New bail-out for banks to cost hundreds of billions of pounds (Guardian newspaper)

[Glottenham]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jan/19/bank-bail-out-rbs

quote:

"Under the new plans, the government will offer to insure bank loans for corporate and consumer debt. It will provide £100bn to underwrite new mortgage lending and extend its existing £200bn scheme until the end of the year, and will also give state-owned Northern Rock a new mandate to increase its lending.
The government said it was taking the measures - just three months after its first £37bn bail-out - after the global financial and economic situation continued to deteriorate, particularly over the last two months. It said that it was "essential" to meet demand for lending from businesses, homeowners and consumers."

Babylon system fall

SEE

[Moneyman]

For god sake are you a business person or a guardian reader? make up your mind. While the story is correct why not use a newspaper that deals with business rather than a grotty rag that for all the workers paid by our tax money.

[Glottenham]

and:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jan/19/economy-banking

quote:

"The tone towards the banks is becoming more aggressive. Gordon Brown and a phalanx of ministers will say they share the frustration of the public at the irresponsibility of past lending practices, the slowness with which they have revealed their debts and their stubborn refusal in the past few months to release credit."

LOL. The deregulated finance market WAS LABOUR GOVERNMENT POLICY. Honestly these polititions make me f'ing sick...also Tory policy by the way of course, in fact thats where labour picked it up from, from Reagun and Thatchers free market, 'the market knows best' dogmatism. And now its imploding. OH DEAR.

AS IS WRITTEN SO SHALL BE

[Glottenham]

For god sake are you a business person or a guardian reader? make up your mind. While the story is correct why not use a newspaper that deals with business rather than a grotty rag that for all the workers paid by our tax money.

The Guardian is very mainstream at the end of the day despite poncing of the radical/activist scene on occassion. Perhaps you should look into other ways of being/living than MONEY, man. As in f'ing sharing, fascist ****!

[Moneyman]

typical guardian reader. If you get working and employ people and make a few quid you are a fascist, whereas if you sit back and are paid by the state where there is no motivation to improve or blow less of our money, you consider yourself a good person. one creates, one uses. One wants to share the produce of others work. You can only really share your own stuff. Governments are not being good by handing over money. the people whose money it is are the ones doing the good.

have you noticed that the left wing are always the ones who need to monitor people (so that they can give out the funds to the correct people of course) and the right wing who want more individual freedom. But any restriction on freedom is always called fascist. So is making money in a free world.

[Mister B]

These posts always make me smile:)
Mister B

[Moneyman]

are you laughing because you are a sensible businessperson or because you are a lentil eating sandle wearing guardian reading cycle nazi.

"It is no use being a poor philanthropist" Warren Buffett

[NetConneXions]

where is all this money coming from......seems we have a bottomless wallet. I want one of those.

[Trainer Bubble]

We're printing it.

[SillyJokes]

The consequences if the banks fail are unthinkable. Society as we know it would collapse and we'd all be living in chaos. So unfortunately, although we'll end up paying, it's probably worth it, considering the alternatives.

[Esk247]

the alternative was that they put some of that few hundred billion in to supporting jobs..if people have jobs they pay taxes...if they have a job they will go on holidays..if they have a job they'll go shopping..if they have a job..you get the idea.

without jobs whats the point in supporting the banking system???? i mean...really...everyone will be on job seekers allowance soon enough and then we'll really see a collapse of society.

[SillyJokes]

the alternative was that they put some of that few hundred billion in to supporting jobs..if people have jobs they pay taxes...if they have a job they will go on holidays..if they have a job they'll go shopping..if they have a job..you get the idea.

without jobs whats the point in supporting the banking system???? i mean...really...everyone will be on job seekers allowance soon enough and then we'll really see a collapse of society.

yes, almost true, and there are areas just as you describe above which already have massive social problems.

I don't know how they get the money and how they could spend it better. I just thought that without banks things would tend to anarchy across the board, rather than just those who don't have jobs. Even those with money and homes would find themselves unable to buy food, fuel etc.

As I don't own my home this scenario really worries me as the landlord could chuck me out to house his own friends and family and I'd have no where to go.

Oh deary me. As if I don't have enough stuff to worry about as it is....

[thebigIAM]

I wouldn't worry, Silly Jokes. I'm sure your landlord has swapped horror stories with other landlords and is grateful to have you. There's plenty more properties to rent right now. Landlords don't want an awful lot, just someone who is respectful of their property, pays the rent on time, and doesn't ring them too often with a string of gripes.