So ....the Banks are getting real?

SeanW · 19-02-2012 11:21PM

Nonetheless, ever since the re-invention of Central Banking, our economic history has been a series of boom-bust cycles. The Great Depression, the tech bubble of the 1990s, the resource-futures speculation & housing bubbles that crashed in 2008, and there are probably others.

It must be said that the implicit guarantees given by governments to banks helps to create a Moral Hazard, stimulating reckless behaviour by providing free insurance, contributed. But even banks that would be allowed to fail, and did, like many of the small and regional American banks, behaved stupidly, and in unison.

I believe that can only be put down to them getting the wrong signals from a manipulated market.

SeanW · 19-02-2012 11:23PM

Sindri wrote: »

That's when it should apply more than any other time!

Yes, it's a fundamental concept of Austrian economics that the boom should make you leery. However I doubt any of these bankers had the necessary training in Austrian economics to spot the tell tale signs of a false boom.

ArmaniJeanss · 19-02-2012 11:24PM

SeanW wrote: »

The fact is that the Irish banking system was destroyed by the European Central Bank and now they're making us pay for it.

How come the Finnish, Austrian, Luxembourg and Dutch bankings systems weren't equally destroyed then?

Could it be that it was actually us, and not the ECB, that was responsible?

starlit · 19-02-2012 11:29PM

Some of them in Scandinavia kept their currency like Britain did. Think Switzerland did the same.

squod · 19-02-2012 11:36PM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

I still to this day cannot understand why financial institutions with staff trained in finance, economics and the rest, lent money to people who obviously, in the medium term could not afford it, can someone please explain this to me, because I reckon there is a case to be made on the part of the borrower.

Bonuses. It's that simple. There was a bonus pyramid scheme in place globally which paid out not when the debt was paid, but when the contract was signed.

Everyone made money. Even if you took on a risky or bad loan. Loans got pooled together. Traders bought these groups of loans and were paid bonuses when they were sold on.

Each new derivative gamble yielded a new bonus. Simple stuff. Gambling for rich idiots. We were a source of cheap credit for all kinds of gamblers.
Everyone knew the risks. FF & the Greens became the bookie. They made us the stooge.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/mortgagesecurities.htm

dxhound2005 · 19-02-2012 11:37PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

How come the Finnish, Austrian, Luxembourg and Dutch bankings systems weren't equally destroyed then?

Could it be that it was actually us, and not the ECB, that was responsible?

You would think the Finns would have learned from their experience in the 1980's but I read now that there is another housing bubble there at the moment.

http://www.irishmanabroad.com/2011/11/is-ireland-finnish-or-japanese/ (see Finland's Crash)

SeanW · 19-02-2012 11:39PM

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

How come the Finnish, Austrian, Luxembourg and Dutch bankings systems weren't equally destroyed then?

They didn't have bubbles. We did, hence the funny money was always going to be attracted to our shores.

The point is, according to Austrian economics, it was always going to go *somewhere* that it should not.

Could it be that it was actually us, and not the ECB, that was responsible?

Partly, because we voted for a succession of Fianna Failure governments with loose fiscal policy.

But it would have been much more difficult to have a bubble form if there were not an easy credit policy to give it oxygen.

KKkitty · 19-02-2012 11:43PM

ejmaztec wrote: »

flutered wrote: »

he will not get to mine, the first line of house insurance will ensure that.

You've got "A Team" coverage, cool.

He can't FACE the truth

LETHAL LADY · 19-02-2012 11:44PM

squod wrote: »

Bonuses. It's that simple. There was a bonus pyramid scheme in place globally which paid out not when the debt was paid, but when the contract was signed.

Everyone made money. Even if you took on a risky or bad loan. Loans got pooled together. Traders bought these groups of loans and were paid bonuses when they were sold on.

Each new derivative gamble yielded a new bonus. Simple stuff. Gambling for rich idiots. We were a source of cheap credit for all kinds of gamblers.
Everyone knew the risks. FF & the Greens became the bookie. They made us the stooge.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/mortgagesecurities.htm[/QUOTE]

I agree sweetie but surely there is a case to be made here, because in all fairness on the consumer/investor part we were missold(if thats a word) a product.

Phill Ewinn · 19-02-2012 11:55PM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

squod wrote: »

Bonuses. It's that simple. There was a bonus pyramid scheme in place globally which paid out not when the debt was paid, but when the contract was signed.

Everyone made money. Even if you took on a risky or bad loan. Loans got pooled together. Traders bought these groups of loans and were paid bonuses when they were sold on.

Each new derivative gamble yielded a new bonus. Simple stuff. Gambling for rich idiots. We were a source of cheap credit for all kinds of gamblers.
Everyone knew the risks. FF & the Greens became the bookie. They made us the stooge.

http://www.sec.gov/answers/mortgagesecurities.htm[/QUOTE]

I agree sweetie but surely there is a case to be made here, because in all fairness on the consumer/investor part we were missold(if thats a word) a product.

Eddie Hobbs has been on about that for years now. If you feel you were missold or given the wrong advise from the lender, then the lender has a case to answer.

admiralofthefleet · 20-02-2012 12:03AM

these are the same banks that are being kept afloat with taxpayers money from the people they are telling to tighten their belts. all the while they continue to get bonuses

mad

LETHAL LADY · 20-02-2012 12:05AM

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

Eddie Hobbs has been on about that for years now. If you feel you were missold or given the wrong advise from the lender, then the lender has a case to answer.

True but Eddie Hobbs is a wanker where does that leave us plebs?

hatrickpatrick · 20-02-2012 12:08AM

I wouldn't have a problem with this if it weren't for the fact that their managers who f*cked us all up in the first place are still getting six figure salaries, and their bondholders are being repayed in full where any ordinary citizen would have just been told to feck off.

So many double standards and so much hypocrisy in the world today.
Where's the JUSTICE? :mad:

Liamario · 20-02-2012 12:08AM

You didn't realise that there are people out there driving their SUVs, (one of multiple cars they own) living in huge houses, in debt and with their mortgage in arrears.
Not only that, but they are all looking for breaks from their mortgages so they can go on one of their many holidays a year to foreign countries.

Nothing will change in this country under the current system.

Jake187 · 20-02-2012 12:09AM

Fulton Crown wrote: »

....Have only the basic TV package

Freesat / Soarview for the win.

The amount of people that don't know about free tv is a joke. 99% of people I talked too who dont know about it think its a 'dodgy illegal box'

Teyla Emmagan · 20-02-2012 12:13AM

The SUV one is a bit funny I think, because even if you're trying to get rid of it I guess no one will buy it off you right now. Or you'll get so little for it it's hardly worth selling (giving you are probably going to need another car anyway). Bit of a rock and a hard place, that one.

Phill Ewinn · 20-02-2012 12:16AM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

True but Eddie Hobbs is a wanker where does that leave us plebs?

The financial regulator put something in place in 2010 AFAIK. You'd have to google it. UK passed laws on this in 2008.

Citizens information or financial regulator.

Teyla Emmagan · 20-02-2012 12:17AM

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

Eddie Hobbs has been on about that for years now. If you feel you were missold or given the wrong advise from the lender, then the lender has a case to answer.

Yeah, only you probably weren't missold - you probably just didn't realise what you were signing up for, which is a bit different. As in, if you'd read your key facts doc, or the Ts & Cs of the product, like you should have, then you weren't 'missold', you just took out a financial product like a loan that you shouldn't have gone near in the first place.

There's a bit of caveat emptor as well, to be fair.

Sindri · 20-02-2012 12:21AM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

True but Eddie Hobbs is a wanker where does that leave us plebs?

:D

I've met him a few times, and his son, who one of my friends, accidentally referred to him as Eddie.

Last time I met him he knocked the changing room door into me at the Gym as he was entering the dressing rooms and I was leaving.

benway · 20-02-2012 12:23AM

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

To be fair this image of fookers having 3 foreign holidays a year, whilst driving around in SUVs, and every family member dripping in versace is a myth where I come from. Did this type of indulgence ever happen?

I know of someone who's around €30,000,000 in debt to Anglo from a failed commercial property development, but whose lifestyle doesn't seem to have been hit too hard. Was into this kind of indulgence, and still seems to be into this kind of indulgence. On one hand, if he can arrange his affairs in such a way as to cushion the blow and distribute assets to his family, then fair ****s. On the other hand, where's the justice in this?

Most ordinary people in mortgage or debt difficulties I've seen through work are at the pin of their collars, doing their best to keep the banks off their back, living in terror - unjustified terror - of a judgment being entered against them. Don't see much extravagance at that end of the spectrum.

I'm just wondering if this article is the start of a smear campaign against those in difficulties with their mortgage, just in case people might start calling for some kind of write-down or debt forgiveness ... perish the thought.

Property developers and buy-to-let merchants are a very different proposition from ordinary people who were suckered in to taking mortgages beyond their means during the Celtic Tiger madness. To my mind, the former are perpetrators and will probably get away relatively unscathed, while the latter will be painted as feckless wasters, blowing their cash on a life of idle luxury ... so of course it's all their own faults and they deserve no assistance or allowances made. :rolleyes:

KKkitty · 20-02-2012 12:29AM

Sindri wrote: »

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

True but Eddie Hobbs is a wanker where does that leave us plebs?

:D

I've met him a few times, and his son, who one of my friends, accidentally referred to him as Eddie.

Last time I met him he knocked the changing room door into me at the Gym as he was entering the dressing rooms and I was leaving.

I'd love to meet him just so I could say Mr. Hobbs, How's it cooking

gcgirl · 20-02-2012 12:32AM

benway wrote: »

LETHAL LADY wrote: »

To be fair this image of fookers having 3 foreign holidays a year, whilst driving around in SUVs, and every family member dripping in versace is a myth where I come from. Did this type of indulgence ever happen?

I know of someone who's around €30,000,000 in debt to Anglo from a failed commercial property development, but whose lifestyle doesn't seem to have been hit too hard. Was into this kind of indulgence, and still seems to be into this kind of indulgence. On one hand, if he can arrange his affairs in such a way as to cushion the blow and distribute assets to his family, then fair ****s. On the other hand, where's the justice in this?

Most ordinary people in mortgage or debt difficulties I've seen through work are at the pin of their collars, doing their best to keep the banks off their back, living in terror - unjustified terror - of a judgment being entered against them. Don't see much extravagance at that end of the spectrum.

I'm just wondering if this article is the start of a smear campaign against those in difficulties with their mortgage, just in case people might start calling for some kind of write-down or debt forgiveness ... perish the thought.

Property developers and buy-to-let merchants are a very different proposition from ordinary people who were suckered in to taking mortgages beyond their means during the Celtic Tiger madness. To my mind, the former are perpetrators and will probably get away relatively unscathed, while the latter will be painted as feckless wasters, blowing their cash on a life of idle luxury ... so of course it's all their own faults and they deserve no assistance or allowances made. :rolleyes:

Your man Simon Kelly his a son of paddy Kelly he does not live too far from me has a lot of stuff in Nama justifys why he pays €30,000 for his kids private education, it's a fooking joke

tayto lover · 20-02-2012 12:37AM

What ?? When did that come out ? Does this mean that my little Tristan, Gucci and Venice will have to go to bogger school OMG ?

benway · 20-02-2012 12:44AM

tayto lover wrote: »

What ?? When did that come out ? Does this mean that my little Tristan, Gucci and Venice will have to go to bogger school OMG ?

Not to worry, I don't see Tristan, Gucci and Venice being the targets here.

I'd say it means, more so, that the banks and their meeja cronies are going to do their damndest to be sure that Pat, Jim and Derek down the road, who never had a lavish lifestyle in the first place, will be forced to pay back the massively inflated, unrealistic mortgages they had foisted on them during the boom to the last penny.

Sure they'd only spend it on truffles, quail eggs and caviar anyway.

Phill Ewinn · 20-02-2012 12:54AM

benway wrote: »

Not to worry, I don't see Tristan, Gucci and Venice being the targets here.

I'd say it means, more so, that the banks and their meeja cronies are going to do their damndest to be sure that Pat, Jim and Derek down the road, who never had a lavish lifestyle in the first place, will be forced to pay back the massively inflated, unrealistic mortgages they had foisted on them during the boom to the last penny.

Sure they'd only spend it on truffles, quail eggs and caviar anyway.

lol. That's a funny one. I heard the same when Lenihan launched NAMA. Turned out to be a protection scam for bankers and developers.

Rich vested interest was never going to pay.

TwoShedsJackson · 20-02-2012 09:01AM

benway wrote: »

I know of someone who's around €30,000,000 in debt to Anglo from a failed commercial property development, but whose lifestyle doesn't seem to have been hit too hard. Was into this kind of indulgence, and still seems to be into this kind of indulgence. On one hand, if he can arrange his affairs in such a way as to cushion the blow and distribute assets to his family, then fair ****s. On the other hand, where's the justice in this?

Most ordinary people in mortgage or debt difficulties I've seen through work are at the pin of their collars, doing their best to keep the banks off their back, living in terror - unjustified terror - of a judgment being entered against them. Don't see much extravagance at that end of the spectrum.

If he owed them 300,000 it would be his problem, he owes them 30,000,000 it's their problem.

The main difference is that the banks will know he hasn't got the 30 mil, it's basically pointless pursuing that loan.

Two working stiffs with a 300,000 mortgage, that's another matter entirely because that can be paid off, in time, and the bank will figure they won't have the nerve to tell them to fu<k off. So they pursue them, and will continue to do so.

pickarooney · 20-02-2012 10:16AM

Every single person who takes out a mortgage is taking a huge financial risk. How can grown adults not be aware of this?

Noreen1 · 20-02-2012 10:56AM

benway wrote: »

I know of someone who's around €30,000,000 in debt to Anglo from a failed commercial property development, but whose lifestyle doesn't seem to have been hit too hard. Was into this kind of indulgence, and still seems to be into this kind of indulgence. On one hand, if he can arrange his affairs in such a way as to cushion the blow and distribute assets to his family, then fair ****s. On the other hand, where's the justice in this?

Most ordinary people in mortgage or debt difficulties I've seen through work are at the pin of their collars, doing their best to keep the banks off their back, living in terror - unjustified terror - of a judgment being entered against them. Don't see much extravagance at that end of the spectrum.

I'm just wondering if this article is the start of a smear campaign against those in difficulties with their mortgage, just in case people might start calling for some kind of write-down or debt forgiveness ... perish the thought.

Property developers and buy-to-let merchants are a very different proposition from ordinary people who were suckered in to taking mortgages beyond their means during the Celtic Tiger madness. To my mind, the former are perpetrators and will probably get away relatively unscathed, while the latter will be painted as feckless wasters, blowing their cash on a life of idle luxury ... so of course it's all their own faults and they deserve no assistance or allowances made. :rolleyes:

I agree. However, that smear campaign started a long time ago. This is just ratcheting it up a bit, imo.

Did no-one tell you yet that we are all responsible?:rolleyes:
Sure we all took out ridiculous mortgages,(I didn't), had an SUV for every day of the week, (I never had a SUV), took three luxury holidays a year (Nope, didn't do that , either), or, failing that, voted for FF.(Not guilty!).

But it's still my fault, don't you know, because I live in a Democratic Country:rolleyes:!

The marketing machines are hard at work. Public Sector against Private sector. Welfare recipients vs The Employed. Those with mortgages are meant to feel guilty about it - even those who can pay them.
Those who are paying off their mortgages early, should be spending their money to kick-start the economy.
Those who are saving for the rainy days that are coming are "uncertain about the economy" - not being prudent!
Sure it's all those people who are paying off their debts, or saving, who are causing the economy to stagnate.:rolleyes:

Why?
Erosion of self-confidence, coupled with a divide and conquer strategy, makes for a group of people so torn by division, and lack of unified leadership, that no adequate resistance is possible.:eek:

benway · 20-02-2012 11:03AM

pickarooney wrote: »

Every single person who takes out a mortgage is taking a huge financial risk. How can grown adults not be aware of this?

It will always be a risk, it shouldn't be a huge risk.

Nobody's trying to suggest that people should have their whole mortgages written off or that they're totally innocent in this. But when you think of the kind of atmosphere there was in this country for the first half of the last decade, people can't be blamed for making rash decisions.

The political class and the meeja were all on message, I remember being treated like some kind of idjut boy because I had no plans to buy property. Even if you didn't "know what a tracker mortgage" was, you still needed to get in the game, or so we were told:

Irish Times, 14 July 2006 wrote:

"Boom times getting even more boomer", says Ahern

Ordinary working people weren't to know that the whole thing was a house of cards - they certainly can't be blamed if what was a reasonable mortgage or loan has now become unfeasible because they've lost their jobs, through no real fault of their own.

TwoShedsJackson wrote:

If he owed them 300,000 it would be his problem, he owes them 30,000,000 it's their problem.

The main difference is that the banks will know he hasn't got the 30 mil, it's basically pointless pursuing that loan.

Two working stiffs with a 300,000 mortgage, that's another matter entirely because that can be paid off, in time, and the bank will figure they won't have the nerve to tell them to fu<k off. So they pursue them, and will continue to do so.

Wouldn't say it's pointless, the guy may not have €30million, but he's got plenty more than your average working stiff. In my book, the banks could, and should chase down these high rollers for every cent they own. Legal fees would be pretty high, shooting down dodgy transfers and the like, but it'd still be more effective in recouping public monies than trying to to extract blood from smaller stones - lots of the people I see getting dragged through the courts don't have any assets whatsoever.

If this means that the great and the good end up in social housing, wearing pyjamas and tracksuit bottoms on their way down the dole office, that's just fine by me.

A bit of market discipline would do them the world of good ... pity that it's just a myth.

davet82 · 20-02-2012 11:10AM

when are people gonna realise that faking their own death is the only way to deal with their finacial problems... shheessshhh!!

So ....the Banks are getting real?

Comments