News Banks getting fooked

[Access Denied]

At last!

Someone has finally done soemthing to make sure the banks are paying their way in the economy. The bonuses bankers get make me sick, I'm glad that they're now finally being made to help us out of the hole they created.

If it works that is.

 

[Sparx]

As much as i hate what the banks done, whats next? where will it go now its acceptable to punish and tax individual companies?

 

[dysfunction]

There is nothing wrong with paying big bonuses.
What is wrong is the bankers taking on huge risks that undermine the general economy.

Barclays didn't receive a single penny from the tax payer as they acted fairly responsible in the whole scheme of things. If they choose to pay large bonuses that's fine by me...

 

[Vasconcelos]

Now I envy Engeland

 

[cHodAX]

Now I envy Engeland

You should, we have pie!

 

[Ch3tan]

At last!

Someone has finally done soemthing to make sure the banks are paying their way in the economy. The bonuses bankers get make me sick, I'm glad that they're now finally being made to help us out of the hole they created.

If it works that is.

Bullshit, daily mail style view. You do realise that the banks are private businesses do you not? Do we stop and restrict bonus's or introduce taxes for other business?

If you make money for your company then you should have no problem receiving a bonus. The view that banks are responsible for the recession is vastly dumbed down, and results in the smelly mass of society demanding blood for something they have no idea about.

 

[Gwadien]

Ahem, Government takes money off banks? banks cut jobs?, it's a bit like putting up Uni costs, less students go uni, and less people get jobs in uni, because there's not enough students.. hmm..

 

[dysfunction]

...Banks don't lend as much to Companies or Individuals...economy takes a dive...Banks move the Head Office elsewhere...

 

[Ch3tan]

Couldn't edit dues to my router being gay; but to expand on Dys' point, why should all banks suffer when not all are responsible for taking public money? When only some departments within banks contributed to the recession, when they've had massive job cuts in a lot of those departments?

It's a ridiculous measure to appease the public, and it will result in nothing but a loss of faith from the banks in doing business in this country.

 

[Gibbo]

Bullshit, daily mail style view. You do realise that the banks are private businesses do you not? Do we stop and restrict bonus's or introduce taxes for other business?

If you make money for your company then you should have no problem receiving a bonus. The view that banks are responsible for the recession is vastly dumbed down, and results in the smelly mass of society demanding blood for something they have no idea about.

Privately owned? You do realise that we own 84% of RBS for example do you not?

 

[andeh]

At last!

Someone has finally done soemthing to make sure the banks are paying their way in the economy. The bonuses bankers get make me sick, I'm glad that they're now finally being made to help us out of the hole they created.

If it works that is.

lol, just fyi it's estimated (beeb article from last year) that 85% of personal tax revenues come from <10% of the population and 95% from <15% respectively.

(Possibly dubious figures of course)

What makes me sick is walking past the 'job' centre and seeing the tax paid on these bonuses put to such good use...

 

[Ormorof]

lol, just fyi it's estimated (beeb article from last year) that 85% of personal tax revenues come from <10% of the population and 95% from <15% respectively.

(Possibly dubious figures of course)

What makes me sick is walking past the 'job' centre and seeing the tax paid on these bonuses put to such good use...

maybe you should get a real job rather than just walking around laughing at the unemployed

 

[Ch3tan]

Privately owned? You do realise that we own 84% of RBS for example do you not?

Yes, RBS, and Northern Rock - so why are the government taking money from the banks that are not partly state owned, or have not taken bail out money?

It's bullshit, far too heavy a level of state involvement. And it will only result in long term harm to the economy as the banks will go elsewhere.

 

[Amphrax]

About fucking time tbh I dont see why the 'workers' have to pay for the mistake the bankers made to begin with. In my opinion should be heavier than that as they fucked us all over.

 

[Ch3tan]

About fucking time tbh I dont see why the 'workers' have to pay for the mistake the bankers made to begin with. In my opinion should be heavier than that as they fucked us all over.

Again - you are penalising workers who pay taxes. Why do you think banks who took no government money should pay extra taxes, and workers who have done nothing wrong pay extra tax on bonus's or have them limited just to appease an ignorant public?

You do realise that it's actually taking money out of the economy. What do you imagine bank employees do with their money? Hide it all abroad and never spend a penny here?

 

[megadave]

Probably go on a nice holiday abroad, yeah.

 

[Gwadien]

Again - you are penalising workers who pay taxes. Why do you think banks who took no government money should pay extra taxes, and workers who have done nothing wrong pay extra tax on bonus's or have them limited just to appease an ignorant public?

You do realise that it's actually taking money out of the economy. What do you imagine bank employees do with their money? Hide it all abroad and never spend a penny here?

I know I shouldn't say this, but I agree with you... We need to be helping banks that effect our economy, I'm sorry, but saying give us your money will make them more inclined to QQ, if it gets so bad, I can just see banks such as Santander pulling out of the Country all together because it's simply not worth it, imagine the effects of that.

We should be looking at removing public-sector jobs that aren't needed none of this 'front line services' bollox, the Consultant of the consultant to advise the consultant on how to tell the consultant how to tell the manager to tell the other manager who will then tell nigel to cut the grass. :<

 

[Ch3tan]

Which generates money for UK tour operators and airlines....

You are a bright guy aoln, even if you believe in this from a social responsibility stand point, you must see that the arguments (or lack of) put forward by those in this thread are nothing than mob mentality with little or no understanding behind them.

 

[ford prefect]

Which generates money for UK tour operators and airlines....

You are a bright guy aoln, even if you believe in this from a social responsibility stand point, you must see that the arguments (or lack of) put forward by those in this thread are nothing than mob mentality with little or no understanding behind them.

I think perhaps mob mentallity is a bit harsh - it is a simple matter of justice that won't happen and injustice that will.

Regardless I agree with you, the health of British banking is absolutely key to the health of our economy. That being said, the title of this thread is wrong - it should be small businesses being fooked, because although we rely on banks for the health of our economy, that shouldn't put them beyond any real culpability.

In real terms, what Osbourne has proposed today has one fundemental flaw, actually, flaw doesn't work, because he knows what he is doing - one lump of well polished bullshit. He has instructed the banks to lend £190 billion (gross - important to bear that in mind) to UK businesses - so a £22 billion rise. Where do you think this money is coming from precisely? As this agreement is gross, it takes absoultely no account at all of repayment on existing and outstanding loans. The easiest and simpliest way of funding this increase is for banks to call in certain types of outstanding business loan and increasing interest on loan renegotiation. In short, it costs the banks nothing and makes them nothing and the government look like they are doing something.

Remember, net lending makes the economy grow, gross in this instance is simply robbing peter to pay paul. The whole thing is spin, nothing more and businesses who are already in trouble will ultimately suffer because if it.

 

[Lamp]

Its all smoke & mirrors. Trust me. People are still getting whopping bonuses.

Its in the government's interest for bankers to continue to get big bonuses. Do you have any idea how much tax the City gives to the Exchequor? Its a lot.

 

[Gibbo]

Yes, RBS, and Northern Rock - so why are the government taking money from the banks that are not partly state owned, or have not taken bail out money?

It's bullshit, far too heavy a level of state involvement. And it will only result in long term harm to the economy as the banks will go elsewhere.

We own 40+% of Lloyds also. Without the bailout of the banking sector the other banks would have fallen also.

The banks can't expect to be able to continue as they did before and they need to contribute towards the debt that they have helped create, and thats all of them. Despite some banks not needing help the whole culture of the sector helped to create banks that needed bailing out. And now the banks know that the government will always bail them out they need to be kept in check. The banks themselves expect their customer to be responsible, it's about time they acted like that too.

Personally I don't think they amount being received from them is enough, but it's certainly a start.

 

[Gwadien]

Its all smoke & mirrors. Trust me. People are still getting whopping bonuses.

Its in the government's interest for bankers to continue to get big bonuses. Do you have any idea how much tax the City gives to the Exchequor? Its a lot.

Exactly, It's just 'OMFG THEYRE GETTING MONEY THATS UNFAIR' Well, actually, you're benefitting out of it, so shh...

It's like the Royal Family, people are like, omfg, the Government gives them so much money, just get rid of them and have more money for us.. erm, no, they have so much estate and they actually do good - Princes trust etc etc, and they actually make money for the Country.

 

[Wij]

As a bank employee, but not a banker, I wish people would butt the fuck out of my bonus. It's part of my package. I work in IT. Our IT was pretty good. IT did not fuck us up.

Thanks to the bank's collapse I'm losing my job. Don't begrudge me my fucking bonus.

 

[Lamp]

When I worked at Salomon Brothers (long taken over by Citigroup), there was a Japanese fella who personally brought in £500,000,000 of revenue for the bank. He got something like 50 million quid bonus for that. It made various papers & was in the trade press, but no one really battered an eyelid. Those were the days.

 

[Ch3tan]

We own 40+% of Lloyds also. Without the bailout of the banking sector the other banks would have fallen also.

The banks can't expect to be able to continue as they did before and they need to contribute towards the debt that they have helped create, and thats all of them. Despite some banks not needing help the whole culture of the sector helped to create banks that needed bailing out. And now the banks know that the government will always bail them out they need to be kept in check. The banks themselves expect their customer to be responsible, it's about time they acted like that too.

Personally I don't think they amount being received from them is enough, but it's certainly a start.

More bullshit. Talk about biting off your nose to spite your face. The UK relies heavily on the banking sector. Also banks are huge organisations with a lot of departments (see Wij's post), and a lot of hedge funds and investment firms were more responsible for the world wide economic problems than the large banks. Do you see them being held responsible? No.

Why doesn't the government tax the energy companies more, and stop bonus's paid by them? You can't have one rule for one and another for an industry that is simply unpopular.

Also as has been pointed out, these measures are useless and do nothing other than appease idiots.

 

[Gibbo]

More bullshit. Talk about biting off your nose to spite your face. The UK relies heavily on the banking sector. Also banks are huge organisations with a lot of departments (see Wij's post), and a lot of hedge funds and investment firms were more responsible for the world wide economic problems than the large banks. Do you see them being held responsible? No.

Why doesn't the government tax the energy companies more, and stop bonus's paid by them? You can't have one rule for one and another for an industry that is simply unpopular.

Also as has been pointed out, these measures are useless and do nothing other than appease idiots.

Whilst the case of an individual not directly involved in the decisions that caused the problems losing their job at a bank is a sad event, and I feel for anyone losing their job over this, I spent a large part of last year with a 10% pay cut to help the firm I work for stay afloat. And even after that some people have still lost their jobs where I work so when it comes to the overall picture I actually have very little sympathy for the banks.

As for energy companies, if one of those goes bust someone else takes up the slack and the world continues. If a bank goes under, as we have seen, it can cause a snowball effect. They are different sorts of companies. You need to compare apples with apples, not apples with pears.

 

[Mey]

Also Lloyds was fine before the right honourable Mr. Brown bullied us into taking on HBOS (admitedly aided by the greed of our then CEO). Why should the hard working staff be penalised for the errors of those in charge, these changes affect the little man more than the big boys. I used to rely on my bonus to supplement my below average salary (with my bonus I would earn 23k a year. Now i'll be lucky to earn 19k).

 

[Mey]

We own 40+% of Lloyds also. Without the bailout of the banking sector the other banks would have fallen also.

The banks can't expect to be able to continue as they did before and they need to contribute towards the debt that they have helped create, and thats all of them. Despite some banks not needing help the whole culture of the sector helped to create banks that needed bailing out. And now the banks know that the government will always bail them out they need to be kept in check. The banks themselves expect their customer to be responsible, it's about time they acted like that too.

Personally I don't think they amount being received from them is enough, but it's certainly a start.

Because people borrowing more than they could afford and not keeping up with repayments is the banks fault right..

 

[DaGaffer]

Because people borrowing more than they could afford and not keeping up with repayments is the banks fault right..

It is if the bank knew they had no chance of keeping up the payments in the first place. Which in the case of the sub-prime crisis was demonstrably true. While it is true to say that people should be responsible for their own actions, this is only true if people actually have access and understanding of all the facts. Most people (and not just lower socio-economic groups), most people, don't understand finance. They don't understand their mortgage, and they certainly don't understand their pension, and financial institutions like that just fine.

Anyway, as for this thread; smoke and mirrors. Osborne has made the tax hike permanent, whilst at the same time changing the rules for corporate taxation (particularly in relation to off-shore earnings) so the banks more than get their money back by a different route. No UK government, and particularly a Tory one, will fuck with the banks.

 

[Zede]

Bullshit, daily mail style view. You do realise that the banks are private businesses do you not? Do we stop and restrict bonus's or introduce taxes for other business?

If you make money for your company then you should have no problem receiving a bonus. The view that banks are responsible for the recession is vastly dumbed down, and results in the smelly mass of society demanding blood for something they have no idea about.

All tory right wing twats see my sig