Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Banjax]

The private sector, is fond of using the mantra, "Let the market decide", in other words let the chips fall where they may.

My understanding is that the Government has guaranteed £35,000 in the event of a bank failing.............that probably takes in more than 95% of the investors/depositers in Britain.

So maybe we should let them fail. I have no sympathy for the banks, and they do not have any for the general population. And besides what other private institution would asked to be bailed out by the British tax payer. (shades of british Leyland in the 1970's here. I don't remember the banks thinking that was a good idea)

Maybe a new order would rise Phoenix like from the ashes. That is better regulated, (although not over regulated)......perhaps that would be for the best.

Is that figure correct Optimist? :-/ :-/  I have a feeling it is far more than that.

£35000 is the amount guaranteed for an individual bank account  


the US has no choice but to plough this $700b into the economy - but they'll need guarantees that the money won't be used on obscene salaries and bonuses on Wall St - don't see why the taxpayer should pick up the tab for the markets' mistakes, nor why these spivs should be rewarded for failure
 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

The private sector, is fond of using the mantra, "Let the market decide", in other words let the chips fall where they may.

My understanding is that the Government has guaranteed £35,000 in the event of a bank failing.............that probably takes in more than 95% of the investors/depositers in Britain.

So maybe we should let them fail. I have no sympathy for the banks, and they do not have any for the general population. And besides what other private institution would asked to be bailed out by the British tax payer. (shades of british Leyland in the 1970's here. I don't remember the banks thinking that was a good idea)

Maybe a new order would rise Phoenix like from the ashes. That is better regulated, (although not over regulated)......perhaps that would be for the best.

Is that figure correct Optimist? :-/ :-/  I have a feeling it is far more than that.

£35000 is the amount guaranteed for an individual bank account  


the US has no choice but to plough this $700b into the economy - but they'll need guarantees that the money won't be used on obscene salaries and bonuses on Wall St - don't see why the taxpayer should pick up the tab for the markets' mistakes, nor why these spivs should be rewarded for failure
 

Thanks Bannjaxx that makes sense now

Its not just the spivs rewarded for failure; it's bailing out a situation that has transpired due to greed, with many escaping the subsequent problems they have caused with huge amounts of money safely tucked away!

Even in capitalist America this sticks in the throat Bannjaxx.

 

[Banjax]

The private sector, is fond of using the mantra, "Let the market decide", in other words let the chips fall where they may.

My understanding is that the Government has guaranteed £35,000 in the event of a bank failing.............that probably takes in more than 95% of the investors/depositers in Britain.

So maybe we should let them fail. I have no sympathy for the banks, and they do not have any for the general population. And besides what other private institution would asked to be bailed out by the British tax payer. (shades of british Leyland in the 1970's here. I don't remember the banks thinking that was a good idea)

Maybe a new order would rise Phoenix like from the ashes. That is better regulated, (although not over regulated)......perhaps that would be for the best.

Is that figure correct Optimist? :-/ :-/  I have a feeling it is far more than that.

£35000 is the amount guaranteed for an individual bank account  


the US has no choice but to plough this $700b into the economy - but they'll need guarantees that the money won't be used on obscene salaries and bonuses on Wall St - don't see why the taxpayer should pick up the tab for the markets' mistakes, nor why these spivs should be rewarded for failure
 

Thanks Bannjaxx that makes sense now

Its not just the spivs rewarded for failure; it's bailing out a situation that has transpired due to greed, with many escaping the subsequent problems they have caused with huge amounts of money safely tucked away!

Even in capitalist America this sticks in the throat Bannjaxx.

 

the words "chicken" "home" and "roost" spring to mind - it maddening that the ordinary joe has to bail them out - same thing'll likeky happen here - although i remember RBOS had a massive share re-evaluation earlier in the year to increase their funds and avoid these calamities - shareholders at the time weren't happy halving to shell out more money (or devaluing their shares)- but at least they weren't going cap in hand to the taxpayers

[Nickbat]

For those who are interested, there is a thought -provoking article here on the background to the credit crunch. Not the sort of article you'd find on the BBC, mind.  

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306632135350949

[albitz]

Very interesting.explodes many of the myths which are flying around at the moment.