Financial Crisis

**OneRedArmy** · 26/08/2009, 4:08 PM

Originally Posted by Macy

He didn't seem to get much support when he sent around the email looking for it when he heard about Lucey's article!

Getting 5 economists to agree on something is some going, so I wouldn't discount the significance of 46 agreeing.

Economists as a profession (whether in the public, private or academic sectors) aren't exactly basking in a warm glow of a job well done at the minute, having, by and large, completely failed to see what was happening in front of their noses (Aherne and Lucey are two of the notable exceptions).

I'm not sure why their views are any less discredited that the public servants and bankers who have borne the brunt of criticism?

**Fr Damo** · 26/08/2009, 4:27 PM

[

QUOTE=John83;1219584]Yes, who pays him couldn't possibly influence what he says.

[/QUOTE]

What he getting 3 maybe 400K? this will seem like chicken feed to him because if and I hope when this thing comes to pass he will get that a month on the US lecture circut. He would have been on 250k down in galway plus tv and radio on top of that, so if doesn't believe it I don't think he would say it. I maybe a bit childish about this but we are damned if we do and more damned if we don't, NAMA is the only good thing to happen to the ISEQ in the last 12 months, pensiors feel better, jobs look safer etc etc the wheels start moving again and we gradually get back to where we were less 20% per acre!

**John83** · 26/08/2009, 4:40 PM

Originally Posted by Fr Damo

What he getting 3 maybe 400K? this will seem like chicken feed to him because if and I hope when this thing comes to pass he will get that a month on the US lecture circut.

I'm sorry, are you really trying to argue that he has a major financial incentive to push NAMA through, and therefore couldn't possibly be biased in favour of it? Really?

I'm not debating NAMA here - I haven't the knowledge of the subject to do it justice - but your arguments for Ahearn's credibility have been utterly laughable.

**Macy** · 27/08/2009, 7:33 AM

Originally Posted by dahamsta

You have your opinion and it's obvious I'm not going to change that so I won't go on about it any more. But you're wrong.

I'll agree to disagree, but I am basing it on my experience from working in the sector (11 years). Maybe I am naive, but I think you're buying into a cliche, and a UK one at that!

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

I'm not sure why their views are any less discredited that the public servants and bankers who have borne the brunt of criticism?

With economists, he who pays the piper calls the tune. Hence, I'd have more faith in independent economists than those with a vested interest.

**Ringo** · 27/08/2009, 9:19 AM

FINANCE Minister Brian Lenihan is considering a major change to NAMA by holding back some of the cash to be given to the banks in return for their bad loans.

Government sources also indicated last night that Mr Lenihan will give more information on the NAMA purchases than had been expected, when he provides details to the Dail next month.

Mr Lenihan is examining a number of ways to put further safeguards in place to protect the taxpayer, including delaying part of the payments.

The move would go some way to addressing the concerns being expressed, particularly from the Green Party, about the values of the loans being taken on by the State.

Rather than giving the entire lump sum up front to the banks for the loans, part of the payment would be held back and only paid if NAMA's assets were giving a return. This system would somewhat avoid overpaying for the assets, while still recognising the post-property bubble value of the loans.

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...s-1870800.html

Getting the Greens on board !

**dahamsta** · 27/08/2009, 9:51 AM

Originally Posted by Macy

I'll agree to disagree, but I am basing it on my experience from working in the sector (11 years).

You've worked in the sector, I've worked outside the sector, banging my head against the wall. I'd argue that I'm more qualified to comment.

**OneRedArmy** · 31/08/2009, 4:09 PM

Garrett Fitzgerald's comments re NAMA are interesting. I'm not sure Enda or Richard Bruton will thank him too much, but I would agree with what he said.

Will be interesting to see how well Lenihan does in the Oireachtas committee thats on now. The main problem is that everyone wants to know the result of the haircut now, but that won't be known until the valuation exercise is complete. Somewhat chicken and egg.

**OneRedArmy** · 31/08/2009, 8:10 PM

Just watched some of the Committee hearing.

Not Richard Bruton's finest day, to say the least. His retraction on debt default was simply embarrassing. Combined with Garrett Fitzgerald's article, FG have probably missed an opportunity.

Joan Burton fared better, whilst I disagree with the Labour plan at least it's coherent.

**Ringo** · 03/09/2009, 5:12 PM

ECB President Jean Claude Trichet has suggested that the beginning of the end of the recession is now in sight.

Mr Trichet said there were indications that 'the significant contraction in economic activity has come to an end.'

Despite the crisis in the credit markets, shrinking economies and rising unemployment, he foresees a period of stabilisation and gradual recovery.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0903/ecb.html

We have increased interest rates to look forward to.

**OneRedArmy** · 04/09/2009, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by Ringo

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0903/ecb.html

We have increased interest rates to look forward to.

Hardly a surprise? They are historically low and can't go any lower. Rising interest rates will actually be a good sign as they will reflect the brakes needing to be applied to economic growth.

Put it another way, if interest rates stay at current levels its a sign that the economy is going nowhere.

**ruben_sosa** · 08/09/2009, 4:57 PM

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

they will reflect the brakes needing to be applied to economic growth.

...in Germany and France, while we stay stagnant but still have higher rates to absorb.

**OneRedArmy** · 08/09/2009, 5:48 PM

Originally Posted by ruben_sosa

...in Germany and France, while we stay stagnant but still have higher rates to absorb.

To a certain extent, but broadly our only chance of recovery is in export led industries like IT and pharma. Property and construction crowded out other investments during the last 5 years and we need export industries to take up as much of the slack as possible.

**John83** · 09/09/2009, 9:24 AM

Originally Posted by ruben_sosa

...in Germany and France, while we stay stagnant but still have higher rates to absorb.

Artificially low rates drove the boom too. It's a price of being in the Euro. It probably saved us considerable pain with rampant currency devaluation in the last year or so too.

**OneRedArmy** · 10/09/2009, 9:08 AM

FG's bumbling around NAMA continues. Dr Dopey (Leo Varadkar) demands that NAMA "publish a list of the 1,500 developers being bailed out"......

Err, keep up Leo, its the banks that are being bailed out. NAMA will actually lessen the chance of the developers being bailed out.

**Ringo** · 10/09/2009, 11:32 AM

The Government has published revised legislation establishing the National Asset Management Agency.

Read the draft NAMA legislation and the Explanatory Memo

The Bill includes a series of amendments that were outlined in a statement by the Green Party yesterday evening.

AdvertisementIt is very unusual for a junior party in a coalition to release a series of changes to legislation, while also taking credit for them.

However, the Cabinet has put getting political backing from the Green Party for NAMA as a top priority.

Among the changes is a risk-sharing arrangement between the banks and NAMA. This means, in the case of a small proportion of the loans, the banks will not get all the money immediately.

Whether they receive further payment depends on whether NAMA is successful.

It will be a criminal offence to lobby new agency.

A tax of 80% on developers' profits will be imposed in cases where they gain from land that is rezoned.

The new agency will be obliged to report to the Minister of Finance every three months instead of every year.

Bank directors appointed before 2008 will be required to stand down over the coming two years.

Chief executives of banks will not be allowed become chairmen as happened in the case of Anglo Irish Bank.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0910/banks.html

**John83** · 10/09/2009, 1:12 PM

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

FG's bumbling around NAMA continues. Dr Dopey (Leo Varadkar) demands that NAMA "publish a list of the 1,500 developers being bailed out"......

Err, keep up Leo, its the banks that are being bailed out. NAMA will actually lessen the chance of the developers being bailed out.

Hypothetical situation: I'm a developer. My business is in bad shape. I'm probably going to default on my bank loans. NAMA buy my loans and decline to foreclose on them for a period of some years. Now, you can weasel with words all you can like, but I'm getting government help here.

**OneRedArmy** · 10/09/2009, 2:23 PM

Originally Posted by John83

Hypothetical situation: I'm a developer. My business is in bad shape. I'm probably going to default on my bank loans. NAMA buy my loans and decline to foreclose on them for a period of some years. Now, you can weasel with words all you can like, but I'm getting government help here.

Real situation. You've likely defaulted already. The banks are rolling up interest, may have been for a period of years and haven't done one thing to pursue you.

It really can't get any worse?

**John83** · 10/09/2009, 2:34 PM

And the bank stays afloat how? Government money.

Most of the people complaining that NAMA should do this or that have just been renaming money.

**OneRedArmy** · 10/09/2009, 7:04 PM

Originally Posted by John83

And the bank stays afloat how? Government money.

Most of the people complaining that NAMA should do this or that have just been renaming money.

But that Government money has to be paid one way or t'other. And its not paid by bailing out developers.

Its two separate issues and for the umpteenth time, Bruton is in a muddle. I don't follow either FG's or your logic.

As an aside, I've just finished reading the Oireachtas Committee transcript from last week and broadly Joan Burton comes out as being best in control of her brief (spoilt slightly by repeated banging of the nationalisation drum without even high level costs) but she asked a couple of great questions. Arthur Morgan

also asked a lot of good questions, but Bruton wasn't even at the races. From a man of his background I'm genuinely suprised.

**John83** · 10/09/2009, 7:43 PM

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

But that Government money has to be paid one way or t'other. And its not paid by bailing out developers.

I don't follow. You mean paid back? Some of it will, some of it won't, with the NAMA route. It's essentially life support for some businesses, an economic stimulus package in disguise (albeit not the most convincingly directed one I think). Dumping it into the banks for shares probably gets it all back eventually, but that route has its own costs - every bank charge you pay will be partly a stealth tax paying for the foreclosed loans anyway.

I've not followed FG on this much. Anything I've read seems more like electioneering than insightful analysis.