Originally Posted by
allmodcons
Barclays got a single sum of $48bn from the US Federal Reserve in September 2008 and Citigroup received 2 payments of $25bn and $20bn in Oct 2008 and Dec 2008.
Whichever way you look at it these 2 banks were not bailed out by the UK Government.
Whichever way you look at it these two banks were offered the bailout money by the UK government.
IMO Just Alf was asserting (correctly) that there was a lot more to the UK bank bail out than UK Government money. It is clear that emergency loans, for example, made available by the US Federal Reserve played a significant role in preventing the banking sector going tits up. They did this because, as previously stated, banks were bailed out based on where they operated (i.e - not simply where they were headquartered).
No, he wasn't and this is classic separatist tactics. Say one thing, get totally caught out and then claim that something else was actually meant by it. He said: "not even the UK bailed out the banks". Except that they did as explained above.
With regard my plagiarism :tsk tsk: of the Business of Scotland article, I'm not afraid to say that this was where I sourced the information in my earlier post, however, unlike the BoS article I don't think it is particularly clever to draw conclusions as to how an iScotland would have coped with or indeed handled the banking crisis. Fact is, Scotland was not Independent at the time of the crisis. Who knows how things could have panned out - relatively unscathed like Norway or badly scarred like EIRE - it depends on how the country was being governed I guess - but you don't know anymore than BoS how things would have panned out.
I knew that was where it was from but and I wasn't trying to imply plagiarism. I was suggesting that if sources are referenced where possible we can at least see whether those sources are coming from a Yes, Better Together or impartial viewpoint. I don't think it does depend on how the country was being governed, I think it depends on the state of out finances. And we know because we have the figures that our finances would not have been strong enough to bail our banks out.
What you can't seem to accept is that the banking crisis happened under the 'watchful' eye of the UK Government.
I have no problem accepting that at all. let's just remember though that the wider context was one in which this happened to the economies and banks of almost every developed country and economy globally. In other words if it was governmental f -up - and to a great degree it was - then it was a f-up perpetrated by almost every govt in the world. You would have to be swivel eyed fanatics to believe that a Scottish Government alone of almost all the world would have avoided it all.
The banks that went bust were UK Banks!
Lehman Brothers wasn't.
Nationalists are often criticised for portraying a vision of a land of 'milk and honey'. I have never suggested that being an Independent Nation State would be easy. I do, however, think it is about Scots making choices in the best interests of Scotland and having to stand or fall by the decisions we take. I also think it is fair to say, that many pro Union supporters (I include you in this category) are just as guilty of portraying an iScotland as a 'basket case' economy.
