Give us back our money!

[yorkie]

Looks like the thieves are trying to avoid paying our money back...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8553979.stm

Voters in Iceland have overwhelmingly rejected proposals to pay the UK and the Netherlands in the wake of collapse of the Icesave bank.

With a third of results counted, 93% of voters said "No" in a referendum.
Iceland's prime minister says her government will remain in office and continue to seek a deal.

The British and Dutch governments want reimbursement for the 3.8bn euros (£3.4bn; $5.2bn) they paid out in compensation to customers in 2008.....

And to think they want to join the EU!

"Rating agency Moody's said recently that the deadlock may force it to downgrade Iceland's debt to junk, making it even harder for the country to borrow much-needed funds on the international market"

Erm, what? No-one should lend them a penny. They've been living a life of relative luxury based on money from overseas paid into ponzi schemes of theirs for years, and they want more money?!

They should be downrated to the absolute lowest credit rating possible.

 

[142094]

Damn PIGS!

 

[Ivo]

I didn't realise that the Dutch were involved as well. I had thought that it was classic British behaviour - recklessly "help" those in "trouble".

Cod Wars, anyone...? :roll:

 

[142094]

Cod Wars, anyone...? :roll:

with chips and mushy peas, plenty of salt and vinegar, bread and butter and a pot of tea?

Seems like old conflicts are rearing their heads again [Looks to Falklands and trouble in NI]

 

[Nick W]

The fact is that the debt is with the insolvent Landsbanki, which was privatised in 2003, and not with the nation state. Therefore it not unreasonable for the state not to pay up. Obviously the very fact they didn't bail out the bank as we did in this country (it is worth noting that the Tories opposed this at the time but in the long term it has been shown to be a beneficial act), and the fact that the Government refused now to pay British and Dutch creditors will harm the nation's credit rating for years to come. However, if that's the repercussions the state is willing to take, we can only stand by their decision!

 

[mrcheek]

Looks like the thieves are trying to avoid paying our money back...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8553979.stm

And to think they want to join the EU!



Erm, what? No-one should lend them a penny. They've been living a life of relative luxury based on money from overseas paid into ponzi schemes of theirs for years, and they want more money?!

They should be downrated to the absolute lowest credit rating possible.

erm. why should a government be responsible for overseas debts of a private company? British people chose to invest overseas in full knowledge that their money was unprotected by the financial protection scheme (it has a proper name. I forget what it is). they greedily sought higher returns. I see no reason why the Icelandic government should pay the money back. the poor people of this country are struggling enough as it is!

 

[yorkie]

They're only 'struggling' because they were living well beyond their means due to foreign money being invested in their ponzi schemes, now that money is no longer there they're having to adjust to that. And to counter your argument, why should our Government pay? And if you think no-one should pay, do you think that council taxes should go through the roof at the councils that are affected?

 

[Nick W]

Though I take your point that their national debt is higher per GDP per capita than ours, they were hardly living beyond their means any more than we were and still are. Icesave was a legitimate business owned by a respectable bank.

Indeed, the council taxes will almost certainly would have gone up had our Government not paid, meaning the money will have been added to our national debt. Feel free vote out the councillors responsible!

 

[mbonwick]

That referendum is irrelevant now anyway, as the Icelandic government have already signed a new deal that's better for all parties.

 

[Old Timer]

The headlines do not explain that the bigger issue was the level of interest proposed as opposed to the capital sum.

As for voting out the Councils, it should be noted that the Labour Government no less was recommending such investment strategies as a way of increasing revenue to the Councils and a means of keeping down Council tax at a time when Labour has been surrepticiously reducing revenue suppoort to Councils, whilst at the same time placing greater and greater financial responsibilities and duties upon them.

 

[mrcheek]

The headlines do not explain that the bigger issue was the level of interest proposed as opposed to the capital sum.

As for voting out the Councils, it should be noted that the Labour Government no less was recommending such investment strategies as a way of increasing revenue to the Councils and a means of keeping down Council tax at a time when Labour has been surrepticiously reducing revenue suppoort to Councils, whilst at the same time placing greater and greater financial responsibilities and duties upon them.

I love OT's wonderful ability to turn almost any subject into saying "Actually, its Labours Fault".

OT is like the Daily Mail. With one subtle difference - the stuff OT says is TRUE!!!!

 

[thefab444]

OT is like the Daily Mail. With one subtle difference - the stuff OT says is TRUE!!!!

Left wing media blah blah blah negates to mention blah blah blah, Daily Mail the bastion of truth blah blah blah.

Why do you automatically assume I support the Conservative Party?

OT.

 

[Nick W]

I love OT's wonderful ability to turn almost any subject into saying "Actually, its Labours Fault".

OT is like the Daily Mail.

Indeed just like the Daily Mail, OT presents correct facts - in fact I'll have to concede that OT probably knows far more factual and background information - then infers or states overdrawn conclusions and sweeping statements without any analysis as to why the facts lead to the conclusion. Fortunately us intelligent people know better.

 

[mrcheek]

Indeed just like the Daily Mail, OT presents correct facts - in fact I'll have to concede that OT probably knows far more factual and background information - then infers or states overdrawn conclusions and sweeping statements without any analysis as to why the facts lead to the conclusion. Fortunately us intelligent people know better.

nonsense. OT is right (ironically, when I first encountered him on these forums we got into a major argument). VOTE OT!!!

 

[Bellwater]

Indeed just like the Daily Mail, OT presents correct facts - in fact I'll have to concede that OT probably knows far more factual and background information - then infers or states overdrawn conclusions and sweeping statements without any analysis as to why the facts lead to the conclusion. Fortunately us intelligent people know better.

There's an error in that statement somewhere.

 

[Nick W]

nonsense. OT is right (ironically, when I first encountered him on these forums we got into a major argument). VOTE OT!!!

No, you were right the first time, OT has failed to give us any evidence that any other party spoke out against investment in foreign banks that they believed to be vulnerable. Therefore all parties with the opportunity to speak out are equally culpable.

There's an error in that statement somewhere.

Please let me know where. Tabloid papers may be selective in the facts they use but I doubt they present fabricated facts - we have various libel laws in place to prevent this.