I dont see the problem. Let them resign - good riddance!

The real question is why they weren't all sacked in the first place!

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

I dont see the problem. Let them resign - good riddance!

The real question is why they weren't all sacked in the first place!

There was a cull - 7 non executive directors were sacked and only 2 executive and 5 non executive directors of the original Goodwin era remained after the tax-payers injection.

I say let them go too!

Originally Posted by Tete123

There was a cull - 7 non executive directors were sacked and only 2 executive and 5 non executive directors of the original Goodwin era remained after the tax-payers injection.

I say let them go too!

The operative word was 'all' I am shocked that any managed to hang on.

If the posties were doing this I can see these same bankers spitting out their coffee all over their cocaine laced Telegraphs in disgust

I have no problem with Bankers, executives, or anybody, getting a bonus. If these people produce £100 million of business, and they get £1 million bonus, no problem. However, if they are paid the same £1 million and they only create £500, 000 - HEY, WE"VE GOT A BIG PROBLEM!

Originally Posted by Major Sinic

The 'lefties' on this board, and in society at large, will be feasting with glee on this latest disreputable behaviour on the part of commercial institutions which should have learnt a salutary lesson. I can't say I blame them.

Some "lefties" are being really pro-active ..........

Originally Posted by article

Chavez said that in contrast to previous governments, his administration is cracking down on irresponsible banking by prosecuting banking executives. As of Friday, the Attorney General’s Office had issued ten arrest warrants for bankers suspected of involvement in the crimes and prohibited nineteen other bankers from leaving the country. The principal stockholder in the Bolivar Financial Group remains in police custody.

and from the same article.............

Originally Posted by article

In a joint statement released on Wednesday, two major private banking associations, the National Banking Council and the Banking Association of Venezuela, said the government’s measures are “appropriate and necessary” and that the financial system as a whole is in good shape.

full article........
Venezuela Nationalizes Two Banks, Investigates Others for Bank Law Infractions | venezuelanalysis.com

Current wailing in the City of London is a wonder to behold: Total-Banker.





On bonuses, why pay them at all? Let employers hire workers on normal contracts of employment for a specified wage. If someone does a good job, they get promoted, or leave with excellent references for a better job. If they fail to fulfil their contract they get demoted, disciplined, or fired. There's simply no need for the bonus culture.

[soap box]

Well of course there is alot of greed in the banking sector. Capitalism is based on greed.

Now greed can be good, but it needs to be controlled. The recession that recently occurred was caused to an extent by GREED, as with many recessions.


The greed is getting so bad that some on Wallstreet actually asked the US GOVT to regulate them, they admitted that they couldn't help themselves.

The problem is that no administration has had the balls to regulate the markets. Wallstreet has a short memory and without regulation the greed will get worse and worse.

but as I said greed isn't necessarily a bad thing it just needs to be regulated.

The book Too big to fail covers this area very well.

[/soap box]

Originally Posted by Kiwi 1691

Too big to fail

Again, the answer's obvious: if a bank's too big to fail, i.e. you effectively have socialism for the rich, it should be broken up. You pass a law making it legal to send in Treasury accountants to carve it into smaller chunks. So if one bit goes tits up the rest isn't dragged down with it.

11% of the UK economy is now financial services-based. It's insane to have basic, structural problems in the sector. But will Cameron do anything about it? He's funded by hedge funds run by his Eton friends. So he's a sock-puppet politician with city boys' arms up his jacksie.

One difficulty is the general public doesn't know what goes on in the City. They know the bu*gers drive Porsches, stuff their pockets with £millions, and moralise about the beauties of 'free market capitalism' while relying on ordinary people to bail them out when things go wrong. But what the hell is a 'credit derivative'? These financial instruments are incredibly complex. Basically they're lines of propositional calculus which would cover several blackboards, and you need a good maths or philosophy degree to understand. Interestingly, an Englishwoman, Blythe Masters, was part of the elite group at JP Morgan which invented them.

http://www.total-banker.com/Images/Blythe_Masters.jpg

Originally Posted by Kiwi 1691

[soap box]

Well of course there is alot of greed in the banking sector. Capitalism is based on greed.

Now greed can be good, but it needs to be controlled. The recession that recently occurred was caused to an extent by GREED, as with many recessions.


The greed is getting so bad that some on Wallstreet actually asked the US GOVT to regulate them, they admitted that they couldn't help themselves.

The problem is that no administration has had the balls to regulate the markets. Wallstreet has a short memory and without regulation the greed will get worse and worse.

but as I said greed isn't necessarily a bad thing it just needs to be regulated.

The book Too big to fail covers this area very well.

[/soap box]

On the other hand Socialism/Communism - EQUAL SHARES OF NOTHING.

Originally Posted by octopus

On the other hand Socialism/Communism - EQUAL SHARES OF NOTHING.

wow thats a ignorant post based on a complete lack of engaging with anything kiwi said.

Originally Posted by Balthazar

But will Cameron do anything about it?

Will Labour do anything about it?
No.

Labour are not willing to stand up to the city - They have not the strength.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

Will Labour do anything about it?
No.

Labour are not willing to stand up to the city - They have not the strength.

That reminds me of pretty mcuh every PMQs this year. Cameron never has any answers, just criticisms.

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

That reminds me of pretty mcuh every PMQs this year. Cameron never has any answers, just criticisms.

Cameron doesn't need answers. He is not the government.
Cameron's job is to hold the Government to account - Criticise and question.
The Government should answer the questions - But they never do.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

Cameron doesn't need answers. He is not the government.
Cameron's job is to hold the Government to account - Criticise and question.
The Government should answer the questions - But they never do.

That's fair, but criticism is only constructive if it does not offer an alternative.

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

That's fair, but criticism is only constructive if it does not offer an alternative.

Cameron does offer an alternative.
Vote Conservative at the General Election.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

Cameron does offer an alternative.
Vote Conservative at the General Election.

That's my point, he doesn't offer a clear alternative. All he has is criticism. A lot of people aren't even clear what he stands for.

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

wow thats a ignorant post based on a complete lack of engaging with anything kiwi said.

All I am saying is that if we followed yours, and Kiwi"s convictions, there would be no greed, because there would be nothing to get greedy over. Capitailism, is generated by ambition. Leftist State ownership like you and your friend Kiwi would like to see, destroys freedom, destroys ambition, destroys people and their dreams. The hard-left Eastern-block states of the cold War shows that nicely. In some places you couldn"t even own a market stall - I know, I visited such a place back in the 70s; and I know which system I prefer. Be carefull what you wish for.

Originally Posted by octopus

All I am saying is that if we followed yours, and Kiwi"s convictions, there would be no greed, because there would be nothing to get greedy over. Capitailism, is generated by ambition. Leftist State ownership like you and your friend Kiwi would like to see, destroys freedom, destroys ambition, destroys people and their dreams. The hard-left Eastern-block states of the cold War shows that nicely. In some places you couldn"t even own a market stall - I know, I visited such a place back in the 70s; and I know which system I prefer. Be carefull what you wish for.

Sorry I missed something, what are my convictions?

Originally Posted by JacquesMagique

Sorry I missed something, what are my convictions?

Convictions of state ownership - including banks. You could then regulate them as much as you wish, because they would all be yours. By all means correct me if I am wrong, but isn"t that Socialism/Communism is all about? Inverted fascism. If Kiwi says Capitalism is based on greed, you have to have an alternative.

Originally Posted by octopus

Convictions of state ownership - including banks. You could then regulate them as much as you wish, because they would all be yours. By all means correct me if I am wrong, but isn"t that Socialism/Communism is all about? Inverted fascism. If Kiwi says Capitalism is based on greed, you have to have an alternative.

Whats wrong with state ownership?

Over here nearly ever case of privatization failed. One of the main reason for the privatisations going bad was too much Greed.

Originally Posted by Kiwi 1691

Whats wrong with state ownership?

Over here nearly ever case of privatization failed. One of the main reason for the privatisations going bad was too much Greed.

Well, that may be so where you are, but over here I don"t think the state are to fit run a market stall, let alone multi £billion pound concerns - try looking at the NHS; a horror story indeed.

Darling warned that one-off supertax will hurt London’s status as global financial centre.

LONDON’s historic role as an international financial hub has been jeopardised by the government’s windfall tax on bank bonuses, according to leading City figures.

Officials from New York, Hong Kong and Switzerland have launched a charm offensive to lure lucrative investment banking business away from London. Several large banks have started to draft plans to divert business away from the capital to rival international centres.

Alistair Darling, the chancellor, shocked the City last week when he announced all banker bonuses over £25,000 would face a one-off tax of 50%. The move will generate at least an extra £550m in revenue.

The tax grab has led to accusations that Darling has undermined the City’s international credibility and broken a basic tenet required by business — a predictable tax regime.

One banker said: “We would expect this in Stalinist Russia but not here. That is why, until now, we kept London as the hub of our operations.” The anger is greatest among foreign-owned institutions, which say they are being unfairly asked to pay for the failings of British banks.

The full story available from here : Rival cities target banks over tax hit - Times Online

And on a related matter of Socialist-inspired taxes on the wealthy:

Hundreds of bosses flee UK over 50% tax.

Britain’s financiers and entrepreneurs are quitting the UK at a rate of 10 a week to avoid Labour’s new 50% taxes.

The burgeoning exodus threatens to deepen a £178 billion black hole in the public finances and leave middle-class voters with higher taxes for years to come, figures obtained from Companies House reveal.

The number of directors of British businesses registered as living in the low-tax centres of Jersey, Guernsey or the Isle of Man has risen by almost 500 to 6,729 in the past 12 months.

The British Virgin Islands is also a popular destination, with 615 directors of UK companies now based in the Caribbean tax haven — an 18% rise on a year ago.

Those known to be fleeing the UK include hedge fund managers, property tycoons, bankers and people who made their money setting up companies organising private healthcare, call centres and luxury holidays.

“The UK model is broken,” said Stephen Hedgecock, a partner in Altis, a £1 billion hedge fund company with 35 staff that has relocated to Jersey, leaving only a small presence in London.

“It’s not just the 50% rate — it’s National Insurance, the treatment of pensions ... everything. It’s just a ridiculous amount of taxation.”

This story available from here : Hundreds of bosses flee UK over 50% tax - Times Online

Originally Posted by Midas

Darling warned that one-off supertax will hurt London’s status as global financial centre.

LONDON’s historic role as an international financial hub has been jeopardised by the government’s windfall tax on bank bonuses, according to leading City figures.

Officials from New York, Hong Kong and Switzerland have launched a charm offensive to lure lucrative investment banking business away from London. Several large banks have started to draft plans to divert business away from the capital to rival international centres.

Alistair Darling, the chancellor, shocked the City last week when he announced all banker bonuses over £25,000 would face a one-off tax of 50%. The move will generate at least an extra £550m in revenue.

The tax grab has led to accusations that Darling has undermined the City’s international credibility and broken a basic tenet required by business — a predictable tax regime.

One banker said: “We would expect this in Stalinist Russia but not here. That is why, until now, we kept London as the hub of our operations.” The anger is greatest among foreign-owned institutions, which say they are being unfairly asked to pay for the failings of British banks.

The full story available from here : Rival cities target banks over tax hit - Times Online

And on a related matter of Socialist-inspired taxes on the wealthy:

Hundreds of bosses flee UK over 50% tax.

Britain’s financiers and entrepreneurs are quitting the UK at a rate of 10 a week to avoid Labour’s new 50% taxes.

The burgeoning exodus threatens to deepen a £178 billion black hole in the public finances and leave middle-class voters with higher taxes for years to come, figures obtained from Companies House reveal.

The number of directors of British businesses registered as living in the low-tax centres of Jersey, Guernsey or the Isle of Man has risen by almost 500 to 6,729 in the past 12 months.

The British Virgin Islands is also a popular destination, with 615 directors of UK companies now based in the Caribbean tax haven — an 18% rise on a year ago.

Those known to be fleeing the UK include hedge fund managers, property tycoons, bankers and people who made their money setting up companies organising private healthcare, call centres and luxury holidays.

“The UK model is broken,” said Stephen Hedgecock, a partner in Altis, a £1 billion hedge fund company with 35 staff that has relocated to Jersey, leaving only a small presence in London.

“It’s not just the 50% rate — it’s National Insurance, the treatment of pensions ... everything. It’s just a ridiculous amount of taxation.”

This story available from here : Hundreds of bosses flee UK over 50% tax - Times Online

(a) good riddance
(b) it's easily dealt with:just declare whatever hole the rats are hiding in a tax haven and tax financial transactions going in and going out at, say, 95%.

People who enjoy the advantages of Britain in good times, then scuttle off with their pile of cash when the shoe starts to pinch, are not good citizens. I'd favour taking their passports away or denying them services paid for by everyone else, e.g. medical treatment (including private hospitals which use NHS trained staff).

They certainly shouldn't be permitted to use British infrastructure, e.g. the transport system and telephone networks. Why should good citizens subsidise them? They're worse than dole scroungers.

Originally Posted by Balthazar

(a) good riddance
(b) it's easily dealt with:just declare whatever hole the rats are hiding in a tax haven and tax financial transactions going in and going out at, say, 95%.

People who enjoy the advantages of Britain in good times, then scuttle off with their pile of cash when the shoe starts to pinch, are not good citizens. I'd favour taking their passports away or denying them services paid for by everyone else, e.g. medical treatment (including private hospitals which use NHS trained staff).

They certainly shouldn't be permitted to use British infrastructure, e.g. the transport system and telephone networks. Why should good citizens subsidise them? They're worse than dole scroungers.

That's always the left's view isn't it; tax, tax, tax and regulate, regulate, regulate! Just for once I wish that you'd see the true picture. It's the wealthy who provide you with the standard of living this country has. Who do you think it is who provides millions of jobs in this country - those wealthy individuals who've set up and run multi-national companies. Who do you think it is who provide the government with enough money to build and maintain (however badly) the infrastructure in this country - those same wealthy individuals who've set up and run multi-national companies.

Like it or not, we live in a globalised society, and Britain is one single, small country trying to compete against others who don't have the same tax, tax, tax mentality there is here. If this carries on for much longer it won't be just the country's AAA credit rating which suffers because of socialist incompetence, but every single person in the place as we sink further and further into debt and many of the major contributors to our economy who could have saved us have moved away to where they're actually seen as being wanted.

Midas is entirely right.

What we need to do is a systematic review of our tax and business laws. Strip away all unnecessary regulations and red tape. This should be coupled with a reduction in the higher rates of tax; bring them all to 40% and below, and the reduction of ALL business rates and taxes.

Originally Posted by Midas

That's always the left's view isn't it; tax, tax, tax and regulate, regulate, regulate! Just for once I wish that you'd see the true picture. It's the wealthy who provide you with the standard of living this country has. Who do you think it is who provides millions of jobs in this country - those wealthy individuals who've set up and run multi-national companies. Who do you think it is who provide the government with enough money to build and maintain (however badly) the infrastructure in this country - those same wealthy individuals who've set up and run multi-national companies.

Like it or not, we live in a globalised society, and Britain is one single, small country trying to compete against others who don't have the same tax, tax, tax mentality there is here. If this carries on for much longer it won't be just the country's AAA credit rating which suffers because of socialist incompetence, but every single person in the place as we sink further and further into debt and many of the major contributors to our economy who could have saved us have moved away to where they're actually seen as being wanted.

I take the view that it's ordinary people who provide the wealth. They're the ones who do the work and take the real risk. They can't run off with their money, like thieves in the night, when the going gets tough.

Come on Midas. To listen to the fat cats moan is pretty funny. They're not patriots. I'd certainly argue they're lower, morally, than a dole scrounger.

Originally Posted by Balthazar

I take the view that it's ordinary people who provide the wealth. They're the ones who do the work and take the real risk. They can't run off with their money, like thieves in the night, when the going gets tough.

Come on Midas. To listen to the fat cats moan is pretty funny. They're not patriots. I'd certainly argue they're lower, morally, than a dole scrounger.

The average person does not risk their £1bn wealth in a business.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

The average person does not risk their £1bn wealth in a business.

They risk more. The average person has just spent £850 billion clearing up the mess left by the bankers - £40,000 per household.

Those same bankers, and their political representatives, who lectured the nation for years on the joys of unregulated capitalism and a small state, had to come running to ordinary Brits when their casino capitalism blew up in their faces.

Now they're complaining about being taxed, threatening to move to Geneva, making unpatriotic remarks about Britain's credit rating, and demanding that ordinary people suffer public expenditure cuts so they can avoid taxation.

As I said, they're lower than dole scroungers. Everyone knows it.

Originally Posted by Midas

That's always the left's view isn't it; tax, tax, tax and regulate, regulate, regulate!

I resent that generalisation, I am most definitely left wing but realise that there needs to be significant tax change (some sort of reduction most likely), reduction of regulation in some areas and increases in other areas.

Some socialists are realistic Midas

Originally Posted by Balthazar

As I said, they're lower than dole scroungers. Everyone knows it.

Exactly....at least dole scroungers arent playing Russian roulette with the tax payer...

At least the bankers are working and are generating wealth.
Dole scroungers just suck wealth out of the system.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

At least the bankers are working and are generating wealth.

They are generating wealthy by perpetuating a broken system which enslaves us all!

The banking and financial industries here contribute a lot of money to the county. The city of london alone contributes about £56 billion a year which is nearly 10% of our total economy and gives the government £9 billion in corporation tax alone not mentioning the hundreds of thousands of people it employs.

According to the britsish bankers association the city of london and it's financial services bring in over £36 billion a year in foreign investment and if taxes are put up and up most of this will suffer badly as companys and their people leave the country.

Originally Posted by Liberal Authoritarian

At least the bankers are working and are generating wealth.
Dole scroungers just suck wealth out of the system.

Many banking activities are socially useless or actively damaging. There's the real economy - people making things, farming, fishing, mining, cleaning the streets, writing computer software, teaching children - then the 'casino' economy: City boys flushing numbers on a screen, skimming cash off the top.

They're parasites and far worse than some nice Onslow character pulling £70pw off the dole. We need more Onslows and fewer Ruperts.

Plus the Chinese have shown you don't need private banks. The Chinese economy is perhaps the fastest growing in the history of the human race, and they now own large chunks of the US. All their banks are state owned and capital flushes through the economy like the Niagara Falls.

Why pay for the parasites and their cash-skimming? These wretched City of London Ruperts, now whinging about their bonuses being taxed, threatening to leave the country, talking down Britain, hiding their cash abroad, are completely useless. They're a luxury we can no longer afford. The sooner they piss off the better.

Plus they're ideologically bankrupt. After all their talk of 'deregulation' and a 'small state' and the 'trickle-down' economy they needed a large state to bail them out! They're useless tossers and everyone knows it! Even the Conservative front bench had to sit on their hands when the bonus tax was proposed. They knew that to oppose it would have been political suicide.

Oh, and don't get me started on the bankers' trade union, the British Bankers Association, whose chief executive, Angela Knight, is the Arthur Scargill of the Square Mile.... Have you heard her on TV?

Originally Posted by Balthazar

Many banking activities are socially useless or actively damaging. There's the real economy - people making things, farming, fishing, mining, cleaning the streets, writing computer software, teaching children - then the 'casino' economy: City boys flushing numbers on a screen, skimming cash off the top.

I'd say that some banking activities are socially useless, but that's not the same as saying they're financially useless.

Plus the Chinese have shown you don't need private banks. The Chinese economy is perhaps the fastest growing in the history of the human race, and they now own large chunks of the US. All their banks are state owned and capital flushes through the economy like the Niagara Falls.

That's not true. Of the 17 largest national banks in China, 12 are non-state-owned. These are Hua Xia Bank, China Everbright Bank, China Minsheng Bank, China International Trust and Investment Corporation (CITIC) Bank, The Industrial Bank in Fujian, Guangdong Development Bank, Shenzhen Development Bank, China Merchants Bank, Evergrowing Bank based in Shandong province, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, China Bohai Bank in Tianjing and China Zheshang Bank. There are also hundreds of non-national banks operating in China, all of who together are contributing to the Chinese economy. The state owned banking sector is but part of that, and has had its own set of financial problems in exactly the same way that other banks have.

Why pay for the parasites and their cash-skimming? These wretched City of London Ruperts, now whinging about their bonuses being taxed, threatening to leave the country, talking down Britain, hiding their cash abroad, are completely useless. They're a luxury we can no longer afford. The sooner they piss off the better.

Because it's a balance. If this country doesn't either pay the same or better rewards to people who run the financial sectors, and the vast majority of them run it very well indeed, or it taxes them excessively or unfairly, they'll just leave and go elsewhere. It's as simple as that. As Crawler pointed out, the financial services and banking sector in the UK is a huge net contributor to the economy and to jeopardise it would be foolhardy in the extreme, particularly to gain a few short-term political points. Anyone with any knowledge of economics will tell you that.

Plus they're ideologically bankrupt. After all their talk of 'deregulation' and a 'small state' and the 'trickle-down' economy they needed a large state to bail them out! They're useless tossers and everyone knows it! Even the Conservative front bench had to sit on their hands when the bonus tax was proposed. They knew that to oppose it would have been political suicide.

That sounds far more like emotive ideology talking than fact and realism! Yes, I'd agree with you 100% that there has been one almighty cock-up in the banking world, however you cannot escape the fact that it was a/ initiated by government in America, b/ compounded by late and incorrectly applied government regulation made without thought to the knock-on effects and c/ aggravated by a very few greedy individuals.