Is it ok to let HBOS go under

beecher

Anyone who is 'loving' what is happening should really take a good long look at themselves and try to see the big picture.

stevetodd

beecher wrote: »

Anyone who is 'loving' what is happening should really take a good long look at themselves and try to see the big picture.

Good point, but unfortunately it will be lost on those you aimed it at.

NikkiP_2

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

Is that remark aimed at me? I haven't said anything in my post about blame.

No it wasnt , it was general statement about people who having taken out loans 'knowing' that it was unlikely they could ever repay them.
If you have done that , then it is aimed at you.

StevieJ

NikkiP wrote: »

Youdo of course realise that it is not just the banks who are to blame. They dint force people to take loans they could not afford.
If you read the majority of posts on this board you can easily see why the banks are now in trouble. The level of debt by people on here is absolutely scary and has contributed hugely to the present position.

The banks are supposed to manage risk on behalf of their shareholders, that means lending to people that can pay them back :T In my view, not only did they not manage the risk but they were constantly trying to foist debt on to sometimes vulnerable (sometimes thick ). One of the benefits of the credit crunch has been the cessation of the vast swathes of trash that used to come through my letterbox from the lending institutions

zedyy

Why not? if a business fails it doesnt get a bail out, why should a bank?

MrFonzerelli

If the bank heads had a majority of their salaries paid as long term locked in shares rather as annual salary with bonuses, they would have been more responsible in their risk taking.:T

As it happens the bank heads have walked away with their many millions and a public apology that's worth less than the pound.:mad:

cogito

If I was a Lloyds shareholder I would be very hacked off about the takeover of HBoS. As the government were bailing out the banks, what exactly was the point of it?

StevieJ

cogito wrote: »

If I was a Lloyds shareholder I would be very hacked off about the takeover of HBoS. As the government were bailing out the banks, what exactly was the point of it?

Remind me, who voted it through ?

julieq

Disaster innit. I mean Lloyds would never apply over-stringent asset valuation critera to HBOS so that if all of the writedown didn't actually turn out to be worst case they'd have a stonking start to next year?

RHYSDAD

Will i still have to pay my mortgage if 'Halifax' goes?