Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
Which, as Thor noted, they are doing, in accordance with domestic law and their international obligations. (he knows more than I do about this, since he's actually in Iceland).
In your hypothetical, my guess is that there's sufficient comity between Canada and the U.S. that we would allow their U.S. creditors to execute against their domestic assets. You're suggesting that Canadian taxpayers would foot the bill, over and above the minimal indemnification offered by the CDIC? (Note that there is a massive difference between paying out a minimum deposit through a government-backed insurance program and actually draining public coffers to cover the actual face-value debts of a bank that went under)
You're certainly entitled to that opinion--but for my part I rather doubt it. I take a different view of the "size" issue--I think that the UK creditors thought they could push Iceland around and recover their lost money from the taxpayer just because they're the big dogs of the North Atlantic. To achieve this, they've framed the issue as "Iceland" owes money to the "U.K." as though this were an international obligation taken on by the government of Iceland which it is now failing to honour. The problem is that's not what happened--and that's really the only point I'm trying to make here.
|
As i said, maybe I'm confused as hell, but I was under the impression that the whole issue is the Icelandic government/people were refusing the cover the minimum deposit insurance offered up by their international agreements. In that case the Icelandic government does indeed owe the UK/netherlands citizens IMO.
totally with you though, anything above that minimum insured levels and the UK/netherlanders can pound sand.