Debt.

« Older   Newer »
  Share  
FionaK
view post Posted on 9/1/2013, 19:04 by: FionaK




QUOTE (FionaK @ 30/10/2011, 23:33) 
The reason you let them go bankrupt first (or rather admit that they are bankrupt) is because then you take them over without buying them: on account of the fact they are not worth anything. If you do not get them to admit it first, they will demand money, saying you are buying something worthwhile: see the history of nationalsing the railways and the mines in the UK. If the are nationalised because they have failed you may have to pay something for the buildings etc: but since you are going to confiscate the money made through fraud that can probably be set off.

Indeed part of the problem is that other funds are in the banks: either they stole them or they didn't. If they did then they are replaced by the money we are putting in the nationalise banks: which is no different from the current bailouts except we take control. If those funds are still there they are still there: ownership of the bank makes no difference.

Although AIG is not a bank I think their latest wheeze illustrates this point quite well

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/res...sue-its-savior/

QUOTE
Some government officials are already upset with the company for even seriously entertaining the lawsuit, people briefed on the matter said. The people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, noted that without the bailout, A.I.G. shareholders would have fared far worse in bankruptcy.

AIG do not deny they were bankrupt: they do not deny they needed the public to bail them out. But now they are suing that same public because they say the terms are onerous. It is breathtaking but it is not suprising. That is why they need to be formally bankrupted then nationalised, for they have no shame at all
 
Top
42 replies since 28/10/2011, 13:13   1255 views
  Share