeds income your in serious bother. That is unless you can get loan approval to cover you through the cash flow problem. This country is no different. The management of our economy is a disaster. We are living beyond our means. We should only be relying on Bank loans to cover emergency situations, not for day to day spending. That surely should be the goal. Tighten up the ship for the storm. Make priorities on the spending side, cut everywhere there is wastage in the system. and there is plenty. Put peoples needs as the priority. And look at new ways to raise finance without depressing the economy further.

Now you are beginning to talk a bit of sense.
Salaries and costs have to decrease if we are to try and trade out of this.
That has to start with the public sector since we cannot cover that without borrowing.
And to counter an often public sector argument I wholeheartedly agree the cost cutting and salary cuts also needs to come across into areas of the private sector in particular professional charges.

gerryo777 wrote: »

The only people who seem to deserve a 'bailout' or 'debt forgiveness' in this country are bankers, developers and speculators.
As soon as it's mentioned for Joe Public the moral hazard brigade seem to be up in arms.
Now, that's twisted logic.
Punish the masses to look after the few!
A proper banana republic.

So your argument is "I want a bailout since other people got one".
Who, in your world, is going to foot the bill for all this ?

BTW I don't agree with bailouts for any fooker.

I did agree with bailing out our two primary banks for systemic reasons.
But my idea of a bailout should have meant the entire top layer of staff were out on their ears and their contracts/pension agreements were null and void.
Thus there would not have been any bailout of individual bankers.
And the likes of lender in cheif richie boucher would have been out on his ar** rather than being promoted.

Francis Murtagh

bbsrs wrote: »

Good luck Francis as you said at least you're trying . But the 64 billion isn't the biggest problem we have , how out of balance our budget is.

thanks for that.

Francis Murtagh

jmayo wrote: »

How can you have a tax allowance on the one hand and yet use even more taxes to gift to people in debt ?
Forgive me, maybe I am a bit dim but if you spend more it usually means you have to gain more revenues.



I am looking forward and I don't see why my kids should pay for someone elses fooking mess.
I don't mind if the tax hikes are used to keep schools open, to keep hospital beds open, to keep Gardaí on the street.
Note I did not mention the salaries and wastage in those services.

But I do mind when someone is basically suggesting I pay more tax so that some people, who for the most part over borrowed during a bubble, get both to walk away from their debts and keep their assets.

To my mind you are asking that my kids pay so someone else gets to keep their house, all the while probably making sure my kids never get a chance to get a house of their own in this country.

That is exactly what the public sector unions have ensured is going to happening in the public sector, where the cushy position of the older staff is ensured all on the backs of the new and future recruits.



This is a Europe/Eurozone wide issue and we are hopelessly screwed until someone in Germany cops on.

But we do need to streamline on own spending.
It is a bit rich to ask the German taxpayer to take a hit for us, all the while we continue to pay our public servants more than theirs.
Imagine asking a German doctor to pay more tax so that his Irish counterpart can continue to enjoy the priviledge of their higher salary.
And AFAIK that same situation exists across a lot of our publicly funded system all the way from Enda Kenny to a porter in a hospital.



Now you are beginning to talk a bit of sense.
Salaries and costs have to decrease if we are to try and trade out of this.
That has to start with the public sector since we cannot cover that without borrowing.
And to counter an often public sector argument I wholeheartedly agree the cost cutting and salary cuts also needs to come across into areas of the private sector in particular professional charges.



So your argument is "I want a bailout since other people got one".
Who, in your world, is going to foot the bill for all this ?

BTW I don't agree with bailouts for any fooker.

I did agree with bailing out our two primary banks for systemic reasons.
But my idea of a bailout should have meant the entire top layer of staff were out on their ears and their contracts/pension agreements were null and void.
Thus there would not have been any bailout of individual bankers.
And the likes of lender in cheif richie boucher would have been out on his ar** rather than being promoted.

Here here !
How come as we own Every bank in Ireland ( except BI although we own a good chunk of that )that we don't simply advertise their top positions for 150,000 a year plus pension and kick out the rest. What would Michael o' Leary do. Kick them out and bring in a new lot..like some of you guys!
He would not be left sucking his thumb wondering how he might be able to do that. If it takes a change in the Law, they the Law should be changed..
The Banking lobby has fooled us for generations that somehow they cannot be touched.
That somehow they are the only ones who understand banking.
Why don't you plural start a lobby group insisting that the state, which is you, should advertise for all the top positions in the state owned banks.
Sack the existing lot all the way down until the axe hits the root. And build up from there.
That would save the state a few Billion a year.
I would do the same with the Civil Service. After all the State, that is you, owns that division too.
After that move on all the fat pensions of the Greedy Ministers and former Taoiseach. Or put moral pressure on them to be patriotic and hand over the loot they robbed from the State, ie from you and me.
That is what is called leadership from the top.

Francis Murtagh

Godge wrote: »

What 3.5 billion loan from the Troika?

Let us be realistic here. We have a budget deficit of 8.9% budgeted for this year. The only people willing to lend us money at anyway decent rates are the Troika.

If we tell the Troika to sing for their money, we have one option and one option only. Close the 8.9% gap overnight. That would require 20-30% cuts in public service pay and social welfare overnight. It would require a 10% increase in both rates of income tax and a reduction in personal tax credits.

The economy would take a hit as multi-nationals would reassess the reliability of our government's promises on corporation tax and IDA support. If we are not willing to pay our legal debts, why would we keep our promises to them would be their thoughts? No amount of reassurance would remove the doubts our actions created. So there would be a large hit on the economy.

Everything you say is reasonable and that is obviously the position being taken by the Government.

I believe we can put pressure on to seriously renegotiate the bailout loan.
I do not want to do anything to cause a drop in confidence. But we must be serious about our desire to cut expenditure as outlined by others in the board.
The will is not there.
This bailout loan can be targeted in a way that will not cause any of the fallout you describe.
On the contrary any reduction in the Troika Loan would actually give the country a big boost, Now that our soccer team is so deflated.
By the way, i am quiet happy to march even if there are 50,000 rugby supporters around town. Maybe they could join in for a bit of the way and show their support for this inititive ! ( cant spell! )
Then we can go to the match and support them.! I am not hopeful that we can win against Argentina, but we can win against the Troika, using reasoned logic and political pressure and the voice of the people.

Francis Murtagh

NIMAN wrote: »

We are all being squeezed, and I hate this term 'the most vunerable'.

I and my wife both work and we are being squeezed with every Budget. We earn decent enough money, but the last 4 or 5 yrs since this crisis began we have seen a large reduction in take home pay. But thats ok if it helps the country get out of the mess its in.

But would you class us as 'the vunerable'? We are probably part of that group called the 'squeezed middle classes' who are reckoned to be taking the biggest hit in Ireland at present. If you get your loans written off, then more than likely it will be the likes of us who will be hit again to cover the cost. Debts don't just evaporate into thin air, they have to be repaid to someone somewhere. This 'debt forgiveness' term is a nonsense, debt is never forgiven, someone else just has to pay it, so you can understand why I am not mad to have tens of thousands of loans/mortgages all written off, because I will end up paying for them in some form or other.

If someone would be kind enough to pay off a part of my mortgage then I'll go out and spend more to help the economy, but no way I will get a write-down on my debt, as (God forbid) I was sensible and only took on debt I could manage, rather than turn myself into some sort of property mogul like many in this country.

I did say in my original post that the middle class are the new poor.
Sorry for being so boring, the banks own you dept. The banks are private companies, money was borrowed from somewhere. Probably from German private banks. They should take the hit for bad loans. Let their shares tumble.
you are already paying for these, hello. You are already paying for the sins of the Irish and European Banks. That 64 billion Loan needs to go back to where it belongs..back to the original banks who loaned the money in the first place.
We will take our share. and much as i hate to say it. But not 64 billion.
Brian Lenehan was in a very difficult situation that night and i bless the man and his family.
He was in a room full of overpaid and stuffed bankers. Their interest was not in the Irish Economy. Their interest was in themselves, and the shareholders who they were answerable to. Brian hadn't a chance. Anglo should have been let go. WE would be better off by 30 billion i think today. And the Bankers drove off into the night. Thieves. Robbing us all of our hard earned weekly pay-packet to pay them.And they are still robbing us all with their fat salaries. This is crazy.
We are taking up the fallout ever since.
That's why i say, NO. I just want to make some little protest. To stick my hand up and say
"this is not fair".

Idbatterim

Sorry for being so boring, the banks own you dept. The banks are private companies, money was borrowed from somewhere. Probably from German private banks. They should take the hit for bad loans. Let their shares tumble.
you are already paying for these, hello.

I agree with this, but unfortunately the germans are the biggest bully in the playground! & are looking after the interest of their banking system, tax payer exposure etc first and foremost...

Brian Lenehan was in a very difficult situation that night and i bless the man and his family.
He was in a room full of overpaid and stuffed bankers. Their interest was not in the Irish Economy. Their interest was in themselves, and the shareholders who they were answerable to. Brian hadn't a chance. Anglo should have been let go. WE would be better off by 30 billion i think today. And the Bankers drove off into the night. Thieves. Robbing us all of our hard earned weekly pay-packet to pay them.And they are still robbing us all with their fat salaries. This is crazy.
We are taking up the fallout ever since.
That's why i say, NO. I just want to make some little protest. To stick my hand up and say
"this is not fair".

Francis I dont think one person would disagree and say its fair! I reckon I Lenihan & probably even the bankers themselves didnt have a clue how huge the figures involved were. The situation was unprecedented. The benefit of hindsight now is great.

ArmaniJeanss

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

Here here !
How come as we own Every bank in Ireland ( except BI although we own a good chunk of that )that we don't simply advertise their top positions for 150,000 a year plus pension and kick out the rest. What would Michael o' Leary do. Kick them out and bring in a new lot..like some of you guys!
He would not be left sucking his thumb wondering how he might be able to do that. If it takes a change in the Law, they the Law should be changed..
The Banking lobby has fooled us for generations that somehow they cannot be touched.
That somehow they are the only ones who understand banking.
Why don't you plural start a lobby group insisting that the state, which is you, should advertise for all the top positions in the state owned banks.
Sack the existing lot all the way down until the axe hits the root. And build up from there.
That would save the state a few Billion a year.

OK, so we kick out everyone in the banks who earns over €150,000, replace those people with other people whose salary we limit to €150,000. And it doing so save a few billion.

OK, so I'm going to charitable to your figures and say 'a few' billion is 2 Billion.
In order for your figures to add up to a €2B saving there would need to be at this moment in time 5700 people earning €500K (we would save 5700 x €350K = €2B) or else 40000 people earning €200K (we would save 40000 x €50K which = €2B).

Sadly however there is actually only 124 people throughout the 4 main banks earning in excess of €200K, so your actual savings here would only be the slightest merest fraction of the few billion you suggest. http://irishindependent.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

I'm genuinely stunned by the way that you could qualify as a pharmacist which needs max points in your leaving cert and a great knowledge of maths to get through the course, and yet be so incredibly poor with big numbers.

Idbatterim

also if you cut their pay, while of course ultimately it would be better for the state, they will lose out on PAYE, PRSI etc, so the saving wouldnt be as big as it might at first appear. Anyone have any idea how many people in the state, private or PS are earning over 100k? I wouldnt even say its 1%...

frankosw

Remember that failing to meet repayments as they fall due could have serious repercussions and your home may be at risk if you do not keep up repayments on a mortgage or other loan secured on it.

Remember this when applying for a mortage or bank loan?

Head The Wall

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

OK, so we kick out everyone in the banks who earns over €150,000, replace those people with other people whose salary we limit to €150,000. And it doing so save a few billion.

OK, so I'm going to charitable to your figures and say 'a few' billion is 2 Billion.
In order for your figures to add up to a €2B saving there would need to be at this moment in time 5700 people earning €500K (we would save 5700 x €350K = €2B) or else 40000 people earning €200K (we would save 40000 x €50K which = €2B).

Sadly however there is actually only 124 people throughout the 4 main banks earning in excess of €200K, so your actual savings here would only be the slightest merest fraction of the few billion you suggest. http://irishindependent.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

I'm genuinely stunned by the way that you could qualify as a pharmacist which needs max points in your leaving cert and a great knowledge of maths to get through the course, and yet be so incredibly poor with big numbers.

Also why would somebody accept 150k for a job in an Irish bank when another bank would pay 500k for the same role?

Scortho

Head The Wall wrote: »

Also why would somebody accept 150k for a job in an Irish bank when another bank would pay 500k for the same role?

I'd take 100,000 for a job in an irish bank. It'd make a nice starting salary as i have no experience. At 150,000 all that we'd get would be the bottom of the class bankers.
Why would someone work for 150,000 in dublin when they could get that as their bonus in the City?

Francis Murtagh

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

He's going to say it should come from the bailout money even though that isn't what the bailout money is for

@Francis Murtagh - You should really read this post by Scofflaw (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81641894&postcount=30), it's a good read and should clarify a few things for you.

That you for that link. It looks good. I need to study it though. Plenty of meat there. Thanks

Francis Murtagh

Head The Wall wrote: »

Also why would somebody accept 150k for a job in an Irish bank when another bank would pay 500k for the same role?

ops i meant a few million !
I never was good at maths

Francis Murtagh

Idbatterim wrote: »

I agree with this, but unfortunately the germans are the biggest bully in the playground! & are looking after the interest of their banking system, tax payer exposure etc first and foremost...

Francis I dont think one person would disagree and say its fair! I reckon I Lenihan & probably even the bankers themselves didnt have a clue how huge the figures involved were. The situation was unprecedented. The benefit of hindsight now is great.

yep

Francis Murtagh

Scortho wrote: »

I'd take 100,000 for a job in an irish bank. It'd make a nice starting salary as i have no experience. At 150,000 all that we'd get would be the bottom of the class bankers.
Why would someone work for 150,000 in dublin when they could get that as their bonus in the City?

Any bottom of the class bankers would be better than the lot we have now.
Why should they be paid higher than the President of the USA.? Its obsene.
Same old, same old excuses. I would go for it and see what calaber would apply. There are more things than money in a job. Some people are not greedy.

Francis Murtagh

Francis Murtagh wrote: »

ops i meant a few million !
I never was good at maths

Ps . there is no need to be personal and mean either.