David Hall must be tumescent at the news
If it means a higher bankruptcy rate and clearing of bad loans then it would be a good thing.
As Cantillon points out…
“the Tánaiste’s reference to the banks having “more than ample provisions to allow them to act now” is a more likely portent of future action.”
irishtimes.com/business/econ … -1.2086020
…but then ruins it with “bankruptcy is not the solution to the squeezed middle’s problems. They require debt relief”.
Sure. Family homes, won’t someone think of the childers etc.
Really how much stronger would their hands be made when you can be free and clear after 8 - 12 months in the UK?
I smell a complete bluff on her part, and not even a good one at that. There are surely better ways to get the banks to the table.
don’t get it - they’d lose the asset in bankruptcy … why would it reduce supply?
Joan wants to make bankruptcy even easier - but mainly to give the borrower more leverage in the alternative PIP process (by which they’d keep the asset)
Oh that bankruptcy – where you keep your assets… Tremendous.
This is where labour and to a lesser extent fg are becoming toxic. Last week we were told only 35/40%% are mortgage holders. Of mortgages 20% are in arrears. To listen to rte (claire byrne/600 grand a year marion) and newstalk (ivan yates/pat kenny)you’d think the majority of people in ireland need a ‘where’s my nama’, and need it yesterday.
By definition a bailout can only benefit the few paid for by the majority. The silent majority of working people that labour just don’t represent… Another nonsense we are peddled is that debt write off is good for the economy, critical even to kick start growth. What is it about this minority of mortgage holders that makes the rest of us so dependent on their profligate spending patterns? Is a euro spent by a debt defaulter worth more in multipliers than a prudent taxpayer? If so, why stop there?
Would fianna fail even have overseen strokes like this?
Easier bankruptcy makes banks more selective about who they lend to. This is a good thing.
They should go even further and introduce jingle-mail as a contractual requirement for all new mortgages.
You forget sometimes until you get an anecdote via UK.
So they make a load of dough in the run up to the bust. Plough it all back into property at the top they did. Pete Tong it goes. Bank seizes their bank account as collateral. One day easy access to seven figure sum next day no. Legal proceedings ensue. They come out with a few slices from the original loaf but assets, not that I heard of. They go off and rebuild their life. in doing so they are now economically poised and in active startup mode with the chance of creating new economic activity in the greater game. That’s the boom bust lifecycle many dream of here.
I think ireland must be majority owned by Parker Brothers.
Not sure where to post this.
What’s happened there?
Hopefully it’s not related to this: irishtimes.com/news/politics … -1.2696995
Keaveney’s contribution to the debate on the Civil Debt Procedures Bill:
It’s been said before (and doesn’t even need to be said on this site) but a register of the debts of our public representatives (and judges, and media personalities, and giants of industry, and…) would be very helpful in allowing us evaluate their public utterances.
If a register of interests is considered necessary why is this register confined to assets?
Absolutely, that would be a pretty horrendous development.