Oh my! Have I finally been trolled? I could do with a laugh though.
what? comparing a bank to woolworths? that is definitely some daily mail styled reasoning, but ok.
No, no comparison at all. Both have staff, both have the majority of their staff on relatively low wages. That's how it works.
here's the problem though, when woolworths went bang it was at most a few thousand jobs, many of those unskilled, minimum wage affairs. i'm not saying it's not an awful, sad thing to have happened but in the long run it is not the end of the world. we can, as a country, afford to support those people who lost their jobs until they find new ones (if ever).
25,000 actually, according to the BBC's reporting at the time.
what do you think would have happened if we let northern rock sink, same with RBS. people would have lost everything, not just a job, everything; houses, pensions, savings, investments. thousands of business' would have failed overnight. it would have just snowballed and snowballed.
I'm not entirely convinced that would have been the case with Northern Rock. The bulk of its business is mortgage lending (which was what got it into trouble). Who can say someone else wouldn't have come along and bought it for a penny? You can bet that however it had been handled (and I don't necessarily disagree with how it was, anyway) that noone would have lost their house. A government wouldn't let that happen, it'd be electoral suicide.
the problem doesn't lie with the bailing out of the banks perse, it lies with what the banks then do with the money once they've been bailed out which is why you get OH NOES FRED DA SHRED etc, etc, etc.
you put up a good arguement to support the idea that reverting back to living the lifestyle of the 1300's, (killing animals with our bare hands, bartering with our neighbours, fearing rare and pillage on a daily basis - i don't actually know wtf was going on in the 1300, but anyway..) is the right way to go, but unfortunately i think that capitalism is probably here to stay.
Whoa. I didn't and wouldn't actually say that, cos I'd sound even more of a loon if I did. I think there's a good argument for being honest though and admitting that if the system doesn't work, it needs changing and if the way to do that is nationalising it all then fine, but admit what you're doing and don't pretend it's anything else because you're too scared to use that word.
Oh my! Have I finally been trolled? I could do with a laugh though.
No, no comparison at all. Both have staff, both have the majority of their staff on relatively low wages. That's how it works.
25,000 actually, according to the BBC's reporting at the time.
I'm not entirely convinced that would have been the case with Northern Rock. The bulk of its business is mortgage lending (which was what got it into trouble). Who can say someone else wouldn't have come along and bought it for a penny? You can bet that however it had been handled (and I don't necessarily disagree with how it was, anyway) that noone would have lost their house. A government wouldn't let that happen, it'd be electoral suicide.
Whoa. I didn't and wouldn't actually say that, cos I'd sound even more of a loon if I did. I think there's a good argument for being honest though and admitting that if the system doesn't work, it needs changing and if the way to do that is nationalising it all then fine, but admit what you're doing and don't pretend it's anything else because you're too scared to use that word.