BOSI - Job losses 750

[hammer]

RTÉ Business: Linen firm says 350 jobs saved

The Smart Economy

Fair play to creditors writing off most of their debts to save Irish jobs

[eoghanacht]

Your point being?

Can your tiny mind even comprehend what our bond rates would be if Lisbon had been rejected?

You lost, get used to it

My point is they sold us a crock of sh1te, it may not bother you, but it bother's most of the rest of us.

enough of the insults, it makes you look like a c*nt ,

[rockofcashel]

Suffice to say ROC that yet again you show you don't know what you're talking about on economic matters.

Go check a few facts before you post next time.

ah go on so.. tell me where I was wrong this time.. go on, outline it instead of your usual crock of Sh**e Tony

[Cassandra Syndrome]

We should be worrying about the interest rate taxpayers have to pay, luckily thanks to the Government insuring Lisbon passing and a necessary budget, the rates we have to pay are far lower than Greece.

Yeah its great that our National Debt is going from under 50 Billion to nearly 200 Billion Euro within 3 years. We should be so grateful. 5% yield is an excellent rate given that the ECB marginal lending rate is 1.75%. What a bargain.

[Digout]

ah go on so.. tell me where I was wrong this time.. go on, outline it instead of your usual crock of Sh**e Tony

Why do you bother entertaining him? Global ignore is a great function.

[hammer]

Social welfare bill 2012 €20 billion
2012 - Debt interest €10 billion
Total tax take €30 billion
Cool, we can cover social welfare & debt interest.

[tonic]

ah go on so.. tell me where I was wrong this time.. go on, outline it instead of your usual crock of Sh**e Tony

No, I'll let you do the research yourself, you just might learn something this time.

Start with the CSO and household wealth in Ireland.

I used to think there was more to you than knee jerk reactions, but that's all you are now.

[rockofcashel]

No, I'll let you do the research yourself, you just might learn something this time.

Start with the CSO and household wealth in Ireland.

I used to think there was more to you than knee jerk reactions, but that's all you are now.

Ah Tony, you are disappointing me now. You make a glib remark at the outset of the thread, and when you are called on it, you make another glib remark. So being called on it again, you then transfer the explanation to me, to cover your tracks.

So, just to amuse you, let me explain it to you in simple terms.

A poster here wondered about the amount of debt in Ireland and how it was a problem for the economy (which it is), so you tried to belittle his argument by claiming that there are assets to back up the debt.

However, my contention is, that the asset values, if realised are now much lower in many cases, the so called negative equity, than the level of debt which this asset was secured by.

Let me explain it to you in simple terms..

Person A had a bought a house for 300k...

asset worth-300k
debt liability-300k

12 months later, assuming 25% fall in asset value
asset worth-225k
debt liability-290k

No problem while Person A remains able to service debt. Negative equity doesn't matter a whit.

However, should Person A now be unable to service debt.. lets call him Mr Carroll for exemplary purpoes...

then bank liability is now 65k.. or possibly even worse

Because is Mr Carroll has no choice but to walk away from the debt altogether, then banks liability is the 290k.. because that is what is still owed.. and, if bank decides that 20,000 Mr Carrolls can't pay, and they try to realise all debts outstanding, they are likely to drive the market price of Mr Carroll asset down even further (supply and demand, economics 101 as the Yanks say)

Now, to counter this, you talk about the national asset wealth worth.. i.e. the lots and lots of people who don't owe money and have assets worth a lot more than their liabilities... fair enough, I accept that

But, lets call one of those people Mr Tonic, who has a net asset value of 500k

Will he pay Mr Carrolls debt for him ?

Nope.. so bank is still in serious trouble with debt, no matter how much Mr Tonic has in positive asset value

Do you kind of understand me now ?

[tonic]

Ah Tony, you are disappointing me now. You make a glib remark at the outset of the thread, and when you are called on it, you make another glib remark. So being called on it again, you then transfer the explanation to me, to cover your tracks.

So, just to amuse you, let me explain it to you in simple terms.

A poster here wondered about the amount of debt in Ireland and how it was a problem for the economy (which it is), so you tried to belittle his argument by claiming that there are assets to back up the debt.

However, my contention is, that the asset values, if realised are now much lower in many cases, the so called negative equity, than the level of debt which this asset was secured by.

Let me explain it to you in simple terms..

Person A had a bought a house for 300k...

asset worth-300k
debt liability-300k

12 months later, assuming 25% fall in asset value
asset worth-225k
debt liability-290k

No problem while Person A remains able to service debt. Negative equity doesn't matter a whit.

However, should Person A now be unable to service debt.. lets call him Mr Carroll for exemplary purpoes...

then bank liability is now 65k.. or possibly even worse

Because is Mr Carroll has no choice but to walk away from the debt altogether, then banks liability is the 290k.. because that is what is still owed.. and, if bank decides that 20,000 Mr Carrolls can't pay, and they try to realise all debts outstanding, they are likely to drive the market price of Mr Carroll asset down even further (supply and demand, economics 101 as the Yanks say)

Now, to counter this, you talk about the national asset wealth worth.. i.e. the lots and lots of people who don't owe money and have assets worth a lot more than their liabilities... fair enough, I accept that

But, lets call one of those people Mr Tonic, who has a net asset value of 500k

Will he pay Mr Carrolls debt for him ?

Nope.. so bank is still in serious trouble with debt, no matter how much Mr Tonic has in positive asset value

Do you kind of understand me now ?

No, you're still barking up the wrong tree. I was just wondering how long it would take you to realise it.

The national Household wealth to which I referred is about twice the national household debt. Household debt is calculated by including mortgage debt and all debts, whereas the household wealth is usually calculated excluding housing assets. If you include housing assets our wealth exceeds debt by a factor of 4.

CS wrote
"The country has about 100 Billion in savings. We are in debt 5 times as much as we save.

Lights out."

I replied
"And we've no assets at all for all that debt? That's shocking so it is."

Cue ROC jumping in with both size 11's

As you can see the original post to which I replied was making a big deal about the total household debt without even mentioning the balancing household wealth.
It was at this point you threw in your tuppence worth, managing to pick up the wrong end of both sticks in your anxiety to have a go at me.

Think before you speak or post or read even, that might do it.

[rockofcashel]

No, you're still barking up the wrong tree. I was just wondering how long it would take you to realise it.

The national Household wealth to which I referred is about twice the national household debt. Household debt is calculated by including mortgage debt and all debts, whereas the household wealth is usually calculated excluding housing assets. If you include housing assets our wealth exceeds debt by a factor of 4.

CS wrote
"The country has about 100 Billion in savings. We are in debt 5 times as much as we save.

Lights out."

I replied
"And we've no assets at all for all that debt? That's shocking so it is."

Cue ROC jumping in with both size 11's

As you can see the original post to which I replied was making a big deal about the total household debt without even mentioning the balancing household wealth.
It was at this point you threw in your tuppence worth, managing to pick up the wrong end of both sticks in your anxiety to have a go at me.

Think before you speak or post or read even, that might do it.

And still you don't address the salient point.. that those having assets are not one blind bit of use to those who have debt