OpinionThe European Union is doing the right thing by not rescuing the bankers
      – BorgClown, 2008-10-07 at 03:40:55   (16 comments)

On 2008-10-07 at 03:43:47, BorgClown wrote...
Bad luck, bankers. Banks are supposed to move money from where it's a surplus to where it's a deficit. And make a hefty profit at it. The economies will suffer from the banker's situation, and the reprisals from the banking groups, but in the end, it doesn't makes sense to rescue them each time they mess their own business.
On 2008-10-07 at 03:46:51, BorgClown wrote...
In Mexico we did the same thing about 6 years back. The banks suddenly needed a HUGE amount of money to prevent a national apocalypse, and they got them. No business should get that much money for free. It makes more sense to buy and auction, or nationalize the banks.
On 2008-10-07 at 09:07:30, Lee J Haywood wrote...
I'm not really sure why it's ever considered necessary for the government to get involved by handing over money like that. I could understand the government paying to make up the missing money on mortgages, or getting involved in making sure that loans were transferred from failing banks to surviving ones, but not in helping the banks to survive by paying them over and above their losses.
On 2008-10-07 at 16:42:59, BorgClown wrote...
I don't get it also. The only simple explanation I can see is corruption. I read that the bank CEOs did not see their perks diminish even when they were asking for help. If the board is letting them get away with it, I suppose they profit somewhere too. In our version of the bank rescue, the deal was wealthy fellows riding the rescue by lending money to themselves or close friends/relatives and not paying it. I wonder if we were a test ground.
On 2008-10-08 at 09:44:50, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Last night I discovered that the bank I was using for half of my savings has gone into receivership. (-: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23564828-details/200,000+UK+savers+hit+by+Icelandic+banking+crash/article.do http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7658417.stm http://icesave.co.uk/
On 2008-10-08 at 18:53:04, BorgClown wrote...
I hope you are covered by the pound limit the article mentions.
On 2008-10-08 at 21:27:05, Lee J Haywood wrote...
I realised that I could still log in, and my balance wasn't as high as I'd thought - mostly because of the loan I gave my mother to pay off her mortgage. Either way, I'm well below the limit - which I already knew was supposed to be £30,000 before the crash. http://www.fscs.org.uk/consumer/ The main problem is that I probably won't get anything back for up to 6 months. Also, this was supposed to be a high interest account but I was only getting annual interest (even though I'd supposedly switched it to monthly), so I've received nothing since Februrary. Not a big winner.
On 2008-10-09 at 02:12:56, BorgClown wrote...
It could have been worse. In Argentina the savings accounts were almost frozen, nobody could draw more than $10 USD a week of them.
On 2009-02-23 at 10:37:58, Lee J Haywood wrote...
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/banks-to-lend-you-your-own-money-200810081308/
On 2009-02-23 at 19:58:36, Thelevellers wrote...
Makes me wanna punch a bankers baby in the face, any old baby just wont do any more... :S
On 2009-02-23 at 20:15:34, Baslisks wrote...
mmmm I get to shit here and yell at tv sets when they decided to contribute too much free money. Anyone want to create an island commune? Thinking bikinis and tropical drinks with some good old fashioned sustainability engineering.
On 2009-02-23 at 22:56:22, Baslisks wrote...
@Baslisks: errr sit here*
On 2009-02-24 at 20:03:13, Thelevellers wrote...
Mmmmm. Bikinis... :D I'm sold on that idea!
On 2009-02-24 at 21:33:59, Baslisks wrote...
alright, now we need to put together a fund.
On 2009-02-25 at 05:05:17, BorgClown wrote...
@Baslisks: Sorry, you lost my support when you shat and yelled at the TV.
On 2009-02-25 at 05:07:16, BorgClown wrote...
Boy, the ending was great: But Mr Darling insisted: "Shut up."