Guy giving Bob Diamond a hard time on SKY now
Discussion
munky said:
I know this because my cousin is a branch manager and let me tell you, she's far from rich.
Ha, reminds me of a few months ago when some ars8y branch cashier wasn't providing the sort of customer service that one would expect in these troubled times - quite taken aback by his rudeness. I was so pissed off with the guy that I complained to someone at the helpdesk not realising Mr Unhelpful was indeed the branch manager. Got promptly asked for some ID by his assistant in a disparaging way so i whipped out a pass for their HQ (as i work in a related company) and said "Is this good enough?'. Boy did she cr8p herself. Well if they are going to make me sit through courses on 'Respecting Clients' .. as you say the Retail arm is a whole world apart from the IB side, despite what Swampy & Co. might think.cardigankid said:
Wurls said:
Have you been refused a loan?
Of course. Hasn't everyone? That is not however the point. Contrary to Soovy's thinking, this is not a joke.Point 1 is that different banks have different criteria and they change over time depending on what level of risk they are exposed to already, and how much appetite for further risk they have. Ergo, it cannot be a cartel. If one place says no, try another.
Point 2, it's well known that businesses in trouble tend to take out loans or draw down lines of credit. Imagine you're the lender - you wouldn't want to lend to a business in trouble, but you would lend to a healthy business with a decent business plan requiring funds to expand or to buy stock for a big new order. Determining what the use of the funds will be isn't always straightforward, as a business in trouble will not always tell the truth. It would also depend on what the business does, and whether the outlook for that sector is rosy.
Sticks. said:
Minor point perhaps Munky but MPs are not pub sec. And even if they were, they'd only be temporary 
What about the banks which re both investment and retail? Interesting discussion on Newsnight last night about it all.
Personally I think they should be split up (as does the Bank of England), and then the argument goes away. Investment banks get to pay what they want, but no taxpayer safety net, and they should be limited in size so as not to pose a systemic risk if they fail. More smaller firms rather than fewer large ones - even if that means less efficiency - and beefed up cross-border, cross-industry regulation to prevent an AIG type fiasco where various regulators all thought some other regulator were monitoring it, but in reality none of them were.What about the banks which re both investment and retail? Interesting discussion on Newsnight last night about it all.
cardigankid said:
Kid yourself on if you wish. History is littered with the remains of those who did precisely that.
Indeed. Perhaps the "denial" of that history lesson dovetails with the "denial" that there was a monster property bubble in full swing and the "denial" that anyone was responsible for that bubble except the borrowers!Economics and politics are closely related. Once the economic situation becomes too severe for the common man he will soon adopt a political strategy instead.
A comedian called Mike Harding used to tell a great story about a walker in the countryside who is challenged by a land owner shouting "get orff my land!". Cutting the long story short, the landowner says the land has been in his family for generations, ever since his great great great great grandfather fought for it. "OK" says the walker, "I'll fight you for it now!"
Without wishing to get all philosophical on everyones' ass, we'll only be happy on this planet when we realise that there's enough stuff here for everybody. We just need to understand that the uneven distribution of resource, or money as it's become, as illustrated by the Harding joke, is the biggest conflict-breeder of all.
I entirely agree. But of course they don't just want all the money, they want the best houses the best education the best cars the best jobs the best everything and they want to exclude everyone else. I don't mind competition, but there is an established elite in the UK who just freeze out everyone else using cash and influence.
By the way, I see the balance of trade slipped to -£8.7bn. That's a recovery for you.
By the way, I see the balance of trade slipped to -£8.7bn. That's a recovery for you.
Edited by cardigankid on Wednesday 12th January 18:14
cardigankid said:
Alfa numeric said:
Why? Free banking, free credit cards, even free overdrafts if you don't exceed the agreed limit
Banking is only free if you keep a credit balance in your account and then you get paid zero or near zero interest, which with inflation is effectively a 4% annual charge just for holding your money. Even an IFA would think that was good. No overdraft is free - they come with charges including arrangement fees and hefty real interest rates, if you are 'fortunate' enough to get one at all, which many find impossible. You might get a credit card, many don't, other than those in financial difficulty who are offered them at interest rates up to 60%, which ought to be illegal but isn't. If you pay in or out a cheque the bank will sit on your money for 6 working days - they all do that. Strange wouldn't you say?Even those 'free' accounts are getting hard to come by. Business Bank Accounts are much worse, and we are now back to a situation where you cannot get a business loan, even with a perfect credit record, unless you can prove in detail that you don't need it. I know, I've tried.
The Australian dollar is riding high, I would much sooner have my money in Aus Dollars than Sterling. The UK can only maintain the current 'recovery' by QE and holding down the value of Sterling.
And, by the way, next time you are in a branch, ask them about their pension, healthcare and home insurance plans. That's how to get really done over. How many people out there have contributed to private pension schemes which are now all but worthless?
Edited by cardigankid on Wednesday 12th January 10:30
However my biggest bugbear with british banks is the way their system works.
Go to a shop put your card in to pay for something. The machine calls your bank your bank authorises payment.
However the payment can take up to 5 working days to come off your statement meaning you are living a false positive or you need to write down every transaction you make ever day and reconcile it against your account every evening to work out your balance.
Much like if you have an overdraft. They will give you a limit but oddly its not a limit as you can go over it.
My mom had an issue the beginning of this month with a late payment going into her account and the balance in her account wasnt enough to cover and outgoing bill.
The bank called her immediately and told her she would be charged for going overdrawn unless she either extended her O/D or put some funds in to cover the difference.
Yada yada. I cannot understand how so called modern british banks use such antiquated systems.
As for Barclays i bank with them and generally i think they are a shower of s
t but am at present stuck by a weird flaw. I think Bob Diamonds responses were perfectly correct and adequate however. the people i really want to see grilled and punished are RBS and to a smaller degree Lloyds who should never have bought RBS.Edited by Tallbut Buxomly on Wednesday 12th January 18:25
tonym911 said:
Without wishing to get all philosophical on everyones' ass, we'll only be happy on this planet when we realise that there's enough stuff here for everybody. We just need to understand that the uneven distribution of resource, or money as it's become, as illustrated by the Harding joke, is the biggest conflict-breeder of all.
I only agree with that if we accept that is because of humans inablity to cooperate and share. If we did that, there'd be enough for everyone.
Ozzie Osmond said:
cardigankid said:
Kid yourself on if you wish. History is littered with the remains of those who did precisely that.
Indeed. Perhaps the "denial" of that history lesson dovetails with the "denial" that there was a monster property bubble in full swing and the "denial" that anyone was responsible for that bubble except the borrowers!Economics and politics are closely related. Once the economic situation becomes too severe for the common man he will soon adopt a political strategy instead.
A comedian called Mike Harding used to tell a great story about a walker in the countryside who is challenged by a land owner shouting "get orff my land!". Cutting the long story short, the landowner says the land has been in his family for generations, ever since his great great great great grandfather fought for it. "OK" says the walker, "I'll fight you for it now!"
Randy Winkman said:
tonym911 said:
Without wishing to get all philosophical on everyones' ass, we'll only be happy on this planet when we realise that there's enough stuff here for everybody. We just need to understand that the uneven distribution of resource, or money as it's become, as illustrated by the Harding joke, is the biggest conflict-breeder of all.
I only agree with that if we accept that is because of humans inablity to cooperate and share. If we did that, there'd be enough for everyone.ZondaMark said:
Trade balance has nothing to do with recovery. In fact, it's often at it's 'worst' when we're doing best.
How do you work that out?When I was at primary school in the fifties we were told that the balance of payments increased before an upturn in the economy because we sucked in raw materials to satisfy orders for our manufacturing industry. That was in the days when there was still a map of the empire, sorry the commonwealth, on the back of our jotters. Now our manufacturing industry represents 12% of GDP, what happens when the Govt. floods the economy with cash is we suck in cars from Germany clothes from China and electronics from Japan.
All this figure represents imho is the inevitable result of trying to pump start an economy that doesn't work. As for the stock market - where do you put your money when it is about to be destroyed by inflation? Not in a savings account, that's for sure. Plus it is so easily manipulated by your mates in the hedge funds.
With the perspective of time, it sems clear to me that the UK is finished. Any key industries we have are in foreign control, and thank God for that becasue they stand a better chance of being competently managed.
tonym911 said:
Randy Winkman said:
tonym911 said:
Without wishing to get all philosophical on everyones' ass, we'll only be happy on this planet when we realise that there's enough stuff here for everybody. We just need to understand that the uneven distribution of resource, or money as it's become, as illustrated by the Harding joke, is the biggest conflict-breeder of all.
I only agree with that if we accept that is because of humans inablity to cooperate and share. If we did that, there'd be enough for everyone.cardigankid said:
ZondaMark said:
Trade balance has nothing to do with recovery. In fact, it's often at it's 'worst' when we're doing best.
How do you work that out?When I was at primary school in the fifties we were told that the balance of payments increased before an upturn in the economy because we sucked in raw materials to satisfy orders for our manufacturing industry. That was in the days when there was still a map of the empire, sorry the commonwealth, on the back of our jotters. Now our manufacturing industry represents 12% of GDP, what happens when the Govt. floods the economy with cash is we suck in cars from Germany clothes from China and electronics from Japan.
All this figure represents imho is the inevitable result of trying to pump start an economy that doesn't work. As for the stock market - where do you put your money when it is about to be destroyed by inflation? Not in a savings account, that's for sure. Plus it is so easily manipulated by your mates in the hedge funds.
With the perspective of time, it sems clear to me that the UK is finished. Any key industries we have are in foreign control, and thank God for that becasue they stand a better chance of being competently managed.
Totally agree that successive governments have not done enough to diversify UK PLC. Too much dependence on finance and the service sector in general. However that doesn't mean they should bash the banks and drive them overseas either, as then we'd lose another industry we're a world leader in.
We do still have a manufacturing sector though. Rolls Royce of course, and carmaking - Jaguar Land Rover (even if foreign owned, so what) and various other car factories
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11921894
and this website lists 4,647 manufacturing firms http://www.freeindex.co.uk/categories/industry/man...
turbobloke said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
cardigankid said:
Kid yourself on if you wish. History is littered with the remains of those who did precisely that.
Indeed. Perhaps the "denial" of that history lesson dovetails with the "denial" that there was a monster property bubble in full swing and the "denial" that anyone was responsible for that bubble except the borrowers!Economics and politics are closely related. Once the economic situation becomes too severe for the common man he will soon adopt a political strategy instead.
A comedian called Mike Harding used to tell a great story about a walker in the countryside who is challenged by a land owner shouting "get orff my land!". Cutting the long story short, the landowner says the land has been in his family for generations, ever since his great great great great grandfather fought for it. "OK" says the walker, "I'll fight you for it now!"
cardigankid said:
ZondaMark said:
Trade balance has nothing to do with recovery. In fact, it's often at it's 'worst' when we're doing best.
How do you work that out?cardigankid said:
When I was at primary school in the fifties we were told that the balance of payments increased before an upturn in the economy because we sucked in raw materials to satisfy orders for our manufacturing industry.
Balance of Payments, by definition, cannot increase or decrease; it balances. What you then say is exactly what would cause an increased trade deficit.cardigankid said:
All this figure represents imho is the inevitable result of trying to pump start an economy that doesn't work. As for the stock market - where do you put your money when it is about to be destroyed by inflation? Not in a savings account, that's for sure.
Stocks are generally a good hedge against inflation, as munky has said.cardigankid said:
Plus it is so easily manipulated by your mates in the hedge funds.
If that were so, why would anyone else bother to participate?Edited by ZondaMark on Thursday 13th January 11:42
Edited by ZondaMark on Thursday 13th January 11:47
FAO anyone who thinks we don't make anything anymore:
The future of UK manufacturing: Reports of its death are greatly exaggerated
The future of UK manufacturing: Reports of its death are greatly exaggerated
And you place credence on a report produced by PWC paid for by persons unknown? How many dodgy companies have they signed off accounts for? I suppose that this is where the employment is going to come from to take up those made redundant from the public sector.
I did not say that the UK had no manufacturing industry. It has a number of very good manufacturers, particularly of motor cars. It has to be said however that every one of these would be down the toilet if it were not for American money and German organisation. Where are Aston's engines built today? Oh, yes, Germany.
What I said was that manufacturing represents 12% of GDP. What is paying the other 88%? Hot air, graphic design and PR spin, like your PWC report. It's not worth wiping your backside with.
I did not say that the UK had no manufacturing industry. It has a number of very good manufacturers, particularly of motor cars. It has to be said however that every one of these would be down the toilet if it were not for American money and German organisation. Where are Aston's engines built today? Oh, yes, Germany.
What I said was that manufacturing represents 12% of GDP. What is paying the other 88%? Hot air, graphic design and PR spin, like your PWC report. It's not worth wiping your backside with.
Edited by cardigankid on Thursday 13th January 13:09
cardigankid said:
And you place credence on a report produced by PWC paid for by persons unknown? How many dodgy companies have they signed off accounts for?
Along the bottom of every graph reads: "Source: UK Office for National Statistics/Bank of England/EuroStat/etc". cardigankid said:
I did not say that the UK had no manufacturing industry.
Nor did I say you did: I said:
FAO anyone who thinks we don't make anything anymore:
cardigankid said:
What I said was that manufacturing represents 12% of GDP. What is paying the other 88%?
Other things which add value.Perhaps it would help if you offered evidence to support your claims.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff