<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nationalising banks isn&#8217;t a bad idea</title>
	<atom:link href="http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/</link>
	<description>Left-wing news, opinion and activism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 18:27:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bank Nationalization Redux - An Awkward Corner</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/#comment-31527</link>
		<dc:creator>Bank Nationalization Redux - An Awkward Corner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1715#comment-31527</guid>
		<description>[...] Chris Dillow says nationalizing banks is not a bad idea. &quot;The simple case for nationalizing banks is that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Chris Dillow says nationalizing banks is not a bad idea. &quot;The simple case for nationalizing banks is that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foyle</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/#comment-26520</link>
		<dc:creator>Foyle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:07:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1715#comment-26520</guid>
		<description>Nick is absolutely right. Governments are a back-up. If you make them the front-line, then you have no back-up except appropriation, defaulting, and printing money.

Besides which I&#039;m pretty sure nationalising all the banks would be illegal under European law.

Lastly - it&#039;s Seumas Milne. Unless you were being ironic about the Grauniad&#039;s editorial style...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick is absolutely right. Governments are a back-up. If you make them the front-line, then you have no back-up except appropriation, defaulting, and printing money.</p>
<p>Besides which I&#8217;m pretty sure nationalising all the banks would be illegal under European law.</p>
<p>Lastly &#8211; it&#8217;s Seumas Milne. Unless you were being ironic about the Grauniad&#8217;s editorial style&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/#comment-26519</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 20:43:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1715#comment-26519</guid>
		<description>James, if you did that you might as well nationalise them. Telling private banks to stay solvent while telling them how to lend out money is a recipe for disaster. At least, if they are nationalised they don&#039;t have to stay solvent. Anyone for printing more money!?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James, if you did that you might as well nationalise them. Telling private banks to stay solvent while telling them how to lend out money is a recipe for disaster. At least, if they are nationalised they don&#8217;t have to stay solvent. Anyone for printing more money!?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James D</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/#comment-26514</link>
		<dc:creator>James D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:56:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1715#comment-26514</guid>
		<description>Nationalization still is the nuclear option though. I am more concerned by the government&#039;s failure to threaten to cap interest rates and impose a statutory duty to lend. Banks would be a lot more co-operative if they received similar treatment to local authorities.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nationalization still is the nuclear option though. I am more concerned by the government&#8217;s failure to threaten to cap interest rates and impose a statutory duty to lend. Banks would be a lot more co-operative if they received similar treatment to local authorities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Newmania</title>
		<link>http://liberalconspiracy.org/2008/12/05/nationalising-banks-isnt-a-bad-idea/#comment-26500</link>
		<dc:creator>Newmania</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:22:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=1715#comment-26500</guid>
		<description>I am not one of those who feels our access to  debt is the root problem  and 
It seems to me that it is a less regulated not amore regulated system we need. You will note that the Insurance Companies are weathering the storm imperturbably and this is because of the extremely fluid competition . Only AIG which acted like a bank has suffered a bank fate  and that’s because it was underwriting bank debt .

More smaller and free-er  would have kept us safer and we should work towards that . but we start from where we are .I see no case for nationalising the specialist and  international services the  City offers . If it cannot make money it should die  so we have to  be clear which banks we are discussing .
 There is a  weak but not  absurd case for nationalising  High Street Domestic Banking for Private Consumers . I am highly horrified  at the idea the  state should  play at Commercial credit   which would turn the economy into an essentially state controlled  dead land  . We cannot afford that
You are wrong to dismiss the awfulness of nationalisation . It  does make stupid  dull expensive and  political companies   but is this worse than what we have ?  Not much  I agree . and  normal domestic banking could  be handled  like a Utility .Its not a stupid idea  but   unless  you think access to debt   is  the silver bullet  its too much  for too little</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not one of those who feels our access to  debt is the root problem  and<br />
It seems to me that it is a less regulated not amore regulated system we need. You will note that the Insurance Companies are weathering the storm imperturbably and this is because of the extremely fluid competition . Only AIG which acted like a bank has suffered a bank fate  and that’s because it was underwriting bank debt .</p>
<p>More smaller and free-er  would have kept us safer and we should work towards that . but we start from where we are .I see no case for nationalising the specialist and  international services the  City offers . If it cannot make money it should die  so we have to  be clear which banks we are discussing .<br />
 There is a  weak but not  absurd case for nationalising  High Street Domestic Banking for Private Consumers . I am highly horrified  at the idea the  state should  play at Commercial credit   which would turn the economy into an essentially state controlled  dead land  . We cannot afford that<br />
You are wrong to dismiss the awfulness of nationalisation . It  does make stupid  dull expensive and  political companies   but is this worse than what we have ?  Not much  I agree . and  normal domestic banking could  be handled  like a Utility .Its not a stupid idea  but   unless  you think access to debt   is  the silver bullet  its too much  for too little</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

