Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

planteria

:laugh:

....but the thread has headed the way that Yorkie1 suggested it shouldn't. a debate about independence, with a glimmer of nastiness too.

laser has made me think a bit more about it, and yes, i'd rather have my money stashed south of the Wall.

JohnRo

The same as the pound? Sweet FA

CLAPTON

JohnRo wrote: »

Scratches head..

The banks had been selling each other utter garbage packaged as something shiny, there was a crisis because none of them trusted each other any more, they needed to offload it all onto someone else. The ruse was that the money from the purchasing of their toxic mess by dishonest brokers otherwise referred to as central banks will be used for lending, it's being used instead for repairing their unaudited balance sheets and plenty more of the same. Nothing more than an unproved experiment that's likely done far more harm than good, unless you're the crooks running the pyramid scheme.

Depositors are being used to bail out bankers and their bonuses.

The Icelandic banks were bankrupt and their government refused to bail out the poor old depositors: so thousands of (UK ) people lost their savings.

In the event the UK government gave personal customers their money back (bailed them out).

Exactly the same would have been the case if the government had chosen not to bail out the depositors of UK banks except the effect would have been huge in for industry and ordinary people.

Don't let your justified dislike of the senior bankers colour your judgement about the banking processes and the effect of allowing large banks to 'fail'.

Thrugelmir

planteria wrote: »

i have never heard of NatWest being part of the "Big Four", it is always Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds and RBS.

RBS wasn't in the same league in the UK until it bought Nat West.

The big four for many years were Lloyds, Barclays, Midland and Nat West.

Midland was acquired by HSBC in 1992.
Nat West by RBS in 2000.

planteria

but you are of the understanding that NatWest is not the largest part of RBS Group?

JohnRo

The opportunity to dismantle the banks in an orderly fashion and end the too big to fail or jail nonsense we have to endure now was at hand. It was not taken because governments are captured and politicians are insignificant, inept and afraid to act in the interests of the general population when facing the money printing masters of the universe.

planteria

i think there is a lot of truth in that. 'Privatise Profits and Nationalise Losses'. i read The Creature from Jekyll Island a few years back.. The Fed, how it is controlled, and the way that the whole system is skewed. people who understand this deeply were well out of bank shares before the crisis, and some have made a fortune by buying back in when they were very low, seeing the one-way bet in front of them.

JohnRo

The problem boils down to trust, the whole system is built on nothing else. Destroy that and the whole thing collapses utterly, which it very nearly did. The price to be paid by the public and the future has been to restore trust in a gang of crooks authorised to run what is essentially a fraudulent pyramid scheme the government takes a cut from.

Whether Scotland's own narcissistic psychopaths, as opposed to those in other western capitals, will ever take the opportunity should it ever arise, to change the way things are done, remains to be seen but is highly unlikely imho.

Thrugelmir

planteria wrote: »

but you are of the understanding that NatWest is not the largest part of RBS Group?

With the dismantling of the empire that Fred built then yes it will form the major rump.

planteria

but prior to the mess that RBS got into?

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Seriously? Ultser Bank, ABN Amro, Citizens bank......... After all RBS was the largest bank in the world for a short time.