Sunday Indo 'debt forgiveness' agenda. Did somebody say 'vested interest'?

pburns

For the second week in a row the Sindo has gone all out on the debt forgiveness issue including:
- Brendan O'Connor (who was calling those talking down property 'cowards' even as the band were playing and the ship sinking)
- Stephen Donnelly - headline: 'We're morally obliged to share burden':eek:
- Two articles on how the banks shouldn't be involved in the 'relief' scheme (i.e. they won't be generous enough in handing out the free moolah) - Messrs O'Connor (again) and Ross.
- An article outlining why it's a great time to buy property in Rathgar (a very specific street in Rathgar is mentioned)
- And to cap it all... apparently we need another quango set up to manage this giveaway...

So am I the only one seething at this populist, vested interest claptrap:mad:?!??!??

Jaq_Draco

I have heard of one certain female "journalist" who would gain very much from a debt forgiveness scheme... :mad:

ei.sdraob

I wonder how much those ads they ran on tv for this cost, sickening crap

1. pimp property onto gaullible fools and profit from it
2. tell everyone abotu soft landings
3. **** hits the fan
4. push for "forgiveness" in order to restart sales

woodoo

pburns wrote: »

Brendan O'Connor (who was calling those talking down property 'cowards' even as the band were playing and the ship sinking)

So true. He was sindo cheerleader in chief for the property porn 5 years ago.

RichardAnd

This whole circus does demonstrate wonderfully, the power that the media has over the masses. If the papers began print articles claiming that world war two never happened, I would say that eventually people might start to believe it. Never believe anything without looking into it yourself and don't bother at all with the Irish media.

ei.sdraob

This article, I swear, morally obliged? Go and $%^& yourselves, this "campaign" will cost them even more readers

edit: didnt this Stephen Donnelly. TD admit on tv that he is in "negative equity" himself? No conflicts of interest there Stephen no? you are no better than Bertie, if anything you are worse...

skregs

I read the Indo, but their self-serving agenda lately is really leaving a bitter taste in my mouth

Gumbo

How come the Indo are spin doctors when they post crap articles on things like debt forgiveness but they are the holy grail when they post crap articles on public sector pay?

Rawhead

kceire wrote: »

How come the Indo are spin doctors when they post crap articles on things like debt forgiveness but they are the holy grail when they post crap articles on public sector pay?

It suits people to pick what they want from this cum sponge of a paper. I have never once seen the indo put up its hands and say they were as involved as the weasel ahern or fingers in the whole mess that it is this country. Everyone lost the run of themselves and I include myself in that.
I remember the indo having property supplements on Wednesdays and Fridays as thick as phonebooks. They constantly pushed this lavish lifestyle that the elite enjoyed. They never questioned the FF tent in Galway or the lavish "charity" bashes in Marbella. They did however run front pages of how a married Garda and nurse couldn't afford a house in Dublin because the property prices they helped inflate were so high. The PS then had to get wage increases to be able afford to live and now the very same paper is calling for those wages to be slashed.
The one common thread that runs through all these things is that Sir anto has continued to make money, a toilet rim dweller like o'connor still has a job (fcuking amazing) and that filthy rotten rag continues to hold influence in this country.

As an aside I see they have now started a smear campaign against Morgan Kelly. They wouldn't print his first article about the state of the country because it went against their agenda and have made sly digs about him the whole time since.

Head The Wall

kceire wrote: »

How come the Indo are spin doctors when they post crap articles on things like debt forgiveness but they are the holy grail when they post crap articles on public sector pay?

Papers only print words, it all depends on the intelligence of the people reading those words . People see what they want to see from the articles.

Your post sums my point up perfectly, you think their posts about the PS are crap because you work there. I find them informative and the facts true.

hmmm

The same paper which gave voice to some of the main cheerleaders of the property/Bertie-boom, are now lecturing us on debt forgiveness and morality.

It's nearly as bad that others who were major property cheerleaders are also now appearing as analysts on radio & TV telling us how we're going to get out of this mess.

They can all go pay their own way out of the mess they've created, the taxpayer doesn't want to be fleeced a second time.

Godge

I have heard that if you were a journalist is Ireland anytime over the last twenty years, the place you went to get a mortgage was the Irish Nationwide and that Mr. Fingleton was very generous in calculating affordability ratios. If this is true, by the laws of averages, there would be a lot of journalists with a vested interest in a debt forgiveness scheme.

It should be mandatory for anyone calling for a debt forgiveness scheme to set out their own interest in one.

OMD

Debt forgiveness happens all the time. It has happened in the past, is happening at present and will happen in the future. I would be critical of any bank, we own, not looking at some form of debt forgiveness.
It makes no economic sense for the bank to pretend it is going to get back money it is not. The bank needs to maximise the amount of money it gets in. Some form of debt forgiveness in some cases is the only way to do this.

swampgas

OMD wrote: »

Debt forgiveness happens all the time. It has happened in the past, is happening at present and will happen in the future. I would be critical of any bank, we own, not looking at some form of debt forgiveness.
It makes no economic sense for the bank to pretend it is going to get back money it is not. The bank needs to maximise the amount of money it gets in. Some form of debt forgiveness in some cases is the only way to do this.

Why not debt for equity swap? With debt forgiveness, the bank (and taxpayer) takes the full hit. With an equity swap, at least the bank might get something back at a later stage, if/when the property is sold, or if the borrower's situation improves and they want to buy back the bank's share of the property.

Surely that's fairer all round, as nobody gets bailed out for free?

OMD

swampgas wrote: »

Why not debt for equity swap? With debt forgiveness, the bank (and taxpayer) takes the full hit. With an equity swap, at least the bank might get something back at a later stage, if/when the property is sold, or if the borrower's situation improves and they want to buy back the bank's share of the property.

Surely that's fairer all round, as nobody gets bailed out for free?

Debt for equity swaps may also be used in some cases though it really gets complicated trying to do this.

You say that with debt forgiveness the bank and taxpayer take the full hit. This is not the case but it is what most people believe. If you have a mortgage for €400,000 on a property now worth €200,000. If the bank repossesses the property then they take the full hit. After all the legal costs if repossession and selling the property along with other fees it will be lucky to clear €150,000. If the bank accepts that you cannot pay the mortgage (and this will obviously not be a blanket thing). It makes much more sense to see how much you can pay and write off say €150,000 of the loan. The mortgagee now will have reduced their mortgage payments in nearly half and the bank has reduced its loss from a potential €250,000 to €150,000.

swampgas

OMD wrote: »

Debt for equity swaps may also be used in some cases though it really gets complicated trying to do this.

You say that with debt forgiveness the bank and taxpayer take the full hit. This is not the case but it is what most people believe. If you have a mortgage for €400,000 on a property now worth €200,000. If the bank repossesses the property then they take the full hit. After all the legal costs if repossession and selling the property along with other fees it will be lucky to clear €150,000. If the bank accepts that you cannot pay the mortgage (and this will obviously not be a blanket thing). It makes much more sense to see how much you can pay and write off say €150,000 of the loan. The mortgagee now will have reduced their mortgage payments in nearly half and the bank has reduced its loss from a potential €250,000 to €150,000.

Not quite.

If the bank re-possesses and sells for 150k, the unfortunate borrower still owes 250k to the bank - the selling of the house does not automatically wipe the rest of the debt, unless the bank decides to write off that debt.

If the bank simply writes off 200k of the debt and doesn't take any equity, and the market recovers in a few years and the house is now worth 250k, the borrower can sell up and walk away with 50k profit, thanks to the generosity of the bank (i.e. the taxpayer).

If the bank takes full equity in the house - 100% - and effectively rents the house back to the borrower - there is a prospect in the long term for the bank to recoup some of the loss. How much is a good question.

I agree it is messy, the devil would be in the details.

However as I see it, there is no difference between a state-owned bank writing 200k off a loan with an associated secured asset and the taxpayer simply putting 200k in bank notes into a paper bag and handing it over to the borrower, if the bank doesn't bother to take some equity in exchange.

Crazy Horse 6

The real fools are the ones who think anything changes in this country. It's the banana republic and always will be.

swampgas

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

The real fools are the ones who think anything changes in this country. It's the banana republic and always will be.

On the contrary, this country has changed massively in my lifetime.

I also happen to think that a lot of good can come out of the current crisis, if handled properly.

Tea drinker

swampgas wrote: »

On the contrary, this country has changed massively in my lifetime.

I also happen to think that a lot of good can come out of the current crisis, if handled properly.

Somewhat agreed, If you look at what happened to Fianna fail.... that's progress isn't it?
Right now it's serving as a line in the sand for FG as well, if they slip too much SF will get their wet dream.

Right now I think FG are under a lot of pressure from the vested interests, and while delivering some pressure of their own I have a perception that they are a little on the back foot right now. Noonan has certainly softened his stance - and too early for it too. Maybe some softly softly and happyspeak is the "on message" right now to try and stimulate domestic demand. Anecdotally was speaking with a (food) trader at the weekend and he maintains he had best August in years.

In fairness the media largely seem incapable of investigative journalism and merely repeat one bad news story after another. This as contrast to their "one good news story" after another of some years ago. Zero progress in Irish media, the good are still good, the sh*** still sh*** . Ourselves to blame for buying it?

foxyboxer

Posted elsewhere...

A potential solution here is the fact that if someone takes out a mortgage with a bank then they don't actually 'own' the house. It remains an asset on the banks balance sheets. Over the course of the mortagage term the bank stand to re-coup a greater amount of money on it's 'investment'. Joe Soap is not a homeowner and is used as a means for the bank to invest it's surplus funds via a mortgage.

As the banks were shown to be failed institutions and were bailed out at a crippling cost to the exchequer (who now control it AFAIK), then a plan of action would be for the government to outlaw interest payments on ALL mortgages (not just those bailed out).

Anyone with a mortgage who makes a payment takes it directly from the capital amount and allowing it to be paid off quicker and avoiding crippling interest charges. Anyone interested in buying a home can get a capital-only mortgage at current market value and may actually OWN the damn thing at some point before they die.

If someone is still struggling to pay off just the capital then repossession by the state occurs and the tenant is allowed to rent under strict terms thus avoiding throwing people onto the streets.

The crisis is a debt crisis and not only here but globally. The old rules are broken and require a new approach.

hmmm

Tea drinker wrote: »

Right now I think FG are under a lot of pressure from the vested interests, and while delivering some pressure of their own I have a perception that they are a little on the back foot right now.

I think they have perhaps recovered. Initially we had this Sunday newspaper generated campaign, the infamous letter to the Irish times, Joe Duffy etc. The reality is though that most people are only peripherally involved, so those with mortgages will keep their mouths shut if it means a free handout. Those who would be paying for this are happy to express sympathy, but there is no support for paying for it.

I think FG & Labour have copped that this isn't a big issue for most people. It would only become a big issue if people were asked to pay for it. The current strategy of managing the marginal cases and reforming the bankruptcy laws to deal with the hopeless is probably for the best.

Writing off the gambling debts of D4 journalists is not a vote winner, and thankfully the government haven't fallen for this manufactured campaign.

Godge

foxyboxer wrote: »

Posted elsewhere...

A potential solution here is the fact that if someone takes out a mortgage with a bank then they don't actually 'own' the house. It remains an asset on the banks balance sheets. Over the course of the mortagage term the bank stand to re-coup a greater amount of money on it's 'investment'. Joe Soap is not a homeowner and is used as a means for the bank to invest it's surplus funds via a mortgage.

As the banks were shown to be failed institutions and were bailed out at a crippling cost to the exchequer (who now control it AFAIK), then a plan of action would be for the government to outlaw interest payments on ALL mortgages (not just those bailed out).

Anyone with a mortgage who makes a payment takes it directly from the capital amount and allowing it to be paid off quicker and avoiding crippling interest charges. Anyone interested in buying a home can get a capital-only mortgage at current market value and may actually OWN the damn thing at some point before they die.

If someone is still struggling to pay off just the capital then repossession by the state occurs and the tenant is allowed to rent under strict terms thus avoiding throwing people onto the streets.

The crisis is a debt crisis and not only here but globally. The old rules are broken and require a new approach.

Like all the other nutty ideas out there, this one fails to take account of the fact that Ulster Bank, Bank of Scotland (Ireland), National Irish Bank, Bank of Ireland and a number of sub-prime lenders are not owned by the Irish Government so would not join this nutty scheme. If a government was foolish enough to mandate something like this, those banks (most of whom have yet to receive a penny from the Irish taxpayer) would demand huge compensation from the Government.

foxyboxer

Godge wrote: »

Like all the other nutty ideas out there, this one fails to take account of the fact that Ulster Bank, Bank of Scotland (Ireland), National Irish Bank, Bank of Ireland and a number of sub-prime lenders are not owned by the Irish Government so would not join this nutty scheme. If a government was foolish enough to mandate something like this, those banks (most of whom have yet to receive a penny from the Irish taxpayer) would demand huge compensation from the Government.

And who are some of these failed institutions to demand anything?
A government is in place to govern. Laws can be changed. It's called legislation.
Too much kow-towing to the banks since Lehmans collapsed. Guaranteeing those institutions in Sep 08. Now there's a nutty idea! Hopefully all ideas are considered before december when we'll have to pay more tax to fund any forgiveness schemes.


This situation is what is termed a game changer and maybe seemingly nutty ideas are the way forward or at least considered.

seamus

pburns wrote: »

So am I the only one seething at this populist, vested interest claptrap:mad:?!??!??

Actually I think it's more to do with journalists and papers wanting to be able to say that they were advocating the "correct" thing to do. They stuck with Bertie during the boom rather than print the naysayer opinions because they didn't want to look silly when the dire predictions didn't come true.

Now they realise that Morgan Kelly and David McWilliams eventually turned out to be right. So when those two start advocating debt forgiveness and whatever, the Indo wants to jump on their bandwagon, hoping that they've got it right.

Going Forward

Head The Wall wrote: »

Papers only print words, it all depends on the intelligence of the people reading those words . People see what they want to see from the articles.

Your post sums my point up perfectly, you think their posts about the PS are crap because you work there. I find them informative and the facts true.

The sindo agenda has definitely changed of late, their blatant anti public service sector phase was based on pure jealousy as employees in a precarious profession compared their own lesser perks and pensions etc to those who chose the PS. I think they went way overboard in generalising and in the lengthy opinion pieces on the subject.
State agency employees also have houses families, etc and only a small percentage who have real power were at the tiller pointing us to the waterfall.

For any newspaper to remain "fresh", the agenda must be changed periodically I suppose and that is what is happening now.

And I do find their and other publications' FOI stories highly informative and revealing, and without them we would be a lot less clued in to the waste in certain areas of the PS.

PS Remember yer man that used to win the "Letter of the Week" for weeks on the trot a few years back? Did the cases of whisky do him in?

mikemac

I back debt forgiveness

If I can move into a room rent free in a lovely mortgaged property.
Only fair

pburns wrote: »

- Brendan O'Connor (who was calling those talking down property 'cowards' even as the band were playing and the ship sinking)

Ah the smart and ballsy man

jonsnow

pburns wrote: »

For the second week in a row the Sindo has gone all out on the debt forgiveness issue including:
- Brendan O'Connor (who was calling those talking down property 'cowards' even as the band were playing and the ship sinking)
- Stephen Donnelly - headline: 'We're morally obliged to share burden':eek:
- Two articles on how the banks shouldn't be involved in the 'relief' scheme (i.e. they won't be generous enough in handing out the free moolah) - Messrs O'Connor (again) and Ross.
- An article outlining why it's a great time to buy property in Rathgar (a very specific street in Rathgar is mentioned)
- And to cap it all... apparently we need another quango set up to manage this giveaway...

So am I the only one seething at this populist, vested interest claptrap:mad:?!??!??

This reminds me of their stamp duty reform "campaign" of a few years ago when ann harris and jody corcoran were trying to sell their high end houses and couldn,t shift them.I twas even more blatant than the debt relief scenario which many people would have an interest in. No one cared very much about stamp duty at the time but week in week out there would be a few articles on it and claims that FF were suffering in the polls for not reforming (abolishing) it.

ei.sdraob

Anyone seen Primetime on NAMA last night and that developer who owes us a metric **** load bringing up people who committed suicide in last few years as a reason why there should be debt forgiveness for everyone and especially him!

Sick! very sick

It is now becoming obvious that the same groups of vested interests that have brought this country to its knees are now campaigning for something that will drive a stake thru' the heart.

Godge

foxyboxer wrote: »

And who are some of these failed institutions to demand anything?
A government is in place to govern. Laws can be changed. It's called legislation.
Too much kow-towing to the banks since Lehmans collapsed. Guaranteeing those institutions in Sep 08. Now there's a nutty idea! Hopefully all ideas are considered before december when we'll have to pay more tax to fund any forgiveness schemes.


This situation is what is termed a game changer and maybe seemingly nutty ideas are the way forward or at least considered.

All of the banks listed in my post are outside of State ownership. Only one (Bank of Ireland) received any money from the State and I am happy to leave them out.

The question remains, who is going to give money to Ulster Bank, Bank of Scotland (Ireland), National Irish Bank and foreign-registered sub-prime lenders for the proposal in the OP?

martinn123

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Anyone seen Primetime on NAMA last night and that developer who owes us a metric **** load bringing up people who committed suicide in last few years as a reason why there should be debt forgiveness for everyone and especially him!

Sick! very sick

It is now becoming obvious that the same groups of vested interests that have brought this country to its knees are now campaigning for something that will drive a stake thru' the heart.

One point I picked up from Prime Time last night was the statment that NAMA are out to recover ONLY the discounted value of the loans they took over.
When NAMA was introduced to us we were told Developers would be chased for the original value of their loans.

This has changed

Frank Daly wrote:

NAMA’s key objective is to generate a commercial return for the taxpayer over time

(its lifespan is expected to be seven to ten years). I mentioned that NAMA had paid
€30.5 billion for its acquired loan assets to date. That consideration, by and large,
represents the current market value of the property and other assets securing the loans.
NAMA’s task, over the next seven to ten years, is to recover that amount for the
taxpayer through debt repayments by debtors or asset sales.
In addition NAMA has to recover whatever it has invested to enhance property assets
underlying those loans. The cash that it generates either from debtors (receipts of debt
interest and principal and the proceeds of asset sales) or from its own direct control of
assets will be used to repay NAMA debt thereby reducing the debt burden of Ireland
as the Minister for Finance has guaranteed NAMA’s debt issuance.

NAMA’s

http://www.nama.ie/Publications/2011/AddressByNAMAChairmanToVintnersAssociation22March2011.pdf

So Debt Forgivness has already been implimented for Developers. What happened to the original idea that NAMA would chase the FULL Debt.

The original value of Debts purchased for 30BN was over 70BN.