Use of "bailout" word in NAMA debate

[Hal]

SPN's point was that Nama will have no problem crystalising the losses by liquidating the deveopers and taking the loses. But the banks wouldn't be able to do this because they can't afford to take those loses. So rather than them doing it and taking the loses, Nama / the public will, and take the loses.

NAMA is just buying time for the banks. In the end whatever losses there might be will be carried by the bank in full.

[Noel Dwyer]

Oh by levies? Yeah that's true. Kinda like when it turned out the new bank guarantees are going to be more expensive for the banks, one of the bank chiefs came out and said that they will in time raise mortgage rates on current mortgage holders to cover the cost.

[Hal]

Oh by levies? Yeah that's true. Kinda like when it turned out the new bank guarantees are going to be more expensive for the banks, one of the bank chiefs came out and said that they will in time raise mortgage rates on current mortgage holders to cover the cost.

If you're going to dismiss the answers why are you asking questions. Just tell us you have your mind made up and be done with it.

[Noel Dwyer]

I have my mind made up. I ask questions in an attempt to counter spin.

[Hal]

I have my mind made up. I ask questions in an attempt to counter spin.

Ah "spin", the closed minds word for counter argument.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, except if it differs to yours, in which case they are only entitled to "spin". very big of you.

[Noel Dwyer]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, regardless of whether it differs from mine. If it seems to be blatant spin from my point of view, I'll put my point of view accross in an attempt to counter it.

Ok hal. As I said any levi applied to the bank will go directly on the customer. Do you disagree with that? Do you genuinely believe the banks top folks, unless required to by the goverment, will take a wage / bonus cut to cover a levi?

[Hal]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, regardless of whether it differs from mine. If it seems to be blatant spin from my point of view, I'll put my point of view accross in an attempt to counter it.

Ok hal. As I said any levi applied to the bank will go directly on the customer. Do you disagree with that? Do you genuinely believe the banks top folks, unless required to by the goverment, will take a wage / bonus cut to cover a levi?

Yes they will pay a levy, they will have no choice. No they won't pass it on, if they could charge more they'd already be doing it.

What has bank salaries got to do with a bank levy? They are of an entirely different order of magnitude with nothing to do with one another at all.

Another opinion is never “spin” unless you can’t counter it, then “spin” is the excuse, nothing more.