Brian Lucey has a piece in the Irish Times today (Monday) that welcomes the FG banking proposal (released last week). He says that it is superior in every way to the NAMA proposal but both proposals have shared problems (like the period in which we will have zombie banks and the guarantees to the depositors). Interesting article:
Nama plan just delaying the inevitable - The Irish Times - Mon, May 18, 2009
does anyone outseide govt support NAMA?
This is the way he sums up the FG plan:Originally Posted by Simbo67
"The consequences of this for the economy are well known and would be utterly disastrous."
His main point is that both the FG plan and NAMA have flaws, and that Nationalisation is the end game.
NAMA contains provision for nationalisation if the NAMA thesis doesn't play out.
If the FG doesn't play out, we could have a systemic collapse.
A demagogue is someone who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.
Goosebump : they both contain (FF and FG) nationalisation. So why not go there now and then...well, hopefully someone has a clue. Waiting to see HOW we fall off the cliff doesnt or shouldnt stop us planning what to do when we get to the bottom...
There is no real difference between NAMA and nationalisation in terms of their net appeal.
Both expose the taxpayers to risk and both require the issuance of massive amounts of state debt.
The downsides of nationalisation are access to finance for the banks and a massive and risky IPO somewhere down the line, which could see all our banks end up in foreign ownership. We also have to consider that the taxpayer becomes liable for every on demand deposit account in the State in one fell swoop.
The downsides of NAMA are that we might not get the sums right, which would mean the problem isn't addressed and that the taxpayer is left holding the baby.
At least NAMA removes the Government and politics from the equation, and allows us to issue debt directly to the banks rather than having to issue it to international markets.
At this point, we just need to get moving on [i]some[i] solution.
A demagogue is someone who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.
After the scandalous carry-on of the entire Irish banking sector over decades, surely this is a good thing.
The Irish banks are all deeply, deeply corrupt. The are all spectacularly insolvent. Their management from top to bottom are just wide boys, gangsters, and croneys. The Irish banks are intimately part of the problem, a major contributing factor to how we got into such a mess, and should be wound up immediately.
Of course, this is the real reason for NAMA and for Fianna Fáil's constant crazy scheming. FF don't want any of the banks to go into receivership, because then the courts would get to see the books and see exactly where the money was going and to who's benefit. FF don't want to lose their tame enablers and co-conspirators in corruption, the banks. FF want to keep the machinery of corruption in place and hope that an international upturn stabilises the economy so that they can get back to business as usual - bleeding this country dry.
Absolutely right.
Anglo Irish Bank was effectively nationalised years ago by FF and their developer friends and they used it as their own private piggy bank, except the money in that piggy bank was not theirs, it belonged to ordinary investors and depositors and it was stolen by the developers with the assistance of Fianna Fail.
Fianna Fail are not a political party. They are quite simply a criminal organisation that just happens to be in power.
NAMA, nationalisation, and the FG plan, have just have different variations of cost. FGs plan being the cheapest. In all three some government hippie with be calling the shots in the bank or banks. FGs plan has less liability.
Either way the fat cat builders will get off the hook.
Bunch of sloppy gombeen fools is all they are. Cant wait till the results in June.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote