Just to put things into perspective. It was recently reported that the wars in the middle east have so far cost America some 200 billion dollars, I understand.

If this is true, well this is less than the amount our prime minister Gordon Brown has just thrown at the Northern Rock bank collapse.

Somehow that makes the war effort sound a bargain!

Approximately how many people would lose money in this bank's collapse?

This has yet to be confirmed. The government has lent over $100 billion dollars already and is now preparing to nationalise the business, so the share-holders will have to be accomodated.The bank's activities involve employment for some thousands of folk in working class areas of the north. Nevertheless the sums involved are horrendous, ain't they?

no matter what is done, this is gonna be messy...

as it always is....

Del Boy

The Government had to intervene. Letting Northern Rock sink would have been disastrous as its the 8th largest bank in the UK. I am in the middle between socialism and capitalism (either extreme is bad) and am generally against nationalizing banks, especially in the case of NR because the banks woes was mostly due to its own incompetance and greed they deserved to go belly up.

But in the case of NR to let it collapse would have been an economic catastrophe, even the conservative party knows it -they just like taking a cheap shot at G.Brown but they would have done exactly the something.

Besides the nationalization is only temporary, G.Brown has said he will sell the bank the moment its out of financial dire straits.

And lastly the Iraq war is actually closing on $2 Trillion, so bailing out NR is a bargain in comparison.

Originally Posted by mmarsh

And lastly the Iraq war is actually closing on $2 Trillion, so bailing out NR is a bargain in comparison.

And you came to this number how?

Originally Posted by Damien435

And you came to this number how?

Here

http://www.usatoday.com/news/militar...-wacosts_N.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/07/usa.iraq


And these guts say $3 Trillion
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle3419840.ece

To quote the USA Today.

The cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could total $2.4 trillion through the next decade...The CBO estimates assume that 75,000 troops will remain in both countries through 2017...As of Sept. 30, the two wars have cost $604 billion, the CBO says...

And the Guardian.

The real cost to the US of the Iraq war is likely to be between $1 trillion and $2 trillion (£1.1 trillion), up to 10 times more than previously thought, according to a report written by a Nobel prize-winning economist and a Harvard budget expert.The study, which expanded on traditional estimates by including such costs as lifetime disability and healthcare for troops injured in the conflict as well as the impact on the American economy, concluded that the US government is continuing to underestimate the cost of the war.

So you have one saying over the next decade the war could costs could add up to $2.4 trillion and the other saying over the course of the next six decades or so the war could cost between 1 and 2 trillion dollars. Projected costs ten years out based on unknown variables is not the same as the actual cost to date.

What a disaster.
That's the tradeoff between private and government. Private is more efficient and has the potential to have extremely positive results. On the other hand they also have a far higher chance of going under. Government... well let's not even get started there but you can always count on whatever they run being there next year.
And I agree. Socialism and Capitalism... either extreme is horrible. I've seen some near-pure capitalistic systems in Southeast Asia. It is simply heart breaking. And there is no justice.