Football Forum | Ticket Forum | Off-Topic Forum | All

twoleftfeet 10:57 Mon Sep 25
Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

They seem to have a massive say in everything that the Labour Party are doing, today it's reported that they vetoed any moves to debate Brexit.
They are also ensuring that momentum candidates get selected for seats.

So force for good or evil?

Labour back to the dark days of being told what to do by trade unions or Labour being the party of the working class?

zebthecat 10:31 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

The Northern Rock bail out wasn't a complete disaster for the Treasury. NRAM (essentially Northern Rock's loan book which was called the bad bank) has been making a tidy return and the government has been selling parcels of it off.
That part of bail out will probably make a profit against expectations as the loans weren't as bad as expected.

Hammer and Pickle 10:06 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Shut it.

The Tory party is now a national liability.

After8 9:49 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

It should have been sold to virgin in the 1st place.

, 8:23 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

And then several years later Osborne sells NR to Virgin losing, according to industry experts, some £400M for us taxpayers/

After8 7:48 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

"I believe the reputation of London is secure because we have taken the right long term decisions for the future of our economy.

This was Gordon Brown celebrating the nationalisation of Northern Rock and spinning that all was well.

SurfaceAgentX2Zero 8:48 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

threesixty 3:24 Thu Sep 28

You're only half-informed.

NR went bust a year BEFORE the big crash. They were (one of) the first to go to the wall in a time of tightening credit because it became known that their loan book was crap and their funding strategy was reckless. But, they couldn't escape their over-reliance on short-term funding because nobody would lend to them medium-long term. Because their loan book was crap. In a time of tightening credit.

Subsequently, their loan book turned out to be not quite so horrific as feared (even that's a fairly generous appraisal), but only because the rest of the banking system collapsed and some of NR's shitty mortgages were saved by H&P's beloved 'sign of economic health and not a collapsing banking system' near-zero negative real interest rates.

westhammerer 4:58 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

360 leaves the twats in his wake and is gentlemanly about it.

Hayzer 3:36 Fri Sep 29
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

360.. knob

Willtell 4:04 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Exactly - you were being disingenuous and you know it.

Your whole post was trying to make out that it was good sense to keep banks afloat and how people could lose lots of money. That was why you implied people could only recover £85k...

DISINGENUOUS and argumentative....

threesixty 3:24 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Willtell

I implied nothing of the sort. I made it explicitly clear.
I said

"The government guarantee is now 85k or so.
AND THAT'S PER INSTITUTION. So if you have 85k in first direct and 85k in Hsbc you’re only going to get 85k
"

Where did I even mention that you only get 1 pay out? I never said that at all. Anywhere. I said you are only guaranteed per institution.
Why pretend I said things I didn't when you can just copy and paste what I said?

As for allowing banks to fail. I said you cant allow banks as big as RBS to fail. Banks with 10s of millions of customers. Thats why the government nationalised them.

NR was a small bank. Them going to the wall would be bad but nothing like RBS dying.

ICE save collapsed and it practically destroyed Iceland. And that bank was nothing compared to the size of RBS.

NR died not because its loan book was crap. The 125%/100% mortgages weren't that bad. The issue was it funded its mortgages and loans with short term credit which dried up when American based mortgage backed securities started to be seen as trash.

If NR had purely 90% LTV mortgages on the their books they still would have died simply because they couldn't get access to short term capital and that was how their business model was set up.

Which in turn is why banks were required to have more capital on hand and led to them cutting back their loans which led to small businesses feeling the pinch during 2008 - 2011.

Willtell 1:50 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Look what you said implied that people would only get one payout to strengthen your argument. Your example was one where First Direct is owned by HSBC (which I didn't know).

Anyone lucky enough to have £85k in more than one bank would get a payout for each bank as long as they are not one company. That fact weakened your argument hence you were being disingenuous and are now playing the innocent card.

Your argument with Infidel has merits on both sides but had Northern Rock been allowed to fail and the government reimbursed people's lost savings then all the other banks would have been forced to restructure. Making banks incapable of going bust is not a good idea...

SurfaceAgentX2Zero 1:46 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

threesixty 12:13 Thu Sep 28

Doesn't matter how much you wriggle, mate. You have given yourself away as a middle-class class warrior who claims to want equality for all as long but draws the line at anything that might adversely affect his own savings.

EXACTLY the same as that other cunt H&P.

threesixty 1:31 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Willtell

"Because you made it sound as though consumers could only claim once under the bank guarantee scheme. But you knew that anyway didn't you? Another example of "disingenuous"?"

I said once per institution.
Many people think they are banking with different companies because the brands are different. That isnt always the case.

BRANDED 1:25 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

It was £50 k at the time. Very ironically I got the full £50 k from the government from icesave. Remember them and what they owned?

Westside 1:21 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

They queued at Northern Rock because the deposit guarantee was not in place at the time

It's been in force since 01/01/2001, with various deposit limits guaranteed.

threesixty 12:15 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

zeb

"Someone doesn't know how fractional reserve banking works"

I mentioned this. I'm not sure if you are saying I am wrong?

Willtell 12:14 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Because you made it sound as though consumers could only claim once under the bank guarantee scheme. But you knew that anyway didn't you? Another example of "disingenuous"?

threesixty 12:13 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Surface

"I see the class warrior and defender of the poor threesixty is very worried about people with £170k in savings who can't be arsed to place it in two different institutions. Or people with £255k who don't have the wit to put it in three."

Forgetting the fact that I said that there will be some very normal people at any one point who could have a large sum of money in their accounts (selling house etc..).

The real issue is the knock on effect that a financial institition with 10s of millions of accounts going under would have on the wider society.

People need to pay people who need to pay people, at the same time or in sequence. When that chain fails, lots of things fail. So your idea that losing money or access to an account is some benign issue limited to rich account holders is just silly.

Furthermore government guarantees are based on borrowing to cover for the loss. Its not as if the government has the cash on hand the guarantee every UK bank account. Again that increases our long term borrowing requirements and effects are economy.

Why everyone on here thinks that all these things are isolated issues is beyond me. They are all connected. It hurts everyone, not just the rich.

threesixty 12:06 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Willtell

"Your point is disingenuous. Put £85k in different brands of the same bank group then you can only claim once. "

thats what I said. Why is this disingenuous? i.e. my first direct/hsbc example.

Willtell 11:12 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

threesixty 2:06
Your point is disingenuous. Put £85k in different brands of the same bank group then you can only claim once.

Put £85k in 3 different banks and you get the pay-out 3 times - £85k from each one.

From - https://www.fscs.org.uk/what-we-cover/products/banks-building-societies/
We have received some enquiries about how we would apply the compensation limits to people who hold multiple accounts in banks that are part of a larger group. If each of the banks is separately authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA):

The FSCS would pay compensation up to the limit of £85,000* per person, per authorised bank or building society.
If each of the banks is covered by a single authorisation:

FSCS would pay compensation up to a total limit of £85,000 once. This limit will be for the total of all the accounts you have with the different bank brands under the authorisation.
* From 3 July 2015, the FSCS will provide

zebthecat 10:49 Thu Sep 28
Re: Momentum, a force for good or a force for evil?

Someone doesn't know how fractional reserve banking works

Page 1 - Next