President Weasel wrote: "Profit is privatised whilst risk is socialised" as someone clever once said. |
Northern Rock to be Nationalised • Page 2
-
Jeepers 16,616 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 16 years ago -
You you think that they got a bit confused with initializations and confused Northen Rock with Network Rail? -
I find it amazing that people are opposed to this.
Our money has gone it to saving this bank, and yes it needed to be saved. Your johnny fuckall business does not need to be saved because it is not going to cause panic in the financial markets if it does.
Yes the problem was 6 months ago, but it's not cured yet, just a plaster has been applied. The BoE is still proping the bank up with tax payers money.
The commercial options all still required pubic money to be viable. If your money was at risk, would you trust someone else with it or keep it in your own hands, so you have control in its destiny?
As for the conservatives, the letters LOL come to mind.
The only concern I have is that the government said its a temporary measure. I think that may be a lie. However the EU's policy on state aid should keep the government in check. -
From the BBC politics-guy's blog
Savage description
Politicians, eh? Whatchagunnado?
Nick18 Feb 08, 08:38 AM
So, has Alistair Darling announced a policy that he has previously accepted will "lead to a slow lingering death for the jobs of the Northern Rock workers, its assets and Britain's reputation as a major financial services centre with... the chancellor cast in the role of undertaker"?
That was the suggestion that led to a lively exchange between Darling and John Humphreys on Radio 4's Today programme this morning. It all stemmed from a quote I put on my blog last night which dates from the time the Lib Dems were being assaulted for daring even to think about the possibility that the Rock might have to be nationalised.
Below is the fuller transcript of the question from the Labour MP for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central, Jim Cousins, and Alistair Darling's reply:
“Jim Cousins MP:
‘The whole House will have noted that the Liberal Democrats have as much regard for the 5,500 employees of Northern Rock in the north-east - and the 6,500 nationally - as they had for the job of their former leader.
[Interruption]
‘Two or three faces in public, 10 in private - that is the policy of the Liberal Democrats.
‘Does my right hon. friend accept that the policy of nationalisation would lead to a slow lingering death for the jobs of the Northern Rock workers, its assets and Britain's reputation as a major financial services centre, with my right hon. friend the chancellor cast in the role of undertaker - and that only by finding a successor business to grow on those jobs, assets and reputations can we offer any real prospect of the taxpayers getting their money back?’
Alistair Darling MP: ‘I agree with my hon. friend. It is regrettable and surprising that the Liberal Democrats never seemed to support our earlier proposals to keep Northern Rock open. It would also, however, be a mistake to shut off all other options and simply go for one at this stage; that does not seem to me to make any sense at all.’”
Source: Hansard, 19 November 2007
So, Darling was careful not to rule nationalisation out but not at all careful about appearing to agree with a savage description of a policy he has now been forced to adopt. -
Is it a bad thing to be envious of/hostile towards incredibly rich, incompetent people now or something? -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoSo is now a good time to get any loans and credit cards switched to NR, in the hope that they'll all get written off as bad debt when NR finally sinks?
.gif)
-
Leolian'sBro wrote:
What parts of incredibly rich, incompetent people are good for the public services then?
It is when you dress it up as defending the public interest. -
Leolian'sBro wrote:
I'm not picky really.
Are you talking about NR directors, FSA supervisors or the governors of the BoE?
And I didn't say they were. I just said if you're envious, come out and say it rather than pretending to be speaking up for the oppressed masses.
The two aren't mutually exclusive though, in fact they're very much related. -
Lutz wrote:
So is now a good time to get any loans and credit cards switched to NR, in the hope that they'll all get written off as bad debt when NR finally sinks?
If NR sinks then the government has gone into liquidation. -
Leolian'sBro wrote:
Well yeah, it was only meant as being a bit tongue in cheek, but then you went and made a point from it that I actually had to respond to.
The two aren't mutually exclusive though, in fact they're very much related.
Very true. Impartial arguments however are the most valid, and the above that I responded too most certainly was not.
But the general idea that if someone takes a gamble shouldn't be royally fucked over if the gamble doesn't pay off seems like an odd attitude. Otherwise of course it wouldn't be a gamble in the first place.
I agree what you said about the media as well - but that seems to be as a matter of course nowadays - see anything from this to the recent bit with the Archbishop. -
President Weasel wrote:
rauper wrote:
I just hate the way it is being spun as "this is necessary to avoid any instability in the financial system" - seems like a) a massive lie and b) quite a lot of instability to nationalise a bank in the first place. Still, at least I know if Eurogamer goes tits up the government will pay to keep it going... (ok, I know it's not quite the same thing... but what's the incentive of running a bank -a business - properly if when you fuck it up it all gets taken care of?).
It's not remotely the same thing and you know it, you're comparing a website (of which I am fond, don't get me wrong) with a bank that employs 6000 people and has people's pensions and mortgages.
I know - but it is a private bank which is trying to make as much money as possible and all the shareholders get the benefit when it goes well - which most likely includes the management. But they get bailed out when it goes badly. Seems like a nice scenario to me (assuming they can live with the guilt of fucking it all up so badly). -
Jeepers 16,616 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 16 years agorauper wrote:
I know - but it is a private bank which is trying to make as much money as possible and all the shareholders get the benefit when it goes well - which most likely includes the management. But they get bailed out when it goes badly. Seems like a nice scenario to me (assuming they can live with the guilt of fucking it all up so badly).
"How do I sleep at night? Very well, on a bed made of your money." -
DodgyPast 9,353 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 16 years agoThe thing is the fact that the government will bail these kind of institutions out is pretty important when it comes to attracting international investors into our financial market.
This financial market is pretty important to the well being of the whole country, so trying to reestablish stability here is pretty important for all of us.
Now most of the measures that went before seemed to offer private companies the opportunity to profit without taking any risks.
Since the current government is such a bunch of complete bunch of wankers they might actually mke a go of it and turn NR into a profitable organisation which they can sell.
At least the nationalisation route means the tax payer takes the risks, but can receive the reward.... rather than most of the other options which only offer the tax payer risk with no opportunity of reward. -
mwtb 2,381 posts
Seen 8 years ago
Registered 17 years agoFirstly, on the topic of NR being "risky". As a depositor, NR has been the safest bank in the UK since the government guaranteed _100%_ of all deposits. If you really have a ton of cash to throw about then obviously check the facts, but as far as I'm aware NR deposits are government backed no matter how large they are.
Secondly, on the general topic of nationalisation. Sure, you can argue that the government needs to protect jobs and preserve confidence in the UK for investors, but you may have noticed plenty of manufacturing jobs have gone to the wall without the Exchequer pulling a few billion out to keep them going and I would point out that investors are consciously taking risks. All that stuff about "the value of your investment may fall as well as rise" would seem to apply.
It may have escaped people's notice, but the entire financial industry has been beaten up on the markets in the past half a year. This is global and the worst isn't necessarily over yet. What are the government going to do if B&B or A&L find themselves in a similar position? How many hundreds of billions of pounds do you think we can magic up without shafting the economy for decades? What makes you think that investors will like the idea of nationalisation anyway? Unless the government turn around and cough up the 400-900% over the closing market value per share that the various shareholder groups are demanding, how happy do you think investors will be about the outcome? -
Benno 11,854 posts
Seen 17 hours ago
Registered 16 years agoHmm i heard their loan book aint half bad, its just not liquid enough
Would of liked to see Branson take the reigns tbh lol, even as just a spectator
I dont care anyway, I dont pay tax
-
My mortgage is with NR.
This fact alone should concern British taxpayers, and also confirm the loan book is NOT 'good'.
.gif)
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
