746, Northern Rock, Richard Branson, Virgin, Virgin Money

lending money to the rich (populist post)

According to the Yucca’s calculations, each of us, if the Virgin-Rock deal goes through, will have lent Sir Richard about 500 quid. Rejoice!


4 thoughts on “lending money to the rich (populist post)

  1. surely ‘lent’ is the operative word here? Won’t he have to pay it off with interest?

    Of course such questions should be an irrelevance given that this private organisation should have been allowed to go to the wall. Isn’t that part and parcel of having a capitalist neo-con govt (regardless of those threadbare socialist cloths no one’s trying to convince us they still have in their cupboard – undoubtedly awaiting a trip to the so-called municipal dump … )?

  2. surely ‘lent’ is the operative word here? Won’t he have to pay it off with interest?

    as i understand it from the bbc link, almost half will be repayed straightaway, and the rest in three years. there is no mention of interests 😉

    its a difficult one: yes, we should have left it sink in its own shame. no, we had a duty to help people who would have sunk with it…

  3. Do we have a duty to help those who would have sunk with it?

    It depends on the stakeholder. If we’re talking about employees there are legislative protections and compensations that would arise from any redundancies.

    If it’s investors then they new what they were doing when they made the investment. Taking a punt. Investment is a gamble some pay off, some don’t and there is no such thing as a dead-cert.

    Debts would be sold on as part of the liquidation process and it is likely that in such dire circumstances ‘chunks’ of the business would be sold off anyway.

    So if we’re living in a capitalist society (and it’s difficult to argue that we’re not) then do we really have a duty to provide additional support for those that would have sunk with it?

  4. i dont know, really…

    there are the employees, the stakeholders, and those who had accounts and mortayges with them.

    some of these people, probably, would have been safeguarded, as you say. and some of them did not deserve safeguard, i guess you are right. but probably there would have been, amongst them, some that did not deserve to lose out and would have lost out.

    do we have a duty? i guess that, as you say, according to the values that capitalist society has to coherently go by, no, we don’t have a duty.

    was it moral, reasonable, economically viable, and electorally viable to let them sunk? no, probably it wasn’t, in at least one of those respects. and i guess the judgement on the government and back of england will depend on which of those respects did motivate them…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s