Nationalisation
Find a Conversation
| Sat, 10-11-2008 - 7:49pm |
It is a word unthinkable at the time of my primary vote (8 January.) Mere mention of the word would produce an immediate rebuttal of nonsense - including by me - because it seemed incomprehensible that a nation so devoted to capitalist ways, with a pro-business government... would ever go near such a topic.
Well, here we are, madness has set in. Our government plans to partially nationalise some of our biggest banks in order to forestall financial collapse. I like the idea of an equity stake in these firms, given the enormity of the bill we are asked to pay.
I'm wondering though about the sheer scope of the word, how it is contrary to so much about our outlook. What are your thoughts about this stunning, incredible, surreal change in our economic system?
Discuss... nationalisation of our banks on whatever level you wish.

Pages
"It was Sweden (the Netherlands is not a Scandi country, btw)"
Thanks, my geography has always been shaky at best.
<>
The RTC which liquidated assets in the S&L crisis was in existence from 1989 to 1995. That is an example of the U.S. government's temporary involvement in banking. What's scary is that the cost of the S&L bailout to taxpayers was $125 billion.
When we are told that by injecting capital through the purchase of preferred stock we taxpayers will have an opportunity to share in the future gains of the financial institutions we're now helping, I have to wonder whether that will actually happen. I fear that the losses we suffer from firms that fail will far outweigh any gains we get from those that succeed. But with the equity positions we'll hold, at least we will be paid dividends and receive any liquidation proceeds before the common shareholders.
My BIL worked for HUD, RTC and FDIC. My sister worked for HUD. In the years leading up to their retirements, they were fed up with the gov't and felt there was too much bureaucracy for any program to be administered in a cost-effective manner. (DH and I tried convincing them that the corporate sector where we worked was even worse.) They voted for Clinton, but switched to Bush in 2000. In 2004 my BIL was still with Bush but my sister voted for Kerry. Guess what? This year THEY ARE BOTH VOTING FOR OBAMA!
I'm not afraid of big government at all. Bureaucracy is a problem in both big gov't and big corporations, but the fact that we taxpayers are constantly looking into where our tax dollars are going, means there is a lot more oversight. How many shareholders of AIG would have expected the execs to be partying after the bailout? If they had simply declared bankruptcy, with no gov't involvement, they never would have known. The officers and directors, and sometimes even the AUDITORS, are able to hide an awful lot from the shareholders. Why else would we now be in this situation?
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM
Wow, what an exciting opportunity for a 13 year old! Which part of Sweden did she visit?
I can imagine that she struggled a bit with the food, though. Even now fish and/or plain boiled potatoes are featured at least 2-3x per week on the school lunch menu (and no choice in the food one gets, it's a matter of eat the fish or potatoes or starve). The kids who grow up here love it, though. Dd could happily eat plain boiled potatoes any day.
It really was great, sadly we weren't able to do it for our other kids.
Pages