The four most profitable Banks on the Planet - NZ Herald
- Thread starter Nugget
- Start date
Indeed Dogmatix, he completely misunderstands and goes off tangent into his usual ramble ramble ramble. I like how he assumes I pay tax and don't reap any of the benefits. A very very very wrong assumption but I digress.
Back to the topic at hand:
Guarantees and bailouts creates monolithic too big to fail companies and is usually capital poorly spent. By definition it is inefficient allocation of capital in society which causes a company to require bailouts in the first place, throwing more money at it won't solve anything and makes it worse (consider opportunity costs).
It would be much more efficient to support small businesses and the general populace than to support those bastard banks (execs).
As for Moral hazard, it is a situation created by guarantees and promised bailouts. This is a fact. People take higher risk if they know they won't be accountable for any losses.
Golden parachutes and what not.
Back to the topic at hand:
Guarantees and bailouts creates monolithic too big to fail companies and is usually capital poorly spent. By definition it is inefficient allocation of capital in society which causes a company to require bailouts in the first place, throwing more money at it won't solve anything and makes it worse (consider opportunity costs).
It would be much more efficient to support small businesses and the general populace than to support those bastard banks (execs).
As for Moral hazard, it is a situation created by guarantees and promised bailouts. This is a fact. People take higher risk if they know they won't be accountable for any losses.
Golden parachutes and what not.
Dogmatix
Active Member
You summed it up well fishball.
Funnily enough (?), I know many of the general population that think in micro view. A few friends of mine were even advocating a law change to allow Super to be used as collateral for mortgages, or to outright pay mortgages off.
People with micro view think of individual benefits without considering the bigger macro picture.
Just goes to show one reason disagreements start on this forum. In this regard I'd say the likes of renovator and auspm are polar opposites.
Funnily enough (?), I know many of the general population that think in micro view. A few friends of mine were even advocating a law change to allow Super to be used as collateral for mortgages, or to outright pay mortgages off.
People with micro view think of individual benefits without considering the bigger macro picture.
Just goes to show one reason disagreements start on this forum. In this regard I'd say the likes of renovator and auspm are polar opposites.
The difference between myself & you eggheads is im not trying to save the world Im trying to better my future . I understand both macro & micro views But theres only one view that matters & thats my future .....get it ? When you two grow up you will get off your moral high ground & realise no one is going to secure your future but yourself .. So you have whatever view you like & think your smart it shows your lack of experience in the real world , Like i said before the smart money accepts whatever theyre entitiled to & doesnt give a shit about micro ,macro ,if the system its protecting is flawed or any number of reasons you put forward . Talk about over analyse it .Oh man its hilarious reading this stuff.Dogmatix said:
Once more for the children & the moral crusaders YOU cant save the world . Take whatever your entitled to & be thankful you get something back . Now i know why NR refers to people as fiscal pygmies. .sheesh . You two OBVIOUSLY dont have enough money in the bank to worry about the guarantee.because anyone that has is thankful its in place . Who cares if they gamble with derivatives ? gamble on the money market? I dont care if they gamble on 2 flies walking up the wall all i care about is if they go belly up i get my money .
Dogmatix
Active Member
That's a pretty good example of micro view right there, thanks.
I'm not saying that either view is 'right'. But if everyone thinks micro, then we'll get populist politics. If everyone thought macro, we'd have some kind of communist utopia. I know which one is more likely.
But the real issue is that the arguments are about the same topic, but from two incompatible viewpoints. Micro view sees macro's as foolish, unrealistic and 'heads in the clouds', whereas macro view sees micro's as greedy, selfish and detrimental to society.
Fun.
I'm not saying that either view is 'right'. But if everyone thinks micro, then we'll get populist politics. If everyone thought macro, we'd have some kind of communist utopia. I know which one is more likely.
But the real issue is that the arguments are about the same topic, but from two incompatible viewpoints. Micro view sees macro's as foolish, unrealistic and 'heads in the clouds', whereas macro view sees micro's as greedy, selfish and detrimental to society.
Fun.
renovator said:
Calling people eggheads doesn't make your argument any better. Only makes you look less competent by having to resort to name calling.
It's clear you don't understand what Moral Hazard and other associated risks are when you have bailouts and golden parachutes.
Of course 'my future' is the only thing that matters to me (and likewise yourself; your future), which is why I leech more from the government than I pay in taxes
.I don't take 'moral highgrounds' like Auspm. I respect him for doing so but I am not him (when have you seen me reference John Galt, Objectivism etc) and quite frankly I share your view of 'get ahead using whatever legal means'.
However, being able to understand both sides of the issue and think logically about how the 'guarantees' work is actually useful to understanding the real situation.
I want the guarantees to help me more than the bankers because I share exactly the same view as you & it's our tax money.
But with this guarantee in place and no legal recourse against unethical bankers they are reaping far more benefits than you or I. They take crazy risks for crazy payoffs (or losses) and when SHTF they cry to the government and get their golden parachutes. We might get our money back after 6 months; knowing government 'processes' that sounds about right. The bankers? Holidaying somewhere on a tropical island with your tax money by that time.
That's what I am saying.
Banks worked fine for hundreds of years without the need for 'guarantees' and even NR says that you should manage your investments and be saavy. Bailouts/guarantees take away this 'responsibility' from the people and they become reckless or stupid by handing money to the banks without a second thought.
Oh and for once maybe try to stop assuming anything about anyone on here; you're wrong more than right and it's getting tiring.
Yeah I figured you would be a LEECH :lol:
fiatphoney
New Member
renovator said:
Bankers have issued Covered Bonds that are now ahead of depositors if a bank fails. Hence govt allows channelling of liquidated Corpserations to the bond holders (ie international banks) first, ensuring greater losses to depositors, and hence greater losses to taxpayers when depositors are bailed out. An Easy Money Socialist expects taxpayers to socialise their losses, to bail them and hence their financial system out, Without Recourse, and to privatise their banking enabled profits. Discouraging toxic practices at the macro and micro level is a benefit to an entire nation at both levels. At the macro level when parasites overwhelms the host (golden goose), the host dies. Then at the micro level, a single parasite consumes other parasites.
When you see kids give up, seeing their macro future consumed by greedy old geezers, and go micro surfing instead of working to pay for your bailout, and they laugh at you, or worse laugh while mugging you - its only an echo of your selfish contempt for society.
If all that money was invested in R&D, instead of wasted on neg gearing, the design of govt policy for macro prosperity would impact on the nation at the micro individual level building real wealth, instead of transferring existing wealth parasitically.
fiatphoney
New Member
renovator said:
That's like saying 'I don't care if the blood bank doesn't refrigerate ALL the blood to save money, just as long as I get MY blood out of them OK.'
Fiat money is the 'lifeblood' of a modern economy, for now.
Im wrong more than im right? :lol: The only tiring thing is reading the constant dribble that comes from the financially inept trying to save the world & laying blame on others for getting entitlements .Blaming banks blaming previous generations blaming negative gearing blaming the government ...always laying blame on something .fishball said:renovator said:
Calling people eggheads doesn't make your argument any better. Only makes you look less competent by having to resort to name calling.
It's clear you don't understand what Moral Hazard and other associated risks are when you have bailouts and golden parachutes.
Of course 'my future' is the only thing that matters to me (and likewise yourself; your future), which is why I leech more from the government than I pay in taxes
I don't take 'moral highgrounds' like Auspm. I respect him for doing so but I am not him (when have you seen me reference John Galt, Objectivism etc) and quite frankly I share your view of 'get ahead using whatever legal means'.
However, being able to understand both sides of the issue and think logically about how the 'guarantees' work is actually useful to understanding the real situation.
I want the guarantees to help me more than the bankers because I share exactly the same view as you & it's our tax money.
But with this guarantee in place and no legal recourse against unethical bankers they are reaping far more benefits than you or I. They take crazy risks for crazy payoffs (or losses) and when SHTF they cry to the government and get their golden parachutes. We might get our money back after 6 months; knowing government 'processes' that sounds about right. The bankers? Holidaying somewhere on a tropical island with your tax money by that time.
That's what I am saying.
Banks worked fine for hundreds of years without the need for 'guarantees' and even NR says that you should manage your investments and be saavy. Bailouts/guarantees take away this 'responsibility' from the people and they become reckless or stupid by handing money to the banks without a second thought.
Oh and for once maybe try to stop assuming anything about anyone on here; you're wrong more than right and it's getting tiring.
Who cares what theyre doing ? do you think you will stop them ? seriously ?. You & the other moral crusaders think you as a collective can make a difference? .... :lol: hahahaha . Dream on
Im not a dreamer full stop !!! Thats the difference .You guys just cant handle the truth / reality .Always wishing & laying blame . That is my definition of an egghead.
nonrecourse
Well-Known Member
They are just tree huggers my term for dead woodrenovator said:
Money is the root of all evil......renovator said:
cause they don't have any.renovator said:
In order to get something back you have to contribute, sadly their entitlement mentality means they lose out yet again. But they will whine that the government will steal it all anyway....The price of dog food keeps increasing, retirement on the government teat will leave a bad taste in their mouths.
Kind Regards
non recourse