What is Digg?174 Comments
- jon26l, on 04/21/2008, -2/+49Nice deal... nationalize risk, privatizes profit
- bosssmiley, on 04/21/2008, -11/+49Nice of Gordy to offer up our taxes as a guarantee to cover bank greed and his own 10 years of mismanagement as Chancellor of the Exchequer. And Alistair Darling couldn't run a whelk stall.
- Harrison88, on 04/21/2008, -2/+31Serious moral hazard issues with this. If the banks know they'll get bailed out they'll invest in riskier assets again. You won't have learnt anything from the whole thing.
If the banks make a profit it's theirs. If the banks make a loss we pay for it. The Government should really stop protecting these inefficient banks but I can see what would happen if they go in to liquidation and savers lose their cash. - PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -3/+25What's communistic is people wanting stability at any cost. Because you do not define what you're willing to sacrifice, and that you let the government determine who gets to 'sacrifice', you fall into a trap. When I give up something of value for the perceived benefits to be gained at a future date, I am sacrificing. When the state decides that 'sacrifices must be made and WE must tighten our belts', and then raise taxes on the people, that is NOT a sacrifice. That is oppression.
If banks were doing right and providing a valuable service not at the mercy of a fluctuating currency, then they would function with stability.
Principles of liberty and prosperity work because they are consistent with the laws of economics, even though bad ideas and artificial manipulation may survive for a time. Ultimately the foolishness is laid bare and fools, hopefully, wise up. You don't have to believe in principles in order to manifest their validity, but you can benefit by adhering to them.
People willing to let others solve their problems for them are deluding themselves. Ron Paul's principles are not about waiting for others, or the government to get it right. You would think with all this government growth that we finally have the money and the manpower to make things work. But go ahead and throw more money at the problem and see how that works for you. - rnolds, on 04/21/2008, -0/+20Something is seriously flawed when two years ago banks are reporting record profits:
2006 £11.5nb HSBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4777714.stm
2007 £7bn Barclays: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6377801.stm
And employees are being paid huge bonuses totalling £8nb plus: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6098162.stm.
Then when huge losses are looming just a few months later it's not the shareholders and upper rank employees who the received huge bonuses from the good times that pay but Darling and the British tax payer.
I'm surprised your average British tax payer is not a lot more angry about this situation. - TerrenceWrist, on 04/21/2008, -1/+20I dread that this is just the start of the 'bailouts'
- PaddyUK, on 04/21/2008, -0/+16Everything time I hear Alistair Darling i'm just filled with Blackadder jokes.
- strafefire, on 04/21/2008, -11/+26Us Ron Paul loonies do not support bank bail outs, *****!
- jlebrech, on 04/21/2008, -9/+24@evilesttoad: it's one side communism for the rich!! Our money is their money, their money is theirs still!
- PaulOwen, on 04/21/2008, -1/+16QUICK! PRINT MORE MONEEEEEEEEEEY!
- powatom, on 04/21/2008, -4/+19Absolutely pathetic.
Everyone in the UK - stop using banks, switch to a credit union ftw. Banks make money off us, then when they screw up we bail them out with taxes. Ridiculous.
Do your part to offset the bail-out by withdrawing all of your money! - PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -0/+14Yes, though the government, just as in the US, endorses the currency through law and regulation. It's auxiliary in nature, but the end result of spending on programs and creating credit by the government and bank, respectively, is similar: Inflation.
- inactive, on 04/21/2008, -2/+15Because it's working out so well for America...
- PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -0/+13Correct. They do distribute money, but not taxpayer money held in government coffers.
They do something a little more insidious by siphoning away the value of the currency via increasing the money/credit supply. Those who get the money first receive the greatest benefit. As poor decisions are often made by those closest to the Central Bank (ie Government), this also expedites the devaluation due to the wasting of resources acquired with 'easy money'. Over time, the market catches up and leaves everyone a little bit poorer as a result, excluding those running the show. - evilesttoast, on 04/21/2008, -2/+14In what way is it anything like communism?
- PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -0/+10Not impossible, just impractical to think it will happen instantly on a national level. The free market always exists, though sometimes it will be called a 'black market'. You have solutions, such as refusing to play by their rules and using alternative currency. Even this will not happen overnight.. one needs to be dedicated to preserving their wealth and willing to understand why things have gone so wrong. The 'why' is fraud. Lots and lots of government and bank endorsed fraud. Fractional reserve banking, what's that?!
- HenvY, on 04/21/2008, -5/+15The Bank of England is independent of the government you dolt.
- matador3, on 04/21/2008, -0/+9Well, it only suggests that a purely free market economy is impossible as long as government is still around and I don't think you'll find many Libertarians arguing differently. The eternal question is how much government, if any, is necessary or tolerable. There is a whole range of opinion about that but no Minarchist would identify a government controlled industry as existing in a free market.
- micro506, on 04/21/2008, -4/+13"Alistair Darling couldn't run a whelk stall"
Only in Britain - stealthc, on 04/21/2008, -1/+9Yes. Protecting businesses from the consequences of bad investments is a good thing. The State can eliminate all pain, and promote all pleasure, without any negative consequences. ALL POWER AND GLORY TO THE STATE!
- PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -1/+9To be fair, Gordy should be motivating you to not give your taxes to such a foolish institution. Once you give them your money, is it really yours anymore? Why continue to expect good things from them when you're consistently proven that the opposite outcome is the reality?
- CressCrowbits, on 04/21/2008, -3/+11I love how the business and banking world call for less government interference e.g. less regulation and less restrictions, yet when it benefits them they are all for government interference - bailouts, subsidies, usually as a result of their own mismanagement and irresponsibility - all paid for by us the taxpayers.
It kind of suggest as true libertarian, free market economy is utterly impossible. - martyngt4, on 04/21/2008, -3/+10Of course if our American friends hadn't been giving out mortgages to people without jobs in the first place and our greedy banks hadn't seen it as a good practice to invest in then we wouldn't be in this mess!!
- matador3, on 04/21/2008, -1/+8Blame the Bill Clinton administration for forcing them to. I'll probably get Dugg down but its the truth.
- inactive, on 04/21/2008, -3/+10Here is another shining example of the correct observations of Ron Paul.
This bailout will result in another and another and another.
The elites will tell us it is all because of a small percentage of subprime loans defaulting. Does anyone believe them?
The banks have been running a ponzi scheme and as all of those schemes fail, this one will too. There is a point in every Ponzi scheme where there are not enough new people coming into the scheme to keep it afloat and it comes crashing down.
In the united States our Constitution designed an honest monetary policy where nothing but gold and silver would be coined. This was to keep us from falling victim to monetary manipulations.
For 140 years our economy was stable and wholesale prices remained the same. Only after the federal reserve scam came into play did we see huge inflation of prices and loss of worth of our currency.
Like many Americans who believe in honest money I began purchasing gold right after the ban on American ownership of gold was lifted.This has resulted in my savings to become worth far more than any CD or IRA or money market account and the appreciation was not taxed.
Since we still see some people who believe in the current banking system my purchase of gold and especially gold coins will be good for me and my family.
Once the Ponzi scheme called banking finally collapses I will be able to weather the storm as will anyone who has purchased gold and gold coins to act as a hedge on inflation and as a stable currency.
I purchased gold coins on the day "W" was sworn in and they will buy me more gasoline and food than the day I bought them.
No savings account will. - Rich333, on 04/21/2008, -0/+7If you don't want to pay the inflation tax, which can only rise as the central bankers print ever larger sums of paper "money", remove yourself as best you can from the state-controlled marketplace. Barter, trade with commodities like silver and gold, do your business in the counter-economy, the only truly free market, black and grey markets free from state controls and the manipulations of the central bankers. Remove yourself from the system of controls and manipulations put in place by the political class for their own enrichment at your expense. While you're at it, "cheat" on your taxes, or don't pay them at all; deny them their plunder, and maximize their enforcement costs as best you can. They are parasites. They exist only to exploit you and I, the productive members of society, we who profit only by virtue of our own labor and ingenuity. Defense, health care, housing, roads, everything the state monopolizes can be provided by free people engaging in purely voluntary relationships; it's foolish in the extreme to think people need to be threatened with death or imprisonment to build and maintain the roads. The state has monopolized these things to consolidate wealth and power into ever fewer hands.
It starts with state "capitalism", where the political class stacks the deck in their favor, falsely claiming the situation to be a free market. Then as they fight amongst themselves for the limited pool of plunder, often scapegoating each other as well as innocent members of the productive class for the problems their parasitism has wrought, the state grows, competition is made ever more scarce, and wealth and power is consolidated into ever fewer of their hands. Eventually state "socialism" - totalitarian control over economic life, and thereby over all aspects of life - is established as the "solution" to the ills of the "free" market they've created. All throughout this process, an ever greater proportion of our produce, that wealth we've created by our own labor, is expropriated by the parasites, who falsely claim it's for our own good. We are their livestock, their slaves, we've been made into their property; the control they claim over each of our lives and labor products is absolute and arbitrary, and the more they exercise their claim the more we suffer for it. Remove yourself from their fixed game. Resist their exploitative efforts. Evade their controls and manipulations. Or don't, and continue to live as a slave.
Agora! Anarchy! Action! - oldhick, on 04/21/2008, -3/+9I guess you don't understand it.
- Harrison88, on 04/21/2008, -1/+7The average British tax payer is clueless about the state of the economy and factors that affect it.
- richardiscool, on 04/21/2008, -3/+9Gosh! Who'd have thought we'd end up with socialism after voting in Labour...
- Tyrghast, on 04/21/2008, -2/+8If the US economy is gonna tank than we're gonna take as many people down with us as we can, it seems.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -0/+6Incidentally, you'll notice that government officials get raises, but their salaries never decrease. Some people are apparently more equal than others and shouldn't be burdened by the consequences of their actions. They tried their best. It's not their fault.... lol
- PeppermintPig, on 04/21/2008, -0/+6A libertarian should be ideal-based. This means that they push for more liberty, whatever the case. We have to live with the situation as it stands, however crummy that may be, but that doesn't mean we have to set definite parameters on our ideals... though we may be perfectly happy if tomorrow we had less taxation. Minarchy is never an ideal, but relative to the current size of the state, those who call themselves Minarchists certainly want less of it.
- ByteGuerilla, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5Myonosken is right. Beveridge's social reforms brought socialist principles into the UK in a big way. The socialist european countries are doing okay for entirely different reasons, one of which is that their grass is greener, as a result of it being on the other side of the fence.
- LoveYouSomeEric, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5When I saw this headline I sincerely thought it was going to be an Onion article. It's way less funny now.
- Smokersroom, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5It is mostly offset by my overdraft.
:( - curtisag, on 04/21/2008, -1/+6Technically, it's privatized risk because the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England are private non-governmental entities that seek profit. However, they have total control of OUR money supply, so they basically have everybody by the balls and can do whatever they want. The real owners of the Federal Reserve are secret, but they no doubt have great investments in much of the banking industry. It's the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the world.
- h3smith, on 04/21/2008, -1/+6As someone who is a staunch capitalist, it angers me greatly. Such a mockery of the system
- patch6, on 04/21/2008, -0/+5Sounds like someone being carried away in a stretcher from a car crash commenting: "Hey, that brick wall's coming closer!"
- DestroyFascism, on 04/21/2008, -1/+6Yeah it would be a shame to see multi millionaires loose the lot, better to take away from those who have a little more than nothing...
- sentime, on 04/21/2008, -0/+4Fools and their banks, like hosts loving the parasites living off of them
- JettaMan, on 04/21/2008, -0/+4The things that aren't working in America are when they adopt statist European-like policies, such as a big powerful state that attempts to control the economy. The US needs to move way more towards free markets.
- inactive, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5Welcome to the club of the middle class who pay taxes to make sure the rich don't lose a dime. But here in the US we do it even better: we give the rich a tax break just for being wealthy so they don't have to pay as high of a percentage of their income in taxes as those of us who are here to wipe their asses when instructed. It's our little reward to them for their much "earned" success. You blokes just don't know how to take care of your aristocracy anymore. To close, I am unfortunately required to point out the sarcasm because after all, this is Digg. Although sometimes it's more fun if I don't.
- fafaforza, on 04/21/2008, -2/+6The sheer size of the banking crisis in the US and UK means that it is in everyone's interest to keep banks from failing.
But isn't that a slippery slope? You're telling private financial institutions that if they achieve a certain (financial) size, they will be able to make increasingly risky financial deals since a central bank will bail them out -- or insure any of their losses.
Now I realize that this bailous is likely necessary, but the central bank there, and the government in the US, should introduce some sort of compensation for the service so that taxpayers in either country aren't taken to the cleaners completely. They should garnish their future profits, or levy processing fees, or whatever your bank does to you when you cannot pay your bill. - crazybugger, on 04/21/2008, -0/+4Where is the money coming from ? From Aliens ?
- stonewaljacksn, on 04/21/2008, -0/+4ron paul write in 2008.
for the only person willing to explain these issues to the people of America.
Barack says "Hope", Hillary talks in circles and goes on a tangent and doesnt come close to getting to the point, all while Ron Paul would explain the intricacies of the system while people changed the channel because his logic was boring. - DMCer, on 04/21/2008, -8/+12News flash: If the banks went under, you'd be screwed 10 times worse.
- NewGTGuy, on 04/21/2008, -0/+4What you mention above is the opposite of a free market. So I ask you, if we are not free then what are we?
- Angostura, on 04/21/2008, -1/+5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
Just because the government can solve solve some problems does not mean that the government can solve all problems. Just because the government cannot solve all problems, does not mean it cannot solve any problems. - warriorscot, on 04/21/2008, -2/+5Gordon Brown did not force people to take out mortgages bigger than they could afford or take more credit than they could pay back.
And its bank money not tax money, they are using it to bolster the economy as better economy makes for more profits for them. -
Show 51 - 100 of 169 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is