They were far too greedy. The worst thing about the bank crisis was that they actually knew the risk they were taking; even employing people who were telling them loud and clear. That's wicked in my book. As for bonuses being just a small percentage of the money they make - someone somewhere has to loose. I an cursed with a long memory - we were told the 'small percentage' tale in the 1970s' 'no, big bonuses won't affect your pension'....oh yeah?
You missed the point, which is, the cash value of the bonuses is simply not enough to save all the swingeing cuts we might experience. It would be symbolic, more than practical.
Remember this, we are meant to have an EU to protect the us from this sort of out-come. Sure the banks were wrong, but the EU and America systemically failed to protect its citizens from themselves as well as tempering the banks.
Also, while the banks were busy making money, the governments were happy to go on a spending spree that simply was not sustainable on the scale it was doing. Also, many of us were happy with the cheap loans and healthy profits to help support pensions.
Banks are simply an element in this issue. We have to look wider to understand full blame.
Sorry disagree! It WAS bankers greed worldwide that precipitated this collapse. Very little Europe could have done. Unfortunately those at the top were paid off with their 30 pieces of silver. However, it was started by greedy bankers. Cutting stupid unearned bonuses would have far more than a presentational effect. In UK would lower house process in London and suburbs, reduce upward pressure on top end wages, make pensions and investments far safer. What gets me is that this was all condoned by a Labour Government! Banks DO NOT create wealth, they simply extract it. If they take a larger slice of the cake, someone else gets a smaller one. Simple as that. Yes the bankers were to blame, wholly and totally. To suggest others, such as regulatory authorities, were also is not right. That’s akin to saying the Magistrates are just as much to blame for crime as the criminals they judge.
What gets me is that this was all condoned by a Labour Government! Banks DO NOT create wealth, they simply extract it. If they take a larger slice of the cake, someone else gets a smaller one. Simple as that. Yes the bankers were to blame, wholly and totally. To suggest others, such as regulatory authorities, were also is not right. That’s akin to saying the Magistrates are just as much to blame for crime as the criminals they judge.
The Labour Government were (partially) to blame for not controlling the industry. In a similar vein courts could be construed as to be condoning crime for not passing strong enough sentences/fines and thereby partially to blame if crime rockets as a result.
So then, George Washington's famous saying might not have been so memorable. 'Father I cannot tell a lie, I felled the tree....but you are partly to blame it was your axe'
You missed the point, which is, the cash value of the bonuses is simply not enough to save all the swingeing cuts we might experience. It would be symbolic, more than practical.
Remember this, we are meant to have an EU to protect the us from this sort of out-come. Sure the banks were wrong, but the EU and America systemically failed to protect its citizens from themselves as well as tempering the banks.
Also, while the banks were busy making money, the governments were happy to go on a spending spree that simply was not sustainable on the scale it was doing. Also, many of us were happy with the cheap loans and healthy profits to help support pensions.
Banks are simply an element in this issue. We have to look wider to understand full blame.
Take just one bank, RBS, we bailed them out and then they paid bonuses of £1.3 billion, this included £1M to 100 people. I really think this is taking the proverbial. I know that these bonuses wont wipe out the debt, but they would go a long way to, say, not trashing the school building projects. The reduction of our debt is supposed to hit everyone, but it does seem to hit the innocent rather the perperrators.
Sorry disagree! It WAS bankers greed worldwide that precipitated this collapse. Very little Europe could have done.
Then there is no point in having it, because that is what they are meant to do. There was a number of countries that didn't get effected. If it was all the fault of the global banks, they would have done.
Our Governments were crap and did nothing to help, I'm afraid, and we let them. I think your analogy is not right. What we had was crap parents who let their kids do exactly what they wanted.
Take just one bank, RBS, we bailed them out and then they paid bonuses of £1.3 billion, this included £1M to 100 people. I really think this is taking the proverbial. I know that these bonuses wont wipe out the debt, but they would go a long way to, say, not trashing the school building projects. The reduction of our debt is supposed to hit everyone, but it does seem to hit the innocent rather the perperrators.
Sadly, this is the rule of life. If wealth didn't matter and didn't buy privilege, what would be the point of of having any?
No sorry, you simply can't pass on or back blame for bad behaviour. I agree parents influence, governments moderate, but we stand and fall on our own. I know many people from broken homes and disadvantaged backgrounds, who have succeeded without bad behaviour. What's the difference between a con man (of a case recently reported locally) who extorted a large sum from an OAP for roof repairs, and the Bank executive who made the self serving decisions which took the whole of her pension? One gets gaol and the other a peerage! In your job, are you constantly thinking how to chizel just a few more quid off the unsuspecting punters? Didn't think so, but that's the banking ethos! By the way, no Country is immune - the generalist press don't generally publish that. Look at the specalist press or the web subscription specalist reports - rather different picture emerges.
If Government, or indeed, the EU can't control banks, then what is their worth? As for your parent comment, I don't understand what you are trying to say. A you say, banks are a business, but banks are a necessity these days, they need to be profitable.
Gordon Brown was quick to take the credit for a stable economy in the 'good' years, but blamed the international market when it went bad. He can't have it both ways. He was complicit (as were the Tories in some regard) in all this mess.
If Government, or indeed, the EU can't control banks, then what is their worth? As for your parent comment, I don't understand what you are trying to say. A you say, banks are a business, but banks are a necessity these days, they need to be profitable.
Gordon Brown was quick to take the credit for a stable economy in the 'good' years, but blamed the international market when it went bad. He can't have it both ways. He was complicit (as were the Tories in some regard) in all this mess.
Indeed banks are a business and as such should self regulate. As Old Goat said, we would be disgusted by a plumber who ripped a pensioner off and spent the money on a holiday, what is the difference? Should we therefore blame the government for all the cons of small businesses? BTW not one of the big banks CEO has a degree in maths.
Should we therefore blame the government for all the cons of small businesses?
The Government determines company law. If they see how business can unfairly exploit its customers, we most certainly expect them to deal with it. Again yours is a poor analogy.
Logged
Male
