£50 billion bail out for banks

8 Jun 2008
Reaction score
United Kingdom
Its on a lot of the news sites, and has been for the last 2 hours, that Gord & Darling (aka 'The Muppets') are going to announce a £50 billion bank rescue plan tomorrow.

Personally, I'm against my (ie, taxpayers) money being used to bail out & rescue these greedy city & banking fat cats who now seemingly want their victims to help them !

I have no savings of any value, I save a small proportion into my pension and I live within my means. If I cannot afford it, I save until I can, or I go without. Yet the Government seems to think it has the right to use our money to rescue these very wealthy earners with taxpayers money - its bizarre !

It won't stop at £50bn either. Royal Bank of Scotland had £12bn a short while ago and its disappeared in a matter of weeks. £50bn is simply a very small pebble in a tumultuous and long-lasting storm of which we are at the very beginning.

When British industry and manufacturing (steel, coal miners, Rover and many others...) went onto the rocks we were told to get on our bikes, to reskill, and look for new work because the those forms of labour were no longer economically viable.

We were told that the hand of government propping up struggling industries was unpragmatic and pointless, yet now when it is City jobs on the line we are told that flinging as many billions as it would have taken to save the primary and secondary industries in the country by a factor of ten is the "only option."

No it isn't, let the bankers and the money men get on their bikes, let them reskill, let them find new places of work, and if they don't like it it's time for them to pull their bootstraps up, they've been tellling us the working classes it's the only way for the past thirty years so make them feel the pain their philosophy of 'self suffcience' has bought to society.

When we've propped up these greedy, overpaid bankers and ensured that their banks don't fail (so they can continue to earn £600k a year +), protected their bad debts, eliminated their lending exposure to sub-prime debts and allowed them to carry on trading - all due to the 'forced generosity' of taxpayers DOES THIS MEAN WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE PAYING OUR MORTAGES ?

After all, lets face it - we're giving money to them after tax, and they'll still want our mortgages paid (again after we're taxed on our earnings).

The whole system is mind-bogglingly obscene !!!

I say, let 'em fail ! Choose the two strongest financial institutions most likely to weather the storm, put all our money into them, and let the rest go to the wall.[/b]
Sponsored Links
Won't work because it can't work...

How can it when world debt/loaning is 10x world GDP...!
The 50bn would hopefully come with strict regulations for the future, basically the government telling the banks you want us to help you but you will do what we say in the future for this money.
Nah....it's just brown buying a new job in advance for when he becomes unemployed at the next election.. ;)
Sponsored Links
Nah....it's just brown buying a new job in advance for when he becomes unemployed at the next election.. ;)
And that would be the biggest mistake by the electorate by not giving him a chasnce to try and right the wrongs , same as the next guy we'll not give them a chance to put things right before we bring in the next one and so on and so forth.
What is the point of pouring money into a failed system, it is defective and all the government is doing is propping it up.The people running these outfits are the same people who have been giving the government lectures on fiscal rectitude and the evils of socialism.
They are the same people to whom private enterprise is almost a religion. Their advisers tell government stop giving the poor money as it only makes them lazy, and spending money on health is bad for people.
Now they have it made just like any other social security scrounger the can blow their own (and other peoples) money on backing losers, and then go to the government and ask for some more.