• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

Bank Guarantee - Is it that which has us doomed?


Digout

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
1,396
Are the bondholders protected by the guarantee ? Is this the reason FF badly need SCAMA ?

If there was to be a default to the bondholders the guarantee would kick in, and seeing as we dont have the cash it would mean a government default and then its time for the IMF or ECB to come in and run the show?

So, its either SCAMA or good bye Irish independence? Sold out by FF once more?

Does anybody know when the next set of bank bonds are due for payment?

This could explain the Green position of supporting the scam. FF have prob told them "If ye walk out now, the country goes down the tubes, and ye will get the blame, not us". Like the wife battered by the alcoholic gambler, the Greens are in fear. They will vote for the scam and walk out after.
 
Last edited:


nonpartyboy

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
6,853
The bank guarantee is not indefinite,we just have to wait it out and then just guarantee the depositors,hopefully FF will be gone by then.
The opposition parties should make a clear statement that the decisions the government is bent on taking are not in the interests of the irish people and unless the government seeks a mandate to make such major decisions they reserve the right to overturn any policy followed previously not in the interest of the irish nation.
 

cactusflower

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
1,280
Lenihan alread put legislation through to extend the damn thing. While I agree in principle that bent deals should not be enforceable, if you look at what happened between Britain and Iceland, you can see that you would want to have he law on your side.
 

Herodotus

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
305
The one good thing Labour did was oppose the guarantee. Everyone hates SCAMA, hopefully it will bring down the government.
 

DCon

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
5,901
Lenihan alread put legislation through to extend the damn thing. While I agree in principle that bent deals should not be enforceable, if you look at what happened between Britain and Iceland, you can see that you would want to have he law on your side.
Did the banks tell him that extending it was a good thing? Seeing as he put the Guarantee in place at the banks request I would not doubt that he takes their advice on the duration of it.
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,908
The banks won't survive credit crunch 2 no matter what. Let's hope the potatoes don't fail this time.
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,891
The one good thing Labour did was oppose the guarantee.
But they wouldn't have if they were in Government ;)

It is very easy to Grandstand and pontificate from the sidelines when your actions have no consequence.


Don't be taken in by their populist playacting.
 

atlantic

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
649
Me has a feeling in me waters ,that this thing (depression) is only starting,when they try to get inflation moving,up with the interest rates more defaults for the small businessman ,small developer,unemployed mortgage holder,more commercial retail/wholesale park defaults,more hotels going bust,more transport companies getting out or going broke.
The banks won't survive credit crunch 2 no matter what. Let's hope the potatoes don't fail this time.
 

He3

Moderator
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
17,094
Don't you remember, "the Bank Guarantee will cost the Irish people nothing"?
In the mind of Brian Lenihan the word 'today' at the end of the sentence was understood.
 

Hal

Active member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
164
Alternatives please people, with full explanations as to exactly you would have dealt with the consequences of your alternative at the time.
 

Rocky

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
8,550
Are the bondholders protected by the guarantee ? Is this the reason FF badly need SCAMA ?

If there was to be a default to the bondholders the guarantee would kick in, and seeing as we dont have the cash it would mean a government default and then its time for the IMF or ECB to come in and run the show?

So, its either SCAMA or good bye Irish independence? Sold out by FF once more?

Does anybody know when the next set of bank bonds are due for payment?

This could explain the Green position of supporting the scam. FF have prob told them "If ye walk out now, the country goes down the tubes, and ye will get the blame, not us". Like the wife battered by the alcoholic gambler, the Greens are in fear. They will vote for the scam and walk out after.
Anglo-Irish Bank should never in a millon years have been part of the gurantee. Knowing what the government did, they were either being very very stupid or very very corrupt when they made that decision, maybe even both. It should have been nationalisied at that time and slowly wound down.

On top of that the bondholders should never have been covered by it either.

However even if there was no gurantee the country would still be screwed and we would need the IMF to come if the main Banks failed, so it really didn't make any difference either way.
 

powderfinger

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
3,352
SPN;1998242[B said:
]But they wouldn't have if they were in Government [/B];)

It is very easy to Grandstand and pontificate from the sidelines when your actions have no consequence.


Don't be taken in by their populist playacting.
You raise an interesting point on one of the fatal flaws in the Blanket Guarantee,SPN.
Indeed the obstinate endurance of Cowen's delusionary notion of Statesmanship and leadership in the month's preceeding the bank instructed guarantee could be interpreted as moral cowardice.
How different things could have turned out if the country had had someone in authority who could have looked beyond institutionalised party political preferences.The record will show that the Labour Party's position in opposing the Guarantee as crafted in the Credit Institutions Financial Support Act was a valid one.
It is because of the paucity of public interest in Cowen's blinkered governance that any semblance of faith or hope in the current administration to deal effectively with the banking collapse has evaporated,imo.
Or as those vested would glibly say.
"We are where we are".
 

X-ray

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
443
Wait for it to extended, i can see it happening on the last nite in office if requierd, just like Tara.

It needs to be run down and then abandoned, protect deposits etc, hang the investers, they invested badly. Too bad.
 

Dillinger

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
971
Alternatives please people, with full explanations as to exactly you would have dealt with the consequences of your alternative at the time.

I wouldnt have let it happen. I would not have based our entire economy around selling houses to one another, that is just completely retarded. I would not have shoveled billions of euros into the building game, while only throwing a few hundred million at small businesses, while treating the SME sector like lepers.
 

ivnryn

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
1,304
The bank guarantee is not indefinite,we just have to wait it out and then just guarantee the depositors,hopefully FF will be gone by then.
Doesn't work. Once the guarantee is in place, it effectively has to be extended until the market has confidence in the banks.

If you knew the guarantee was ending in 1 month, and you were pretty sure the bank couldn't cover deposits, what would you do? If you withdraw now, you are guaranteed your money, if you wait, you might lose it.

The effect is that any insolvent banks would all go bankrupt due to mass withdrawls a few weeks before it ended.

What they could do is say that it will not apply to new deposits once the deadline ends, at least that wouldn't result in mass withdrawls.

The guarantee is the Trojan Horse of this who saga. Once it was passed (with FG support .. grr), we were committed to bailing out the banks. FG's proposals are designed to bail them out to the minimum level.

What they should have done was put a limit in the guarantee, but the plan was that it would re-create confidence and so the banks could recover.

On top of that the bondholders should never have been covered by it either.
Are bond holders guaranteed ?? I thought it was just depositors, the bond guarantee was only "implied".
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,891
You raise an interesting point on one of the fatal flaws in the Blanket Guarantee,SPN.
Indeed the obstinate endurance of Cowen's delusionary notion of Statesmanship and leadership in the month's preceeding the bank instructed guarantee could be interpreted as moral cowardice.
How different things could have turned out if the country had had someone in authority who could have looked beyond institutionalised party political preferences.The record will show that the Labour Party's position in opposing the Guarantee as crafted in the Credit Institutions Financial Support Act was a valid one.
It is because of the paucity of public interest in Cowen's blinkered governance that any semblance of faith or hope in the current administration to deal effectively with the banking collapse has evaporated,imo.
Or as those vested would glibly say.
"We are where we are".
There is nothing glib about stating that "we are where we are".

The only way out of "where we are" is to accept "where we are".

We can't plan a way out of here until we know where "here" is, and we decide where exactly we want to get to.

"Those vested" know exactly where they want to get to, and are lobbying hard to achieve their goal - all day, every day.

The rest of us are still fighting amongst ourselves.

Divide and conquer - it still works!
 

SPN

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
16,891
I wouldnt have let it happen. I would not have based our entire economy around selling houses to one another, that is just completely retarded. I would not have shoveled billions of euros into the building game, while only throwing a few hundred million at small businesses, while treating the SME sector like lepers.
Unfortunately, we live in a democracy and the people voted for this debt fuelled, construction based "prosperity" in 2002.
 
Last edited:

nuj

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2004
Messages
520
There is nothing glib about stating that "we are where we are".
Don't be silly. It is one of the glibbest, most meaningless phrases since "going forward".
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top