Is this a conspiracy?

Fromthetrees

Hope this is the right thread to post in.
So, on Vincent Browne he announced that some of the people we're paying the 1.2 billion to are 'the Rothschilds', on the same programme 'our' minister is saying we were 'warned' not to default on these payments or basically the sky will fall in. Another of the companies we are paying is Goldman Sachs.
The only explanation I can understand is that we have to pay these people because it is systemic to the survival of our banking system.
I want to hear a logical and thought out reason why we actually need to pay these foreign investors...

Jonny7

because we owe the money to foreign investors.

Basically our banks ****ed up worse than the Icelandic banks - then our government dug the hole deeper

shedweller

No, it's not a conspiracy because theres loads of information about it on the internet. We are being forced to pay the banks back for some gambling losses they had.

Will we ever do anything about it? No.

Sometimes i wonder if there is any point in keeping abreast of current affairs as we get shafted anyway! I know, it's a bit defeatist. But banging my head against a wall comes to mind.

Will we EVER do anything about it? No.

weisses

Conspiracy maybe ........ Screwed by the government definitely

weisses

shedweller wrote: »

No, it's not a conspiracy because theres loads of information about it on the internet.

Can you point out to me in a clear cut answer (link) the reason not to burn the senior bondholders (that's what were talking about right?)

studiorat

there is no clear cut answer.

paying back is supposed to keep interest rates on future loan manageable.

not paying runs the risk of interest rates being unmanageable and not being able to run the country as a result.

either way it's opinion and what would happen in each case is uncertain...

thing is the bond holders didn't gamble the money, the banks did. the unsecured bit it "Unsecured Bonds" seems to mean that a profit from these is not secure but the value of the thing actually is...

AngryBollix

It probably isnt that big a surprise to see the rothschild family linked to this in some way given their background.

clever_name

AngryBollix wrote: »

It probably isnt that big a surprise to see the rothschild family linked to this in some way given their background.

link?

jackiebaron

Well the large banking houses and their agents in the various financial agencies conspired to create the entire financial meltdown in order to shift wealth upwards. They inflated multiple markets, sold early, then shorted everything and as the whole thing plummeted they gutted pension funds. They then fobbed off the story that taxes would be needed to cover banks losses and Joe Public acquiesced fearing the whole world would end if they weren't allowed to get their hands on all that lovely tax money that would normally go to services for the smellies (middle and working class).
So yes it was a conspiracy.
It was a classic pump-and-dump scheme that your less scrupulous brokerage firms used in the 90's (*) but on a national and international scale.

(* e.g. Stratton-Oakmont, depicted in the movie Boiler Room)

Fromthetrees

[QUOTE=shedweller;76734135]No, it's not a conspiracy because theres loads of information about it on the internet. We are being forced to pay the banks back for some gambling losses they had.

Will we ever do anything about it? No.

Sometimes i wonder if there is any point in keeping abreast of current affairs as we get shafted anyway! I know, it's a bit defeatist. But banging my head against a wall comes to mind.

Will we EVER do anything about it? No.[/QUOTE]

Why are we paying back gambling loses?
Like I said the minister said we were warned to pay back unsecured bondholders (like the Rothschilds and Goldman Sachs) or else face serious consequences, who exactly is warning democratically elected members of the peoples dail, while elected members actually listen to these threats from outside, who makes these threats? Iceland ignored these warnings by the way.

shedweller

And how is iceland doing nowadays? From the complete lack of news on them, i'd say they are doing quite well! But we can't be let know about that can we? That might start a "contagion" that would show up the banking system for the scam that it is.

robtri

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Why are we paying back gambling loses?
Like I said the minister said we were warned to pay back unsecured bondholders (like the Rothschilds and Goldman Sachs) or else face serious consequences, who exactly is warning democratically elected members of the peoples dail, while elected members actually listen to these threats from outside, who makes these threats? Iceland ignored these warnings by the way.

gambling losses??? how are they gambling losses??

it is a bond.. not a punt down paddy power...

the banks in question needed cash so they go out to investors and ask for money. in return for money they agree to pay back the money with an agreed amount of interest on a specfic date... there is no gamble..

if you have a mortgage u cant turn around to the bank and say sorry lads not paying you back cause my house has devalued the gamble didnt pay off...

it is a loan not a gamble...

and what happens if we default..

very simple when we go looking for more money to keep the country running instead of being charged 6% interest.. we will be charged 20% plus..if we can find anyone to lend us money....

if you think we are ****ed now, that would not be a pleasant future for us...

namloc1980

shedweller wrote: »

And how is iceland doing nowadays? From the complete lack of news on them, i'd say they are doing quite well! But we can't be let know about that can we? That might start a "contagion" that would show up the banking system for the scam that it is.

Eh....why do people keep coming out with this myth that everything is hunky-dory in Iceland? They are battling with runaway inflation because their currency is worthless (even against the Euro which is banjaxed). Annual inflation rate in Iceland is currently running at 6.5% :eek: having peaked at over 18% in 2009 :eek::eek:....but hey everything is perfect in Iceland right?

As a percentage of GDP government debt in Iceland is higher than Ireland's government debt to GDP....but hey everything is perfect in Iceland right?

Business failures in 2011 in Iceland are up over 60% on 2010....but hey everything is perfect in Iceland right?

namloc1980

robtri wrote: »

and what happens if we default..

The €1.25bn paid out this week was to pay bonds that are unsecured and unguaranteed for a defunct/bust/dead Bank. The Irish people had NO obligation to pay this money out, yet our muppets in Govt did so anyway...WHY??

robtri

namloc1980 wrote: »

The €1.25bn paid out this week was to pay bonds that are unsecured and unguaranteed for a defunct/bust/dead Bank. The Irish people had NO obligation to pay this money out, yet our muppets in Govt did so anyway...WHY??

the bank still exsists..
just renamed but still the same bank..

why ..same reason i outlined..

namloc1980

robtri wrote: »

the bank still exsists..
just renamed but still the same bank..

why ..same reason i outlined..

It's a bust Bank. You didn't answer why we paid out this money? These particular Bonds were NOT covered under the Bank Guarantee Scheme.

Fromthetrees

robtri wrote: »

gambling losses??? how are they gambling losses??

it is a bond.. not a punt down paddy power...

the banks in question needed cash so they go out to investors and ask for money. in return for money they agree to pay back the money with an agreed amount of interest on a specfic date... there is no gamble..

if you have a mortgage u cant turn around to the bank and say sorry lads not paying you back cause my house has devalued the gamble didnt pay off...

it is a loan not a gamble...

and what happens if we default..

very simple when we go looking for more money to keep the country running instead of being charged 6% interest.. we will be charged 20% plus..if we can find anyone to lend us money....

if you think we are ****ed now, that would not be a pleasant future for us...

Why are the Irish people responsible for any of this though? I'm not saying we should default on our national debt, my point is that we're paying back the money private banks own, that is not sovereign debt. To use your analogy about the mortgage, if I default on my mortgage, which is a private transaction between me and the bank, why would any other citizen be expected to pay for the bank losing the money they leant to me, doesn't make sense.

ArmaniJeanss

Fromthetrees wrote: »

If I default on my mortgage, which is a private transaction between me and the bank, why would any other citizen be expected to pay for the bank losing the money they leant to me, doesn't make sense.

This is a poor analogy because 'any other citizen' has always been expected to pay for your mortgage default.

In much the same way as you pay marginally more for your car insurance because the insurance company has to pay into a fund to cover the driver who is uninsured, and you pay more income tax than you would if no-one was operating tax evasion schemes. So similarly your default of your mortgage has always led to an extra .000001% interest rate on my mortgage or my bank charges etc.

Fromthetrees

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

This is a poor analogy because 'any other citizen' has always been expected to pay for your mortgage default.

In much the same way as you pay marginally more for your car insurance because the insurance company has to pay into a fund to cover the driver who is uninsured, and you pay more income tax than you would if no-one was operating tax evasion schemes. So similarly your default of your mortgage has always led to an extra .000001% interest rate on my mortgage or my bank charges etc.

I admit I could have used a better analogy but I still think it is quite apt, for example, I don't pay marginally more for car insurance because I don't have a car, you can apply the same logic to mortgages, I would safely assume that in fact the majority of citizens don't have mortgages, therefore they don't in anyway cover the costs of private defaulters, the point being you enter into a mortgage or buy car insurance willingly and with your eyes open, you quite simply agree to pay the extra .000001% interest rate, that's the way it is.
This is not the same as every citizen being liable for banking debt, it doesn't make sense, there are people not yet born who are liable for this debt.
Lastly, these investors did take a gamble, albeit low, they still invested taking a small risk in the hope of making a return, much like private citizens invested money in shares of banks, they were considered a very safe bet, the difference is though that the shareholders lost all there money.

robtri

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Why are the Irish people responsible for any of this though? I'm not saying we should default on our national debt, my point is that we're paying back the money private banks own, that is not sovereign debt. To use your analogy about the mortgage, if I default on my mortgage, which is a private transaction between me and the bank, why would any other citizen be expected to pay for the bank losing the money they leant to me, doesn't make sense.

I never said we as a nation as responsible... just explaining why the bonds are not a gambling loss... and what some of the implications are if our government refused to pay the bond..

robtri

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Why are the Irish people responsible for any of this though? I'm not saying we should default on our national debt, my point is that we're paying back the money private banks own, that is not sovereign debt. To use your analogy about the mortgage, if I default on my mortgage, which is a private transaction between me and the bank, why would any other citizen be expected to pay for the bank losing the money they leant to me, doesn't make sense.

is that not what is happening????

and to keep your analogy.. if you defaulted on your mortgage... the bank sezies your house and other assests... now what happens when you go looking fo another mortgage or loan of a bank after this???? be very very hard to get a loan.... it is the same for the governement... if they default they will get ****ed in the long term by the bond markets... something we are told we cannot afford.... no money for the government.. no guards, no nurses, no firemen, etc......

Fromthetrees

robtri wrote: »

is that not what is happening????

and to keep your analogy.. if you defaulted on your mortgage... the bank sezies your house and other assests... now what happens when you go looking fo another mortgage or loan of a bank after this???? be very very hard to get a loan.... it is the same for the governement... if they default they will get ****ed in the long term by the bond markets... something we are told we cannot afford.... no money for the government.. no guards, no nurses, no firemen, etc......

Your post is such bullsh1t, by the way it wasn't my analogy at all, did you even read the thread before you posted?
I'm way too lazy to respond with my own response so this a copy and pasted one...

I'd play hardball with Merkel and Sarkozy. Walk in and say "we get a reduction, and a 0 interest rate or we default and your precious eurozone goes splat."

Fact 1: They are in no position to argue, they know it would trigger all hell. Yeah, we'd suffer (which we're going to anyway) but thats not how you play poker. You dont worry about your hand, you think about how much pressure the other guy will take before he folds. They cant take any.

Fact 2: The markets would love it. Contrary to popular belief, the markets are sky high for us at the moment because of the threat of default. The *threat* not the actuality. In reality they would welcome a default in a sense because it clears away the real enemy: Uncertainty.

Fact 3: If you think that they wouldnt loan us money again because we'd have a "bad credit rating" you are thinking like a punter. Markets dont care about emotional history. They care about profit. Full stop.
If you kicked their mothers in the face yesterday and they thought they could make a profit off investing in you today, they would.
The only real issue of a "repeat" would be if Ireland boomed again AND the world had a financial meltdown AND Europe was in debt crisis... then, yes, Ireland might be at risk of default again but the chances of that are none. So they wouldnt worry about it.

Fact 4: They cant believe what they are getting away with. They wouldnt blame us for a haircut now, they already have gotten more than they ever thought they would. There wouldn't be a "financial bomb", quite the opposite. We would become the best place in Europe to put money because we'd be the only country which was certain not to be in debt trouble!

Fact 5: When the US Treasury was downgraded by S&P the cost of borrowing (the Yield) actually *fell* (Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-off-downgrade)
Why?? Because the markets paniced, looked around and realised everything is in sh*te and went to the safest place in town... the US Treasury Bonds... the very things that started the panic by being DOWNGRADED!!

jackiebaron

robtri wrote: »

gambling losses??? how are they gambling losses??

it is a bond.. not a punt down paddy power...

the banks in question needed cash so they go out to investors and ask for money. in return for money they agree to pay back the money with an agreed amount of interest on a specfic date... there is no gamble..

if you have a mortgage u cant turn around to the bank and say sorry lads not paying you back cause my house has devalued the gamble didnt pay off...

it is a loan not a gamble...

and what happens if we default..

very simple when we go looking for more money to keep the country running instead of being charged 6% interest.. we will be charged 20% plus..if we can find anyone to lend us money....

if you think we are ****ed now, that would not be a pleasant future for us...

Because the banks took private money and leveraged it to the hilt on betting on the movement of collateralised debt obligations and credit default swaps. They basically bet on sh!t they had no idea about.

That, my friend, is gambling.

If you don't know this then I suggest you do some reading rather than come out and say that the global financial crisis was caused by a few people who couldn't pay their mortgages. You don't know what you're talking about.