Two days to giving away €718 million!

Biggins

We are just two days away before we give away €718 million (see here).

Now I know there are supposed good reasons for doing this but somehow it don't sit right with me.
Honestly, would anyone be willing to say why we should be going ahead with this massive payout?
It just seems madness at first and second glance - is there someone that can say there is justifiable reason/benefit to our nation to be doing this in two days?

I'm still not convinced they are doing the right thing!

TheZohanS

FG are the very same as that last shower of wasters.

Elohim

I thought only amounts in the billions were discussed these days.

cosanostra

Its about choices and this government are choosing to bail out Goldman sachs for their gambles and close our hospitals!

RepublicanEagle

Am I the only one who thought this had something to with the lotto?

dlofnep

We shouldn't pay them one single penny. They are unguaranteed bonds and we don't owe them even the courtesy of a smile. Especially not when public services are being hit. The current shower is just as bad as Fianna Fáil was.

SEPT 23 1989

It would sit a lot easier with me if the bankers and politicians who caused this disaster were dead or serving life sentences for crimes against the State

galwayrush

Better to spend some of it buying some decent pairs of balls for our leaders.

SeaFields

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

Am I the only one who thought this had something to with the lotto?

I thought biggins had come into money and had two days to give it away. I is disappoint.

Chuck Stone

How do we stop them?

laoch na mona

with bricks

cosanostra

Chuck Stone wrote: »

How do we stop them?

As constantine said on vinb double tap to the head

Chuck Stone

Could someone take out an injunction to prevent it or something?

At least that would draw attention to it.

Lord Trollington

Who are the bondholders exactly???

dlofnep

Lord Trollington wrote: »

Who are the bondholders exactly???

We will never know.

MungBean

I brought this up in the Irish Economy forum and from what I could ascertain the bank is obliged to pay it both in respect to how banks operate and how the ECB wants us to deal with senior bondholders.

I'm all for giving bondholder the fingers and letting them go to hell and I dont think there is anything that says the bailout or emergency bank funds will be affected if we burn them but at the same time its proceeds from the sale of Anglo assets and senior bondholders seem to be first in line to benefit from that. Its not about what benefit it will have or to who its about what Anglo is obliged to do with the proceeds of the sale of assets.

Thats how I understood it anyway. Personally I'd keep it and tell the bondholder and ECB to fcuk each other.

Biggins

Lord Trollington wrote: »

Who are the bondholders exactly???

That was asked today by a few people in the media.
So far no one has clearly said I think - but part of me is suspicious to think that many a mate of a politician or a politician themselves might be part of those awaiting this payout.

Seaneh

they are unsecured bonds, they are not guarenteed a return, the bonds aren't preforming, they holders shouldn't expect a return, they are in no way entitled to a return.

They knew the rules going into it, they should accept them now and either sell up or ride it out and hope for a return later.

Who cares? It's 5% of the size of our deficit and it's a condition of our bailout which we need to keep our massive deficit (and country) going.




GET YOUR PRIORITIES RIGHT, PEOPLE.

Seaneh

Kadongy wrote: »

Physically stop it from happening.
No time for any other approach.
Find out what needs to physically happen and physically obstruct that from happening.

Short of storming the Dail and abducting the cabinet I don't think there is any of physically stopping it, it's not like there will be trucks full of cash driving onto ferries and delivering the money to the bond holders....

Mr Trade In

The bank in question is defunct, their money is gone, lost in the void that is hedge fund lala land,they should get nothing. It is clearly stated on every ad for investment banking the value of your investment may go up or down and you could suffer a loss.

TheZohanS

Biggins wrote: »

That was asked today by a few people in the media.
So far no one has clearly said I think - but part of me is suspicious to think that many a mate of a politician or a politician themselves might be part of those awaiting this payout.

Mostly the German banks, they were falling over themselves to loan to Irish banks in the boom.

MungBean

Seaneh wrote: »

they are unsecured bonds, they are not guarenteed a return, the bonds aren't preforming, they holders shouldn't expect a return, they are in no way entitled to a return.

They knew the rules going into it, they should accept them now and either sell up or ride it out and hope for a return later.

They are not guaranteed by the state but they do stand to recoup the bond if the bank has sufficient assets to cover it when wound down. The guaranteed bondholders were covered no matter what and paid with state money. This isnt state money we are talking about its proceeds from the sale of Anglo assets.

ilovesleep

Sickening.

Seaneh

TheZohan wrote: »

Mostly the German banks, they were falling over themselves to loan to Irish banks in the boom.

Banks own most of the unsecured bonds?

Not likely mate.

Mr Trade In

Isn't Roman Abramovich one of those involved in this?

Seaneh

MungBean wrote: »

They are not guaranteed by the state but they do stand to recoup the bond if the bank has sufficient assets to cover it when wound down. The guaranteed bondholders were covered no matter what and paid with state money. This isnt state money we are talking about its proceeds from the sale of Anglo assets.

The proceeds of the sale of anglo assets IS state money now.

Seaneh

Mr Trade In wrote: »

Isn't Roman Abramovich one of those involved in this?

Could be, no way to know.

Kadongy

Mr Trade In wrote: »

Isn't Roman Abramovich one of those involved in this?

He likes to take money from countries with bad economies and stupid governments and give it to people who are good at football.

bnt

Lord Trollington wrote: »

Who are the bondholders exactly???

As the article suggests - bonds are assets which can be sold on, whole or in part. It's likely that other banks are on the hook, and if so, they won't exactly want to advertise that fact, will they?

A failure to pay out on a bond on schedule would be like you failing to pay your credit card bill on time: depending on the contract, you could be liable for extra charges, and your credit rating will take a knock. Ireland's credit rating has already taken some knocks: it means that if the govt. wants to borrow money in the future (by issuing another bond), the interest rate will be higher. Giving bondholders a haircut is not without consequences.

Biggins

Mr Trade In wrote: »

Isn't Roman Abramovich one of those involved in this?

Its appears possible so - and whats more, it appears that he threatened to sue if he didn't get his money!

See for example: http://www.google.com/search?q=Roman%20Abramovich%20bond%20holder%20threats#hl=en&sa=X&ei=hyevTs7wPIbJhAeZhZGYBg&ved=0CBYQBSgA&q=Roman+Abramovich+bondholder+threats&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&fp=19557f1f637173eb&biw=1024&bih=1165

MungBean

Seaneh wrote: »

The proceeds of the sale of anglo assets IS state money now.

The state is a shareholder. In the wind down the bondholders come first as far as I know. We bought a dud banks that now needs to pay its debts, we own debt not assets.

galwayrush

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Who cares? It's 5% of the size of our deficit and it's a condition of our bailout which we need to keep our massive deficit (and country) going.




GET YOUR PRIORITIES RIGHT, PEOPLE.

But, how long can we as ordinary people afford to keep paying for the mistakes of gamblers? It's easy to say we have to pay it back, but how much can we actually take?
If that's only 5% , how on earth do they think they can squeeze the rest out of us?

Biggins

bnt wrote: »

...A failure to pay out on a bond on schedule would be like you failing to pay your credit card bill on time: depending on the contract, you could be liable for extra charges, and your credit rating will take a knock. Ireland's credit rating has already taken some knocks: it means that if the govt. wants to borrow money in the future (by issuing another bond), the interest rate will be higher. Giving bondholders a haircut is not without consequences.

Well that at least explains better something of the situation - better explained by than those in charge at the moment so 'cheers' for that.

K-9

TheZohan wrote: »

Mostly the German banks, they were falling over themselves to loan to Irish banks in the boom.

I don't think it is mostly German banks, the UK and US seems to be as heavily involved, if not more.

It says Anglo Irish will pay these out of their own resources. How? Makes no sense to me.

MungBean

Biggins wrote: »

Well that at least explains better something of the situation - better explained by than those in charge at the moment so 'cheers' for that.

If you have time pick through this thread and read Scofflaws posts. I gleaned a great deal from them in relation to the situation myself.

Although the argument for not paying can still be made it does explain better the reasoning behind why its being paid I think.

Good loser

This is the real world folks.

Why in the world would the Govt pay (through Anglo) if it had a choice.

On the simplistic logic of not paying wouldn't it make sense to borrow more and more and more money and then default i.e. in 2013 when we have got all the IMF cash.

the groutch

deja vu anyone?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtL06DVaZ00

washman3

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Who cares? It's 5% of the size of our deficit and it's a condition of our bailout which we need to keep our massive deficit (and country) going.




GET YOUR PRIORITIES RIGHT, PEOPLE.

its €718 million. A fraction of which would keep my local respite centre open, it closed 3 months ago due to "cutbacks"
it would also open the Dementia and cancer-care units which have yet to open after being newly built.
it would most likely put the 500 people countrywide that spent last night on trolleys in a bed.
We can delude ourselves into thinking that "this is part of our bailout"
and we must be seen as the good boys when in actual fact we are a laughing stock of the world.
The "bailout" was negotiated by a bunch of gutless politicans with no mandate from the Irish people. The present Government do have choices.
Lets hope they make the right choices in the next 2 days.
At least Greece have now decided to hold a referendum on their bailout, they have some respect for their citizens.!

cosanostra

bnt wrote: »

As the article suggests - bonds are assets which can be sold on, whole or in part. It's likely that other banks are on the hook, and if so, they won't exactly want to advertise that fact, will they?

A failure to pay out on a bond on schedule would be like you failing to pay your credit card bill on time: depending on the contract, you could be liable for extra charges, and your credit rating will take a knock. Ireland's credit rating has already taken some knocks: it means that if the govt. wants to borrow money in the future (by issuing another bond), the interest rate will be higher. Giving bondholders a haircut is not without consequences.

At what point do the consequences become too much from paying these bonds? people emigrating,people committing suicide because the governments bled them dry, when people cant put food on their table so as to pay these bondholders or when people are dying because of cutbacks in our health service

cosanostra

Good loser wrote: »

This is the real world folks.

Why in the world would the Govt pay (through Anglo) if it had a choice.

On the simplistic logic of not paying wouldn't it make sense to borrow more and more and more money and then default i.e. in 2013 when we have got all the IMF cash.

Maybe Michael Noonan holding German Bonds might give you an insight into the type of people making these decisions

Mr Trade In

Biggins wrote: »

Its appears possible so - and whats more, it appears that he threatened to sue if he didn't get his money!

See for example: http://www.google.com/search?q=Roman%20Abramovich%20bond%20holder%20threats#hl=en&sa=X&ei=hyevTs7wPIbJhAeZhZGYBg&ved=0CBYQBSgA&q=Roman+Abramovich+bondholder+threats&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&fp=19557f1f637173eb&biw=1024&bih=1165

Knew I had seen it somewhere, the rich get richer. He is a billionaire oil baron who lost at monopoly, he should go and play with his life-sized Subbuteto set.

washman3

cosanostra wrote: »

Maybe Michael Noonan holding German Bonds might give you an insight into the type of people making these decisions

I think you've just said it in a nutshell. well done.

TheZohanS

The Greeks are giving bondholders a 50% haircut, we loaned them close to €1bn.

galwayrush

TheZohan wrote: »

The Greeks are giving bondholders a 50% haircut, we loaned them close to €1bn.

So, considering we have no money, we obviously borrowed the 1 billion to loan to the Greeks who now only have to pay half of it backto us, but we have to pay the money we borrowed (to give them ) back in full...Brilliant :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

washman3

washman3 wrote: »

its €718 million. A fraction of which would keep my local respite centre open, it closed 3 months ago due to "cutbacks"
it would also open the Dementia and cancer-care units which have yet to open after being newly built.
it would most likely put the 500 people countrywide that spent last night on trolleys in a bed.
We can delude ourselves into thinking that "this is part of our bailout"
and we must be seen as the good boys when in actual fact we are a laughing stock of the world.
The "bailout" was negotiated by a bunch of gutless politicans with no mandate from the Irish people. The present Government do have choices.
Lets hope they make the right choices in the next 2 days.
At least Greece have now decided to hold a referendum on their bailout, they have some respect for their citizens.!

So you think that by not paying this money 500 people will magically receive hospital beds? The world is a bit more complicated than that. We have people on trollies in hospitals, despite the fact we're throwing massive amounts of money at the health service. Now imagine we refuse to play ball with the ECB - we can't go to the markets to borrow - so we end up having to cut our health budget in half at least! By then we're stuck closing not just your local respite center, but your local Garda station.

Would you be happy then?

Wetai

galwayrush wrote: »

So, considering we have no money, we obviously borrowed the 1 billion to loan to the Greeks who now only have to pay half of it backto us, but we have to pay the money we borrowed (to give them ) back in full...Brilliant :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

Borrowing money to then loan to someone? A loan .. within a loan? ..

i57dwun4yb1pt8

i fcuking HATE fine gael, and i voted for the cockbags.

god fcuking damn it

galwayrush

If we don't pay it back, we get no more, but the problem long term is, what happens when the ordinary folk can no longer afford to pay?

washman3

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

So you think that by not paying this money 500 people will magically receive hospital beds? The world is a bit more complicated than that. We have people on trollies in hospitals, despite the fact we're throwing massive amounts of money at the health service. Now imagine we refuse to play ball with the ECB - we can't go to the markets to borrow - so we end up having to cut our health budget in half at least! By then we're stuck closing not just your local respite center, but your local Garda station.

Would you be happy then?

Its not actually complicated at all,but from listening to the vested interests some of us have deluded ourselves into believing that it is.
It is actually very simple.Bondholders gambled,the gamble failed,they lose,get over it. we cant pay because we need the money to run our country,which is more important than throwing millions at people like Roman Abromavich.
The hospitals case i mentioned is just an example of the many areas where we could use the money.
BTW... next time you back a horse in your local bookies and it finishes last,go in and demand,not just your own money back but the amount you would have got if it had won.
Try it.!!! and let us know what answer you get.

UglyBolloxFace

LiamN wrote: »

Borrowing money to then loan to someone? A loan .. within a loan? ..

LoanCeption!