A casual conversation between two robots sheds light on the Irish economic crisis

by Mike Novack Fri Nov 26, 2010 17:33

Ask instead what happens if you choose not to bail out the banks. I agree, gambled and lost. So might make us feel good not to bail them out. Which would be all well and good if we didn't feel the need to borrow tomorrow. The collapsed banks wouldn't be lending anything to anybody. The quantity* of money in circulation decreases (not as much exists any more)

We could REPLACE the banking system (now where do we get the capital for that)

* Not a fixed physical quantity but created when a working banking system is allowed to lend out deposits in addiition to their capital (only keeping a certain percentage on hand for "reserves").

by Wrong Mike Fri Nov 26, 2010 20:00

So what if the PRIVATE banks collapsed? We could easily have setup a Gov't backed bank to make credit available - there was nothing stopping us doing that, but the traitors Lenihan and Cowen decided to take the worst possible course of action instead.
Instead all that money which we could have used to setup a bank is being sunk into shoring up the dying Private banks. Again this is tantamout to a treasonous act,

We could REPLACE the banking system, for internal Irish use/credit. and we could simply supply the capital ourselves, by printing our own paper currency. that's all money is anyway - printed paper which people are prepared to accept a method of payment for goods and services- So long as the Irish people could be persuaded to accept the new paper then it become the new currency.

Instead the criminals that run Irish politicls decided that was not an option for us - I can only presume that their masters the International Banking Class told them to not even consider it.

A look at the Bondholders of Anglo shows that Goldman Sachs and Rothschilds are listed as creditors. Both Goldman Sachs and Rothschilds have been acting as 'advisors' to the Irish Gov't during this crisis. - If that's not a criminal conspiracy then what is?

Mapping the Golden Circle of the Irish Banking, Business and Political Elite - http://hubriticanomaly.blogspot.com/2010/11/mapping-golden-circle-of-irish-banking.html

"Now lets look at the other side of the equation, at Ireland itself. Well Ireland's GDP before the crash, in 2008, was ... drum roll please... €207 billion. Or 0.207 trillion.

SO.... on one side we have Ireland whose bond holders, its people, have between them a total GDP wealth of 0.207 trillion euros. Who are being FORCED, against their will, to pay Anglo Irish bank's debts to its bond holders, who between them hold 20.8 Trillion euros. The people of Ireland are paying to, and protecting the wealth and power of, people who have 100 times more wealth!

So where do these wealthy bond holders live and work?

Germany has the most with 15 of the bond holders. Who between them hold 5.3 trillion euros.
France is next with 10 bond holders. Who have about 4 trillion to keep them warm.
Britain is third with 9 who have around 3 trillion.
The Swiss have 6 but who have about 8.5 trillion.
America has only three and hold only a trillion.

Other nations include, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, Holland Finland, Norway, Sweden, Poland, South Africa and Italy.

All these figures are very rough. The figure for Switzerland is certainly under because Private Swiss banks just don't publish figures. What we can say for sure, figures or no figures, is these are not banks investing widow's pensions or orphan's pennies."

Click here - http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/5097/aibondholders3.jpg - for a High-Res image of the list of Anglo Bondholders, showing that Gov't 'Advisors' Goldman Sachs and Rothschilds are also Anglo-Irish bank Bondholders

Gov't Advisor Goldman Sachs and Rothschilds are also Anglo-Irish bank Bondholders

by Mike Novack Fri Nov 26, 2010 20:50

"and we could simply supply the capital ourselves, by printing our own paper currency. that's all money is anyway - printed paper which people are prepared to accept a method of payment for goods and services- So long as the Irish people could be persuaded to accept the new paper then it become the new currency"

In which case it must be hard to understand the problem. Your leaders must be traitors to you if they had such a simple way out. Sorry, but you appear not to understand how it works. Unlimited use of the printing press doesn't create more money except in the sense of hyperinflation so it now takes thousands to buy a loaf of bread.

LOOK -- I am NOT saying you shouldn't do something else rather than submit to this blackmail but you need to understand the consequences of the choices.

Will an example help? Let's take a road as an example (a major highway project). I don't mean by taking this example that I think you need more major highways. It's just a "placeholder" for whatever major project you do think worthy.

HOW do we do this? Or rather how have we become accustomed to do this? Let's say that the road project will cost 10 years worth of what we can afford to annually budget for this purpose. Iinstead of using those resources for something else we might want (i'ts always choices, tradeoffs). What do we do? Do we put off having the road for ten years as we accumulate the necessary? Or have we become accustomed to "we want it NOW" so we BORROW the money for the project and build the road this year. We'll be paying it off not for ten years but probably twenty -- because the lenders won't give us this money out of the goodness of their hearts. Those nasty SOBs will insist on being paid interest. How much interest? That depends on lots of things including how certain they are that we will pay them back. Have we ever defaulted?

Get it now? Of course can stiff the bankers but then forget about future loans until they forget. Which won't be any time soon. Tthe most likely outcome would be that in the future you DO have to wait ten years for that new highway. Raise the capital among yourselves? Sure, and if you had it among yourselves you wouldn't be having a NATIONAL financial crisis (it['d be an internal crisis between different gorups of you).

The decision you face is a people is which is going to be the lesser pain.

The decisions from among which your politicians get to choose is which the people will accept and who will they blame for the pain. PLEASE -- I am NOT limiting this to your current politicians because even the most radical woiuld be in the same boat. If the people want "jam today" they will throw out whomever tries to get them to wait. Your (current) politicians might possibly be wrong in their judgement that they will fare better giving out the jam and having others/outsiders imposing the pain. Maybe your people are willing to face facts, willing to make the sacrifices necessary to maintain your sovereignty. Willing for the next 10-20 years doing without jam until have accumulated among yourselves enough "surplus".

Am I being too cynical? I will be more ready to believe those of you who are shouting NO! if you make it clear that you do understand what that would mean. And anybody who thinks as simple as "just print money" doesn't understand.

by Wrong Mike, once again Fri Nov 26, 2010 22:29

Despite the condescending reply, Mike, it is you who does not understand - you have forgotten recent history of countries which default, or perhaps you never knew it in the first place.

Over the past 100 years Argentina has defaulted on average once every 20 years. Yet they still have managed to find someone to lend them money at a bearable rate of interest.

Were we to default we would not be defaulting on any debt of the Irish people anyway - default is the wrong word - all we would be doing is saying 'No we will not assume responsibility for the bad decisions of the private lenders who lent to those banks who behaved recklessly ' - these debts are not the debts of the Irish Gov't or the Irish people.

There would be some intitial pain involved, granted but that would be mitigated by a new currency in circulation internal which could be exchanged for goods and services just like the Euro is today, and just like the Sovereign Irish Punt was in the not too distant past.

After a period of time, once lenders see that we have our financial affairs in order, we would again receive credit at a bearable rate of interest, just like Argentina has done many times in the past. the difference being that we will not be carrying a mountain of debt put onto our shoulders by the Crooks Lenihan and Cowen who appear to working for the International financial Criminals who loaned the reckless PRIVATE banks the money in the first place. We do have a Sovereign wealth fund of our own which can be utilised to tide us over this temporary crisis. this Sovereign wealth can be used as backing for an internal currency in order to provide credit for our economy.

this is not mere opinion - it has been already demonstrated by the experience of countries such as Argentina and Brazil. Right now Argentina recievce credit at a far favourable rate than Ireland.

It may have escaped you attention mike, but each time the Gov't has opened it's big fat criminal mouth to announce plans for austerity, the cost of Irish borrowing has shot upwards. This is because the people that loan money to Gov'ts such as our realise, when they hear the Gov'ts plans, that these plans are going to destroiy the Irish Economy, and consequently they charge a higher rate of interest. The cost rose 2 weeks ago when the Gov't announced it's plans for cuts and also this week when the Gov't announced the Finalised plan - it is plain to see that the people who loan money have decided that the Irish Gov'ts plans are damaging to the future economic prosperity of the Country and have reacted accordingly.

So despite your condescension and spin and despite the Gov'ts spin, the people that loan money appear to think that they know better the effect of not defaulting, on a debt we the Irish people don't even owe in the first place, than either you or Lenihan or Cowen.

by Default is the only SANE option Sat Nov 27, 2010 00:08

British Euroskeptic MEP Nigel Farage , in just under 4 brief minutes tells more truth about the entire European experiment than all European bankers, commissioners, and politicians have done in the past decade.

"Good morning Mr. van Rompuy, you've been in office for one year, and in that time the whole edifice is beginning to crumble, there's chaos, the money's running out, I should thank you - you should perhaps be the pinup boy of the euroskeptic movement. But just look around this chamber this morning, look at these faces, look at the fear, look at the anger.

Poor Barroso here looks like he's seen a ghost. They're beginning to understand that the game is up. And yet in their desperation to preserve their dream, they want to remove any remaining traces of democracy from the system. And it's pretty clear that none of you have learned anything. When you yourself Mr. van Rompuy say that the euro has brought us stability, I supposed I could applaud you for having a sense of humor, but isn't this really just the bunker [or banker?] mentality. Your fanaticism is out in the open. You talk about the fact that it was a lie to believe that the nation state could exist in the 21st century globalized world. Well, that may be true in the case of Belgium who haven't had a government for 6 months, but for the rest of us, right across every member state in this union, increasingly people are saying, "We don't want that flag, we don't want the anthem, we don't want this political class, we want the whole thing consigned to the dustbin of history."

We had the Greek tragedy earlier on this year, and now we have the situation in Ireland. I know that the stupidity and greed of Irish politicians has a lot to do with this: they should never, ever have joined the euro. They suffered with low interest rates, a false boom and a massive bust. But look at your response to them: what they are being told as their government is collapsing is that it would be inappropriate for them to have a general election. In fact commissioner Rehn here said they had to agree to a budget first before they are allowed to have a general election.

Just who the hell do you think you people are. You are very, very dangerous people indeed: your obsession with creating this European state means that you are happy to destroy democracy, you appear to be happy with millions and millions of people to be unemployed and to be poor.

Untold millions will suffer so that your euro dream can continue. Well it won't work, cause its Portugal next with their debt levels of 325% of GDP they are the next ones on the list, and after that I suspect it will be Spain, and the bailout for Spain will be 7 times the size of Ireland, and at that moment all the bailout money will is gone - there won't be any more.

But it's even more serious than economics, because if you rob people of their identity, if you rob them of their democracy, then all they are left with is nationalism and violence. I can only hope and pray that the euro project is destroyed by the markets before that really happens."

So now the EU can tell us when we can hold an election. Now the EU can tell us to do whatever they want us to do - This is why we NEED to default ASAP. so that we can regain some control of our own affairs.

~Anyone telling us not to default is an enemy, or an idiot.

Embedded Video Description: MEP Nigel Farage nails the EU dictators.

by Mike Novack Sat Nov 27, 2010 14:03

Taking what I have been saying as suggesting you should not default is ridiculous.

I have NOT been saying that you should not default, only that in making that choice you need to compare the problems both ways and then decide. Your choice. But those here who keep saying NO PROBLEMS (only minor pain) with defaulting are doing a disservice. In comparing evils to make our choices between them we need to be honest.

We are seeing lots of silly statements like "just print money; no problem". Or take what you have just said. Is the experience of Argentina over that time period what you want for Ireland? (in other words, what do you know of the history -- political, economic, military, etc.). You'd want to add evidence that Argentina's crises during that period had nothing to do with the choices. Prepared to do that?

Are you asking my personal opinion? Yes I think you should bite the bullet and default. Accept the resulting pain from that choice to maintain your sovereignty. I'm not at all sure would be less pain and I'm not at all sure how much INTERNAL political instability would cause but at least you'd be free. Please try to think back and remember what economic conditions were like in Ireland BEFORE the time of "the Celtic Tiger". Maybe too many of you in this conversation are too young to remember those days? But THAT may be the situation for Ireland based on internal production and consumption and what you would have to live with for at least a few years. The question before you isn't how to live in oppulence. It's which is better, austerity forced upon you from outside or fiorcing austerity upon yourselves. MAYBE the level of austerity would be different and you should feel free to argue the merits based upon that. Politically it would be very different as in the first case your society can see the enemies as "without" while in the latter likely to see the situation as enemies "within".

Choose -- but choose realisticly

by default is the only SANE option Sat Nov 27, 2010 21:41

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-26/iceland-faring-much-better-after-permitting-banks-to-fail-grimsson-says.html

Iceland Is No Ireland as State Free of Bank Debt, Olafur R. Grimsson, president of Iceland. Says

Nov. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Iceland's President Olafur R. Grimsson talks about the country's progress since receiving a $4.6 billion International Monetary Fund-led loan. He speaks with Mark Barton on Bloomberg Television's "On The Move." (Source: Bloomberg)

Iceland’s President Olafur R. Grimsson said his country is better off than Ireland thanks to the government’s decision to allow the banks to fail two years ago and because the krona could be devalued.

“The difference is that in Iceland we allowed the banks to fail,” Grimsson said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s Mark Barton today. “These were private banks and we didn’t pump money into them in order to keep them going; the state did not shoulder the responsibility of the failed private banks.”

Ireland’s Prime Minister Brian Cowen said this week his government has discussed an 85 billion-euro ($112 billion) bailout with the European Union and International Monetary Fund after the country’s banks threatened to bring the euro member to the brink of bankruptcy. Iceland’s banks, which still owe creditors about $85 billion, were split to create domestic units needed to keep the financial system running, while foreign liabilities remained within the failed lenders.

As a consequence, “Iceland is faring much better than anybody expected,” Grimsson said. The Icelandic state’s liability on foreign depositor claims stemming from Icesave accounts at failed Landsbanki Islands hf should be put to a national referendum, he said.

“How far can we ask ordinary people -- farmers and fishermen and teachers and doctors and nurses -- to shoulder the responsibility of failed private banks,” said Grimsson. “That question, which has been at the core of the Icesave issue, will now be the burning issue in many European countries.”

Accept Losses

Iceland is relying on a $4.6 billion IMF-led loan to rebuild its economy. Grimsson said today the government may not need the entire amount.

Bondholders of European banks should be prepared to accept losses because voters are becoming increasingly unwilling and unable to fund bailouts, FXPro Financial Services Ltd. said in a Nov. 24 note.

“The taxpayer has no realistic prospect of being able to save their banks, such is the magnitude of their bad loans and their extraordinary dependence on central bank support,” wrote Michael Derks, chief strategist in London at foreign-exchange firm FXPro. “Both junior and senior bondholders in these insolvent banks need to suffer huge haircuts,” he said.

Forcing bond holders to “share the burden,” may help the euro region remain intact, Derks wrote.

Junk

Grimsson, who said Iceland’s talks to join the European Union are ongoing, in January this year blocked a $5.2 billion deal to cover British and Dutch depositor claims stemming from Icesave accounts. The move prompted Fitch Ratings to downgrade the island’s debt to “junk” as a normalization of international relations grew more remote. Iceland’s Finance Ministry on Nov. 16 said the country may now be weeks away from a “final resolution” to the Icesave dispute as it secures broad lawmaker backing for a new accord.

Kaupthing Bank hf, Landsbanki and Glitnir Bank hf failed within weeks of each other in October 2008 after they were unable to secure short-term funding. The banking crisis led to an 80 percent slump in the krona against the euro offshore, until the slump was stemmed by the introduction of capital controls at the end of 2008.

Kaupthing’s winding-up committee today said it finished dealing with claims lodged against it. The bank is dealing with a total of 28,167 claims filed by creditors across 119 countries totaling 7.32 trillion kronur ($63 billion), it said in a statement today.

by Eily Wily. Sun Nov 28, 2010 00:34

The Royal mail is also hugely exposed. default NOW!

by Eily Wily. Sun Nov 28, 2010 00:46

No Bank No Debt.
Leave euro print punts distribute through post offices. Take your money out of the banks now and buy silver- get phyical delivery. that s the best way to kick these evil actioned peoplei the gonads.

Govt already has it's personal wealth offshore.

Time for zurich to be charged with Money laundeing for the financial terrorists.

by Why the need to mischaracteris, Mike? Tue Nov 30, 2010 15:49

@Mike - "We are seeing lots of silly statements like "just print money; no problem".

As you well know - I never said "just print money; no problem" - I mentioned floating a new DEBT-FREE currency, for internal domestic use, with REAL backing, which is not the same as "just print money; no problem" no matter how often you attempt to deliberately mischaracterise it in that fashion.

A local debt-free currency that has the trust and confidence of the locals, WILL work. It's been done before most notably in Austria and Germany. It worked quite well in Austria until the International Financial criminal Banksters forced the Austrian Central Bank to clamp down on it.

by Default is the only SANE option Tue Nov 30, 2010 15:53

Why Build Your Own Community Currency System? http://publication.nodel.org/Community-Currency-System

"A Local Exchange Trading System (LETS) is a community-owned and run currency system based on a zero-sum model, as opposed to monetary systems in which the money-suppliers continuously add interest, thereby increasing the money supply. Each member's account is usually set to start at zero; in order to trade on average half the accounts will be "in commitment” but with no interest being charged or earned at either end.

.. . . . Why would you want to set up a local exchange trading system? Motivations of people joining a currency community could vary from needing help and being short of cash to having time on their hands and wanting to help but not really feeling they could afford to volunteer. Some people worry about the actions of the mainstream banking system, which is grounded in two things: control of the mechanism for credit creation, and control of public confidence. Many also wonder if there's a way to “open-source” the things people need from central banking systems. "

by W. Finnerty Wed Dec 01, 2010 09:42

Not only can the people of sovereign independent states create their own "interest and debt free" money, for their own lawful and responsible purposes, they actually have a need and a duty to do so: if they are to really be sovereign and independent.

It is a very well known, well documented, and extremely important historical fact -- which can easily be verified using the Internet search engines -- that when former US President Abraham Lincoln, and the people who elected him, decided to stand up to the "lovers of slavery" who started the Civil War in the United States in the 1860s, he quickly found that while the privately owned banks were willing to provide the money he needed for the war, they were also demanding huge interest rates: so huge -- well in excess of 20% as far as I can remember, from documents I read some time back -- that President Lincoln flatly refused to have anything whatsoever to do with them, because he feared that if he did, the bankers would slowly but surely get control of the whole nation (in effect) through the "perpetual debt" mechanism so beloved and treasured by the privately owned global banking cartel.

President Lincoln then put legislation in place for his Government to produce debt free and interest free money (based on the "US Dollar" which became known as the "Greenback") to fight the Civil War; and, not only that, he and Government went on to defeat "the lovers of slavery".

As this whole subject now seems EXTREMELY important for the people of the Republic of Ireland to learn more about, and to do so quickly, I would suggest that people experiment (without delay!!) by entering word strings (into some of the Internet "Search Engines") such as those provided in the two lines of text just below:

Abraham Lincoln, debt free and interest free money ...

John F Kennedy, debt free and interest free money ...

The whole idea that "we (the people of the Republic of Ireland) have no choice other than to turn to the IMF (International Monitory Fund) for our money" is nothing more -- or less -- than a complete pack of lies: pure and simple.

by Yeats Wed Dec 01, 2010 10:55

@Default is the... I know that LETS systems operate successfully in some countries and believe the system of barter can have many benefits when people and countries are cash-strapped. A big But is that locally such systems depend on a community dynamic of positive and frequent interaction. People involved need to have goods (food, things etc.) and practical services (labour, skilled work) to give and take among communities. On paper a LETS system seems both logical and attractive. Unfortunately the dynamism required for successful operation proves to be weak. In Sligo several years ago they tried the LETS system, but it fizzled out due to lack of interaction. One successful by-product was the establishment of a communal vegetable garden on the edge of town, which seems to be still doing well.

by W. Finnerty Mon Dec 06, 2010 06:30

In what appears (to me) to be a straightforward violation of Article 10 of our written Constitution (Bunreacht na hEireann), the Republic of Ireland's natural oil and gas resources are STILL going to be given away it seems; while, at the same time, extremely deep cuts in public spending -- of an unprecedented level -- are being proposed in order to pay for bailing out the bankers, who, as a result of their own free choices, and without any consultation whatsoever with the people of the Republic of Ireland, have collectively -- and possibly deliberately for all we know? -- built up an enormous mountain of gambling debts around the world, the exact size of which nobody really seems to know.

"IRELAND has EUR 5.4 trillion of oil lying off the west coast, it was revealed yesterday (i.e. January 30th 2009)": Please see at
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/90909  (BACKUP COPY)

"SITTING ON A (5.4 TRILLION EUROS) FORTUNE":
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/2997336  (BACKUP COPY)

With the soon to be expected general election in the Republic of Ireland in mind, which is believed to be only weeks away, it should be a case of political suicide for any Republic of Ireland TD (Dail Eireann "Elected Representative") who votes in favour of tomorrow's budget proposals?

But will it?

Or, will it be a case of: "Bankers rule - okay?"

Related link: http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1205/budget.html