LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksLoans = property development
Property development loan default= repo of property
Is that right?Then government become property owner.
Originally Posted by HanleyS
Loans = property development
Property development loan default= repo of property
Is that right?Then government become property owner.
A champion of the people emerges with the age-old and appealing promise of "something for nothing" - to be financed through every-increasing taxes. Supply and demand are thrown out of gear - the overhead goes up; the effective use of human energy goes down; the standard of living is lowered because money cannot buy wealth that is not produced.
WEAVER, HENRY GRADY,
I don't think the banks are in any position to resist, they're insolvent.
The future saviour of the Irish Economy:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
[/QUOTE]
it's not your call. Normally, it's up to the owners of the loans (the banks) and the purchaser (NAMA) to agree on a valuation. The question is how far can the state go in forcing the issue. Really, all I'm saying is that instead of doing the normal thing here, and being conservative about it (which may be what the lawyers have recommended) we shouldjust accept that the constitution might have to be changed to push through whatever is the right thing for the country.
Only if the developer goes into liquidation. The plan seems though to keep the developers on life support indefinitely to avoid liquidation. This cannot be legal under competition law. It must represent unfairly favourable lending terms.
The future saviour of the Irish Economy:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Probably pointless, but I threw together a facebook group:
Stop NAMA | Facebook
If I set up a Bank tomorrow, and raise the finance to buy loans from, say, AIB, in what way is this "distorting the market"?
It isn't my fault that there are no other buyers out there.
ACC are clearly trying to motivate some of other members of various syndicates they are involved in to buy their property loans in the very short term. They want out of the game, and they want out yesterday.
I would also suggest that people should wait until the draft Bill is published later this week. It contains lots of the detail about how the process will work. If you have comments or suggestions at that stage talk to your TD and have amendments put down at the Committee Stage.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain
“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte
Even if they are insolvent, that doesn't give the state any enhanced rights to forcibly acquire their assets.
They aren't going to resist. They can't wait to get these loans off their Balance Sheets.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." Mark Twain
“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes. Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” Napoléon Bonaparte
Ive said it once and ill say it again.
NATIONAL STRIKE
.
A clear avenue of challenge would appear to be under Article 43 of the Constitution where the exercise of private property may be delimited in the interests of the 'common good' and that are compatible with the 'principles of social justice'.
To my mind there is a clear avenue for challenge NAMA under Article 43 if, as anticipated, the State is going to grossly overpay the financial institutions for these assets and thereby exposing citizens to a massive possible losses. You can certainly argue whether this in the 'common good' and certainly whether it complies with the 'principles of social justice' as you will have a massive transfer of risk from the share and bondholders of certain financial institutions to the ordinary taxpayer.Private Property.
Article 43.
The State acknowledges that man, in virtue of his rational being, has the natural right, antecedent to positive law, to the private ownership of external goods.
The State accordingly guarantees to pass no law attempting to abolish the right of private ownership or the general right to transfer, bequeath, and inherit property.
The State recognises, however, that the exercise of the rights mentioned in the foregoing provisions of this Article ought, in civil society, to be regulated by the principles of social justice.
The State, accordingly, may as occasion requires delimit by law the exercise of the said rights with a view to reconciling their exercise with the exigencies of the common good.
Reply With Quote