Whether it is or it isn't is pretty much irrelevant as NR couldn't be allowed to collapse, but at least this bank has tangible assets.The value of the housing stock held by Northern Rock won't be near the £55 - 100 Billion for a very long time, is that a good use of public money?
ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (Updated 2021)... HERE
ANNOUNCEMENT : PLEASE BE AWARE WE ARE NOT ON FACEBOOK AT ALL!
FORCING PENSION CHANGE IS LIKE RAPE
-
Tman
- Posts: 4129
- Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 09:57
Re: So why's it Legal to bail the Banks out?
-
TrueBlueTerrier
- FORUM ADMINISTRATOR
- Posts: 72539
- Joined: 30 Dec 2006, 10:29
- Gender: Male
- Location: On my couch
Re: So why's it Legal to bail the Banks out?
I understand the practicalities of why the couldn't let the run on NR bring it down, but surely in a Market driven economy which the UK is at the moment the Government should not have intervened and NR should have been allowed to sink or swim on its own merit.Tman wrote:Whether it is or it isn't is pretty much irrelevant as NR couldn't be allowed to collapse, but at least this bank has tangible assets.The value of the housing stock held by Northern Rock won't be near the £55 - 100 Billion for a very long time, is that a good use of public money?
Mind you Brown is a monetarist who advocates central control so he was never going to let that happen.
Last edited by TrueBlueTerrier on 30 Apr 2008, 11:15, edited 1 time in total.
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts.
Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility.
If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link
My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility.
If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link
My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
-
Vulcan
- Posts: 87
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 13:48
Re: So why's it Legal to bail the Banks out?
Why, Barings was allowed to? Northern Rock is not one of the Big Five Banks, Why didn't they do what RBS are doing?Tman wrote:Whether it is or it isn't is pretty much irrelevant as NR couldn't be allowed to collapse, but at least this bank has tangible assets.The value of the housing stock held by Northern Rock won't be near the £55 - 100 Billion for a very long time, is that a good use of public money?
Happily Retired.
-
Night Tonic
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 21:35
The repercussions for those with mortgages tied up in Northern Rock don't bear thinking about and since one bank is generally attached to various financial institutions, it would have had far reaching consequences. A bank can hardly be compared to a pension. Either way, the government cannot pay into our pensions unless it is a loan. End of.
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/business ... -20838770/
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/business ... -20838770/
-
Vulcan
- Posts: 87
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 13:48
The repercussions for those with pensions in Royal Mail don't bear thinking about and since Royal Mail workers/pensioners deal with many financial institutions it WILL have far reaching consequences. A bank can be compared to a pension. They both are used by people. The government can pay into our pension if they had the political will. End of.Night Tonic wrote:The repercussions for those with mortgages tied up in Northern Rock don't bear thinking about and since one bank is generally attached to various financial institutions, it would have had far reaching consequences. A bank can hardly be compared to a pension. Either way, the government cannot pay into our pensions unless it is a loan. End of.
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/business ... -20838770/
Happily Retired.
-
Night Tonic
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 21:35
Are you actually aware of how little control the government has now and how much is set by he EU or are you stuck in some kind of dream-like 70s retro idealism? Go read. The government would simply be fined if they did. They will not, cannot, bail out the pension and if all hope is pinned on that old chestnut, Santa Claus just gained a whole new following.
-
Vulcan
- Posts: 87
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 13:48
According to Gordon Brown we still have control of our Sovereignity, or is he telling lies? Whenever someone says the government CAN help, the answer is always 'the EU won't allow it'. So what happens if the EU declare the aid package given to Northern Rock & Royal Mail are illegal? will the government obey, or will it argue its case?Night Tonic wrote:Are you actually aware of how little control the government has now and how much is set by he EU or are you stuck in some kind of dream-like 70s retro idealism? Go read. The government would simply be fined if they did. They will not, cannot, bail out the pension and if all hope is pinned on that old chestnut, Santa Claus just gained a whole new following.
Why is any criticism always met with 'are you stuck in the 70's'?
Is Northern Rock nationalised? if it is, is not the aid package illegal, if you apply the rules as you apply them to RM.
If as you say that RM is no longer a public service, but run as a business, does it not qualify for the same aid as Northern Rock received?
Happily Retired.
-
Night Tonic
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 23 Oct 2007, 21:35
Well I could criticise the overpowering influence of the EU and I can tell you, I loath it! I'm of the "Love Europeans, Hate The EU" fraternity.
I would imagine that there are completely different rules for financial institutions anyway because without that, countries wouldn't be able to work together as they're trying to do over the present crisis. However, its a fact that government cannot intervene here under EU rules. It could lend us the money to plug the deficit but we'd still have to pay it back - plus interest which wouldn't help any as far as I can see. Plus we'd STILL have to change the pension - final salary pensions are all suffering through bad investments.
We retain 'some' of our sovereign status but around 80% of the work now down in parliament is EU business so thats where we are. Personally I think that sucks but like everyone else - I'm stuck with it. Talk of 'uprisings' is fine, but in reality there won't be any and we have to live with what we've got. If I honestly saw an opportunity for changing things, I'd go for it, but I don't, and certainly not a cat in hells chance through union pressure.
I would imagine that there are completely different rules for financial institutions anyway because without that, countries wouldn't be able to work together as they're trying to do over the present crisis. However, its a fact that government cannot intervene here under EU rules. It could lend us the money to plug the deficit but we'd still have to pay it back - plus interest which wouldn't help any as far as I can see. Plus we'd STILL have to change the pension - final salary pensions are all suffering through bad investments.
We retain 'some' of our sovereign status but around 80% of the work now down in parliament is EU business so thats where we are. Personally I think that sucks but like everyone else - I'm stuck with it. Talk of 'uprisings' is fine, but in reality there won't be any and we have to live with what we've got. If I honestly saw an opportunity for changing things, I'd go for it, but I don't, and certainly not a cat in hells chance through union pressure.
-
Vulcan
- Posts: 87
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 13:48
If you just imagine that there are completely different rules for financial institutions, how can you make the statements you have made about Northern Rock & Royal Mail. If you don't know, don't hypothesise. So unless a country is in the EU we can't co-ordinate rescue remedies to the present crisis? We had better tell all them banks/financial institutions that unless they deal within the EU, they will just have to suffer their losses with NO aid from the UK Government, so Northern Rock will have to return the aid package, because most of their trading/business was with the US.Night Tonic wrote:Well I could criticise the overpowering influence of the EU and I can tell you, I loath it! I'm of the "Love Europeans, Hate The EU" fraternity.
I would imagine that there are completely different rules for financial institutions anyway because without that, countries wouldn't be able to work together as they're trying to do over the present crisis. However, its a fact that government cannot intervene here under EU rules. It could lend us the money to plug the deficit but we'd still have to pay it back - plus interest which wouldn't help any as far as I can see. Plus we'd STILL have to change the pension - final salary pensions are all suffering through bad investments.
We retain 'some' of our sovereign status but around 80% of the work now down in parliament is EU business so thats where we are. Personally I think that sucks but like everyone else - I'm stuck with it. Talk of 'uprisings' is fine, but in reality there won't be any and we have to live with what we've got. If I honestly saw an opportunity for changing things, I'd go for it, but I don't, and certainly not a cat in hells chance through union pressure.
Politicians & Big Business must love you, because they just have to explain to you that nothing can be done & just accept it without fighting. There maybe no chance of change through union pressure, but there certainly is a chance of change through VOTER pressure. Politicians don't like losing power once they have it & so WILL listen to VOTERS, just remember what happened to the Tories in '97, the same can happen tomorrow & 2010 to New Labour. Gordon has done a few U-turns recently, what's one or 2 more if it keeps him in No10?
Happily Retired.
-
Vulcan
- Posts: 87
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 13:48
-
rockytony67
- EX ROYAL MAIL
- Posts: 419
- Joined: 04 Dec 2007, 18:31
- Gender: Male
- Location: London Town
As you've already said elsewhere NT your retiring in a couple of year's, your pension will not be hit too badly, it's a lot easier to say accept the conditions(or at least say that you can't see how the union can get a better deal) when your not in the firing line, I admit it might be hard to get a better deal but I've got a feeling Labour are going to get hammered tomorrow, and they will be looking for all the help they can get, it won't help if all the worried MPs start getting letter's from the Union saying how much there constitution's who work for RM are going to lose off there pension's, and how the union will stop paying into the party's kittie, I know what you are saying about Europe but lets be honest politicians change things all the time, I admit it may be all pie in the sky, but what is the choice, let them walk all over us, break contracts, treat us with contempt in the way they ran there consultation, I know it will be hard but as someone once said "The truth of the matter is you always know the right thing to do. The hard part is doing it".Night Tonic wrote:Stuck record. Enjoy your retirement.
-
johno47
- Posts: 495
- Joined: 10 Feb 2007, 16:45
- Location: Burslem
As far as i am aware goverment hasnt been bailing out banks for decades, they provided a safety net to customers to provide a refund of any monies lost up to £35,000 in bank accounts if a bank went under, i cant remember any bank going even close to going under before Northern Rock, and their problem was mostly caused by people pannicking and forcing a run on the bank, which would have caused the bank to go under, thats why the goverment stepped in, and also if the goverment cant help us out then why has it set aside £850 million for RM if our pension gets in to trouble, people keep going on about you had your chance to say something, well i did but RM arnt listening, and to be honest i think people put their trust in the union, because they thought they knew what they were doing, thats not because they are thick, its because thats what the union is supposed to be there for, to represent your best interests, i dont know anybody who works in RM that thinks this isnt worth fighting against, ive said before that the biggest problem in RM is the im alright jacks, youve all got them in your offices, if people dont want to strike or take action against these changes, then fine, but this is my pension ive paid into for 25 years, a pension that was fully paid up and secure untill it had to be joined up with POPPS because RM took pension holiday, so you will have to exscuse me if i dont listen to the just let RM do what they want brigade.
-
Vulcan
- Posts: 87
- Joined: 24 May 2007, 13:48
It will be interesting after these changes to the pension have been introduced to see if RM will be reducing the repayments to the pension deficit by the same % as they are going to be reducing their contibutions to the pension fund. Also how many of the 17 years they are always saying they will be paying EXTRA into the pension fund to make up for the pension holiday they took, they will actually pay. I'm willing to bet after a few years they will have a reason to reduce or stop the overpayments.
Happily Retired.
-
Tman
- Posts: 4129
- Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 09:57
With respect, this is tosh.The repercussions for those with pensions in Royal Mail don't bear thinking about and since Royal Mail workers/pensioners deal with many financial institutions it WILL have far reaching consequences. A bank can be compared to a pension. They both are used by people. The government can pay into our pension if they had the political will. End of.[
Were RM's scheme to collapse (and it won't) you honestly feel it would have the same effect on the economy of GB as a run on a bank? A bank can be compared to a pension fund?
Maybe you're forgetting that there are many pension schemes, (including goernment dept. ones) who've been hit hard by the same conditions ours has, so apart from the fact that the government sure as Hell won't want to create a precedent by paying money into failing schemes, they (the government) also won't want to be seen to be "looking after their own" at the expense of the rest of society, because that would be a big vote-loser too.
All this talk of EU, banks, laws, political wills etc etc is just hot air though. The fund has been rejigged whether we like it or not, and although it appears to be not as good as before, we're stuck with it.
All the carping and criticising, hypothetical ruminating, dumb name-calling and "ahh yeah buts" ultimately mean nothing, as do the threats of further IA. The last strike would have crumbled had it gone on much longer (mainly due to all the young kids and Poles on short-term/1 hour per day contracts having no will or reason to strike) and this will be more of the same.