This blog is closed and has moved to http://Charlottegore.com. See you there!
Something I've heard a lot today:"Well if we're giving them all this money than it's right that we have a say in how it's spent."
*Sigh*
Why couldn't I have become an evangelical Socialist? I'd be so happy today. This would be the best day ever. The only problem I'd have is how to spin it to people who might get a little suspicious, but seeing as how everyone's pretty much resigned to mass bank nationalisation I don't think I'd have anything to worry about.
My mum used to be like this. If I had to ask her for help, it would come with so many strings, conditions and obligations that I learned very quickly never, ever to ask for help. That in order to be free you have to stand on your own two feet.
I know a few 'insiders' have been joking about the inevitable demise of 'free (as in beer) banking', but to see the end of 'free (as in speech) banking' is... well it's tragic and terrifying at the same time. This centralised Government control of the cogs of the economy, combined with the massive erosion of civil liberties and a state under the world's largest amount of survillance - with a Government that, if relected, intends to make ID cards compulsory - and we're looking at a receipe for hell.
I feel like a frog that's starting to wonder if she should jump out of the pan.
This blog is closed and has moved to http://Charlottegore.com. See you there!
Posts
7 comments:
I don't have a problem with the treasury taking positions on banks boards.
It's not an end to free banking at all, it's 3 banks that have been part nationalised, and one fully nationalised - nationalisation is what comes of being "too important to fail".
You can't have it both ways..
.. either you leave entirely to the market and watch as the "invisible" and "rational" hand of market panics, runs around like a headless chicken, syphoning cash to directors like AIG, Enron and Lehman Bros before crashing spectacularly and taking jobs, homes and a large chunk of the economy with them.
or you take it out of their mismanaging greedy hands.
For me, the fatal words were "too important to be allowed to fail", which makes it clear that the market can't be trusted (because we know the market is as intelligent and rational as a 2 year old child at best, and a chicken without it's head at worst)
I don't want it both ways.
I want the bad banks to fail, simple as.
So if the bad banks fail, what happens to those of us with savings - a failed bank takes everybody's savings with it.
A graceful winding down isn't always possible, particularly when there isn't enough cash left to reimburse savers.
That's what "too big to fail" comes down to, because 99/100 times Receivership is just a firesale where the receivers take their cut first and creditors and both customers get shafted.
Ah, finally, at last someone said it. Thanks.
Why should those without savings be forced to pay to protect those with savings?
Then Charlotte you will condemn millions of people to misery...and incidentally you will also help end the capitalist system which normally is something i would be in favour of but I am not if the price is the former consequence...
I'm not an evangelical socialist by the way...for one thing im a committed atheist....
oh and by the way this has *nothing* to with ID cards....your hostility to this move is actually based in Orwellian paranoia where none exists...governments across the globe are doing the same thing...
Интернет-магазин товары по почте ShopBody.ru тренажеры и спортивные товары, ингаляторы ультразвуковые, шагомеры электронные, утягивающее белье, а также автоматические тонометры и тонометры Omron, детские весы, пульсомер, миостимулятор тела, массажер
Post a Comment