We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Iceland tells the UK & Dutch to swivel - Again.......
Comments
-
What are interest rates in Iceland at the moment?
Their closest equivalent to the BoE's Base Rate will be the 'Loans against collateral' rate which is 4.25%.
http://www.sedlabanki.is/?pageid=194
CPI is below target at 2.3%, there is rather unusually a trade deficit which relates to technical changes caused by winding up banks (!), the unemployment rate is extremely high by Icelandic standards at over 8% (1-2% is more normal).0 -
-
poppingjay wrote: »Let's take it one step further and have a global amnesty where all countries return things they have stolen? The thought of the Queen sitting there in only her pants amuses me somewhat
Pervert....0 -
Funny how we are willing to use our military to protect people in libya, or as aid for people in pakistan (both populations hate us and want to blow us up), but we cant use our military to get money we are owed. TypicalI am not a financial expert, and the post above is merely my opinion.:j0
-
As you say, Governments are free to repudiate agreements made by previous Governments. Iceland's is choosing to do so.
That is unlikely to be consequence free. Taking on a debt of many times annual GDP is also unlikely to be consequence free. So you take your chances on one or other option.
Looks like the govts of NL and UK disagree as they are taking the matter to court."The time for negotiations is over. Iceland remains obliged to repay. The issue is now for the courts to decide," Mr de Jager said in a statement.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13029210'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
That's not true!Because most of the money being lost was local authority deposits - ie OUR MONEY.
Most of the money deposited in Icelandic banks came from private British investors, not local authorities.
We should take a step back and see how the collapse of the Icelandic banks was engineered from the City of London for its own gain.
Remember, first, that there was a run on the Krona. That was very easy to engineer since the currency is so small and vulnerable to the post-Bretton Woods floating exchange rate system. In a matter of days, the Krona lost half of its value against the euro and the pound. The name of George Soros, manager of the shadowy Anglo-Dutch Quantum Fund, springs to mind, in relation to nefarious currency operations.
However, before that currency sabotage took place, many if not most of the GBP deposits taken by the Icelandic Banks had already been converted into Krona.
The British corporate and state medias then whipped up a hysteria about the stability of the Icelandic banks.
The British investors took fright from the adverse media coverage and scrambled to withdraw their deposits from the Icelandic banks.
The inevitable happened, there was run on the Icelandic banks and they collapsed like a house of cards.
As for the Icelandic people and their culpability, precisely why should 500,000 people underwrite the deposits of a bank which was owned by half a dozen international institutions and financiers?
Furthermore, the Icelandic banks were licensed to raise 95% of their capital in London, and not Reykjavik, so the Bank of England must shoulder most of the blame for its shoddy regulation.
As for Darling's act of extraordinary compassion in reimbursing the British investors, that was always a sham.
In targetting Iceland, this was an act of economic warfare orchestrated by the City with the collusion of HMG. The British investor and his capital were used as pawns, in a ruthless consolidation plan for the European banking industry.
Perhaps the most ruthless aspect of the banking swindle is that Joe Public is expected to foot the bill for these enormous bailouts.
The compliant corporate media does not even discuss the alternatives, and they exist.
To end the Great Depression, Roosevelt introduced the Glass-Steagall Act, which put the banks through bankruptcy re-organisation.
What was crucial then and was so effective in ending the Depression, was the separation of retail banking, which is essential for every economy, from the toxic speculative "banking" of the so-called "investment banks". Under Glass-Steagall, the former were saved, and the latter were rightly left to flounder.
However, what HMG and the City did not want with the Icelandic operation was trouble on home soil from those aggrieved British (and Dutch) investors whose capital had been exploited to provide the momentum for the attack on the Icelandic economy. Hence Darling's unprecedented offer to reimburse 100% of British deposits in Icesave et al.
You can sense that the plans targetting the Icelandic economy were set in place some years before they were unwrapped.
The claim that Iceland has lost out on European Union membership because of their unwillingness to bankroll the bailout, completely misses the point. The majority of Icelandic people never wanted to join the EU. It is actually being argued by international financiers that the country MUST now join, in order to be able to drawn on the stability of the ECB, etc.
So there is another motivation for the economic attack on Iceland: to destroy its political and economic sovereignty.0 -
We should take a step back and see how the collapse of the Icelandic banks was engineered from the City of London for its own gain.
Your notion of Iceland as some poor innocent victim of speculative attack is so far away from the truth I don't know where to begin. The truth is more like British and Dutch depositors being victims of a fraudulant lure to unknowingly prop up an Icelandic banking system that was actually already in crisis back in 2006. Iceland was not a victim of the global financial crisis, rather the crisis just pulled the rug from under their ongoing scam.0 -
Funny how we are willing to use our military to protect people in libya, or as aid for people in pakistan (both populations hate us and want to blow us up), but we cant use our military to get money we are owed. Typical
I don't know where on earth you get your information from but I just love this 'we'. If by 'we' you mean our government then their actions hardly speak for the public at large.
If our armed forces are engaged somewhere then it's almost certainly to protect in the interests of the oil companies, saying they are there to protect the people is what's known as propaganda.
And what was our money doing there in the first place?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards