Bomb explodes outside Bank of Greece.

Harold Weiss · 10-04-2014 10:17AM

NIMAN wrote: »

Blowing up this bank will have zero effect on anything.

Plus, those suffering due to not being able to afford to live, will still not be able to afford to live.

That's quite true.

Harold Weiss · 10-04-2014 10:20AM

errlloyd wrote: »

Arbitrarily blaming bankers for all Irelands problems is fine, if that gives you comfort at night. Ultimately though the greed of Irish people to take ridiculous mortgages was just as real as the greed of the banks to offer them.

Here's analogy for your belief.

A shop owner gives discounts on all his stock to shoppers thus not making a profit and unable to pay his staff or rent ultimately going bankrupt. His shoppers are really happy.

Who's fault is it the shop had to close? The shop keeper or the consumers?

Think about it. Is the shopper just greedy or is the owner irresponsible?

Bankers gave money to people they knew couldn't afford to pay it back and they went bankrupt but you think it's the people taking the money to blame?

No, it isn't.

The Backwards Man · 10-04-2014 10:20AM

Mother of God.

Boombastic · 10-04-2014 10:22AM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

and all the other people that work in the bank that aren't the focus of your stupid actions. Oh and some passers by out doing their shopping, but sure, hey, collateral damage.

if one lies down with the dogs one can't complain when one catches fleas

anncoates · 10-04-2014 10:23AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

If a bomb exploded outside an Irish bank, would many here would support the bombers?

Only morons

Loads.

Son Of A Vidic · 10-04-2014 10:23AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Would a bank help me out?

Good God no, sure don't you know it's our job as taxpayers to always help the bankers out. After all, it's a cyclical pattern.

DrumSteve · 10-04-2014 10:27AM

Some of the posts on this thread could best be described as the contents of a puddle of wank.

Blowing up banks; as if the ordinary joes in there are responsible for the mess we're in.

Harold Weiss · 10-04-2014 10:30AM

DrumSteve wrote: »

Some of the posts on this thread could best be described as the contents of a puddle of wank.

Blowing up banks; as if the ordinary joes in there are responsible for the mess we're in.

Cash dispensers / bank tellers are not bankers. We're talking about the top percentile of banking.

Nino Brown · 10-04-2014 10:30AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Bankers gave money to people they knew couldn't afford to pay it back and they went bankrupt but you think it's the people taking the money to blame?

They only gave un-affordable mortgages to people who applied for a mortgage they couldn't pay back. The banks and the customers thought house prices would continue to rise, so they're both equally negligent.
We have free education in this country, and the maths skills required to calculate how much of a mortgage you can afford, is pretty much wrapped up by about third class in primary school. So anybody who blames the banks for giving them more than they could afford to pay is an idiot.

Nino Brown · 10-04-2014 10:31AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Cash dispensers are not bankers.

Please enlighten us, as to what qualifies as a banker then.

errlloyd · 10-04-2014 10:33AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Here's analogy for your belief.

A shop owner gives discounts on all his stock to shoppers thus not making a profit and unable to pay his staff or rent ultimately going bankrupt. His shoppers are really happy.

Who's fault is it the shop had to close? The shop keeper or the consumers?

Think about it. Is the shopper just greedy or is the owner irresponsible?

Bankers gave money to people they knew couldn't afford to pay it back and they went bankrupt but you think it's the people taking the money to blame?

No, it isn't.

There are a lot of reasons why that analogy doesn't work.

Firstly people didn't buy an item, they got mortgages. It's a much longer commitment. If a shop owner was offering very cheap bread, and told me to sign up for the rest of my life I wouldn't.

Secondly the shopkeeper isnt getting blamed by the consumers for his failure, which is what we're talking about. If your analogy went the whole way, the shop would close, and then all the people in the local area would burn down the shopkeepers house because his greed caused their shop to close. If you wanna treat the bankers like failures that's fine, I failed a school exam once, does that mean I should be blown up?

Finally your analogy simplifies the commitment people signed up to. For it to be accurate you'd need a situation where the shopkeeper was offering them a stupidly cheap lifetime sign up to say milk. And after a while they realised either the milk was bad, or it was gonna run out and they'd still owe on it.

conorhal · 10-04-2014 10:34AM

Well in 2010 rioting resulted in 3 bank workers including a pregant teller being burnt alive after protesters set fire to a bank in Athens.
So, no. Even if I can understand the anger and the impulse, I don't think this kind of thing is an action that anybody should support.

Harold Weiss · 10-04-2014 10:35AM

Nino Brown wrote: »

They only gave un-affordable mortgages to people who applied for a mortgage they couldn't pay back. The banks and the customers thought house prices would continue to rise, so they're both equally negligible.
We have free education in this country, and the maths skills required to calculate how much of a mortgage you can afford, is pretty much wrapped up by about third class in primary school. So anybody who blames the banks for giving them more than they could afford to pay is an idiot.

Banks are a business and I'd presume they're good with numbers so if they couldn't see the bubble in housing market like many others did, they deserve to go bankrupt.

If a business owner goes bankrupt due to his own stupidity, nobody blames his customers but when banks go bankrupt, people blame the customers...it makes no sense.

Well, I know why people think that but it's nonsensical.

Banks bankrupt themselves, you blaming the customers is laughable.

Valetta · 10-04-2014 10:41AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Cash dispensers / bank tellers are not bankers. We're talking about the top percentile of banking.

Who's this "we" you speak about.

After 40 odd posts, you are the only one advocating the bombing of banks.

You still have to say what would be achieved by such idiotic, dangerous, illegal, moronic, sensless, imbecilic actions.

Nino Brown · 10-04-2014 10:43AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Banks are a business and I'd presume they're good with numbers so if they couldn't see the bubble in housing market like many others did, they deserve to go bankrupt.

I whole heartily agree, we have introduced massive moral hazard by bailing out banks. The problem is, if the banks were allowed to collapse we would have experienced much more hardship than we actually did, so bailing them out may prove to be the lesser of two evils, but only time will tell.

Harold Weiss wrote: »

If a business owner goes bankrupt due to his own stupidity, nobody blames his customers but when banks go bankrupt, people blame the customers...it makes no sense.

That's not true, if a business goes under because a customer doesn't pay their bills, both parties are at fault, the customer for not paying, and the business owner for allowing bills to accumulate to dangerous levels.

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Banks bankrupt themselves, you blaming the customers is laughable.

That's ridiculous, if everyone starts paying back their debts tomorrow, Irish banks will be back in a good position again almost overnight, so people not paying what they owe is what is bankrupting the banks.

bear1 · 10-04-2014 10:47AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

I agree but if protesting doesn't work, maybe extreme measures are required.
After all, that's what bankers do when they can't coerce some dictatorship overseas, they send in the military to oust the regime, blowing up any locals that resist.

Bankers are awful people, the lowest form of human on the planet.

What if a mother, father or child had been near the car when it went off?
Does that just become collateral damage because some tosser is angry at the bankers?
It's not all the bankers fault what has happened in Greece, Ireland, Spain feck the whole EU.
We all got suckered into it and now we are paying the price, some more than others.
But going around and planting car bombs to make a bloody point is the most idiotic thing one could do.
Your posting history on other threads always seem to be controversial - from Ukraine to this.

DrumSteve · 10-04-2014 10:50AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Cash dispensers / bank tellers are not bankers. We're talking about the top percentile of banking.

Oh that's okay then.

That'll shield them from the blast I suppose.

Foxhound38 · 10-04-2014 11:23AM

Harold Weiss wrote: »

Protesting seems ineffective with politicians so maybe a few bombs and shootings of bankers would reflect the true feelings of Irish people suffering.

:rolleyes:

Femme_Fatale · 10-04-2014 11:25AM

Yeh injuring/killing people on the street and tellers/administrators in the bank on not much more minimum wage... that'll learn the banking fat cats.

yeswecantooo wrote: »

Not all have... and what about the hundreds of people in the central bank and regulators office ... they did not do their job properly but yet they got (well) paid for it.

None of them did? Even the clerical administrator on 23k?

humanji · 10-04-2014 11:26AM

Right, I'm going to lock this as it seems to just be one person desperately trying to justify murder/terrorism.

Bomb explodes outside Bank of Greece.

Comments