It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Iceland Recovering Fastest in Europe After Jailing Bankers Instead of Bailing them Out

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 06:09 PM
a reply to: Cuervo

But nobody has been able to explain to me why there has to be a middleman to fulfill that function.

Them evil bankers have been around long before government was created, and their 'central banks'.

Especially since they aren't held accountable to taxpayers yet are backed by us

LOL the Federal Reserve isn't accountable to anyone rember now:

Governments created fiat currency that BANKERS, and them evil corporations, we use.

It's just one more group to pass money through before it gets to us...

Well now look at it this way.

Government creates money then they created taxes that pays government.

Why do they need to exist? What are they doing that can't be done without them?

Because society can not function without them. Especially so were are jumping off the 'cashless' cliff.

What are the people going to do without credit cards,EBT cards, home loans, and auto loans.

We live under the instant gratification society.

Buy now pay later, and pay for decades.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 07:31 PM

originally posted by: neo96

Because society can not function without them. Especially so were are jumping off the 'cashless' cliff.

What are the people going to do without credit cards,EBT cards, home loans, and auto loans.

We live under the instant gratification society.

Buy now pay later, and pay for decades.

Again, why is that banks are the only ones that can do all that? Why banks? Why this third-party source.

And when you mention that banks were around first, you must realize that was also before they were backed by the taxpayer and they had to succeed in order to exist. Now they don't. Now they don't justify their own worth to the rest of us. They don't need to be shut down, they just need to fend for themselves without borrowing from us and lending it back.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 08:02 PM
a reply to: Cuervo


it gives a pretty good rundown of how it goes together.

Note that with the fed being completely detached from the government, there's no oversight. They can do more or less whatever they want, and they don't really need to tell anyone.
With such a scary and powerful idea such as money for nothing, it helps to have nobody sticking their nose into your book keeping.
What bothers me is that part of our taxpayer money goes to pay interest to this privately owned bank for 'money' we borrowed from them- when they just made it up in the first place.

nothing might mean nothing, but until it collapses I need to trade my time for money to pay my bills- and that means I'm paying some percentage of my time as interest on a debt made of nothing that I didn't agree to taking in the first place.

It's pretty screwy.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 08:04 PM
a reply to: Cuervo

I think, in order for a real capitalist system to flourish, what you said is spot on.

Not only do they need to fend for themselves, we need to remove as many "middle men" as possible in order to obtain true economic liberty.

Economic regulation should dissolve the practice of creating "financial instruments" which is little more than paper transferring real property and acting as a surrogate for that property, regardless of who actually bought the physical property to begin with.

I find what happened in 2008 to be increasing, not decreasing. The banks are bigger than ever and their "financial instruments" are the only thing they truly hold as "assets". There is no such thing as a "toxic asset", only resold contracts that are essentially worthless once the debt they are based on is either paid, or the debtor defaults.

It is a recipe for disaster and they are more common now than they ever were.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 08:05 PM

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
On topic,Iceland sounds like they are doing well,good to see

On topic - they're not. The OP article is full of crap and note it doesn't even mention GDP growth figures anyway. See my post above - you'll be one of those who believed the OP at face value and didn't for one minute think to check if it was true or if it was (and it obviously is) a biased article from a site with an agenda.

In case you missed it, Iceland's GDP has shrunk by 1.5% in Q1 2015. It is also some 20-25% off it's pre-2008 value and they needed a bailout from the IMF and Scandinavian countries.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 08:09 PM
a reply to: Cuervo

Again, why is that banks are the only ones that can do all that? Why banks? Why this third-party source.

Banks are the only one that can do what ?

They aren't for starters government cut out the middlemen vis a vis student loans and guess what ?

It debt ballooned to over 1 trillion. That the tax payer is on the hook for.

Same with government ran 'retirement' social security. That the tax payer is on the hook for.

Hell don't even get me started on Fanny and Freddy with mortgages. That the tax payer is on the hook for.

I prefer a private banking system.

The banks went to hell when the Federal Reserve was created.
edit on 13-6-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 08:12 PM
a reply to: projectvxn

Not only do they need to fend for themselves, we need to remove as many "middle men" as possible in order to obtain true economic liberty.

That isn't a true capitalist system.

A free market is a free market where ANYONE can provide a good or service.

That is what banks do.

The regulation makes it more difficult for banks to do business. A the cost is passed on to the consumer.

And they take MORE risk.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:35 PM
banks are too big to fail, unfortunately most governments will let the banks rape the account holders and the tax payers and bankrupt the government before they allow a bank to fail, sad but true.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 10:46 PM

originally posted by: Willtell

So much for the lie that “the welfare state” doesn’t work.

If you put controls on the money machine, and protect the macro-economics and don’t let a few greedy and powerful few pollute the macro-economics of the country, then the model of this country and Western Europe can work.

The fact is that NOT ONE COUNTRY IN THE WORLD follows a conservative model of no taxes, ANTI-NATIONAL HEALTH-CARE and libertarian economics because It doesn't work.

Amazing, the USA is the only country where conservative doctrine is used to torture the people

Others realize the inhuman, unscientific model of conservative economics, that is typified by the Kansas Governor that has ruined the state of Kansas, DOESN’T WORK!

Good for the people of Iceland who aren’t plagued by the conservative economic theory of (worship the rich and dam the middle class and poor) such as America is burdened with and keeps the torture of the American people alive.

America built itself into the greatest nation in the world on conservative policy, it wasn't until liberals stuck their hands in the cookie jar that it began to falter.........

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 11:33 PM

January 2014

"What happened in Iceland from 2008 to 2011 is regarded as one of the worst financial crises in history. It seems likely that never before had a country managed to amass such great sums of money per capita, only to lose it again in a short period of time. But Iceland, with a population of just 320,000, has also staged what appears to be the fastest recovery on record. Since 2011, the gross domestic product has been on the rise once again, most recently at 2 percent. What's more, salaries are rising, the national debt is sinking and the government has paid off part of the billions in loans it received in 2008 from the International Monetary Fund ahead of schedule. It's a sign of confidence."

Iceland's dramatic comeback, has recommended a similar policy cocktail for other nations in crisis. The rules are as follows: Allow your ailing banks to collapse; devalue your currency if you have one of your own; introduce capital controls; and try to avoid paying back foreign debts.

That may sound like an extremely self-serving recipe -- and it was. Whereas billions of public money was pumped into the banking system in Ireland so that financial institutions could pay back their creditors, Icelanders voted against this route in two separate referenda. They couldn't see why they should pay for the greed of foreign investors who followed the Siren song of high interest rates to the island nation.

They feel deceived by the country's elite and their big money, the mechanisms of which they hardly understood.

After the crash, many Icelanders turned away from the world and global trade. They began spending more time with their families and children, in the outdoors and with Icelandic books. Alcohol consumption dropped among young Icelanders, and the subjective feeling of happiness increased.

A very down to earth article that reiterates that Iceland did what was good for Their Citizens - not the money 'masters' and foreign 'speculators' .

From the IMF in 2011:

ey to Iceland’s recovery was an IMF-supported program worth $2.1 billion that was agreed in November 2008, shortly after the country’s three main banks collapsed in spectacular fashion. The program included controversial measures such as capital controls and a decision not to tighten fiscal policy during the first year. It also sought to ensure that the restructuring of the banks would not require Icelandic taxpayers to shoulder excessive private sector losses.

The IMF’s contribution to Iceland’s recovery was advice on a set of policies to tackle the crisis and its aftermath, as well as some financing. The design of the program was unique from the Fund’s perspective, particularly with respect to the capital controls, but it was necessary given the severity and the depth of the crisis.

There is plenty of information of either side of the argument. But I find two things hard to dispute:

Rampant 'unregulated' financialization led to the collapse. I fail to see how 'regulation' was the problem as some have suggested.

Iceland acted in the interests of it's citizenry and not in the interest of 'speculators'. The entire 'raison d'etre' for the return that speculartor/investors receive is based on 'risk'. If the investors are bailed out by 'taxpayers' there is no risk and so there should be no or little return.

Iceland met the crises with the above in mind and bailed out it's citizens, who needed serious help after the crash, rather then let those citizens flounder into proverty rather they paid pay off speculators.

Spin it anyway you choose to, what they did benifited the most people with very little harm to others.

Some local business men are upset about the tight capital - but they are still in business because of the capital controls and other REGULATIONS inforced after the crash.

posted on Jun, 13 2015 @ 11:45 PM
a reply to: FyreByrd

Says Antimedia.. that well known source of reliable info.

posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 02:50 AM
a reply to: FyreByrd

But this undermines the American idealism of apotheosis as underlined by the founding fathers =/

edit on 14-6-2015 by ghaleon12 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 06:58 PM
I laugh how people think that the USA is a capitalistic nation yet we bailed out the Auto industry (more than one time mind you, *cough* Chrysler) the banks and anything else that was too big to fail. Iceland on the other hand a supposed "Socialist" country let them fail and imprisoned some! That is capitalism, if your business fails it fails. No one bails you out. AIG, Lehman Bros, Goldman Sachs, Fannie and Freddie May, BofA, Wells Fargo, GM, Chrysler should have all failed as with our Federal Reserve.

posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 07:14 PM
Too bad Iceland is just a one-time aberration, a blip on the radar. I wouldn't be surprised if in the future they underwent some "regime change", but in truth they aren't even important enough to be bothered with.

You're all still in the dark and hopelessly naive. There is no "free market" and there never was. I would prefer to call our current system mercantile absolutism.

posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 08:49 PM

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: Temudjin
a reply to: Cuervo

Ever wondered how a society over 10.000 people actually work, if you arent self sufficient as a society.You need the bankers, while Iceland is however self-sufficient they could lock down and they would survive. However the US, has trippled its size since the 1930, yet hasnt learnt that you are outliving your assets per person. You blaim the bankers or the state for everything, yet forget that your want is more than the needs.

Tell me what the bankers can do that our government can't.

The International Bankers own many of the major countries and can go to war with any country that defies them. That is what the Bankers can do that our Politicians can't.

posted on Jun, 14 2015 @ 09:52 PM

originally posted by: FyreByrd
Granted Iceland is a small country (the oldest Democracy in the world) with a fairly homogeneous poplulation but it's response to the Banking crises of 2008 is informative. This is a country that at the time was completely 'in' in the financial sector; the only fiancial company to come through whole was 'woman' run. Something to think about.

There recovery is nothing but amazing and they did the exact opposite of 'western economic wisdom' of bailing out the banks and heading into austerity.

After Iceland suffered a heavy hit in the 2008-2009 financial crisis, which famously resulted in convictions and jail terms for a number of top banking executives, the IMF now says the country has managed to achieve economic recovery—“without compromising its welfare model,” which includes universal healthcare and education.

In fact, Iceland is on track to become the first European country that suffered in the financial meltdown to “surpass its pre-crisis peak of economic output”—essentially proving to the U.S. that bailing out “too big to fail” banks wasn’t the way to go.

Yeah - and they are fine knitters too.

Iceland is a small fish in a very big ocean. Iceland going under wouldn't bring down the world economy.
Same goes for Greece. While Greece is a slightly bigger fish, it is still a small fish overall in a very big ocean.

Iceland not bailing out banks was irrelevant. Irrelevant because the effects would be limited.
Greece defaulting at the start would have sent shockwaves around Europe and by extension the world. It would have destablized the Eurozone and other periphery countries like Portugal and Spain would be under immense pressure now, if they hadn't already succumbed to a default them selves. That could have lead to the partial break up of the Eurozone with these countries at least going back to their old currencies. Around the world stocks would have tumbled and the not so wise(ie in the know with insider information) investors would have lost a lot, while those in the know(ie Sorros and other maggots) would have had a net gain. But the effects would on world markets would have been short lived anyway.
Greece didn't default because it would have screwed Germany and France, particularly's banks.

The USA on the other hand is a whole different issue. It is the big fish, the biggest fish in the ocean.

What I think is going to happen, is that the world will be transitioned from the USD as the reserve currency to the Yuan or a new global currency to replace the USD. There will be an orderly shift to avoid any disastrous effects. Think about it..the ruling elite are the same everywhere. There is no difference between Chinese America European Russian etc. All the upper echelons of elites are on the same agenda. They do not care for America or China or Russia or Germany or Greece or Brazil..they care about their wealth, and their wealth alone. Whether America is top dog or China or Russia or Europe, it makes no difference. Those people will continue to profit, the rest of us will continue to battle to make ends meet and get ahead a little.

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 03:02 AM
Commendable by the people of Iceland, no doubt. But let's put this all into context: The entire country is contained on a tiny island and has the population of Flagstaff, AZ.

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 03:11 AM
a reply to: Leonidas
With an economy to match?
I think that there are economic principles similar to those of inertia.

edit on 6/15/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 03:41 AM
If Iceland is so perfect, how come their suicide rates are twice that of the UK and higher than the US. How come Iceland has the highest rate of anti-depressant usage in the world?

Anti depressant use

I am posing these questions to get us back to reality. Iceland is no State of Perfection because it jailed a few bankers for fraud.

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 06:36 AM
a reply to: Cuervo
Not exactly, our governments give these crooks the right to create money pretty much out of thin air and all the bankers have to do is hold about 10% in deposits of that money. Eg if the banks have 1 million in deposits they can lend out 10 million in loans. The governments of the world also borrow from the banks which is paided back with interest. This interest is paided back from everybodies taxes as most governments in the world owe the banks debt. How these crooks get away with these scams is unbelievable. In derivitive deals if their is a loser their is also a winner. The winners from the financial meltdown seemed to have disappeared and are never seen or heard from. Where did all this money go and who was it that really profited. The big question is why do governments of this world allow these people/entities to do this to us are they just stupid or is their more sinister forces behind the bankers and are they using the financial systems as methods for controling humanity and thus the need to keep goverments and people in debt and never allow them to get ahead.

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in