Printable View
Why hasn't there been so much as a peep about this??
Some pretty hefty names on that list.
Can someone who knows what they're talking about explain some of the significance to me?
Hamster, feel free to delete if i'm being libelous or whatever :excruciating:
Nobody has ever convinced me that Anglo should not have been allowed to fail. From the start the government have talked about the need to get credit flowing to business, yet Anglo never actually loaned to business in the first place.
No offence, but the reason that there hasn't been a peep about it is that "bank bonds owned by large global fund managers and investment banks" isn't exactly a surprise. In fact, it would be a surprise if those names weren't on the list.
Who did you think owned the debt?
David McWilliams has been writing about the funding of our Celtic Tiger lifestyle by the Germans for over 5 years.
The alleged reason that Anglo was saved was because of the fear once bitten, twice shy, the very same banks wouldn't buy Irish bank or sovereign debt and force the whole country into the arms of the IMF. Whether this is true is very debatable (and eminently worthy of debate), but people get wrapped up in dark conspiracy theories about controlling oligarchies getting bailed out etc which is not so worthy of debate.
The ironic thing is we're nearly at exactly what we were trying to avouid in the first place (the IMF pulling the strings).
Bond rates going up this week in the face of austerity measures still suggests (to me anyway), that it's the bank bailout that is the problem the bond markets have with Ireland. Thanks Lenihan, Cowen et al.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
I don't follow?Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
We keep getting told that it's the deficit that's the problem, not the national debt levels caused by the bank bailout. Why in the face of a plan to reduce the deficit, are bonds up well over 7%? I'm not claiming to be an expert, but it doesn't make sense to me if the deficit is the problem why a plan to deal with that would lead to a spike in interest rates?
We obviously read different sources then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
My understanding of the common view is that the total deficit is the problem, with the bank bailout contributing c70% in 2010 (I could be wrong on this?) and the structural (i.e. spending more than we're taking in) contributing the remainder. Its not an either or. Also, the structural is a multiyear issue if not addressed.
Also, I don't see the link that its the austerity package thats causing the rates demanded from Ireland to rise?
Bar the timing? Some financial commentator on Newstalk saying that the problem is this Government and the only way out is a new Government who don't have the same credability issues and have a mandate for a 4 year plan. Obviously I'd believe that, but it was interesting coming from (on the face of it at least) and independent market "expert".Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Whilst a new Government is desirable for a large number of reasons, I wouldn't expect it to improve the country's credit rating, in the short-term anyway. Swaps prices are fairly volatile and do respond to daily geopolitical developments, whereas actual Government debt sales are the acid test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
We're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Austerity, on its own, will induce a deflationary spiral and continue the "death by a thousand cuts" with unemployment remaining very high and stagnant growth.
But if we don't cut spending, we'll go bankrupt very quickly as nobody will lend to us.
No win situation, unless we can find someone to lend to us at low interest rates.
Oh dear god, it's the "sure they're all as bad as each other" line. (I know you don't mean it ORA and you're 100% correct on your points, but you know the way a FF voter will read it, and it drives me demented to even catch a glimpse of this.)
If any fianna fail voters are actually reading ORA's post, please bear this in mind: if you hadn't voted FF the last time, we would still be in recession, but it's unlikely we'd be in quite so bad a recession; because Richard Bruton would be in charge of Finance, and he actually has a clue about economics.
Are you still reading? You're probably thinking now that I'm wrong, because Brian Lenihan is a great man in Finance, but if you look back on recent history and actually think about what's happened, you should see that he isn't. He has never, not once, acted proactively in the interest of the state or the people; he has been 100% reactive to events, and those reactions have been 100% in favour of a small cabal of very, very wealthy men.
That's not a good finance minister, and the only reason you have the opinion you do is because the media is too scared to call him on it, because of his illness. Simple as. Vote for whoever you want, but heed this warning, on a purely financial level, money in your pocket: If you vote Fianna Fail again, you will pay for it, and it will cost you more than a vote for another party. I absolutely guarantee this.
Ahem. For the avoidance of doubt I fully support an immediate change in Government. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
In many ways it doesn't matter whether people believe Lenihan did or didn't take the right decisions, the baggage he brings with him and the fact he's part of the furniture of the FF establishment that stands for everything that is wrong about Ireland means he, and all his colleagues, need to go.
They certainly do, but will the people that voted for FF the last time around, in spite of their performance up to that date, be able to see this?
I wish there was a way of identifying these people, little floating harps above their heads as they walk around or something. They deserve ridicule.
A good few of them have nice cushy jobs in the county councils of Ireland, are involved in FAS, doing some government sponsored scheme, or into some other quango that's around.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
(I have a good few FF voting neighbours back home that have done quite well with a FF led government- its that 25% again!)
I know guys in construction who voted FF out of fear for jobs. Ironically, all of them have since been let go.
I'd say a lot of them work in banks, work(ed) in construction and in the IFSC as well to be honest.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
There's more politically connected people working in the banks now than ever with the Government appointing public interest directors to the boards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
The main movers and shakers in the IFSC are overwhelmingly foreign IME.
The construction and property guys liked to back a winning horse.
FF voters are everywhere, across all income levels. Maybe, for the first time, that might be about to change. And if it doesn't, then God help us..
Yeah but the point is that in the upper echelons of the civil service its nearly all FF
Really? Any evidence? On the basis the civil service only promotes from within (despite repeated efforts to change) I struggle to see how the civil service has a FF bias, or more correctly, more of a FF bias than the rest of the country?Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
If we're in such a desperate situation, and our country needs to be saved, why aren't FG and Labour getting the big sharp knives out and disemboweling Cowen and co.? Why are they not hammering them without break and calling for an election - I haven't heard either leader push constantly for an election with any type of honesty or vigour. I think it's a repeat of the last election where FG (imo) didn't go the whole hog to form a rainbow government because they knew what was coming down the line. They don't want to be in government now and they certainly don't want a national government. I would never vote FF in my life as I believe they represent what is worst in our society, from the criminal DeValera to blustering Biffo, they are a lost cause, though they will fiddle their way back in through the next election, I have a sick feeling (even though none of my friends, family or relations would vote or have voted for them).
Sorry I meant the upper echelons of the civil service. Evidence - well read any recent article by Shane Ross, or look at something like RTE (or the FAI) to see how FF get their claws in. FF are not stupid, its cronyism at its bestQuote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
(How did I knew you wud reply to my post!!!The foreigner!)
They've certainly their crony's in elements of the public sector, more so than the civil service which is stricter. OT but this is the real reason for so many semi states imo.But they're probably not as many connected/ untouchables as people like to think, in my experience - it's just them that make the news. They don't need to do it in the civil service as they employ so many "advisors" - the view of the "Yes Minister" all powerful civil service isn't real (The "Thick of It" is more applicable!).
I wouldn't have a whole lot of time for senators making a very healthy extra income talking about Public Sector waste - he should be exposing this from the floor of the seanad, or in committees, not writing (expensive) books about it!