The new socialism

[IR35 Avoider]

I read recently that in a few previous "bail-outs" during financial crises, the US government ended up making a profit for taxpayers. (I can't remember what crises they were, I recall the Savings & Loans one was the one where they didn't profit.) Given that they helped themselves to 80% of AIG's share capital, in addition to charging over 11% per year for the actual money they put in, maybe they will profit once again?

[DimPrawn]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/b...-200809151254/

[Paddy]

That's very interesting, never knew Burma Oil received a state handout.

Do you have a link?

No, happened before Internet you need back copies of news papers, but this happened after the handout.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...55C0A967948260

[BankingContractor]

I remember Denis Thatcher as director of Burma oil going cap-in-hand to the government to get a handout to stop Burma Oil going under. So much for Maggie’s free market forces when it comes to her husband’s company

That's very interesting, never knew Burma Oil received a state handout.

Do you have a link?

[AtW]

Burma oil going

Oil is pretty valuable - worth saving even though the people who run such companies into the ground should automatically get very long jail sentences as a warning to the others - company might be saved, but not the people who run it.

[DimPrawn]

I remember Denis Thatcher as director of Burma oil going cap-in-hand to the government to get a handout to stop Burma Oil going under. So much for Maggie’s free market forces when it comes to her husband’s company

I knew it was all Thatcher's fault.

[Paddy]

I remember Denis Thatcher as director of Burma oil going cap-in-hand to the government to get a handout to stop Burma Oil going under. So much for Maggie’s free market forces when it comes to her husband’s company

[BrilloPad]

There is a certain view that says that too much regulation caused all these OBS instruments - if it was a "free" market with less regulation then we would not be in trouble now.

Even if you agree with that (not sure I do) - the sight of bankers saying "we are too important to fail" sticks in the throat of most.

IMO depression likely - the gap between rich and poor(not just money - but values) is too large. As SG says - a good dose of common sense needed.

It also looks bad that now to be in banking you have to be v v big or v v small.

[DimPrawn]

If this happened to Chinese banks, all the directors would have become organ donors by now.

Bailing out the banks is not the right thing to do, but under the current systems there is nothing to stop the bankers walking away with millions/billions in bonuses just before the bank becomes insolvent.

The rules/law has to change so that anyone receiving the benefits of good banking decisions pays all the liabilities if bad banking decisions are made.

[The Lone Gunman]

Good isn't it? These bankers make millions if not billions over the years yet when their business goes tits up it is the tax payer who is asked to rescue their companies. These guys walk away with very healthy bank accounts and share portfolios whilst the little people lose everything.
There should be a way of removing Ltd liability status from these people under these circumstances. Government should only step in when the owners and shareholders have stumped up everything they own.

Is the government or the bank going to bail me out when I plead poverty and tell them my assets don't cover my debts?

[sasguru]

Funny how all the unreconstructed right-wing capitalists and libertarians are completely quiet.
Things seem very different if their money is about to go down the pan.
Suddenly socialism and government seem very good things indeed

[DimPrawn]

The Government of the biggest capitalist country in the world bails out the banks with tax payer money. You couldn't make this up! socialism for the rich!

Rewarding the risk comrade! Free markets until the tulip hits the fan!

It's clear the whole global financial system is flawed. Without the intervention we would have complete collapse of the world's money markets. However what is not clear is how a repeat of this credit crisis is going to be prevented, how to stop wealthy bankers profiting at tax payers expenses and how much tax payers money is going to be stolen by banks in this way.

But as you say, it's privatising profit and nationalising losses.

[Old Greg]

The Government of the biggest capitalist country in the world bails out the banks with tax payer money. You couldn't make this up! socialism for the rich!

Rewarding the risk comrade! Free markets until the tulip hits the fan!

Yes, it is kind of ironic, but it ain't socialism of any kind.

<On soapbox>
The state is just an arm of the capitalist class, with varying levels of concessions granted to those at the bottom of the pile according to the political and economic circumstances. Free markets / low taxes / cuts in public spending / laissez-faire are promoted as an ideology when it means increased profit. But when state intervention is required to reduce losses, then the free market spiel is quietly dropped. Both positions are entirely consistent as the exercise of power by the powerful to their own benefit. There's just plenty of spin to make it seem very complex to pull the wool over her eyes.
<Off soapbox>

Having said all that, I haven't had a night's sleep for 10 weeks so apologies if this makes even less sense than usual.

[Bagpuss]

The Government of the biggest capitalist country in the world bails out the banks with tax payer money. You couldn't make this up! socialism for the rich!

Rewarding the risk comrade! Free markets until the sh1t hits the fan!