'Should we nationalise the banks?' poll discussion

Former_MSE_Lawrence

Poll between 19-26 Jan 2009:

Should we nationalise the banks?

This week the government covered another £200 bn of banking assets and increased its share in RBS to 70%. Is it time for us to take the whole banking system into state ownership and control?

Which of these is closest to your view of what the Government should do?

A. Don’t bail banks out, let them fail, if that’s market forces. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]26% (2139 votes)[/FONT]
B. Take stakes in banks if needed, but don’t take operational control (current situation). [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]18% (1511 votes)[/FONT]
C. Nationalise all the banks the govt is taking a share of. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]29% (2437 votes)[/FONT]
D. Nationalise ALL banks. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]9% (729 votes)[/FONT]
E. Nationalise ALL banks and building societies. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]7% (548 votes)[/FONT]
F. Other. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]1% (111 votes)[/FONT]
G. Don’t Know (don’t understand it). [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]10% (803 votes)[/FONT]
H. Don’t Care. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]1% (71 votes)[/FONT]

This vote has now closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below. Thanks

[threadbanner]box[/threadbanner]

bunking_off

Unusual...hundreds of votes but not a single comment.

Nationalisation is an anathema to me, but I went Option C. Why?

Well the current scheme may work, but there's no guarantee that even with the toxic-loan underwriting scheme, the banks will start to lend : the proceeds could be squirrelled away, paid out in the form of bonuses to the very people who got us in this mess, or paid out to shareholders. The Government claim to be leaning on the banks to curtail the excesses of some of the bonus culture, but the very fact that bonuses are still being paid at all proves the message hasn't got through.

Nationalising all banks would be profoundly unfair..why should the minority of banks that have run good businesses be penalised?

I think letting the banks fail is a bad idea...there's a potential domino effect at play here that could run out of control.

It seems to me that if the aim is to get the banks lending again, the best way - although it goes against the grain for me - is for the Government to be doing so directly rather than using intermediaries where ultimately they don't seem to exercise control. What better way than using the banks that they've acquired via nationalisation?

This would probably break a series of EU rules about state intervention, but, well, needs must. In any case, the fines involved...if we choose to pay them...would be trifling next to the amount the Government's currently ploughing in to shore up private enterprises.

tripled

I believe in A, but have voted for B because we already have too much tax payers money tied up in the banking system now to let them fail, even before this week.

benood

Other - over the last 15 years I've lost count of the number of experts who sagely said that the problem with Japan was the toxic liabilites held in their banks and if only they'd written them all off sooner then Japan could recover - easier said than done....

Some banker is suggesting sale and leaseback of all these dodgy loans don't know how it might work... but it's an idea

cymro

Putting money into any failed business is very risky. Putting money into a failed business without making radical changes to e.g management, strategy etc is just plain foolish - if things don't change the outcome will probably be the same!

If we can bail out banks why can't we bail out businesses who perhaps failed for more legitimate reasons other than poor management?

I think the government bailing out banks last year will go down as the most expensive government blunder in our generation. It comes as absolutely no surprise that the same banks are already looking for more money.

Sceptic001

Other.

The problem is that these banks are too big to be allowed to fail. Break them up into smaller units, regulate them properly and in the unlikely event that one gets into trouble it can be allowed to go bust without destroying the entire economy.

Sam_BMN

B - The state (ie us) should get something in return for a bail out, but I can't bear the thought of the politicians trying to run a business.

grumpynotoldman

We don't nationalise we regulate.
First we take Manhattan, ............................................................................

Then we take Berlin.
The reason it went wrong is that unregulated banks created unsupervised products that were indecipherable even to other bankers. Slater Walker started all this in asset stripping British manufacturing and pension fund raids. That's why they won't lend to each other now. They know they lied to each other and now don't trust them even if they are trying to tell the "truth". They don't even know how to count what they have got. Pathetic.
The fact that the govt. gave them £17k ( Robert Peston's blog) of my money , which is about equivalent to the shortfalls on my endowments makes me wince.
They seem to have just about remembered how to do old fashioned ( 80 % max LTV) which around here has stabilised the housing market, but it may just be Nationwide and Brittania, gobbling up the good risks as they can undercut everyone by 0.5% with understandable deals.
I wonder what line of work the newly unemployed Mortgage brokers went into.
Probably IVA advice and Insolvency practitioners.
Bitter, like honey, baby.:o
There's graffiti on all the bins in Brighton, with a slogan " I STOLE ALL YOUR MONEY!" and underneath the logos of all the banks.


Do you think it's Banksy

worbikeman

The problem with the banks and a lot of businesses (e.g.Royal Mail) is that huge bonuses are paid out as a 'reward' for failure. Bonuses should be just that - a reward for success only, if they are given at all. Ordinary mortals are expected to be content with just their salary. And the sack for failure.
As if those bloated fat cats needed more cash!

fi1966blue

If you nationalise the banks then all the shares are worthless.
Hundreds of thousands of people in the UK hold their savings in Bank shares and that would mean all their savings are lost.
Many people especially old Bank Staff have saved shares all their lives as a pension and also all of us with any share based savings plans would lose.
We may have lost at the moment but at least can see a light at the end of the tunnel if we hang on and wait for a change in the current climate.
NATIONALISATION means all the share money is LOST.!!!!!

teddyco

Don't nationalise the banks, regulate them!

Adam Smith, one of the greatest economists of all time and the author of 'An Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations', was a proponent of banking regulation. He knew the true nature of man and the need for strict regulation of an industry that was prone to cheating and embezzlement. How
ironic that after 250 years we still haven't learned anything from those wise men who came before us.

Letting banks fail to teach a few greedy bankers their lesson is foolish because we will all suffer. Criminal bankers should be punished with heavy fines, penalties, and lengthy prison sentences if they violate strict banking codes and regulations.

The leaders at Lehman Brothers and other banks who orchestrated our current financial catastrophe should be put in jail for 20 years minimum without parole to send a message lest other folks in the banking industry are tempted to steal.