If the current market value was paid, and not a euro above, would opponents of NAMA become supporters?
Or is it a case that NAMA in it’s “best” form would still be terrible compared to the other options?
Or, is it the main problem with NAMA that we haven’t been told exactly how it will function and what it will pay, and therefore we are left to assume that it will favour FF contributors above the tax-payer, and that some of the people who managed to get us into this mess will be able to weasel out?
From the many posts I’m getting the impression that opposition to NAMA is based mostly on 3, but that some people would become supporters if 1 were the case. Obviously, there’s no concensus but is this an innaccurate interpretation?
I would feel more comfortable with NAMA if they paid at current market levels followed by temporary nationalisation (due to recapping the banks). Then sell the banks later on at a decent price.
But if “the current market value” was paid then there would be no need for NAMA, the banks would do the job themselves.
From what I can see, the job of NAMA is to come along and take all the banks toxic shite and give them a shed load of money for it, then hand back the, now, Irish State’s, toxic shite and give them more money to work out the loans.
NAMA only exists because the banks need to find “the greater fool” - and, citizen of the Irish republic, they seem to think that’s you!
Ah now, dont forget the potential reciever/ liquidator of O’Carrolls property might have asperations at a lower floor than the banks resulting in a dose of the poor mes in all the best social circles and a few golden ones as well.
If NAMA paid the “market” price for the assets, the banks would be bust. That means they would be taken fully into public ownership.
Therefore at market prices, the state is buying the assets from itself. Pointless.
NAMA only makes any sense as a means to overpay.
Overpayment means transfer of future taxpayer earnings to a small cabal of large bank shareholders and developers.
If this theft proceeds, I for one will move my tax residency abroad. Unlike the majority of Irish people, I don’t sit on the sofa while my
house is being burgled.
This is the problem of course, the smart money will calculate the entirety of the States liabilities and will exit stage right to a state that is likely not to tax them excessively. The Irish government and Banks have a near sociopathic desire to rape the tax payers wallets to pay for this mess .
I would not give the banks money that they will not lend anyway , I favour a form of balance sheetable scrip instead…all to protect the taxpayer.
We should pay the current market value and only for the absolute minimum number of assets, ideally only stuff that the state is interested in…
NAMA is trying to bail out the banks indirectly by overpaying on debts. It also has the side effects of allowing developers to apply political pressure to reduce their debts and also has the potential for fraud when the state offloads the assets…
The way NAMA is set up, that is a certainty
There is the problem that doing NAMA honestly wont bail out the banks… If we pay market price, there is no gain for the banks… But if we pay above market price, its a no strings gift to the banks…
My problem is if NAMA is set up to do something, it should be defined clearly openly and up front… If we give the banks extra money, dont give it to them with no strings, get something in return…
A bit of honesty and competence in setting up NAMA would be nice
It really depends if NAMA has been setup with the intention of saving the Bankers, the Developers or both.
NAMA has within it’s powers the ability to lend money to developers and to sell them back their own assets at undisclosed prices.
There has also been a story floated at the weekend about the Government forcing AIB & BOI to merge.
As I see it there is always the possibility that Lenny has just been bluffing about not nationalising the banks and that he will apply a huge haircut (say 85%) to the Banks loans this will allow NAMA to sit on them for a while and then lend the developers the money to buy back their own developments at say 20cent on the Euro. The developers get out of Jail free, NAMA is shown to make a profit and the only losers are the banks and the Taxpayers who will be told by FF that this is the best deal possible for them, sure look NAMA made a profit.
Of course the banks will need to be recapitatised but sure the taxpayer is picking up the tab one way or the other.
Of course I could just be talking through my arse, I frequently do, but is this not a possibility?
Nothing wrong with good old fashioned capitalism, the banks and developers are failed businesses. Why prop them up at all?
We can have new banks, we can cut our losses and even pay people back deposits to a certain amount. Even that has questions of a moral nature nevermind NAMA!!!
I wouldn’t like to imagine a situation where depositors start losing deposits, as bad as NAMA is, it is certainly preferable to having deposits wiped out.
Yup. That’s where the idea of valuing the loans at their “long term economic value” isn’t a bad one, because even marking them to market ensures overpayment… Of course, we all know the circularity issue with that one but as has been pointed out, it’s all public money at the end of the day, we’d probably get more bang for our buck in a recapitalisation though.
But all this implies it’s an honest course of action by misguided statesmen.
If the thing doesnt sell at " Market Prices" then there is no Market. People claerly want and need housing, allthough not the ammount of stuff that we have, but if they are not buying it for wahtever reason then let the Market decide what should happen next.
Not the two Brians.
Im looking forward to Carroll goin bust 2morrow. Dont confuse this with glee, its just i beleive that the faster we get to the bottom then the faster we can recover. Or at least know where we are. This death by a thousand cuts would really get to you. The Chinese knew what they were at with that one.
