Iceland tells the UK & Dutch to swivel - Again.......

FTBFun

B_Blank wrote: »

Firstly we should ban any icelandic imports. Then we should issue an ultimatium. Pay up or air strikes begin. The air strikes will hit at the heart of their economy, and to take out their military. Then we should move in and take all their gold.

That won't take long, seeing as Iceland doesn't have an army, air force, or navy. I don't believe attacking the Icelandic police with Apache gunships is the best approach in this situation really....

IronWolf

Arcaine wrote: »

Good on the people of Iceland! Taxpayers should not be on the hook for bad decisions made by banks or individual investors, here or in Iceland. I wonder how many people on this board who are arguing for the money to be paid by Iceland are OK with the 4 billion or so taxpayers in the UK will potentially pay to bail out Portugal?

You do know that the British taxpayer is the one that has paid for the Icelandic banks screwing up, thats why we want Iceland to pay us back!

Arcaine

IronWolf wrote: »

You do know that the British taxpayer is the one that has paid for the Icelandic banks screwing up, thats why we want Iceland to pay us back!

British and Dutch investors got duped into investing in a product and they didnt understand the risks. Sorry but I have no sympathy.

ILW

I still cannot understand why the British government decided to guarantee the deposits in a foreign bank, makes no sense whatsoever.

chewmylegoff

ILW wrote: »

I still cannot understand why the British government decided to guarantee the deposits in a foreign bank, makes no sense whatsoever.

same reason we insisted on the passporting scheme for banks - we thought that making it easier for banks to do business in other EU countries would result in british banks taking over europe. instead, the opposite happened.

ILW

chewmylegoff wrote: »

same reason we insisted on the passporting scheme for banks - we thought that making it easier for banks to do business in other EU countries would result in british banks taking over europe. instead, the opposite happened.

But it appears they agreed to guarantee the deposits in the Icelandic banks AFTER they went bust.

ChiefGrasscutter

You forget the "circumstances" at the time.

There would have been many people with well over the £50K protection limit kept in UK banks at that time. Up to then they had always though that HMG would always bail out the banks - ie their deposits 100% so had not really bothered about the limit

Had Gordon Brown announced he woudl only bail out savers in Icesave/Kauphting whatever up to the tune of £50K each depositor and anything above that figure would be "lost"........have you any appreciation of what would be the result the next day in the UK.

There would be a mega run on just about every single savings institution in the UK with all the people with over £50K in one group seeking to split it up among other savings groups - and I would have been among those doing it.
There would have been huge sums withdrawn from some groups and there would indeed have been banking chaos.

Gordon in effect had no option but to bail everyone out.

asbokid

ILW wrote: »

But it appears they agreed to guarantee the deposits in the Icelandic banks AFTER they went bust.

The British Treasury guaranteed 100% of deposits in the Icelandic banks when such a guarantee was denied to depositors at British banks. Fancy that!

The collapse of the Icelandic banking system was a deliberate act of sabotage. It is just one aspect of a worldwide economic warfare operation that has been orchestrated by fascist circles in the City of London.

The objective of the operation is multi-faceted.

1) The City is employing economic sabotage to tighten its hegemonic control of international banking.

2) Smaller financial players who have provided essential competition are being deliberately and unceremoniously eliminated through underhand means. Financial institutions that have been wiped out by the City oligarchy include numerous British building societies, and many of the newer banks that came about through demutualisation.

3) The taxpayers of the hapless overseas nations that nominally played host to distressed banks find themselves saddled today with the bankers' onerous debts.

This policy of shifting severe indebtedness away from the banking sector and inflicting it on the taxpayer is a well-worn and quite deliberate policy. The history of these fascist plans goes back generations.

The European banking crisis of today, and the unchallenged expectation that struggling taxpayers should pay off the crippling banking debts, bears striking similarities to an earlier City of London operation that targetted the intra-war Germany of the Weimar Republic.

Back in 1919, fascist City of London financiers were also to be found, pulling political levers from behind the scenes. Back then, bankers demanded through a clause of the Versailles Treaty (which the bankers themselves had written) that a crippling debt be paid to them by the bankrupt and demoralised German people.

That debt, the German people were told, was the price that you must pay for your "war guilt" for WWI.

The widespread poverty in Germany caused by this enormous manufactured debt had the effect of turning the Nazi party and its socialist manifesto into a very appealing proposition for the German nation.

The Nazis were offering the people a renewed sense of national pride through full employment, a grand programme of public works and, crucially, the abandonment of the debt payments ordered at Versailles.

The rest is history.

Back to the contrived Icelandic crisis, however.

The deposits of British investors, together with the funds that local authorities were virtually ordered by HMG to invest in Iceland, were exploited in the City's engineered attack on Iceland.

The use of public funds and those of a large number of small investors was deliberately designed by the City to garner widespread public support for its aggressive economic action plan against the tiny island nation.

ILW

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

You forget the "circumstances" at the time.

There would have been many people with well over the £50K protection limit kept in UK banks at that time. Up to then they had always though that HMG would always bail out the banks - ie their deposits 100% so had not really bothered about the limit

Had Gordon Brown announced he woudl only bail out savers in Icesave/Kauphting whatever up to the tune of £50K each depositor and anything above that figure would be "lost"........have you any appreciation of what would be the result the next day in the UK.

There would be a mega run on just about every single savings institution in the UK with all the people with over £50K in one group seeking to split it up among other savings groups - and I would have been among those doing it.
There would have been huge sums withdrawn from some groups and there would indeed have been banking chaos.

Gordon in effect had no option but to bail everyone out.

Still don,t get your point, surely HMG has no responsibilty for investments in foreign institutions.

leveller2911

Generali wrote: »

The UK won't be allowed to go to war with another member of NATO. It really is that simple.

Theres always conkers.........Sort it out like real men........;)