McArdle - It must not happen again. No sh*t batman.

Funny, he forgot to mention he was a major part of the problem.

Please supply a linky link in future!!! … ?a=2419394

And don’t cut and paste the entire article! :nin

Spintastic stuff.

No mention of the fact that the contributions to the NPRF that have been brought forward are borrowed money? That will have to be paid (both coupon and eventual repayment) with taxpayer’s money? Or that only 4 bn of the 7 bn has come from the NPRF with the remaining 3 bn being directly borrowed? Or that Anglo is likely to require 3-4 bn of borrowed money? Or that the guarantee has pushed Irish bond spreads to a record against other eurozone countries resulting in a higher cost of borrowing? Or that the NAMA is likely to be funded by borrowing? Or that the state of the banks has contributed to the loss of Ireland’s AAA rating?

Will we ever see the money back from the banks? I doubt it.

Transparency = no information due to commercially sensitive nature… we might as well leave the banks to manage the debts themselves. At least, as publicly quoted companies, they will have to account to their shareholders for their balance sheet at risk of criminal charges.

Ah, and the lovely straw man arguments - NAMA or nationalisation, the guarantee or the banking system bust.

Grow a pair, Mr. McArdle, you’re approaching retirement. Give us some real analysis and leave the spin to the fluffers at the other banks. Respected? Not around these parts…

Sorry TUG, busy day. Understood. :blush:

What’s this OUR shit paleface?

We’re all paying for the sins of some.
People like yourself sinned more than most.
People like yourself are paying less than most.

Good for you. Now piss off.


Shouldnt he say “When I dont have it - feck it I’ll borrow it” mentality. If I have it its none of his business what I do with it.

He’s quoting official Fianna Fail policy. When the place was awash with money they spent it like drunken sailors. McCrevey actually used the “When I have it I spend it” line. Bertie was also a fan of that kind of logic.

No thought for whether the income was sustainable. I’ve used the analogy of the lotto winner who spends the entire winnings on a castle and then can’t understand why his dole money isn’t enough keep the place heated and maintained etc.

He’s wasting his breath of course. Does anyone think for a second that if we start running surpluses based on some future bubble (let’s say…Jelly Beans) that the government of the day will carefully put the money aside and work towards reducing our cost base.

Will they F**k! They’ll splurge like hell to win elections.


any one developer or banker involved should lose a pinkie