Iceland's Financial Crisis - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

retmil46 · #1 03-06-2010, 09:26 AM

Sounds like a bad deal all the way round...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100306/ap_on_bi_ge/eu_iceland_financial_crisis

Basically, it sounds like when one of Iceland's main banks, Icesave, went under, British and Dutch investors lost their shirts. The British and Dutch govts apparently compensated the investors similar to what our FDIC would do, and now those govts are knocking on Iceland's door wanting their money back - to the tune of over 5 billion dollars. And the deal worked out would have gotten the money from guess where - the taxpayers.

The Icelandic president/PM refused to sign the deal, which triggered a national poll on the bill. And from the sound of it, the taxpayers are pissed and going to vote hugely against it - they would have to fork over 25% of their monthly income each month for the next 8 years to pay back the UK and Netherlands.

The taxpayers see it as not being their problem - the bank execs got greedy and mismanaged the bank and overspent causing it to go under, and the British and Dutch got greedy going for the higher than normal interest rates the bank offered and ignored any signs of trouble - why should they have to pay back someone else's money, when they lost it due to their own incompetence?

And the IMF is dropping hints that if the public nixes the deal, Iceland just might find it rather difficult to get any loans from them in the future.

Hatterasguy · #2 03-06-2010, 09:34 AM

Its like looking into our future when China calls the debt due.

catmandoo62 · #3 03-06-2010, 09:45 AM

then we send back all the lead filled toys,poisoned dog food etc etc.and call it even!they then quit selling stuff to us.and wal-mart goes belly up.sounds like a win win situation.

retmil46 · #4 03-06-2010, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Its like looking into our future when China calls the debt due.

My thoughts exactly. I almost added that at the end of my original post, wondering when we were going to get screwed with a similar deal.

dynalow · #5 03-06-2010, 12:27 PM

^^
Obama's got it covered. Not to worry.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/85237-cbo-estimates-huge-deficits-average-1-trillion-per-year-for-the-next-decade

President Barack Obama's budget will lead to deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion over the next decade, the CBO estimated Friday.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said President Barack Obama's budget would lead to annual deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion for the next decade.

The estimates are for larger deficits than the budget shortfalls expected by the White House.

Annual deficits under Obama’s budget plan would be about $976 billion from 2011 through 2020, according to a CBO analysis of Obama's plan released Friday.

The Obama administration estimated its policies would lead to an average annual budget shortfall of $853 billion for the next 10 years.

The difference is that Obama’s estimate expects more tax revenue.

The independent CBO and Obama expect a similar amount of government spending over the next 10 years -- about $45 trillion. But the CBO expects Obama's policies to bring in $35.5 trillion in tax receipts, less than the $37.3 trillion expected by the White House.

CBO expects fewer tax revenues largely because it expects less economic growth than the White House over the next decade.

"It's not that the administration has a rosy scenario, but the CBO is a little less optimistic about income growth," said Jim Horney,
director of federal fiscal policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

The CBO expects the economy to grow at about 4.4 percent annually during the last half of this decade, while the administration expects annual growth to range from 5.3 percent to 4.3 percent from 2015 to 2020.

The CBO's prediction for this year's deficit -- $1.5 trillion -- is 56 billion less than the White House estimate largely because it expects less federal spending.

The deficit for this year is on pace to top last year's record budget shortfall of $1.4 trillion, according to another CBO report.

The larger deficit so far is due almost entirely to a drop in tax revenue.

Spending by the government is about the same as last year, but tax receipts dropped from $861 billion to $796 billion.

The budget office said Thursday the deficit for the first five months of the fiscal year, which starts in October, was $655 billion, an 11 percent increase over the same period in the last fiscal year.

Individual tax receipts dropped by $53 billion, mostly because of lower wages and the middle-class Making Work Pay tax credit in the stimulus championed by the Obama administration.

RELATED ARTICLES
Deficit on pace to surpass last year's $1.4 trillion record
Corporate tax revenues fell by $11 billion because of lower profits and a tax break in the stimulus that allowed companies to use current losses to offset taxes on past year's profits.

The government spent $1.45 trillion through February, the same amount it spent last year over the same period.

Spending on unemployment benefits nearly doubled, rising from $36 billion in the first part of 2009 to $69 billion this year, while defense and entitlement costs saw smaller increases.

But the extra costs was offset by a sharp drop in bailout spending. The government has spent just $9 billion under the bank bailout, officially known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, compared to $113 billion spent last year.

The $1.56 trillion deficit expected by the White House would be a record shortfall in nominal dollars.

It would be equivalent to nearly 11 percent of the country's economy, the highest level since the post-World War II era.

The White House budget predicts the deficit will fall to roughly 4 percent of the economy over the next decade as the economy recovers, federal spending on stimulus and bailouts end and Bush-era income tax cuts expire.

President Barack Obama has created a bipartisan commission of lawmakers and outside experts to chart a path toward a more reasonable fiscal budget. Democratic congressional leaders have pledged to hold votes on the commission's recommendations after the mid-term elections.

Republicans said the more dour CBO estimates show Obama's policies to be more unsustainable than expected.

“The news today from CBO is clear: the President’s budget will continue to lead our nation into a fiscal catastrophe – an even worse one than the President’s own numbers suggest," said Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.), the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee.

Senate Republicans said Obama's expected savings from healthcare reform would be "wiped out" if CBO's deficit estimates are correct. The healthcare legislation favored by the president would save about $1.1 trillion over the next two decades, according to the White House and CBO studies.

"It won’t even make up for the additional $1.2 [trillion] that the CBO found that the President missed in his budget projections in just the next 10 years," said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

This story was updated at 6:50 p.m.

One wonders if the Obama numbers include or ignore his touted savings from health care reform?

Hatterasguy · #6 03-06-2010, 12:41 PM

Yep their idiots.

Pooka · #7 03-06-2010, 04:34 PM

The situation in Iceland has nothing to do with anything here. I can remember when banks in Columbia and Bolivia were paying 600% interest per year, then they went broke and everyone was wiped out. Several large New York banks lost Billions on this deal, and they should have.

The Euro governments should have asked if the investors were so smart then why did they invest in something that was so shallow? I guess they had their reasons for paying the investors back, but the citizens of Iceland did not cause this and should not be on the hook for it.

China can call for our debt if they want, but if they drive the US into default their loans are worthless. It could be the best thing for the US if they did call in our loans.

A sucessful real estate developer told me many years ago he always borrowed far more than he needed on a commercial project. That way the bank could not forclose on him because if they did they would be stuck with an unfinished project. He said it was better to make the bank a partner in a deal and not a lender, and it was even better to make the bank a partner without them knowing it.

Keeping this in mind it seems that China is now our partner in this debt thing. If we go under so do they, so tell me again why they are going to call in our loans?

As far as many of the comments from Republican leaders on this matter... I think these are the same guys that said they want to see Obama fail, so how can anything they say be treated as objective?

kerry · #8 03-06-2010, 05:10 PM

Not sure of all the implications of this but in my mind, the responsibility lies which those bank customers who put their money in Icelandic banks without insurance. (at least that's what it looks like to me). Don't know why the British and Dutch bailed out their citizens but I'm making a wild guess that they did not do it with the approval of Iceland's citizens.

Fulcrum525 · #9 03-06-2010, 07:51 PM

I'm curious to see how international law will come into play with this case as Iceland isn't part of the EU but is pushing for future membership....

daveuz · #10 03-06-2010, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynalow

^^
Obama's got it covered. Not to worry.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/85237-cbo-estimates-huge-deficits-average-1-trillion-per-year-for-the-next-decade

President Barack Obama's budget will lead to deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion over the next decade, the CBO estimated Friday.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said President Barack Obama's budget would lead to annual deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion for the next decade.

One wonders if the Obama numbers include or ignore his touted savings from health care reform?

We talk about the budget as the president's budget, and that makes sense, as the president is the one proposing it. But this is also the country's budget. It reflects not just what the president is proposing, but what's actually happening, and what's been happening. It reflects the creation of Medicare (Lyndon Johnson) and Medicare Part D (George W. Bush), Social Security (FDR) and lower marginal tax rates (Ronald Reagan). It reflects economic growth, which can't be traced to any one president, and financial crises, which are similarly diffuse.
And that tends to make presidents look both better and worse than they actually are. The giant deficits that greeted Obama were not really his fault. The bottom fell out of the tax base. Medicaid and unemployment insurance both became much bigger because so many people needed their help. That might have been his problem, but it was not his fault. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/obamas_budget_problem_and_ours.html

Chas H · #11 03-06-2010, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Its like looking into our future when China calls the debt due.

A debt is a contract with explicit terms agreed to by both parties. As with most debts, U.S. treasury bonds (which is the U.S. debt that Chinese entities hold) cannot simply be "called" by the creditor prior to the bonds' expiration dates any more than someone's mortgage or car loan can be called before it's due. A lot of people seem not to understand that debts cannot just be arbitrarily called at any time unless the debtor defaults on payments, or in unusual cases where that is written into the contract.

Treasury bonds are sold with a given maturity (for example, a date 5 years, 10 years, or 30 years after issue). Upon maturity, the government redeems those bonds for the face amount. In the meantime, the government pays cash interest payments (the "coupon") on a regular basis. You can demand early payment on the debt all you want if it makes you feel good, but no one will pay any attention to you.

daveuz · #12 03-06-2010, 08:29 PM

Trying to spend less? You won't find this in Karl Rove's new book. SPENDING IN IRAQ

Spent & Approved War-Spending - About $900 billion of US taxpayers' funds spent or approved for spending through Sept 2010.
U.S. 2009 Monthly Spending in Iraq - $7.3 billion as of Oct 2009
U.S. 2008 Monthly Spending in Iraq - $12 billion
U.S. Spending per Second - $5,000 in 2008 (per Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on May 5, 2008)
Cost of deploying one U.S. soldier for one year in Iraq - $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)
Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq - $9 billion of US taxpayers' money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also, per ABC News, 190,000 guns, including 110,000 AK-47 rifles.
Missing - $1 billion in tractor trailers, tank recovery vehicles, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other equipment and services provided to the Iraqi security forces. (Per CBS News on Dec 6, 2007.)
Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq - $10 billion, per Feb 2007 Congressional hearings
Halliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported - $1.4 billion
Amount paid to KBR, a former Halliburton division, to supply U.S. military in Iraq with food, fuel, housing and other items - $20 billion
Portion of the $20 billion paid to KBR that Pentagon auditors deem "questionable or supportable" - $3.2 billion
Number of major U.S. bases in Iraq - 75 (The Nation/New York Times)
TROOPS IN IRAQ
Troops in Iraq - Total 115,000 U.S. troops as of November 30, 2009. All other nations have withdrawn their troops.
U.S. Troop Casualties - 4,379 US troops; 98% male. 91% non-officers; 82% active duty, 11% National Guard; 74% Caucasian, 9% African-American, 11% Latino. 19% killed by non-hostile causes. 54% of US casualties were under 25 years old. 72% were from the US Army
Non-U.S. Troop Casualties - Total 316, with 179 from the UK
US Troops Wounded - 31,669 through September 30, 2009, 20% of which are serious brain or spinal injuries. (Total excludes psychological injuries.)
US Troops with Serious Mental Health Problems - 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home
US Military Helicopters Downed in Iraq - 73 total, at least 36 by enemy fire
IRAQI TROOPS, CIVILIANS & OTHERS IN IRAQ
Private Contractors in Iraq, Working in Support of US Army Troops - More than 180,000 in August 2007, per The Nation/LA Times.
Journalists killed - 140, 93 by murder and 47 by acts of war
Journalists killed by US Forces - 14
Iraqi Police and Soldiers Killed - 9,381
Iraqi Civilians Killed, Estimated - A UN issued report dated Sept 20, 2006 stating that Iraqi civilian casualties have been significantly under-reported. Casualties are reported at 50,000 to over 100,000, but may be much higher. Some informed estimates place Iraqi civilian casualities at over 600,000.
Iraqi Insurgents Killed, Roughly Estimated - 55,000
Non-Iraqi Contractors and Civilian Workers Killed - 569
Non-Iraqi Kidnapped - 306, including 57 killed, 147 released, 4 escaped, 6 rescued and 89 status unknown.
Daily Insurgent Attacks, Feb 2004 - 14
Daily Insurgent Attacks, July 2005 - 70
Daily Insurgent Attacks, May 2007 - 163
Estimated Insurgency Strength, Nov 2003 - 15,000
Estimated Insurgency Strength, Oct 2006 - 20,000 - 30,000
Estimated Insurgency Strength, June 2007 - 70,000
QUALITY OF LIFE INDICATORS
Iraqis Displaced Inside Iraq, by Iraq War, as of May 2007 - 2,255,000
Iraqi Refugees in Syria & Jordan - 2.1 million to 2.25 million
Iraqi Unemployment Rate - 27 to 60%, where curfew not in effect
Consumer Price Inflation in 2006 - 50%
Iraqi Children Suffering from Chronic Malnutrition - 28% in June 2007 (Per CNN.com, July 30, 2007)
Percent of professionals who have left Iraq since 2003 - 40%
Iraqi Physicians Before 2003 Invasion - 34,000
Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since 2005 Invasion - 12,000
Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion - 2,000
Average Daily Hours Iraqi Homes Have Electricity - 1 to 2 hours, per Ryan Crocker, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq (Per Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2007)
Average Daily Hours Iraqi Homes Have Electricity - 10.9 in May 2007
Average Daily Hours Baghdad Homes Have Electricity - 5.6 in May 2007
Pre-War Daily Hours Baghdad Homes Have Electricity - 16 to 24
Number of Iraqi Homes Connected to Sewer Systems - 37%
Iraqis without access to adequate water supplies - 70% (Per CNN.com, July 30, 2007)
Water Treatment Plants Rehabilitated - 22%
RESULTS OF POLL Taken in Iraq in August 2005 by the British Ministry of Defense (Source: Brookings Institute)
Iraqis "strongly opposed to presence of coalition troops - 82%
Iraqis who believe Coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security - less than 1%
Iraqis who feel less ecure because of the occupation - 67% Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces - 72%

Hatterasguy · #13 03-06-2010, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chas H

A debt is a contract with explicit terms agreed to by both parties. As with most debts, U.S. treasury bonds (which is the U.S. debt that Chinese entities hold) cannot simply be "called" by the creditor prior to the bonds' expiration dates any more than someone's mortgage or car loan can be called before it's due. A lot of people seem not to understand that debts cannot just be arbitrarily called at any time unless the debtor defaults on payments, or in unusual cases where that is written into the contract.

Treasury bonds are sold with a given maturity (for example, a date 5 years, 10 years, or 30 years after issue). Upon maturity, the government redeems those bonds for the face amount. In the meantime, the government pays cash interest payments (the "coupon") on a regular basis. You can demand early payment on the debt all you want if it makes you feel good, but no one will pay any attention to you.

Yes I understand how it works, but in country to country lending its not always so cut and dry.

Not that they would because it would hurt them, but if they wanted their money they could screw us over pretty good. How about traiffs and seizing US assets in their country to pay off part of it?

Don't like it? Go to war.

cmbdiesel · #14 03-06-2010, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Yes I understand how it works, but in country to country lending its not always so cut and dry.

Not that they would because it would hurt them, but if they wanted their money they could screw us over pretty good. How about traiffs and seizing US assets in their country to pay off part of it?

Don't like it? Go to war.

kinda like...I don't care who holds my debt, as long as I hold the button...seems like an inevitable US policy...

retmil46 · #15 03-06-2010, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daveuz

Trying to spend less? You won't find this in Karl Rove's new book. SPENDING IN IRAQ

Spent & Approved War-Spending - About $900 billion of US taxpayers' funds spent or approved for spending through Sept 2010.
U.S. 2009 Monthly Spending in Iraq - $7.3 billion as of Oct 2009
U.S. 2008 Monthly Spending in Iraq - $12 billion
U.S. Spending per Second - $5,000 in 2008 (per Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on May 5, 2008)
Cost of deploying one U.S. soldier for one year in Iraq - $390,000 (Congressional Research Service)
Lost & Unaccounted for in Iraq - $9 billion of US taxpayers' money and $549.7 milion in spare parts shipped in 2004 to US contractors. Also, per ABC News, 190,000 guns, including 110,000 AK-47 rifles.
Missing - $1 billion in tractor trailers, tank recovery vehicles, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other equipment and services provided to the Iraqi security forces. (Per CBS News on Dec 6, 2007.)
Mismanaged & Wasted in Iraq - $10 billion, per Feb 2007 Congressional hearings
Halliburton Overcharges Classified by the Pentagon as Unreasonable and Unsupported - $1.4 billion
Amount paid to KBR, a former Halliburton division, to supply U.S. military in Iraq with food, fuel, housing and other items - $20 billion
Portion of the $20 billion paid to KBR that Pentagon auditors deem "questionable or supportable" - $3.2 billion
Number of major U.S. bases in Iraq - 75 (The Nation/New York Times)
TROOPS IN IRAQ
Troops in Iraq - Total 115,000 U.S. troops as of November 30, 2009. All other nations have withdrawn their troops.
U.S. Troop Casualties - 4,379 US troops; 98% male. 91% non-officers; 82% active duty, 11% National Guard; 74% Caucasian, 9% African-American, 11% Latino. 19% killed by non-hostile causes. 54% of US casualties were under 25 years old. 72% were from the US Army
Non-U.S. Troop Casualties - Total 316, with 179 from the UK
US Troops Wounded - 31,669 through September 30, 2009, 20% of which are serious brain or spinal injuries. (Total excludes psychological injuries.)
US Troops with Serious Mental Health Problems - 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home
US Military Helicopters Downed in Iraq - 73 total, at least 36 by enemy fire
IRAQI TROOPS, CIVILIANS & OTHERS IN IRAQ
Private Contractors in Iraq, Working in Support of US Army Troops - More than 180,000 in August 2007, per The Nation/LA Times.
Journalists killed - 140, 93 by murder and 47 by acts of war
Journalists killed by US Forces - 14
Iraqi Police and Soldiers Killed - 9,381
Iraqi Civilians Killed, Estimated - A UN issued report dated Sept 20, 2006 stating that Iraqi civilian casualties have been significantly under-reported. Casualties are reported at 50,000 to over 100,000, but may be much higher. Some informed estimates place Iraqi civilian casualities at over 600,000.
Iraqi Insurgents Killed, Roughly Estimated - 55,000
Non-Iraqi Contractors and Civilian Workers Killed - 569
Non-Iraqi Kidnapped - 306, including 57 killed, 147 released, 4 escaped, 6 rescued and 89 status unknown.
Daily Insurgent Attacks, Feb 2004 - 14
Daily Insurgent Attacks, July 2005 - 70
Daily Insurgent Attacks, May 2007 - 163
Estimated Insurgency Strength, Nov 2003 - 15,000
Estimated Insurgency Strength, Oct 2006 - 20,000 - 30,000
Estimated Insurgency Strength, June 2007 - 70,000
QUALITY OF LIFE INDICATORS
Iraqis Displaced Inside Iraq, by Iraq War, as of May 2007 - 2,255,000
Iraqi Refugees in Syria & Jordan - 2.1 million to 2.25 million
Iraqi Unemployment Rate - 27 to 60%, where curfew not in effect
Consumer Price Inflation in 2006 - 50%
Iraqi Children Suffering from Chronic Malnutrition - 28% in June 2007 (Per CNN.com, July 30, 2007)
Percent of professionals who have left Iraq since 2003 - 40%
Iraqi Physicians Before 2003 Invasion - 34,000
Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since 2005 Invasion - 12,000
Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion - 2,000
Average Daily Hours Iraqi Homes Have Electricity - 1 to 2 hours, per Ryan Crocker, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq (Per Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2007)
Average Daily Hours Iraqi Homes Have Electricity - 10.9 in May 2007
Average Daily Hours Baghdad Homes Have Electricity - 5.6 in May 2007
Pre-War Daily Hours Baghdad Homes Have Electricity - 16 to 24
Number of Iraqi Homes Connected to Sewer Systems - 37%
Iraqis without access to adequate water supplies - 70% (Per CNN.com, July 30, 2007)
Water Treatment Plants Rehabilitated - 22%
RESULTS OF POLL Taken in Iraq in August 2005 by the British Ministry of Defense (Source: Brookings Institute)
Iraqis "strongly opposed to presence of coalition troops - 82%
Iraqis who believe Coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security - less than 1%
Iraqis who feel less ecure because of the occupation - 67% Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces - 72%

Dude, believe it or not, I squawked long and hard AGAINST going into Iraq - and I'm retired military. My gut told me it was one war too many - we didn't have the resources, manpower, and money - and as Colin Powell predicted in the 1st Gulf War, we ended up stuck in there for years. Say what you want about GW, Dad Bush did have enough sense to listen to his generals when it came to actually fighting the first war and not get stuck in that quagmire. But then here comes Junior and Donny Rumsfeld with his New American Century crap, and here we are stuck in the 21st century version of Vietnam.

Believe me, people that are in or have been in the military are the last ones that want to be fighting an unnecessary war - because it's THEIR butts that's getting shot at. It was a Civil War general that came up with the quote "only a damn fool fights a war when he doesn't have to" - and that's exactly my opinion of GW and Rummy.

But if I was pissed off at the way GW and the R's spent money for 8 years, then here comes Obama and the D's, and in short order they make the previous bunch look like amateurs when it comes to blowing our tax money. FCOL, first they give every federal agency a 10% budget increase in the middle of the worst recession in 80 years, THEN they start mumbling about balancing the budget? I can damn well guess what that means - my taxes are going up. And spare me the Obamaspeak on how it's only on 250 grand and up - I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night, and in my 51 years I've seen this same BS played out before.