Thursday, January 3, 2008

the usual nonesense

Nocitybailout - epetition reply

"As a responsible citizen, I do not believe it is right for you to ask me to pay for the City's financial excesses, especially since a bailout encourages lenders to continue making predatory loans, with the assumption that taxpayers are on the hook. Any proposed bailout will only reward lenders and borrowers who acted irresponsibly, and it will punish people who work hard and diligently manage their finances by not buying houses which they cannot afford.

Posted by seanb303 @ 03:48 PM (711 views)
Please complete the required fields.

4 thoughts on “the usual nonesense

  • I got my emailed reply about an hour ago.

    I wasn’t expecting a straight answer.

    We made our point, but are they listening, I mean really listening?

    Please complete the required fields.

  • “The Government’s response to the situation at Northern Rock was necessary to avert a threat to the stability of the UK’s financial system and avoid a serious disturbance in the wider economy.”

    It sounds like they did the right thing to me. What else could they do? Let NR go bust? That would very likely trigger an over reaction from the wider public, and instead of the walking on eggshells that we are now doing (cutting IRs, giving wider support to the banking industry) we could have fallen straight through the floor.

    If you leave it to the markets people will get burnt — that is, after all, the way markets work. You may think your money is safe, but having just open house will hurt the poorest. People also quite rightly expect protection. If you put £50k into a bank, you do not expect to lose it (or even a part of it).

    There is no easy answer to this — either have much tougher regulation (‘but we don’t want to control the markets’) or have a free market (‘but I demand some guarantees’).

    Please complete the required fields.

  • Received the same reply at about the same time. Similar to all the responses I’ve had to the government e-petitions I have signed, i.e. a combination of completely missing the point and “don’t you worry your pretty little head about it.”

    Please complete the required fields.

  • “was necessary to avert a threat to the stability of the UK’s financial system”

    But the threat to the stability of the UK’s financial system was generated from within the UK financial system, not by outside influences!

    It’s like saying that when a kid craps in the swimming pool, everyone else should clean the floating bits of poo up, not the kid that did it, because everyone else is using the pool. It completely ignores the moral link between actions and consequences!

    At best illogical, at worst deceptive.

    Please complete the required fields.

Add a comment

  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>