to NAMA or not to NAMA - that is the question

peasant

So, Enda Kenny and FG have nailed their colours to the mast ...they will be voting against NAMA

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0821/banks.html

Enda Kenny described NAMA as a gamble by Fianna Fáil on the property market and said it was fundamentally 'unfair' and 'unwise', because it transfers responsibility for dealing with toxic loans from the banks who made them and the investors who funded them to the Irish taxpayer.

The Greens will have a party convention before they decide which way to vote ...that could go either way.

Then there would be a few FF dissenters who just might not vote along with the governement.

This NAMA thing could be the end of the governement

RonMexico

I see it as about the last chance for the greens to redeem themselves ever so slightly.

No to NAMA.

eamonnm79

RonMexico wrote: »

I see it as about the last chance for the greens to redeem themselves ever so slightly.

No to NAMA.

Its only thanks to the democratic nature of the Green Party that insures that the leadership must listen to the members that they are doing this. The leadership are being dragged kicking and screaming and will deserve no credit if the party votes against this.
Power can do funny things tro people.

tolosenc

RonMexico wrote: »

I see it as about the last chance for the greens to redeem themselves ever so slightly.

No to NAMA.

They'll go with it, the last thing they want at the minute is a general election. Essentially, the same FF poison as got the PDs has got the Greens.

MrMicra

I disagree toulousain, the Greens have to walk at some point. Fianna Fail transfers are going to stay with Fianna Fail. Only the hardcore will give Fianna Fail any preference and those people will not vote Green at all.

They have to pick their moment. This is a chance to say that they were shocked by the valuation process, that FF are corrupt and to beat their breasts and ask forgiveness from their voters.

They definitely do not want to be in with FF in the runup to a general election. The government won't fall and this gives the Greens the chance to wash themselves clean of the FF 'slime'.

spank_inferno

Would it be fair to say that if say 80% of green grass-roots people are against the NAMA bill, then Gormley's hands are tied and he cant vote for it anyway??

Or does it really matter what the party activists feel?

LostinBlanch

Well I agree with you micra. Voting no to NAMA is the only way that the Greens can regain any credibility - and that's only from a very narrow political perspective. Never mind the national one, that could see generations of taxpayers saddled with overpriced property just to make sure that FF backers, and bank bondholders don't take the hit they should.

But Eamon is right, the Greens leadership are fighting tooth and nail to toe the FF line. It was interesting watching some GP members from Clare on primetime a couple of nights ago - not one of them to my memory was in favour of NAMA. One of them said historically that the Greens were never a pro developer party and then he asked asked what happened, how did they become one overnight. He also said that a lot of longstanding members had left the party as a result of the leaderships actions. He said that was a pity as they couldn't vote in the convention on NAMA.

LostinBlanch

spank_inferno wrote: »

Would it be fair to say that if say 80% of green grass-roots people are against the NAMA bill, then Gormley's hands are tied and he cant vote for it anyway??

Or does it really matter what the party activists feel?

Well he'd be officially supposed to vote the way the membership directs, but he'd do it through gritted teeth as he knows he'd be out on his arse before the second round counting is complete (in the general election that is).

A lot of party activists have left the party due to it's dropping of any principles that it had purely to get into power.

Fat_Fingers

Most people would be against the principle of privatizing profits and socializing losses. At lest you would think that. My old man told me to always pay attention to what you don't see or hear.
We now know FG are against it, Greens are panicking they will end the same way as PD's. But where are the "protectors of working class"??? How come we don't hear a peep from Jack O'Connor and David Begg's ???
Those two have a lot to say on everything and anyhing but nothing on NAMA??

Sand

This is the time for the Greens to redeem themselves. They may be fearful of what a general election will bring, but a general election is coming regardless. They can enter that election as the party that bought an end to the madness of NAMA, with a certain level of gratitude from the non Fianna Fail electorate ( I for one promise the Greens at least a number 2 vote if they bring down NAMA) or they can enter it 3 years from now as a the party they helped shackle the Irish people with the greatest transfer of private to public debt in the history of the state.

Their call on what will be more popular with the electorate.

is_that_so

I have to say it's disappointing to see some posters offering to horse trade their votes because they oppose a particular piece of legislation.

On a personal level I will not give a vote to the Greens under any circumstances as the complete abnegation of their core beliefs, makes them, in my view, undeserving of my vote.

The Green vote is not as simple as it looks. While not necessarily a NAMA fan I do accept it with very serious reservations. What bothers me more is the "Johnny come lately" opposition to NAMA and of course the Greens had to chime in, or should I say Dan Boyle , attempting to claim credibility.

It's also amusing to see both FG and Labour trot out their not-NAMA plans. The concept of NAMA, for all its downsides, is developed to the point where it can actually be implemented. Other plans are not and regrettably we are fast running out of time to do something about the mess.

That said NAMA may not be big enough to pull the Greens out of government or get that 2/3 majority. But leaving government is big enough to wipe out the Greens as a political force for the foreseeable future.

I think their review of the programme for government is far more important to them and support for NAMA in some respects can be traded for it. If they can get some more blood out of FF in return they'll hold the line. But there are plenty of other potholes along the way that are more likely to get them squirming in their seats.

Sand

I have to say it's disappointing to see some posters offering to horse trade their votes because they oppose a particular piece of legislation.

Man the **** up then I guess.

On a personal level I will not give a vote to the Greens under any circumstances as the complete abnegation of their core beliefs, makes them, in my view, undeserving of my vote.

I wouldnt be too bothered if they betray their own core beliefs, so long as they do not betray my core beliefs. Killing NAMA is the most important priority for anyone in Ireland that isnt a Fianna Failer, a property developer or senior executive in Bank of Ireland and AIB. Rural bus networks, carbon taxes and all that other stuff is just fineprint.

While not necessarily a NAMA fan I do accept it with very serious reservations. What bothers me more is the "Johnny come lately" opposition to NAMA and of course the Greens had to chime in, or should I say Dan Boyle , attempting to claim credibility.

It's also amusing to see both FG and Labour trot out their not-NAMA plans. The concept of NAMA, for all its downsides, is developed to the point where it can actually be implemented. Other plans are not and regrettably we are fast running out of time to do something about the mess.

Are you serious? NAMA is so badly thought out and developed that it is supported only by a repetition of very poor, badly thought out chants repeated so often that they become assumed to be fact. Christ, it wasnt so long ago they geniuses behind NAMA were claiming publically that even if the public lost money, they would simply tax the banks to get it back...oblivious to the reality that this would completely invalidate the purpose of NAMA. This had to be pointed out to them. By people who were probably incredulous at their grinding stupidity.

The even greater stupidity is that NAMA needs to pay enough now to avoid recapitalising the banks in future, which so bloody stupid that the people who repeat it should headbutt a wall until they reach some higher state of enlightenment. Or death. Whichever comes first.

Thats the level of intellectual capability brought to bear on developing NAMA.

The only people arguing for NAMA in the public sphere are Fianna Fail, banks, developers and bought and paid for toe rags of Fianna Fail, the banks and/or developers.

I think their review of the programme for government is far more important to them and support for NAMA in some respects can be traded for it. If they can get some more blood out of FF in return they'll hold the line. But there are plenty of other potholes along the way that are more likely to get them squirming in their seats.

Fianna Fail is the Titanic. The Greens simply need to decide whether they are going to get off before the ship leaves port, or get off in the north atlantic after its hit an iceberg.

is_that_so

Sand wrote: »

Man the **** up then I guess.

Well let me clarify that for you.

I have to say it's disappointing to see some posters who choose to take the higher moral ground on the likes of FF will suggest stooping to the same type of hypocritical horse trading of their votes .

Fianna Fail is the Titanic. The Greens simply need to decide whether they are going to get off before the ship leaves port, or get off in the north atlantic after its hit an iceberg.

I think you are ascribing far too much to the NAMA effect and its ability to rescue the Greens from political wipeout. The analogy might be better expressed as the Titanic already adrift on the ocean and it's a question of whether they bail out without a lifeboat or wait for the iceberg and hope to get into a boat.

SkepticOne

is_that_so wrote: »

The analogy might be better expressed as the Titanic already adrift on the ocean and it's a question of whether they bail out without a lifeboat or wait for the iceberg and hope to get into a boat.

We've already hit the iceberg. The ship is sinking. NAMA is a lifeboat for the government (excluding the greens), bankers and developers.

ynotdu

Really ALL our TD,s have let us down since this crisis began.
They could have put country first and formed a Govt of national unity(we would know it was a charade),but we might have got less bad publicity abroad that is costing us More jobs as well as losing the name of a country *safe to lend money to*(thus we are borrowing at much higher interest rates:mad:)


we are an international joke now thanks to shifting deck chairs on the titanic over a year since the Govt finally realised we had hit an iceberg.

nobody knows for sure if NAMA would work or not,but if we go for total nationlisation,the *Pure*capitolists worldwide will withdraw ALL their money,leaving us further in the crapper.

i dunno who or what has the answer at the moment but our TD,s are making things worse not better.

Eamonn Ryan said that the Green party was based on an idea and even if their td,s are wiped out that idea will continue(apparently the German Green party where wiped out but stormed back)I am inclined to agree with him that the greens will come back even if wiped out at an election.
unless we end up as a third world country which is still very much in the realms of possibility:(

SkepticOne

ynotdu wrote: »

nobody knows for sure if NAMA would work or not,but if we go for total nationlisation,the *Pure*capitolists worldwide will withdraw ALL their money,leaving us in the further in the crapper.

I think you need to draw a distinction between ideological capitalists and investors. Those who lend money to banks (or governments), all they care about is their return. They would lend money to North Korea if they felt there was a return.

Sand

I have to say it's disappointing to see some posters who choose to take the higher moral ground on the likes of FF will suggest stooping to the same type of hypocritical horse trading of their votes .

Are you advocating I should vote for the party that supports the most harmful and dangerous policies for Ireland, and by extension for myself?

The reality here is that the Greens have the ability to bring down NAMA and in doing so rescue Irish people and their children and their grandchildren from generations of debt and indentured servitude for the benefit for Bank of Ireland, AIB and Liam Carroll and his cronies.

The party that brings down NAMA will get very high consideration from me when it comes to voting time. That could be the Greens if they find the stones to do so. Should they support NAMA and shackle Ireland to the banks debts then I will punish them.

If you dont like that....man the **** up.

I think you are ascribing far too much to the NAMA effect and its ability to rescue the Greens from political wipeout. The analogy might be better expressed as the Titanic already adrift on the ocean and it's a question of whether they bail out without a lifeboat or wait for the iceberg and hope to get into a boat.

I think you are assuming NAMA is just another Fianna Fail sly trick for the boys. Possibly even Fianna Fail have deceived themselves into thinking this. It isnt. NAMA is the greatest theft ever perpetuated in the history of the Irish state. Bank of Ireland, AIB and property developers have gambled massively in recent years. They earned the rewards and they paid themselves handsome bonuses. It was their risk, and their gain.

Now suddenly, when losses are on the cards it becomes our risk and our loss. All on the basis that we need banks like AIB whose record of service to the Irish people includes overcharging, repeated required bailouts ( this is not the first time AIB have forced the Irish people to go deeper into debt to rescue them from their own incompetence) gross incompetence, tax evasion ( AIB showing some corporate citizenship in thanks for the bailout it received from Irish taxpayers) and corruption. Good markets demand that the incompetent, like AIB and Bank of Ireland and Anglo Irish are wiped out when they screw up.

If you want to take the analogy as far as you wish to, then NAMA is better expressed as Fianna Fail, property developers and bankers shoving women and children overboard to drown so they can grab the last few lifeboats. The Greens can either be seen to be helping throwing the women and children overboard, or demanding a stop to the madness. You tell me whats going to play better.

Sand

nobody knows for sure if NAMA would work or not,but if we go for total nationlisation,the *Pure*capitolists worldwide will withdraw ALL their money,leaving us further in the crapper.

Myth to be honest. If NAMA was dropped, the international markets would take a better view of Irelands sovereign debt and its ability to repay it because we wouldnt be seen to be borrowing 60-90 billion to knowingly invest in assets worth 10-20 billion. Which kinda freaks out investors you know, that they are being asked to put their money with a government that thinks thats a good idea.

ynotdu

Sand wrote: »

Myth to be honest. If NAMA was dropped, the international markets would take a better view of Irelands sovereign debt and its ability to repay it because we wouldnt be seen to be borrowing 60-90 billion to knowingly invest in assets worth 10-20 billion. Which kinda freaks out investors you know, that they are being asked to put their money with a government that thinks thats a good idea.

i hope you are right,your version at least offers some HOPE!

i heard George Lee(wearing the FG cap,but i think even if he was not a TD his private thoughts would be the same)

He said in essence that our agreement with the EU to *fix* our economy should be renegotiated as he felt taking the proposed amount of money out of our economy over 5 years would be counter-productive in terms of cash flow/jobs.

it *sounded* sensible, i wonder what you and others think of this?

cbweb

Hi,

FF have travelled a long way from their roots and are heading us towards Banana Republic status with themselves and a small elite oligarchy milking the rest of us paying serfs.

According to Brian Cowen, the NAMA legislation is complex! Could be beyond our
limited serf understanding, not that he is bothered to better inform the public!

I've a small site www.namasaysno.com and a blog http://colmbrazel.wordpress.com where I attempt to gather information to bring people up to speed, including myself, on developments.

What is not complex is the NAMA core, which involves a massiive transfer of wealth from the poor(the tax payers) to the rich ( the developers who don't pay tax )

This beats the buggy voting machine waste, even our Irish 'Kmer Rouge' decentralisation efforts, NAMA is our coup de grace, this could sink us!

cheers

Colm

lucernarian

I've read repeated comments about how disgraceful the NAMA act is, but I want to know why there is particularly vociferous opposition. Saying that it simply bails out developers is like a child throwing the toys out of the pram.

So what are the actual disadvantages, without all the rhetoric?? That's what has to be established in answering the original question.

SkepticOne

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I've read repeated comments about how disgraceful the NAMA act is, but I want to know why there is particularly vociferous opposition. Saying that it simply bails out developers is like a child throwing the toys out of the pram.

So what are the actual disadvantages, without all the rhetoric?? That's what has to be established in answering the original question.

Disadvantages: 1. The taxpayer takes almost the entirety of the burden of the banks' poor decision making as opposed to shareholders and bond holders as would normally be the case.

2. Lack of any basis for the "economic value" of these assets.

4. Lack of transparency.

5. Bailing out developers is a disadvantage in itself for the country.

Those are the ones I can think of at present.

Sand

- NAMA requires that Ireland borrow 60-90 Billion Euro to fund the purchase of assets worth maybe 20 billion. This is a very bad return on investment.

- The borrowing required to fund NAMA directly affects Irelands ability to raise further capital for other, economically useful projects. Lenders take NAMA into account when considering Irelands ability to repay.

- NAMA provides vast amounts of funding to the banks but there is little or no reason to believe this will allow the banks to lend it out again - and this is the primary reason for bank bailouts: to ensure banks are there to provide capital to the real economy.
They are already overleveraged, it is quite likely they will simply take the cash and use it to build up their balance sheet - just like they have done with the cash provided under recapitalisation already. NAMA cash may simply vanish from the economy into the balance sheets of AIB and Bank of Ireland as they batten down the hatches and prepare to throw people in negative equity out of their homes.

- NAMA as a means of delivering cash to bank balance sheets is the worst possible means of doing so for taxpayers. Taxpayers give the banks cash and in return get worthless assets. A better option would be the taxpayers giving the banks cash and getting ownership of the bank in return. Bank shares are currently at bottom - the taxpayer could wait 5 years and sell with a nice return assuming the banks survive. This is what makes the "Better we pay too much now and avoid having to recapitalise later!" argument so stupid - at least with recapitalisation we get something that might offer a return.

- NAMA transfers all the risk and losses from bond holders and shareholders to taxpayers. This is immoral: Bonds and shares are investments. When they were entered into, the people involved recognised (or should have recognised) that they might lose money. Under NAMA they will not. The effects of NAMA have already made it hard for banks to realistically negotiate debt for equity schemes with their bond holders, because those bond holders do not have to be realistic when they can hope for NAMA to bail them out.

- Perhaps most importantly is the moral hazard. If the banks operate in an enviroment where they can reap the benefit of risk taking, whilst evading the losses then that encourages the banks to leverage their risk. It is the rational response to being in a situation where any losses are absorped by others. By bailing out the banks now we plant the seeds of the next bailout. This is not the first time AIB has required a massive bailout by the Irish taxpayer. It wont be the last if NAMA is allowed to continue.

- NAMA has also confused the importance of a banking system, with the importance of AIB and Bank of Ireland. Yes, we need banks. No, we do not need AIB and Bank of Ireland. Banking will survive in Ireland even if AIB and BoI go down in flames.

A "good" bank model set up by the state could do so at much lower cost and directly provide credit to the economy. The most dangerous myth about NAMA is that there is no alternative ( or TINA for short ). There are many alternatives, but Fianna Fail have ignored them persisting with the route best for bankers and developers and worst for taxpayers.

is_that_so

Sand wrote: »

Are you advocating I should vote for the party that supports the most harmful and dangerous policies for Ireland, and by extension for myself?

The reality here is that the Greens have the ability to bring down NAMA and in doing so rescue Irish people and their children and their grandchildren from generations of debt and indentured servitude for the benefit for Bank of Ireland, AIB and Liam Carroll and his cronies.

The party that brings down NAMA will get very high consideration from me when it comes to voting time. That could be the Greens if they find the stones to do so. Should they support NAMA and shackle Ireland to the banks debts then I will punish them.

If you dont like that....man the **** up.

I think the final line of this quote sums up where many of the comments you have made about me and my posts are coming from.

The generational FF/FG voter is far more honest than this type of horse trading. At least they ask nothing in turn. This is as bad as the voters who gave FF their vote because they put more money in their pocket or that the conned them into thinking they could do a good job.

That fact that you don't see that giving a "personal votes" merely perpetuates the political patronage and sense of entitlement that has blighted the country is a reflection on your own reasons for voting. Clearly you do not see the hypocrisy of your own criticisms of FF and by extension the people who voted for them.

As for the repeated boorish comment, with respect, soapboxing does little to advance any credibility of how you cast your votes.

ei.sdraob

instead of giving the money to banks

they could give every man woman and child €22500 (90b / 4m )


now thats what I call a stimulus! every single person in Ireland is getting that amount attached onto their names as debt! :mad:


does anyone have the number of taxpayers in Ireland so one can calculate the burden per taxpayer?

Sand

I think the final line of this quote sums up where many of the comments you have made about me and my posts are coming from.

The generational FF/FG voter is far more honest than this type of horse trading. At least they ask nothing in turn. This is as bad as the voters who gave FF their vote because they put more money in their pocket or that the conned them into thinking they could do a good job.

That fact that you don't see that giving a "personal votes" merely perpetuates the political patronage and sense of entitlement that has blighted the country is a reflection on your own reasons for voting. Clearly you do not see the hypocrisy of your own criticisms of FF and by extension the people who voted for them.

As for the repeated boorish comment, with respect, soapboxing does little to advance any credibility of how you cast your votes.

The fact that you confuse a national issue that will affect generations with horse trading over keeping a local clinic open or rural bus network doesnt say much for the credibility of how you cast your votes.

Or are you the sort of voter who thinks your local rural bus is a national issue?

If you find my comments boorish, fine. I really cant be bothered mollycoddling everyone I encounter on the internet - especially when theyre trying to pretend that NAMA must be shouldered with stern resolution to do the right thing by all patriots, with reluctance but with civic pride. Not all views and opinions are worthy of the same time or consideration. NAMA is so blatantly against the national interest that its laughable you pretend supporting it is the path of stoic patriot. Its the path of the sucker.

SkepticOne

ei.sdraob wrote: »

instead of giving the money to banks

they could give every man woman and child €22500 (90b / 4m )


now thats what I call a stimulus! every single person in Ireland is getting that amount attached onto their names as debt! :mad:


does anyone have the number of taxpayers in Ireland so one can calculate the burden per taxpayer?

Then people wouldn't need to borrow as much. How would the banks survive?

ei.sdraob

SkepticOne wrote: »

Then people wouldn't need to borrow as much. How would the banks survive?

i dont want that much money in my name, and as paye taxpayer its probably alot more than that, since the figure is for every man/woman and child in country not every taxpayer



the banks should have taught of that before they signed away their money to cowboy developers

its not the taxpayers job to bailout businesses

my business makes a mistake we dont bailed out, if anything they keep raising taxes and making it harder to make money in this country

theres nothing special about banks, they are holding this country hostage

you know what they say about negotiating with terrorists

SkepticOne

There was an element of facetiousness in my last post but I could well imagine the banks arguing this very point a few years down the line when people and businesses, quite rightly imo, become very cautious about taking on debt.

Sand

i hope you are right,your version at least offers some HOPE!

i heard George Lee(wearing the FG cap,but i think even if he was not a TD his private thoughts would be the same)

He said in essence that our agreement with the EU to *fix* our economy should be renegotiated as he felt taking the proposed amount of money out of our economy over 5 years would be counter-productive in terms of cash flow/jobs.

it *sounded* sensible, i wonder what you and others think of this?

I like George Lee, I think he is a cut above the usual gombeen politician we have in Ireland. Id reckon though that what he might think is not necessarily whats politically popular - Fine Gael are hoping to win the next election so they dont wish to alienate the public sector, which represents about 300,000 votes.

Essentially Ireland is drastically spending beyond its means, with rapid inexplicable growth in social welfare payments ( up 67% in real terms since 2002) at a time of record low unemployment. The public sector increased staffing to hand out the dole to fewer and fewer people over a similar time span.

There is a lot of misappropriated fat in the government budget that we cannot afford. Getting into a debt cycle where we borrow more and more from abroad (and NAMA is going to make this a nightmare), running up a higher and higher portion of the public budget to service ever increasing debt, and increasing taxes again and again to try bring more money in to service that debt....thats the path right back to the 1980s where costs were only cut and a dose of realism introduced when the country was literally on its knees and simply couldnt borrow anymore to put off the dark day of facing up to the problem..

The other option is to look at the social welfare spend, look at the public sector and look at in terms of our current fiscal capabilities. Not what our tax take was back in 2005, but what it is now. This isnt a short term "blip". In the long term, even if government revenue increases by 10% a year, and government spending by only 2% a year, it will still take something like 15 years to reach equilibrium again.

Government spending needs to be rationalised as soon as possible and that means effectively cutting surplus staff ( HSE Im looking at you...), pointless quangos, funding thats not 100% vital and overly generous salaries in the public sector. Unions and so on have warned that this is deflationary, but to be honest, it is the least worst option. We cannot spend what we do not have, and the longer we put off the required cuts the more and more debt and interest we will rack up. If Ireland can recapture its competiveness and lose its status as one of the most expensive places in the world to run a factory, then we can move forward.