42% of entire Euro zone crisis paid for by Ireland according to Eurostat

noodler

Poster Boy wrote: »

Well we obviously are not able to agree on who "we" and "they" means, as I reject your assertion that it was willingly carried out by the Irish State.

Ok.

Poster Boy

hooradiation wrote: »

Cry harder, maybe that'll change something.

Its not a case of "crying"; its a case of "doing". I urge others to do the same - or failing that, to at least try to post suggestions avoid being glib or inane.

davet82

noodler wrote: »

In what respect are Germany bleeding us dry?

i never said anything about bleeding anyone dry but our debts cannot be paid back so what i'm saying is we will get relief or a deal like you said, so that we can manage 'our' debts that 'we' ran up but it will go on for a very very long time

take the promissory notes we need a deal on this, enda more than anyone needs a deal on this and it boils down to the germans to give the nod for it to happen, which it will i reckon for endas sake but it will have so many if's and but's and attachments it won't make any difference to us, it will keep us ticking over so we can keep paying money, imo, we should never have borrowed to pay people who should never have been paid back

hooradiation

Poster Boy wrote: »

Its not a case of "crying"; its a case of "doing". I urge others to do the same - or failing that, to at least try to post suggestions avoid being glib or inane.

The "doing" in this case being stamping your feet and pretending things are illegal because you don't like them.

Good lad, you'll go far.

Zebra3

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so who exactly should pay for the mess?

The shareholders of the banks.

Who else?

They were private businesses that failed.

It's called capitalism.

noodler

davet82 wrote: »

i never said anything about bleeding anyone dry but our debts cannot be paid back so what i'm saying is we will get relief or a deal like you said, so that we can manage 'our' debts that 'we' ran up but it will go on for a very very long time

This is what you said, apologies for paraphrasing your original post

davet82 wrote: »

just about enough relief to keep us 'ticking over' so the can milk us for money for the next century...

It seems to be the case that people sometimes forget that if we take all the banking debt away our debt falls to 80% of GDP but our annual deficit remains at about 15bn.

i.e. austerity wouldn't go away.

davet82 wrote: »

take the promissory notes we need a deal on this, enda more than anyone needs a deal on this and it boils down to the germans to give the nod for it to happen, which it will i reckon for endas sake but it will have so many if's and but's and attachments it won't make any difference to us, it will keep us ticking over so we can keep paying money, imo, we should never have borrowed to pay people who should never have been paid back

For the promissory note the deicison rests with the independent ECB. I am not suggesting that the ECB are not vunerable to any influence but the final nod is certainly not with Germany.

I of course agree with you that money should never have been borrowed to save Anglo or Irish Nationwide.

Poster Boy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so who exactly should pay for the mess?

Investors who make bad investments - what used to be known as "capitalism".

For example, as indeed happened, I bought bank shares. They went bad. Tough tits for me. I am not looking for any other Irish citizen - or German, French, or Pole - to now turnaround and pay me my original stake plus profit.

Yet this is exactly what is being gutted out of the Irish people by German, French and other bad banks who are happy to see us take the blame for their bad investments.

There is a separate issue which is whether the heads of the Irish banks were engaged in reckless trading prior to the bust, and also what was the real value of assets they claimed to have. In that regard I would be perfectly happy if larger investors who lost out, such as German banks, were to push for proper investigations and criminal prosecutions if needs be.

But you see none of that is happening. Instead it is the innocent Irish people who are being subjected to a process of collective guilt for crimes they did not commit.

Qui bono / who benefits?

Poster Boy

hooradiation wrote: »

The "doing" in this case being stamping your feet and pretending things are illegal because you don't like them.

Good lad, you'll go far.

Ah, I see you are struggling to post something other than a post that manages to be both glib and have an ad hominem attack.

I think you're right. I probably will go further than you anyway.

Good lad yourself.

Jazzzman

If we get it up to 51% can we not claim some sort of majority ownership?

noodler

Jazzzman wrote: »

If we get it up to 51% can we not claim some sort of majority ownership?

Well...technically...the Eurostat data says we paid 41bn but that just includes money from annual budgets - i.e. the negative effect on our budgets over th elast few years.

We also put in 20bn or so from our own reservers (National Pension Reserve Fund) which would take us over the magic 50% mark!

But then again, I am sure if we applied the same criteria to the other member States we would find that some of them did pay some extra banking bills that way.

Fratton Fred

Poster Boy wrote: »

Investors who make bad investments - what used to be known as "capitalism".

For example, as indeed happened, I bought bank shares. They went bad. Tough tits for me. I am not looking for any other Irish citizen - or German, French, or Pole - to now turnaround and pay me my original stake plus profit.

Yet this is exactly what is being gutted out of the Irish people by German, French and other bad banks who are happy to see us take the blame for their bad investments.

There is a separate issue which is whether the heads of the Irish banks were engaged in reckless trading prior to the bust, and also what was the real value of assets they claimed to have. In that regard I would be perfectly happy if larger investors who lost out, such as German banks, were to push for proper investigations and criminal prosecutions if needs be.

But you see none of that is happening. Instead it is the innocent Irish people who are being subjected to a process of collective guilt for crimes they did not commit.

Qui bono / who benefits?

so when the Irish banks go bust and these "Investors" come looking for their money and start seizing assets, what happens then?

I agree by the way. Bernard Madoff has been in prison for pover three years and yet no one has been charged with offences related to the fraud at Anglo.

gallag

The irish also need to stop borrowing to pay for the world most expensive public servants, they wont vote to slash their own pay/pensions even if it is the right thing to do.

Poster Boy

noodler wrote: »

It seems to be the case that people sometimes forget that if we take all the banking debt away our debt falls to 80% of GDP but our annual deficit remains at about 15bn.

i.e. austerity wouldn't go away.

Good point with which I somewhat agree.

However the so-called "austerity" being imposed presently is not real austerity, in so far as it is being applied to some - but not to others.

For example, Eamon Gilmore continues to be paid more than David Cameron, even though Cameron leads a financially viable state 15 times larger than us, while Gilmore is only second in command of a small bankrupt state.

Therefore it is austerity only for some, generally tending to be at the lower end of the economic spectrum.

To me, this is "Apartheid Austerity", plain and simple.

It is for this reason, that in my eyes, the continued excessive pay by ECB/EU to the relatively small clatter of people currently in leadership role effectively amounts to a bribe. It is fiscal heroine; over-the-top payments for substandard work - why?

noodler wrote: »

For the promissory note the deicison rests with the independent ECB. I am not suggesting that the ECB are not vunerable to any influence but the final nod is certainly not with Germany.

Noodler, although we disagree, you post intelligent comments. I am not sure if the above comment was your finest ever :pac:

Fratton Fred

Poster Boy wrote: »

Good point with which I somewhat agree.

However the so-called "austerity" being imposed presently is not real austerity, in so far as it is being applied to some - but not to others.

For example, Eamon Gilmore continues to be paid more than David Cameron, even though Cameron leads a financially viable state 15 times larger than us, while Gilmore is only second in command of a small bankrupt state.

Therefore it is austerity only for some, generally tending to be at the lower end of the economic spectrum.

To me, this is "Apartheid Austerity", plain and simple.

It is for this reason, that in my eyes, the continued excessive pay by ECB/EU to the relatively small clatter of people currently in leadership role effectively amounts to a bribe. It is fiscal heroine; over-the-top payments for substandard work - why?

Abso ****ing lutely.

not only are they over paid, but there are far too many of them.

squod

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so who exactly should pay for the mess?

Pay for it. I want our bluddy money back. Never mind worrying about who pays for what. We're in the hole for Gods knows how many billions.

This game of cards is rigged against us. Think it's time we started jailing people, sticking the debts on them and riding off into the sunset.

ShadowHearth

I know they say there is no point going out and protest... So here we go, they just dropped more and more shiet and no one said a thing. So now they just gave us the bill and said: " aye, lads, you don't mind anyway, cheers!"

davet82

gallag wrote: »

The irish also need to stop borrowing to pay for the world most expensive public servants, they wont vote to slash their own pay/pensions even if it is the right thing to do.

That will solve everything so?

lets pretend you do that tomorrow, the problem of the massive debt is still there and still will be there. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a reduction btw, it may even help but its a weird thing just to throw into the mix here...

You cannot cut your way out of this mess. You have to remember also for every 1 billion in public sector cuts thats 750 million that leave the domestic economy, thats spent in shops and business around Ireland and instead goes to paying back huge debts that belong to the banks. The trick is to get cuts and investment in the right balance but its probably impossible in these conditions with a government with no innovation or vision what so ever other than hoping being good that europe/ecb/germany will cut us a break...

Zebra3

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so when the Irish banks go bust and these "Investors" come looking for their money and start seizing assets, what happens then?

What assets?

davet82

noodler wrote: »

i.e. austerity wouldn't go away.



For the promissory note the deicison rests with the independent ECB. I am not suggesting that the ECB are not vunerable to any influence but the final nod is certainly not with Germany.

I of course agree with you that money should never have been borrowed to save Anglo or Irish Nationwide.

I'm not suggesting austerity will go away either, i think i may have hopped on something you said but i actually agree...

as for ECB and german influence, probably an understatement but thats just my opinion

Fratton Fred

Zebra3 wrote: »

What assets?

anything that has been used as security for a loan.

ie, property.

Poster Boy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so when the Irish banks go bust and these "Investors" come looking for their money and start seizing assets, what happens then?

I agree by the way. Bernard Madoff has been in prison for pover three years and yet no one has been charged with offences related to the fraud at Anglo.

I am not convinced the rot was restricted to Anglo or Irish Nationwide. In any event, such "investors" are in the same boat as me:

One accepts the assets are not now of the value they were accorded. This generally creates 2 scenarios, everywhere except Ireland:

Either;

A: One comes to the opinion that although the bank was well managed, losses can occur - and one moves on, hoping that there may be some recovery at a later date.

B: One is not of the opinion that the bank was well run, but instead may have engaged in reckless trading - or worse, which may have been part reason behind the collapse. Normally, in such instances, where banks fail, there is an investigation, and if there has been suspected wrong-doing, there are prosecutions. To date this has not successfully occurred in Ireland, and I simply ask you this:

Where else in the world, have there been any successful prosecutions for such a macro collapse after 5 years?

If it happens here, it will be a world first. However experience shows that justice delayed is justice denied, and despite some hope on my part at the beginning of this administration that there would be some accountability, I no longer hold that hope. Without accountability, there is no reason why this won't happen again.

And this is the greatest failing of Fine Gael and Labour to date: No Accountability. Combined with them extracting over-pay from ECB/EU, this ensures that they are not respected as negotiators by our so-called "EU Friends" - and hence the current negotiations are a sham process.

Thus in my eyes, the current "arrangement" amounts to being money thrown at the matter by ECB/EU in order that they can then claim it back - all fixed to our necks.

It's also known as "theft".

Chips Lovell

Fratton Fred wrote: »

...and yet no one has been charged with offences related to the fraud at Anglo.

Really?

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/Sean+Fitzpatrick+to+stand+trial+next+year/id/19410615-5218-50ff-cadf-880314852448

R P McMurphy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

so when the Irish banks go bust and these "Investors" come looking for their money and start seizing assets, what happens then?

I agree by the way. Bernard Madoff has been in prison for pover three years and yet no one has been charged with offences related to the fraud at Anglo.

If they want to come and sieze an acre outside longford or the numerous valueless sites that they loaned excessive money for then let them go ahead

Fratton Fred

Poster Boy wrote: »

I am not convinced the rot was restricted to Anglo or Irish Nationwide. In any event, such "investors" are in the same boat as me:

One accepts the assets are not now of the value they were accorded. This generally creates 2 scenarios, everywhere except Ireland:

Either;

A: One comes to the opinion that although the bank was well managed, losses can occur - and one moves on, hoping that there may be some recovery at a later date.

B: One is not of the opinion that the bank was well run, but instead may have engaged in reckless trading - or worse, which may have been part reason behind the collapse. Normally, in such instances, where banks fail, there is an investigation, and if there has been suspected wrong-doing, there are prosecutions. To date this has not successfully occurred in Ireland, and I simply ask you this:

Where else in the world, have there been any successful prosecutions for such a macro collapse after 5 years?

If it happens here, it will be a world first. However experience shows that justice delayed is justice denied, and despite some hope on my part at the beginning of this administration that there would be some accountability, I no longer hold that hope. Without accountability, there is no reason why this won't happen again.

And this is the greatest failing of Fine Gael and Labour to date: No Accountability. Combined with them extracting over-pay from ECB/EU, this ensures that they are not respected as negotiators by our so-called "EU Friends" - and hence the current negotiations are a sham process.

Thus in my eyes, the current "arrangement" amounts to being money thrown at the matter by ECB/EU in order that they can then claim it back - all fixed to our necks.

It's also known as "theft".

it isn't as simple as "Moving On" though. Banks rely on a constant stream of money to work. If that stream of money dries up, they can no longer operate. This includes everything right down to putting money in the ATMs. The bank lends you €200,000 for a mortgage (secured on your home) which you repay over 25 years. They borrow that money from another bank, pension fund etc and pay it back over six months. after six months, they borrow money to repay the intial loan and so on. If, after six months they can't borrow money, they are in default.

When they can no longer operate and repay their debts, their creditors will come looking for their money back (regardless of who that is, German bond holders, Credit Unions, pension funds or normal people who have their life savings in a deposit account).

Fratton Fred

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Really?

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/Sean+Fitzpatrick+to+stand+trial+next+year/id/19410615-5218-50ff-cadf-880314852448

oh, everything's fine then.

R P McMurphy wrote: »

If they want to come and sieze an acre outside longford or the numerous valueless sites that they loaned excessive money for then let them go ahead

but they won't though. a liquidator will go for the assets that are most likely to be worth something.

The only property with any sort of value at the moment are people's homes.

noodler

Poster Boy wrote: »

Good point with which I somewhat agree.

However the so-called "austerity" being imposed presently is not real austerity, in so far as it is being applied to some - but not to others.

For example, Eamon Gilmore continues to be paid more than David Cameron, even though Cameron leads a financially viable state 15 times larger than us, while Gilmore is only second in command of a small bankrupt state.

Therefore it is austerity only for some, generally tending to be at the lower end of the economic spectrum.

To me, this is "Apartheid Austerity", plain and simple.

It is for this reason, that in my eyes, the continued excessive pay by ECB/EU to the relatively small clatter of people currently in leadership role effectively amounts to a bribe. It is fiscal heroine; over-the-top payments for substandard work - why?

Austerity has touched just about every facet of society in some respect. PS workers pay, welfare, tax increases for all workers, property tax that affects those with larger homes more, pay cuts for TDs etc etc. I won't get too bogged down right now on exactly who got more than burned than who because there are around 25bn of cuts and tax increases to go through!

Poster Boy wrote: »

Noodler, although we disagree, you post intelligent comments. I am not sure if the above comment was your finest ever :pac:

The ECB is indpendent.

Now they have everntually changed their tune at several junctures of this crisis when people had been calling on them to do more, r.h eventually bought bonds of Euro Zone sovereign states, reducing rates, LTROs, OMTs etc etc but I really think it is overstating it so say that the ECB Governing Council does carries out German Government opinion.

Just about every action I listed above was taken by the ECB despite German or Bundesbank disapproval (I believe the German Central Bank Governor was the only one on the council to vote against the OMTs programme).

Poster Boy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

it isn't as simple as "Moving On" though. Banks rely on a constant stream of money to work. If that stream of money dries up, they can no longer operate. This includes everything right down to putting money in the ATMs. The bank lends you €200,000 for a mortgage (secured on your home) which you repay over 25 years. They borrow that money from another bank, pension fund etc and pay it back over six months. after six months, they borrow money to repay the intial loan and so on. If, after six months they can't borrow money, they are in default.

When they can no longer operate and repay their debts, their creditors will come looking for their money back (regardless of who that is, German bond holders, Credit Unions, pension funds or normal people who have their life savings in a deposit account).

For the investor who was unfortunate enough to make an bad investment, whether by being misled or bad luck, it is a case of moving on. I haven't gone into a German bank with a gun looking for my money back , and I wouldn't expect them either to that to our government.

Yet that is what they did, so obviously the old rule book doesn't apply anymore. If the old rule book doesn't apply, I don't see why I should accept new rules made by others which are deliberately designed to cost me through theft.

As to the old "money in the ATMs" chestnut, in my opinion that is up there with the "We" people concept. In my opinion, these incorrect notions are distracting people to the effect where they are allowing them dictate their lives. I regard this as nothing other than "social control", based on what Hitler would have described as "The Big Lie" - say it often and loud enough, and people believe it.

As I already set out, in my opinion the "We" decided narrative is false - and equally the "ATMs will run out" idiom is also without substance. Please let me explain:

1. ATMs are supplied with Euro currency.

2. Each member state prints its own Euro currency.

3. In Ireland, the Euro currency is printed in the mint at Sandyford, where previously all our currency was printed.

4. In the event of private banks failing, this would have no impact on the ability of the Irish mint to continue printing currency.

5. In the instance of ATMs failing, temporary measures would be taken in order to overcome the difficulty. It is not pleasant, but it is doable. In Ireland we are "fortunate" enough to recently have experienced an unintended practice run for such a scenario, with the recent failure of Ulster Bank. The country did not collapse.

Regarding asset seizure by any particularly persistent investor, as one poster has already stated, if the ECB want to seize an acre of land outside Longford - let them.

Chips Lovell

Hang on. Are you saying that if all the banks failed, we could have dealt with it by printing money and handing it out?

Poster Boy

noodler wrote: »

Austerity has touched just about every facet of society in some respect. PS workers pay, welfare, tax increases for all workers, property tax that affects those with larger homes more, pay cuts for TDs etc etc. I won't get too bogged down right now on exactly who got more than burned than who because there are around 25bn of cuts and tax increases to go through!

The ECB is indpendent.

Now they have everntually changed their tune at several junctures of this crisis when people had been calling on them to do more, r.h eventually bought bonds of Euro Zone sovereign states, reducing rates, LTROs, OMTs etc etc but I really think it is overstating it so say that the ECB Governing Council does carries out German Government opinion.

Just about every action I listed above was taken by the ECB despite German or Bundesbank disapproval (I believe the German Central Bank Governor was the only one on the council to vote against the OMTs programme).

We disagree, but again I commend you on posting informed comments - particularly regarding the last point.

Biggins

Poster Boy wrote: »

...2. Unless I am mistaken, this does not appear to have been reported on RTÉ. If not, why not?

Anyone with any insightfulness can possibly see RTE ALWAYS kisses ass to the government of the day.
They don't wish to bite the hand thats feeding it, our money also!