Rules are there to be broken....if it saves your skin

TruckerT

chewmylegoff wrote: »

The IMF is just a collection of people who mostly don't really know what they're doing and make it up as they go along. They have this in common with pretty much all large organisations in the entire world, which are pretty much all staffed in the same way.

Wow, that is a very bold generalisation which I mostly agree with.

At the head of most large organisations there are some people who take home enormous amounts of money. But if the organisation should fail, then they will be out of work.

Banks get taxpayer bailouts.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

Apart from Iceland, only Cyprus has experienced shut-down cash machines.

TruckerT

yes but what has Cyprus got to do with casino banking?

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

yes but what has Cyprus got to do with casino banking?

As a nation, probably very little (apart from the time-worn 'lack of regulation' argument).

As a failed banking system, the evidence is clear - they thought they were onto a winner.

It is interesting how little we hear about how Icelanders and Cypriots are managing to survive the meltdown of their banks.

Perhaps it isn't so difficult after all...

TruckerT

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

As a nation, probably very little (apart from the time-worn 'lack of regulation' argument).

As a failed banking system, the evidence is clear - they thought they were onto a winner.

It is interesting how little we hear about how Icelanders and Cypriots are managing to survive the meltdown of their banks.

Perhaps it isn't so difficult after all...

TruckerT

Iceland defaulted on it's overseas debts but bailed out it's banks for it's own people: it has returend to a fishing economy.

With Cyprus it's probably too early to say; in nay event it was based on a corrupt money laundering economy for Russian !!!!! which was eventually bound to fail.

With Argentina may 'middle class' people's savings were totally wiped out and it's still suffering high unemployment and low growth as people are reluctant to lend any money for investment.


Are you still willing to lose all your savings for the pleasure in seeing the banks fail and millions become unemployed?

grizzly1911

CLAPTON wrote: »

Are you still willing to lose all your savings for the pleasure in seeing the banks fail and millions become unemployed?

What if there are no savings lose?

Many may not be any worse position if they did fail.

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

Iceland defaulted on it's overseas debts but bailed out it's banks for it's own people: it has returend to a fishing economy.

With Cyprus it's probably too early to say; in nay event it was based on a corrupt money laundering economy for Russian !!!!! which was eventually bound to fail.

With Argentina may 'middle class' people's savings were totally wiped out and it's still suffering high unemployment and low growth as people are reluctant to lend any money for investment.


Are you still willing to lose all your savings for the pleasure in seeing the banks fail and millions become unemployed?

In Europe, the bailed-out banks are doing just fine.

But unemployment is massive and growth is low or non-existent. People's savings are being eroded by low interest rates.

Iceland sounds like a pretty chilled out place to be - they found a solution.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

grizzly1911 wrote: »

What if there are no savings lose?

Many may not be any worse position if they did fail.

virtual ALL companies keep their money in banks
if banks fail then those companies would not be able to access their money
they would not be able to pay their staff
they would not be able to pay their suppliers
one would expect they themselves would be unable to continue trading and so become bankrupt
one would expect massive unemployment
many would be in a much worse position

ordinary people, even if they have no savings usually have their salary paid into a bank
ordinary people often pay their bills via their bank
if the bank failed they would be unable to access their salary and pay their bill
many would see this as being in a worst position.
true of course they could move to another bank; however if by that time their employer ceased paying them that wouldn't be so good

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

In Europe, the bailed-out banks are doing just fine.

But unemployment is massive and growth is low or non-existent. People's savings are being eroded by low interest rates.

Iceland sounds like a pretty chilled out place to be - they found a solution.

TruckerT

I believe Iceland is rather cool.
Their solution was to bail out their banks.

TruckerT

CLAPTON wrote: »

virtual ALL companies keep their money in banks
if banks fail then those companies would not be able to access their money
they would not be able to pay their staff
they would not be able to pay their suppliers
one would expect they themselves would be unable to continue trading and so become bankrupt
one would expect massive unemployment
many would be in a much worse position

ordinary people, even if they have no savings usually have their salary paid into a bank
ordinary people often pay their bills via their bank
if the bank failed they would be unable to access their salary and pay their bill
many would see this as being in a worst position.
true of course they could move to another bank; however if by that time their employer ceased paying them that wouldn't be so good

You have said all that before - nobody disagreed with you then, and nobody disagrees with you now.

The question is 'what are we going to do about it'.

TruckerT

CLAPTON

TruckerT wrote: »

You have said all that before - nobody disagreed with you then, and nobody disagrees with you now.

The question is 'what are we going to do about it'.

TruckerT

that's very like of you to say that

however there are some people who believe that letting the banks fail would be an appropriate course of action.