What's the worst that could happen?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:30 am

Everybody's panicking in the streets. All I hear is that we can't let the banks fail, we can't let the markets fail, we have to nationalize this or that ............

Why?

What would happen if gov't allowed the "correction" to occur naturally?

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:38 am

Accountable;1018317 wrote: Everybody's panicking in the streets. All I hear is that we can't let the banks fail, we can't let the markets fail, we have to nationalize this or that ............

Why?

What would happen if gov't allowed the "correction" to occur naturally?

I think your banking system would collapse, the dollar would collapse, the US would slide into a depression lasting at least a decade, and the consequences would be extraordinarily serious for ordinary people of allowing the market to rip up the economic life of the nation for the sake of the free market philosophy. Its more important to my mind that the economic structure of the nation is allowed to survive than just fulfilling the ideological agenda of free market fundamentalism. But then I am a European, and we have a more state-based approach to life, its interesting to see what will happen.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:44 am

Galbally;1018324 wrote: I... the consequences would be extraordinarily serious for ordinary people of allowing the market to rip up the economic life of the nation ....
That's what I mean. Serious in what way?

Post by **spot** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:46 am

The words you're missing there, Galbally, are ten million dead from homelessness and starvation in the tent cities that would be regularly bulldozed by whatever municipalities they sprang up in.

QUINNSCOMMENTARY · Post by **QUINNSCOMMENTARY** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:35 am

Accountable;1018333 wrote: That's what I mean. Serious in what way?

Check your history books from 1929 to 1941 and you will get an idea of what can happen and how bad it could be. On the other hand, if you are one of the 75% who had a job and didn't live where they had dust storms, how bad could it be?

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:09 am

There are already homeless people in USA.....there have been for years. Wages did not keep up with the cost of housing. There are actually employed people living in shelters here because they don't make enough to afford housing. There are homeless families living in shelters too.

They say the unemployment rate is 6.1%, but they calculate that by counting the people who are on unemployment relief payments which only lasts for six months. After that you are not counted anymore. Bottom line is they don't tell us what the unemployment rate actually is. We have probably already been in depression for a few years now.

The reason they started the subprime lending is because the average person could no longer afford to buy a house on the old system. This was not the case 30 or 40 years ago. At that time almost anyone could afford some kind of house.

But the banks had to keep the lending going to keep making money. Now that they lent to people who could not pay, the scheme hit a brick wall.

Nothing will happen if banks don't get bail money...except some banks will go out of business. But since not every single bank did this, they will not all go out of business. Giving money to banks will not solve the homeless problem or job loss problem.

So bottom line....if the banks don't get bailed nothing will happen except to the banks. This is just a scare tactic.

And they don't have that money yet because there are conditions that they don't really want to agree to. And banks don't want to lend to each other because they don't trust each other right now. This is so ironic. They don't trust each other...lol. They know that they are all lying and cooking the books...and it is taking them down.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:11 am

Accountable;1018333 wrote: That's what I mean. Serious in what way?

Mass homelessness, mass poverty on a third world scale, mass social upheaval, a massive loss of productive capital through a collapse in equity prices, and in general a destabilization of the whole system. Its not worth allowing philosophical rigidity of the financial and intellectual elite to overcome the common good of the people, thats precisely why communism collapsed, because in the final analysis it wasn't much use to the common soviet citizen that they lived in a military superpower when their own personal lives were so miserable that they lost all respect and faith in the system.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:38 am

Galbally;1018390 wrote: Mass homelessness, mass poverty on a third world scale, mass social upheaval, a massive loss of productive capital through a collapse in equity prices, and in general a destabilization of the whole system. Its not worth allowing philosophical rigidity of the financial and intellectual elite to overcome the common good of the people, thats precisely why communism collapsed, because in the final analysis it wasn't much use to the common soviet citizen that they lived in a military superpower when their own personal lives were so miserable that they lost all respect and faith in the system.

I think it's the other way around. We were already having mass homelessness. This city is full to the brim with homeless people, homeless shelters, food lines etc. There is already mass social upheaval. There are armed take over robberies almost daily.

This was happening before the failure of the banks. The banks are failing because they make money lending money....but there is almost no one left to lend money to.

Wages are so low compared to housing that if people borrow money they soon get maxed out and then can't pay. They can't sustain the payments. Also there is no disposable income. People can't even make enough for the basics. They have to use credit to just get by. But since they are making less than they have to spend to live, they soon max out on their credit and then default.

It's no about philosophy. It is about whether bailing out banks is effective. Will it raise wages? No. Will it end homelessness? No. How does it help the economy to give money to banks?

The banks can't make it because of the economy. They can't make money from people who have no disposable income. It is not that the economy can't make it without the banks.....but the banks can't make money from an economy that has no money in it.

CARLA · Post by **CARLA** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:10 am

Simply it is called a "Depression" it happened once it could happen again and now is as good as time as any for that to occur if something isn't done.

My Parents and Grand Parents lived thought the depression. I have heard to horror stories don't want to relive that part of our history.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:13 am

wildhorses;1018389 wrote:

And banks don't want to lend to each other because they don't trust each other right now. This is so ironic. They don't trust each other...lol. They know that they are all lying and cooking the books...and it is taking them down.

That may happen in your country but never in England.

Our Politicians are of the finest upstanding truthful people one could ever vote into Parliment.

Our banking chiefs only have the interests of the common working man in their hearts. They strive every day to make life better for the under-privaliged in England.

We are all jolly proud of them, why we even line the streets to cheer them on their way to a hard day's work at The House of Commons.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:17 am

oscar;1018625 wrote: That may happen in your country but never in England.

Our Politicians are of the finest upstanding truthful people one could ever vote into Parliment.

Our banking chiefs only have the interests of the common working man in their hearts. They strive every day to make life better for the under-privaliged in England.

We are all jolly proud of them, why we even line the streets to cheer them on their way to a hard day's work at The House of Commons.

Oscar, you are waaayyyyy too funny girl:wah::wah: Do you sit up at night thinking of funny things to say:-6

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:30 am

Kathy Ellen;1018629 wrote: Oscar, you are waaayyyyy too funny girl:wah::wah: Do you sit up at night thinking of funny things to say:-6

No, it comes naturally after living with Mr Oscar for many years :wah

AND JUMPIN JACK FLASH IS A GAS GAS GAS :guitarist

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:01 am

QUINNSCOMMENTARY;1018380 wrote: Check your history books from 1929 to 1941 and you will get an idea of what can happen and how bad it could be. On the other hand, if you are one of the 75% who had a job and didn't live where they had dust storms, how bad could it be?

That 25% that gets thrown about - is that the peak number or the number at the time of the crash? I'm guessing it was peak. Any idea of the stat at the time of the crash?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:06 am

CARLA;1018618 wrote: Simply it is called a "Depression" it happened once it could happen again and now is as good as time as any for that to occur if something isn't done.

My Parents and Grand Parents lived thought the depression. I have heard to horror stories don't want to relive that part of our history.
A lot of experts say that the depression was prolonged by the gov't programs, that the pain would have been over sooner without them.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:14 am

Accountable;1018970 wrote: A lot of experts say that the depression was prolonged by the gov't programs, that the pain would have been over sooner without them.

The panic's over it seems. -- Check out thread, "British Prime Minister solves worlds economic crisis". All posts welcome. :-6

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:02 pm

Accountable;1018970 wrote: A lot of experts say that the depression was prolonged by the gov't programs, that the pain would have been over sooner without them.

Yeah, there are always a lot of well paid experts working for rich people who can point out how the poor people have to starve so the rich people can get their children helicopters.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 1:45 pm

oscar;1018639 wrote: No, it comes naturally after living with Mr Oscar for many years :wah

AND JUMPIN JACK FLASH IS A GAS GAS GAS :guitarist

You really are funny...I'm glad you're part of our garden:-6:p

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:51 pm

Kathy Ellen;1019229 wrote: You really are funny...I'm glad you're part of our garden:-6:p

Why thank you kind Maam.

I'm afraid Mr Oscar's get up and go, got up and went rather some time ago. I have to make my own amusement these days.

They don't let me out much and i'm not allowed anything sharp to write with here in own lunatic asylum, or Great Britain as some like to call it.

I really appreciate that. I shall go and prod Mr Oscar to tell him what you said.

Happy posting and watch out for those sneaky Mexicans sneaking under that chicken wire:sneaky::sneaky:

We'll worry about the Ruskie's, you deal with the Mexicans. :wah:

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:49 pm

wildhorses;1018389 wrote: There are already homeless people in USA.....there have been for years. Wages did not keep up with the cost of housing. There are actually employed people living in shelters here because they don't make enough to afford housing. There are homeless families living in shelters too.

They say the unemployment rate is 6.1%, but they calculate that by counting the people who are on unemployment relief payments which only lasts for six months. After that you are not counted anymore. Bottom line is they don't tell us what the unemployment rate actually is. We have probably already been in depression for a few years now.

The reason they started the subprime lending is because the average person could no longer afford to buy a house on the old system. This was not the case 30 or 40 years ago. At that time almost anyone could afford some kind of house.

But the banks had to keep the lending going to keep making money. Now that they lent to people who could not pay, the scheme hit a brick wall.

Nothing will happen if banks don't get bail money...except some banks will go out of business. But since not every single bank did this, they will not all go out of business. Giving money to banks will not solve the homeless problem or job loss problem.

So bottom line....if the banks don't get bailed nothing will happen except to the banks. This is just a scare tactic.

And they don't have that money yet because there are conditions that they don't really want to agree to. And banks don't want to lend to each other because they don't trust each other right now. This is so ironic. They don't trust each other...lol. They know that they are all lying and cooking the books...and it is taking them down.

Consider what happens when any company becomes bankrupt. An Administrator is appointed who's job it is to maximise the repayments to the creditors of the company by recovering as much of is assets as possible - those assets including the debts owed to the company.

Now apply that to a bank going under - the creditors are the people with money on deposit - savings, and the assets not only include the building etc but are mainly made up of the outstanding loans.

What you have is a double whammy, firstly your loans (including your mortgage) will be foreclosed - can you afford to pay them back out of savings? At the same time, remember, your savings have gone because the bank they're lodged with is bankrupt. You cannot sell your house because everyone else is in the same boat. You have no job because the company you work for is in the same boat.

Basically you have just been evicted and you are penniless, even if you're one of the lucky ones who's debit free and keeps their life savings under the mattress you cannot buy anything because all of the shops have gone belly up. Inflation is running riot and what money you have is useful only for lighting the fire.

The country is now back to a barter economy with no working transport system and very little administration but, don't worry, it all just a scare tactic.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:10 pm

Jester;1018420 wrote: The worst is that home prices settle to a real price instead of an artificially high level of speculative priceing based on what someone 'can' sell a home for rather than what its value really is.

Thats what destroyed the hoem market, speculative value, the system collapsed on itself.

No 3/2 home, even if it has a big lot is worth half a million dollars! Thats rediculous!

What we should have done is refuse to buy the homes when they were so expensive, instead of allowing more borrowing, we should have sat on the homes and let them go to bid like they are now!

NO- DO NOTHING the market will right itself. Some banks will fail some will get stronger.

The doom and gloom your all portraying is exactly in line with the hookey global warming doomers. We're all gonna die by 2013 anyway when the polar ice caps melt! Who cares what happens in the market.

And by the way Im stealing christmas this year.

Nothing will happen except that the doom and gloomers will get air time.

So how do you see the economy running without the money flow from the banks - remember that 70% of your economy is retail and if people do not have money to spend there is no economy.

You are a prudent man, you live within your means and have no need for the banks to lend you a penny and, barring day to day cash, your assets are in land and material. What about your customers? Are they so prudent?

If your customers cannot pay you, how will your cash flow do?

If you cannot sell assets, how will you raise capital?

Everything is interlinked and no man is an island - you are as dependant on the economy as everyone else.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:38 pm

Bryn Mawr;1019420 wrote: So how do you see the economy running without the money flow from the banks - remember that 70% of your economy is retail and if people do not have money to spend there is no economy.

You are a prudent man, you live within your means and have no need for the banks to lend you a penny and, barring day to day cash, your assets are in land and material. What about your customers? Are they so prudent?

If your customers cannot pay you, how will your cash flow do?

If you cannot sell assets, how will you raise capital?

Everything is interlinked and no man is an island - you are as dependant on the economy as everyone else.

good heavens Bryn, we agree

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:39 pm

fuzzy butt;1019435 wrote: Nothing bad is going to happen. Economies have to breathe. the world economy is breathing in at the moment it will breathe out again in a few years .

In the words of Paul Keating - "this is the reccession we had to have"

True, but in America, it ran out of breath along time ago.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:02 pm

fuzzy butt;1019444 wrote: Not necessarily. if they hadn't pulled the plug it would have bankrupted the country. They're not dead in the water yet, they're just taking stock.

Our government has just garrenteed all deposits for the next three years..............thank god.

Hi fuzzy, we've been debating the economic crisis all day. Hop over to the thread "British Prime Minister solves world crisis".

I won't bore you with it all again as i think it's on most threads now but our government bought our banks out this morning, sacked the bank chiefs and directors. They invested a massive amount of government cash which basically means the taxpayer owns the banks now with the government ruling them.

It's great news and lots of excitement here in the press.

It means banking is freed up but no fat bonus's going out to fat cat money men.

15 EU countries are following Gordon Browns agreement with more expected to follow and Bush expected to accept the agreement as well.

It's early days yet but if Bush does except it, America shouldn't have a problem and shares will rise.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:50 pm

Bryn Mawr;1019386 wrote: Consider what happens when any company becomes bankrupt. An Administrator is appointed who's job it is to maximise the repayments to the creditors of the company by recovering as much of is assets as possible - those assets including the debts owed to the company.

Now apply that to a bank going under - the creditors are the people with money on deposit - savings, and the assets not only include the building etc but are mainly made up of the outstanding loans.

What you have is a double whammy, firstly your loans (including your mortgage) will be foreclosed - can you afford to pay them back out of savings? At the same time, remember, your savings have gone because the bank they're lodged with is bankrupt. You cannot sell your house because everyone else is in the same boat. You have no job because the company you work for is in the same boat.

Basically you have just been evicted and you are penniless, even if you're one of the lucky ones who's debit free and keeps their life savings under the mattress you cannot buy anything because all of the shops have gone belly up. Inflation is running riot and what money you have is useful only for lighting the fire.

The country is now back to a barter economy with no working transport system and very little administration but, don't worry, it all just a scare tactic.

Giving money to the banksters is not the answer. Or should I say ...buying inflated mortgages is not the answer.

What the banks want at this point is for the USA taxpayer to buy mortgages at the inflated price that they lent to the homeowner. The homes are not worth those inflated prices.

They should instead either buy the bank and run it...kick out the management...or...they should refinance the mortgages directly with the homeowner at the current value of the homes. Then the inflated portion should be the bank's loss. And since the government would then have control of the banks in question, they can lend for other purposes as well.

The bank management who are responsible should not be given play money at taxpayer expense. They have already proven they can't handle money and are not honest.

Otherwise the bailout is doomed to fail. And the economy already is regardless of any bailout. There are already homeless people, jobless people. That was already happening. Any bailout will not solve this. People need jobs...at real wages...to be able to have any economy.

Banks don't create the economy...people do...consumers. If people can't make money, they can't spend it. It is the consumer who is the foundation, not banks. Banks just figure out how to make money from the economy.

I still think it is a scare tactic to say if we don't hand over money to the banks that it will cause the economy to fail.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:13 pm

wildhorses;1019616 wrote: Giving money to the banksters is not the answer. Or should I say

They should instead either buy the bank and run it...kick out the management...or...they should refinance the mortgages directly with the homeowner at the current value of the homes. Then the inflated portion should be the bank's loss. And since the government would then have control of the banks in question, they can lend for other purposes as well.

The bank management who are responsible should not be given play money at taxpayer expense. They have already proven they can't handle money and are not honest.

Banks don't create the economy...people do...consumers. If people can't make money, they can't spend it. It is the consumer who is the foundation, not banks. Banks just figure out how to make money from the economy.

I still think it is a scare tactic to say if we don't hand over money to the banks that it will cause the economy to fail.

This has already happened today in Britain. The Prime Minister Gordon Brown used massive government funds to buy out the banks. He would not agree to the deal unless the bank chiefs resigned which they had no choice.

The bank directors are out of a job and will be replaced by government appointed personel. No bonus's etc will be paid to the fat cats at the top.

The government will now have control of the banks and the banks in effect belong to the tax payers.

This freed up lending enabling the stock market to rise.

Gordon Brown in the week took extrordinary steps, using anti-terrorism laws to bankrupt Iceland who owe the world £35 billion. After they refused to repay British Investment, he froze Icelands assets and forced them into ceasing trading.

15 European countries are to follow in Gordon Brown's agreement, with more speculated and Bush looking about to follow suit.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:22 pm

oscar;1019628 wrote: This has already happened today in Britain. The Prime Minister Gordon Brown used massive government funds to buy out the banks. He would not agree to the deal unless the bank chiefs resigned which they had no choice.

The bank directors are out of a job and will be replaced by government appointed personel. No bonus's etc will be paid to the fat cats at the top.

The government will now have control of the banks and the banks in effect belong to the tax payers.

This freed up lending enabling the stock market to rise.

Gordon Brown in the week took extrordinary steps, using anti-terrorism laws to bankrupt Iceland who owe the world £35 billion. After they refused to repay British Investment, he froze Icelands assets and forced them into ceasing trading.

15 European countries are to follow in Gordon Brown's agreement, with more speculated and Bush looking about to follow suit.

This is great news. I am glad that leaders of Britain have some common sense and backbone. I am still holding out hope for USA.

Actually I read that Bush is trying to change strategy on the use of the bailout money. I am hoping he will follow Gordon Brown's excellent example. I think it can work if the corrupt banksters are put out of business. The banks can then be run with the good of the country in mind.

I am not sure if this will help our economy. Wages have been eroded and so people don't have much disposable income to drive the economy. So I am holding out hope that they will come up with a strategy to solve this problem.

I heard about British account holders not being able to access their money in Iceland. That is just terrible. I hope they will soon get their money. Are they going to get all their money back?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:53 pm

wildhorses;1019630 wrote: This is great news. I am glad that leaders of Britain have some common sense and backbone. I am still holding out hope for USA.

Actually I read that Bush is trying to change strategy on the use of the bailout money. I am hoping he will follow Gordon Brown's excellent example. I think it can work if the corrupt banksters are put out of business. The banks can then be run with the good of the country in mind.

I am not sure if this will help our economy. Wages have been eroded and so people don't have much disposable income to drive the economy. So I am holding out hope that they will come up with a strategy to solve this problem.

I heard about British account holders not being able to access their money in Iceland. That is just terrible. I hope they will soon get their money. Are they going to get all their money back?

Firstly, the Iceland issue. as i said, they owed £35 billion to the world. Icelandic government illegally refused to pay it back to British Investors. Gordon Brown used the anti-terrorism law to bankrupt them. Iceland's government then told British government that they were "Seeking new friends". This was Russia who was offering to give Iceland more money from their EU revenue. Gordon Brown then threatened Iceland with legal action to get British money back. Iceland just did not have any capitol to re-pay and were just refusing . After the action Brown took, Iceland asked for talks with Brown and they have offered a small intermediate re-payment. What Brown might do, is what he did this morning, which is to shore up the British Investors into Icelandic banks with government money until they go through the process of getting it all back.

I read on line today, that Icelandic civilians are walking round with banners saying "Gordon Brown is a bastard". No, they just under-estimated the man.

If Bush takes gordon Brown's agreement which looks very likely, your banking chiefs and fat cats who have been creaming off the taxpayer for years, will lose their jobs. the package is a set deal. It can not be signed unless giant bank chiefs resign and the directors replaced with government personnel. It is the only way the deal can work.

you can't have a situation where the government and the tax payer own the banks, and still have the fat cats sitting at the tops on massive salerys.

Gordon Brown today is a hero to the man in the street but the money men must hate him for ruining them.

Gordon Brown has huge experience in Finance. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer under Tony Blair until he took over as Prime Minister. It's why so many European countries are trusting his agreement and going withy it.

I think Bush will just have no option, after bailout, he has to free the banks to lend again and get the shares moving.

Gordon Brown has his critics over what he did to Iceland but come on??? £35 billion they owed and still wanted more. They have a population of just 300,000 for goodness sake. Yes, o.k. he bankrupted another country. That's what happens when they threaten to go to the Ruskie's.

I just hope Bush listens to him, but the money men on Wall Street will hate him.

There should be an announcement over the next week as to what Brown and Bush have agreed to.

I really hope it works out for America as well as us.

The White House will have control of the banks and govern what ever they do in the future.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 11:38 pm

Jester;1019497 wrote: ahh lets see here...

I see the economy doing just fine, I think the idiots that made bad decisons should go out fo business, the idiots that accepted bad loans shoud learn thei rlesson the hard way and I think the big companies that were run by th swindleres should get put in a pinata and give ball bats to the people they swindled for some batting practice.

I think the whole market will settle and when it does a new breed of smarter business man will be at the helm, the kind that dont borrow money to build their business, if you have to do that you dont deserve to build your business.

You know Im set actually, I did not borrow money and I dont owe anything to anyone, so if I slow down I will be fine. If my business stops I will be fine. I have my pension, and I have rentals that are bought and paid for. The onyl thign that will affect me will be the inflation that will hit and devalue the dollar.

The truth is that this isnt a hard enough hit to our economy to change much, or to convince the bad finaincal boondogglers to stop being so specualtive, and greedy. I dont see any runs on banks and I see the market in flux.

To get out of this mess we need to retool our infrastructure and put people back to work, thats the key, drill for oil, domestic oil now, go to aflat rate tax and get rid of the tax code boon for the politicians to manipulate and have power over and tell them idiot politicians to get the heck out of states rights. Alaska should be selling oil to the highest bidder on the open market as a state economy, Kansas should be selling wheat to the higest bidder on the open world market as a state economy, California should be selling grapes to the world market etc etc etc. No US Federal middle man. The feds shoudlnt be in california banks, or kansas banks or alaska banks for that matter.

The mess we have is because we dont let our states operate independently of the federal government.

Teh feds should build and maintian the infrastructure, protect our borders and guard the constituitonal rights of individuals, and thats all. The rest is up to the states.

Thankfully, you won't ever have to find out - the leaders of countries around the world have taken sufficient action that they should have prevented the collapse which would have been hard enough to hit your economy for six (think Russia in 1989) with enough left over to bring down many other countries at the same time.

Retooling a countries infrastructure during a collapse would be a neat trick to pull off - you generally have to wait for the dust to settle and them put the pieces back together in a different way, otherwise everything you try gets pulled down with the rubble.

wildhorses · Post by **wildhorses** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:07 am

oscar;1019641 wrote: Firstly, the Iceland issue. as i said, they owed £35 billion to the world. Icelandic government illegally refused to pay it back to British Investors. Gordon Brown used the anti-terrorism law to bankrupt them. Iceland's government then told British government that they were "Seeking new friends". This was Russia who was offering to give Iceland more money from their EU revenue. Gordon Brown then threatened Iceland with legal action to get British money back. Iceland just did not have any capitol to re-pay and were just refusing . After the action Brown took, Iceland asked for talks with Brown and they have offered a small intermediate re-payment. What Brown might do, is what he did this morning, which is to shore up the British Investors into Icelandic banks with government money until they go through the process of getting it all back.

I read on line today, that Icelandic civilians are walking round with banners saying "Gordon Brown is a bastard". No, they just under-estimated the man.

If Bush takes gordon Brown's agreement which looks very likely, your banking chiefs and fat cats who have been creaming off the taxpayer for years, will lose their jobs. the package is a set deal. It can not be signed unless giant bank chiefs resign and the directors replaced with government personnel. It is the only way the deal can work.

you can't have a situation where the government and the tax payer own the banks, and still have the fat cats sitting at the tops on massive salerys.

Gordon Brown today is a hero to the man in the street but the money men must hate him for ruining them.

Gordon Brown has huge experience in Finance. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer under Tony Blair until he took over as Prime Minister. It's why so many European countries are trusting his agreement and going withy it.

I think Bush will just have no option, after bailout, he has to free the banks to lend again and get the shares moving.

Gordon Brown has his critics over what he did to Iceland but come on??? £35 billion they owed and still wanted more. They have a population of just 300,000 for goodness sake. Yes, o.k. he bankrupted another country. That's what happens when they threaten to go to the Ruskie's.

I just hope Bush listens to him, but the money men on Wall Street will hate him.

There should be an announcement over the next week as to what Brown and Bush have agreed to.

I really hope it works out for America as well as us.

The White House will have control of the banks and govern what ever they do in the future.

I certainly hope Bush gets this one right. You are right. We can't have a situation where the taxpayer money is in the banks and the corrupt banksters are in charge of it. It would alleviate the situation only very temporarily, but then would go off the cliff shortly. This is why I said the bailout (in it's current form) can't work.

As far as bankrupting another country...OK he did. But sometimes you have to play hardball. Sometimes it is necessary to survive. I agree with what Gordon Brown did, under the circumstances.

Millions of Americans have written to their legislators and Bush about this situation. We know it can't work just to hand over the money. We hope for a sustainable outcome.

LOL....the money men hate Gordon Brown? Well that is to his credit. He should wear it as a badge of honor.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:51 am

Nobody sees the irony?

The gov't encouraged, even pushed, the banks into doing what they did, and now the gov't is punishing the CEOs for doing exactly what they were paid to do. Banks are businesses. The businesses did what businesses do. I'm not saying the CEOs aren't getting what they deserve. I'm just saying we shouldn't be lauding the politicians and calling them heroes for trying to clean up a mess they created in the first place.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:43 am

I agree with accountable, I give the British (and other European countries including Ireland) for grasping the nettle and doing something decisive. But the caveat is this, we should not be in this position in the first place. The economic rules of the past 20 years have been a nonsense, banks have been allowed to run up massive foriegn borrowings and now the national governments are having to guarentor those borrowings.

Ultimately we are moving massive amounts of private debt into public debt that is still going to have to be paid back somehow; which means the public borrowing of all of our nations is now massive, and the good news is that all this extra public borrowing we are going to have to pay for has already been wasted years ago loaned out by banks and spent (by us) on private consumption and a stupid property boom, from which all who bought property are going to take a hit on.

All those fat arsed jeeps, oversized ineffieicnt houses, expensive holidays, fancy furniture, credit card impulse purchases and general crap that surrounds us, but of course commerical property is the real black hole where all the money has been thrown, what an incredible waste. If you think that there is no long-term consequence of all that wasted money, then your living a delusion. Our generation have ensured the relative poverty of the next generation or two, we should be ashamed.

You see, hardly any of the capital poured into our societies over the past 10 years has been used contructively to benefit the long term prosperity of our socities by actually investing in produtive enterprise or publically beneficial infrastructure.

Most has been wasted on overpriced land and property, which has become an obscene mechanism for enriching property developers, large-scale land owners, and bank officials (who now somehow have become multi-million and billionaires) while the ordinary citizens continue to pay back the loans they paid them with for the next thirty years, while public services are cut and taxes now rise to bailout the system that the money men have so comprehensively robbed.

That means that no only will you be paying your mortgage to the guys who just empoverished your country, your taxes will increase, and your money will be worth less, and guess who are the only people who made any money out of it? Yep, the same guys who caused it, sickening eh? Still in favour of the bold and brave free market, run by criminals, and paid for by the taxpayer, while social services and infrastructure crumble and decay?

So now the people responsible are walking away with enourmous pensions and payoff, while the politcians who presided over it clean up the mess they failed to deal with 10 years ago and act like they should get medals! Its absolutley outrageous that this situation has been allowed to happen in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I am hopeful that the plans that have been unveiled do stop the rot in the financial system, but there needs to be a complete rethink of how global and national finance is organized, and also how we run our economies, as its apparent that the last decade or two have been an economic nonsense, living the high life on borrowed money, undermining our socities with easy wealth that our children and their children are now going to have to pay for.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:52 am

wildhorses;1019685 wrote: I certainly hope Bush gets this one right. You are right. We can't have a situation where the taxpayer money is in the banks and the corrupt banksters are in charge of it. It would alleviate the situation only very temporarily, but then would go off the cliff shortly. This is why I said the bailout (in it's current form) can't work.

As far as bankrupting another country...OK he did. But sometimes you have to play hardball. Sometimes it is necessary to survive. I agree with what Gordon Brown did, under the circumstances.

Millions of Americans have written to their legislators and Bush about this situation. We know it can't work just to hand over the money. We hope for a sustainable outcome.

LOL....the money men hate Gordon Brown? Well that is to his credit. He should wear it as a badge of honor.

I have been a staunch Labour party member for years (Blair/Brown government) and over the last year, i have just despaired at some of their antics. I resigned from the Labour Party refusing to give any more donations to them).

Gordon Brown has only been Prime Minister for about a year although he has huge experience in charge of Britain's finances under Blair.

I am beginning to wonder now if Brown had this genius all along but was held back by Tony Blair and backbiting members of his cabinet. We have a long history of our politicians stabbing each other in the back.

I have to say that when the press were hailing Gordon Brown last night as the mastermind behind saving the whole world from economic disaster, i have been a tad proud. If he pulls off the whole agreement, he will in no doubt be hailed as one of the greatest world leaders. This will probably cost his opposition the next election battle against him.

I was a little concerned that he would back down in the face of the threat of Iceland going to Russia but again, he steered the threat.

I did say on another thread some time ago that i always believed that Gordon Brown was not a man to be messed with. (He's scottish, that says a lot!). I think we just have not had a situation serious enough for the world to see that until now.

Even his opposition, The Tory Party have come out publically and backed his plan.

The law that he used against Iceland was "The anti-terrorism and crime Act" and that's where his critics have missed the point. The law includes anything that is a threat to the UK economy as well as a threat to UK security. He has stood up for his own people and i just wish Bush had done that a long time ago, he may have been able to avoid some of the mess.

The banks Chiefs have ruled the economy for too long. Gordon Brown showed remarkable leadership when he said, no deal unless the bank chiefs go as well as directors. There will be no fat bonus's for them this Christmas and frankly, i hope it hurts like hell.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:22 am

Galbally;1019747 wrote: I

All those fat arsed jeeps, oversized ineffieicnt houses, expensive holidays, fancy furniture, credit card impulse purchases and general crap that surrounds us, but of course commerical property is the real black hole where all the money has been thrown, what an incredible waste. If you think that there is no long-term consequence of all that wasted money, then your living a delusion. Our generation have ensured the relative poverty of the next generation or two, we should be ashamed.

Galbally, you know i have said this many times on other threads. I blame greedy, buy now pay later consumers as well as politicians. No-body put a gun to my head when my junk mail arrived offering me thousands in credit on plastic. Some people will not live within their means, some will grab anything going.

We have a society now where people think they have a "Right" to the luxery life until it goes tits up and then let the government take the blame.

I'd like to see an introduction where every greedy consumer who is thousands in debt on plastic, taxed higher than the one's who have lived beyond their means.

Why the hell should we pay for our neighbours greed?

The banks have only taken advantage of greedy consumers who have absolutely no sense of consequence in their lives. It is the irresponsibility of them that has played a major part in this worlds economic difficultie's.

I am already hearing the death thro's from the likes who have 4 cars stuck in their drive. They are now bleating about how it's all the politicians fault because they might have their cars re-possessed. Well, tough titty in my book.

I can say hand on heart that we go to bed at night knowing we don't owe anybody one single penny.

I even see it in students. Up to their eyes in debt on plastic and bank loans at the ages of 17 to 18 yrs old. A recent survey showed that the average 17 yr old student was £6,000 in debt. They cried their eyes out when Blair dared to suggest that they pay for their uni fee's as in America. Alot of them can't even get off their backsides to go and get a part-time job to get them through college. They take the loans and the plastic and then due to the unexceptable low pass rate, come out of Uni whinging that they can't get a job and pay it back. Who do they blame then -- Oh it's the governments fault.

I'm not saying for one minute that this horrible mess should not been created in the first place but i am getting a little tired of people who think they can just knock the government when it suits them. When our governments increase anything, they are the first to grab the opportunity and the first to complain when they suffer from a "excess syndrome".

I am just hoping that as Brown has only been Prime Minister for a year, there may be more to him than we saw under Blair. maybe this is the start of how tough Brown is going to get. I hope so because this world has been crying out for some-one like him for years.

I won't be rushing off to re-new my labour party membership but i am just waiting to see what he does next.

He has shown incredible Leadership in this crisis and i just think credit where credit is due.

The people of America can breathe a little more easily tonight thanks to Gordon Brown. Let's not harp on about past government mistakes, let's look to what they are doing for our future.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:40 am

For all those Icelandic citizens who are waving banners with "Gordon Brown is a bastard". Yep, paybacks tough isn't it???? :wah::wah::wah:

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:54 pm

oscar;1020013 wrote: Galbally, you know i have said this many times on other threads. I blame greedy, buy now pay later consumers as well as politicians. No-body put a gun to my head when my junk mail arrived offering me thousands in credit on plastic. Some people will not live within their means, some will grab anything going.

We have a society now where people think they have a "Right" to the luxery life until it goes tits up and then let the government take the blame.

I'd like to see an introduction where every greedy consumer who is thousands in debt on plastic, taxed higher than the one's who have lived beyond their means.

Why the hell should we pay for our neighbours greed?

The banks have only taken advantage of greedy consumers who have absolutely no sense of consequence in their lives. It is the irresponsibility of them that has played a major part in this worlds economic difficultie's.

I am already hearing the death thro's from the likes who have 4 cars stuck in their drive. They are now bleating about how it's all the politicians fault because they might have their cars re-possessed. Well, tough titty in my book.

I can say hand on heart that we go to bed at night knowing we don't owe anybody one single penny.

I even see it in students. Up to their eyes in debt on plastic and bank loans at the ages of 17 to 18 yrs old. A recent survey showed that the average 17 yr old student was £6,000 in debt. They cried their eyes out when Blair dared to suggest that they pay for their uni fee's as in America. Alot of them can't even get off their backsides to go and get a part-time job to get them through college. They take the loans and the plastic and then due to the unexceptable low pass rate, come out of Uni whinging that they can't get a job and pay it back. Who do they blame then -- Oh it's the governments fault.

I'm not saying for one minute that this horrible mess should not been created in the first place but i am getting a little tired of people who think they can just knock the government when it suits them. When our governments increase anything, they are the first to grab the opportunity and the first to complain when they suffer from a "excess syndrome".

I am just hoping that as Brown has only been Prime Minister for a year, there may be more to him than we saw under Blair. maybe this is the start of how tough Brown is going to get. I hope so because this world has been crying out for some-one like him for years.

I won't be rushing off to re-new my labour party membership but i am just waiting to see what he does next.

He has shown incredible Leadership in this crisis and i just think credit where credit is due.

The people of America can breathe a little more easily tonight thanks to Gordon Brown. Let's not harp on about past government mistakes, let's look to what they are doing for our future.So many things we agree on. :yh_clap

I don't know if your gov't cocked things up like ours did and started this house of cards that was bound to collapse sooner or later, so I may agree with everything you typed here.

tito · Post by **tito** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:35 pm

seems to me that 401ks and similiar plans are very vulnerable. If congress did not approve the legislation then it is my opinion that ENTIRE 401ks would have been lost rather than the 10-20%losses we seem to be experiencing. By passing this legislation i feel that our congress may have missed an opprtunity not to bow to the desire of the world banks to use the United States as a lead advocate to globalize the worlds economy. i would also like to point out that in this thread and on the mainstream media alot of blame is pointed toward greed and bad decisions etc as to blame for this crisis. all of this may be true however i have read that if it was just a matter of paying off unpaid loans 100 to 200 billion should cover it. what we need to understand is that we are in a wartime economy. the war in iraq has cost us 800 billion. and will cost us well into the trillions. congress just passed legislation that provides 800 billion and will actually cost well into the trillions DO THE MATH

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 9:10 pm

Accountable;1020694 wrote: So many things we agree on. :yh_clap

I don't know if your gov't cocked things up like ours did and started this house of cards that was bound to collapse sooner or later, so I may agree with everything you typed here.

Thanks for that. i was only putting a post on not a speech to the senate, glad you approve.

Well, according to British press reports in today, Bush is taking The Gordon Brown deal.

You will have to indulge me but at the moment i am a tad proud of our Prime Minister even if Icelandic citizens are waving banners with Gordon Brown's a bastard on them. Payback hurts doesn't it Iceland?

Just indulge me briefly?

Today's Headlines

"The man who saved the world's financial system.....Gordon Brown"

Gordon Brown's rescue plan was hailed worldwide with Germany, France, Italy and other European countrie's saying they will follow suit.

But perhaps the most notable endorsement came from Paul Krugman, who yesterday won the Nobel Prize for economics"

"The US Treasury and Federal Reserve Bank were working last night in using Britain's package as it's blueprint.

The package appears to have worked -- with the FTSE 100 up 324.84 points at 4256.9 and french and german shares sharply higher. Wall Street advanced almost 600 points."

Gordon Brown seems to be blaming The hard line tactics of the banks. I agree with galbally that the governments around the whole world have allowed them to it for too long. I remember in one of Gordon Brown's speeches in the past weeks, he said "The age of irresponsibility is gone".

It's real good news for America though.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:53 am

It's not good news for America. A capitalist system runs on greed and fear. Our gov't created this crisis - at least here in this country - by promoting the greed and removing the fear. They took away the risk.

When people trust that safety measures will prevent harm they do things that would otherwise be really stupid. We love rollercoasters that flip upside down and will jump off a cliff if there's a bungee cord on the ankle. Through Fanny Mae & Freddy Mac, and other legislative measures, Congress handed business big giant bungee cords and begged them to jump.

I hope people have learned a good lesson here, but I'm afraid the only message is that no matter how stupid the minority are, the majority will be there to bail them out, so they may as well have fun.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:14 am

Accountable;1020890 wrote: It's not good news for America. A capitalist system runs on greed and fear. Our gov't created this crisis - at least here in this country - by promoting the greed and removing the fear. They took away the risk.

When people trust that safety measures will prevent harm they do things that would otherwise be really stupid. We love rollercoasters that flip upside down and will jump off a cliff if there's a bungee cord on the ankle. Through Fanny Mae & Freddy Mac, and other legislative measures, Congress handed business big giant bungee cords and begged them to jump.

I hope people have learned a good lesson here, but I'm afraid the only message is that no matter how stupid the minority are, the majority will be there to bail them out, so they may as well have fun.

I just posted a new thread from our newspapers this morning about Bush and the banks. I hope that will cheer you up. At least you have the satisfaction of knowing that now Bush is using the British blueprint, the banks chiefs and directors will be losing their jobs. Total humiliation. One of them Goldman Sachs where Hank Paulson made his money.

I do think that what has been done is better than total meltdown.

Gordon Brown is also calling on world leaders to create a global regulator.

There is so much in my papers this morning on it that it's too much to put on FG.

As i am female, i have no idea how to add a link. I only just learnt how to put my pics on.

It's ironic that before any of this happened, i said that if Obama got in, with Gordon Brown's record in finance, your economy would be dictated by our government because i didn't believe Obama had enough experience.

I also said before the Icelandic bankrupcy, that Gordon Brown was not a man to be ****** with.

Phrophet Oscar???:-6:-6:-6

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:23 am

Accountable;1020890 wrote: It's not good news for America. A capitalist system runs on greed and fear. Our gov't created this crisis - at least here in this country - by promoting the greed and removing the fear. They took away the risk.

When people trust that safety measures will prevent harm they do things that would otherwise be really stupid. We love rollercoasters that flip upside down and will jump off a cliff if there's a bungee cord on the ankle. Through Fanny Mae & Freddy Mac, and other legislative measures, Congress handed business big giant bungee cords and begged them to jump.

I hope people have learned a good lesson here, but I'm afraid the only message is that no matter how stupid the minority are, the majority will be there to bail them out, so they may as well have fun.

I understand where you are coming from, but in my opinion the situation with the actually money and financial system has been so destroyed by the actions of Wall Street that your government had no choice, the other option to let things crash naturally would have resulted in the destruction of the American economy, its financial system, the dollar, and quite probably the authority or ability of the government to prevent the carnage that would occur following that.

So they are pulling out all the stops to save the system, ok. However, once the fire in the house has been put out, then the people and organizations that are directly (forget indirectly thats not going to happen) responsible will have to made answerable to the government and probably the legal system for what has happened. Quite a few people are going to have to pay with their jobs, their wealth, and their big fat pensions. That won't change what has happened, but when it becomes apparent just how bad this is, it will be demanded, I assure you.

The most important thing is this for me in all of this, whatever you Americans want to do, in Europe I want them to make sure that we never turn over the economic survival of our nations over to coked-up, hubrisitic, lying, irresponsible, well-dressed scumbags in financial companies ever again. The lesson of having to undo 25 years of thatcherism and reganomics is going to be extremely painful, but I don't want it ever to go back there to that failed philosophy again, the market left to itself just leads to oligarhgy and ridiculous levels of wealth for the few, and misery, insecurity, and debt for the rest. If you want to dispute that, then I say that the evidence is that this is precisely what the last 25 years of super-capitalism in the west has produced, I'd love to see evidence to the contrary.

Lets base the European economy from here on in (at least) on sound money, minimum public spending or debt, and on promoting business and enterprise that is involved in actually producing things that are useful and selling them to other people in the world, not on repackaging debt on money borrowed from Asians and loaned out to young couples for houses that they cannot afford in the first place. The economy of a nation should be run in such a manner to ensure the economic life of the people who comprise that nation, the people shouldn't be there to facilitate the needs of those at the top of the economy. My country is more than just an "economy", and its time we got back to realizing that.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:36 am

In a few short weeks, the gov't has taken steps to take over the banking system, insurance system, and real estate. It will be a generation before we can get them out, if ever. I'd have preferred collapse. It would have been an easier mess to clean up. As it is, I'm afraid our culture of self-determination and personal accountability will be irreparably destroyed and replaced with one of slothful dependence on a Robin Hood gov't.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:45 am

Your up very early galbally, no work today??

Post by **spot** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 4:46 am

Accountable;1020916 wrote: In a few short weeks, the gov't has taken steps to take over the banking system, insurance system, and real estate. It will be a generation before we can get them out, if ever. I'd have preferred collapse. It would have been an easier mess to clean up. As it is, I'm afraid our culture of self-determination and personal accountability will be irreparably destroyed and replaced with one of slothful dependence on a Robin Hood gov't.

I was chatting with my lad earlier about Somali pirates and the Royal Navy sending a presence and the sudden reduction in incidents. We discussed the most extreme measures a Royal Naval captain still had at his disposal and decided that sending a signal to a US Carrier Group to heave to for boarding and inspection was probably the top of the list. Especially, we added after five seconds, if the Carrier hove to. It'd be instant promotion for the officer who tried that on for size if he had a feasible excuse.

Sorry - not really relevant.