<?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: Pre-budget report: Five expert views in the Guardian</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.debtonation.org/2008/11/pre-budget-report-five-expert-views/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.debtonation.org/2008/11/pre-budget-report-five-expert-views/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:39:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bob Porter</title>
		<link>http://www.debtonation.org/2008/11/pre-budget-report-five-expert-views/comment-page-1/#comment-425</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Porter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://debtonation.org/?p=750#comment-425</guid>
		<description>Martin,great does this mean the banks then become landlords and thus actually have to manage some &#039;real&#039; estate and be responsible 

for some real management of real stock. I like the muslim concept of banks being joint shareholders in whatever enterprise they lend money for. The 

recipient of the money simply gains increasing share of the enterprise as repayments are made.
Without such responsibilities the banks remain 

mere usurers. I dont believe the proping up the banks is doing other then restoring the system (if it works) that gave us the problem. At least the 

British now have a legal share in the banks so they if the banks are rejuvenated they too recive a dividend. As I see it  much of the prop up money 

is a straight steal from the public purse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Martin,great does this mean the banks then become landlords and thus actually have to manage some &#8216;real&#8217; estate and be responsible </p>
<p>for some real management of real stock. I like the muslim concept of banks being joint shareholders in whatever enterprise they lend money for. The </p>
<p>recipient of the money simply gains increasing share of the enterprise as repayments are made.<br />
Without such responsibilities the banks remain </p>
<p>mere usurers. I dont believe the proping up the banks is doing other then restoring the system (if it works) that gave us the problem. At least the </p>
<p>British now have a legal share in the banks so they if the banks are rejuvenated they too recive a dividend. As I see it  much of the prop up money </p>
<p>is a straight steal from the public purse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin</title>
		<link>http://www.debtonation.org/2008/11/pre-budget-report-five-expert-views/comment-page-1/#comment-418</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 20:24:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://debtonation.org/?p=750#comment-418</guid>
		<description>As usual Anne you are ahead of the game. 

I recommend using bank assets to bring all threatened 

repossessions into social housing: no more forced repossessions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As usual Anne you are ahead of the game. </p>
<p>I recommend using bank assets to bring all threatened </p>
<p>repossessions into social housing: no more forced repossessions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

