[Diggers350] Hail Iceland, Saviour of reason!

[ilyan]

The law in the UK used to say that if a Bank failed then its customers 
would be refunded by a levy on all the other Banks to repay its 
customers.   I forget up to how much but probably about £20,000, so 
prudent people with stacks of lolly kept no more than that in any one Bank.

Some stupid German stashed a million  dollars in a US Bank where the 
Federal repayment guarrantee  was only $10,000.  When that Bank went 
broke the Fed ignored their own rules and some idiot President saw that 
the German was repaid in full by the  Fed to preserve some imagined US 
goodname.    That started the rot in Banking.

Soon after that the Brits raised the compo limit to £50.000 in the UK. 
    Now the Brits have changed the rules again and are trying to lumber 
Icelandic taxpayers with the damages done by incompetent commercial 
Bankers.

Governments are universally incompetent.   Did you hear how sloppy their 
international  aircraft safety regulations to investigate plane crashes 
are?    THeir money management is even worse.    If there is to be money 
it must be administered as a store of value and a medium of exchange.    
Governments that debauch the currency should be abolished before they 
destroy thier Countries.   politicians and economists  who make 
inflation should be flogged.   Restore the whole of Keynes Theory and 
bring in a progressive tax on wealth to do so.

Woolworths are mentioned.     The people who issued the junk bonds that 
enabled racketeers to bugger up Woolworths should be obliged to refund 
Woolworths to the useful chain that it was,   There should be no limit 
to their liability.
Ilyan



On 10/04/2011 17:49, james armstrong wrote:
>
> Sent this letter to Iceland's ambassadorin London.
>
> Dear Ambassador,
>
> Subject: Iceland’speople’s vote not to refund UK Government for failed 
> bank.
>
> As a UKcitizen I sincerely thank the people of Icelandfor coming to 
> the right decision.
>
> (and perhaps inadvertently)exposing the anomaly at the heart of 
> corporate entities.
>
> In UK Barclays bank have a capitalization of 24% the GDP of UK
>
> Landisbank had a capitalization in excess of the Iceland GDP.
>
> Corporations clearly exhibitextraordinary wealth disparity compared 
> withpeople.
>
> I note recompensing the UK Government would cost each Iceland person  
> the absurd amount of  £9,000.
>
>
> That the people (in this case of Iceland) should pay for thesins of a 
> corporation is unthinkable. It is equally preposterous of HMG to ask 
> this of either the people of Icelandor the people of Britain, or, of 
> the people who lost out through landisbanki.
>
> Who is to pay?
>
> Any government even proposing the people should pay when the debts or 
> losseshave been incurred by corporations , has clearly lost touch 
> withthe contract which underlies society and with the role of 
> government itself .
>
> Why shouldone sectorof society, people, undewrite the wrongdoings ofa 
> subsidiary sector, whether corporations or government?
>
> Toensure the continuance of a sound banking system is only an argument 
> from convenience (tho’ a very strong argument.) in order to preserve 
> the value of the currency and the ‘trust’ behind it and trust in the 
> banking system.
>
> Thatargument from convenience mustgive way (even under its own terms) 
> from a stronger argument from a greater convenience .
>
> It ismore convenient (and much more viable) for other corporations to 
> shoulder the debts and consequences of one of their members.
>
> Existing giant corporations should repay the people who have lost out 
> from Landisbank.
>
> including corporations from UKas well as from Iceland.
>
> Any other arrangementinvites another default in future and on an even 
> greater scale and by another corporation.Converselycorporations will 
> think twice, and regulate themselvesknowing thatdefaults must cost the 
> sector.
>
> Every corporation trading in UK already has an enormously privileged 
> status, having been conferred with a sort of honorary human existence 
> , and benefiting from personal rights, action at law, and above all, 
> access to trade with the sovereign people (in this case of Britain.)
>
> It has cost the people ofBritain, all the travails in one thousand 
> years of history, notexcluding major wars in 1914 and 1939 to 
> establish a viable stable and productive society which corporations 
> can now access by registering at company house in City Road, Londonfor 
> £100.This can only be explained by national
>
> CORPORATE PRIVILEGE
>
> But the extent of thisprivilege now frequently dwarfs that of 
> individuals in many aspects.
>
> Unlike people, corporations are not finite and may enjoy mature 
> ‘lives’ of some two hundred years and more – they can canibalise other 
> corporations and may existin more than one country ,
>
> amnesia .
>
> For £100 registration feethey emerge full grown into maturity- a 
> condition which takes a person twenty years and costmaybe £100,000 .
>
> The good people of Icelandhave exposed thefailure in the social 
> contract, people, government andcorporations.
>
> CORPORATIONS’ IMMUNITY FROMLEGAL CENSURE
>
> Almost daily we in Britainhear of some giant corporation having been 
> fined in amounts which clearly define the crime or misdemeanor as most 
> serious.BP, Microsoft, Matalan, Woolworths, all were fined over 
> £1million. Latelyby Office of Fair Trading in UK, 104 construction 
> firms were fined for rigging bids for public contracts are 
> examples.Just one of those companies was fined £838,000- yet the 
> Dorset local government authority (LGA) have subsequently entered into 
> agreement with this company for a development in this town. The LGA 
> alsoloaned or granted this company some £200,000 to £2million .
>
> Another example isMs Goldman Sachs ,bankers, being fined $550million 
> in USAand a further £17.5million by Financial` Services Authority in 
> UK.For an individual this would attract lifelong stigmatization, for 
> companies – little notice or a passing mention in the press and 
> generally silence on BBC .
>
> REMEDIES
>
> The urgent need is to redefine the conditions of existence of each 
> corporation.
>
> A first step is to set a variable termination date for each 
> corporation now and in future on registration. Secondly, after a 
> growth period of someten years tocharge a realistic annual substantial 
> fee on every corporation, graduated to thesize, andprofits and 
> capitalization of each corporation.
>
> Trade associations of each sector of industry and commerce should 
> carry legal responsibility for thedebts and good conduct of members 
> (which membership should be compulsory).
>
> Lobbying of MPs and Government by corporations (now endemic) should be 
> illegal.
>
> Please thank the people of Icelandforexposing the reality ofthe 
> present out of control, too big, too privileged , too politic , too 
> unregulated, too freeloading corporate sector.
>
> If it cost the UKgovernment £3 billion for this lesson it would be a 
> very very cheap price.
>
> Of course it need not costHMG , £1 ; the total cost should be passed 
> on by HMG to the corporate sector in UKand to any corporations in 
> Icelandwho are able to contribute, on the principle that corporations 
> have a transnational existence. .
>
> It could be most constructive if youare able to pass this information 
> on to interested parties in Iceland.If I can help take the proposal 
> further please let me know.
>
> Yours faithfully,James Armstrong.11 April 2011
>
> Dorset, UK
>
> JCA: Ice
>
>
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/mailman/private/diggers350/attachments/20110411/5afbb717/attachment.html>