This banks thing is starting get silly
Discussion
I don't pretend to fully understand the workings of the banks or how they have got the govement by the balls, but the thing that is starting to bug me is, when they were ripping us all off right left and centre, making fortunes out of current accounts, excessive charges and then publishing huge profits, the goverment didn't do a thing, but now it's gone the other way we are expected to do something. we have given them cash to enable them to lend more money, from what i have read all they have done is kept it to bolster their balance sheets.
Now fatboy brown is talking about insurance to underwrite the toxic debts.
How? Why? can I have one just in case any of my customers don't pay?
Now fatboy brown is talking about insurance to underwrite the toxic debts.
How? Why? can I have one just in case any of my customers don't pay?
Edited by Adrian W on Sunday 18th January 10:43
the banking industry is the only private sector that the public sector always bails out. How many arrests? How many prosecutions?
Bankers should, every single one of them, be absolutely ashamed of themselves and their industry. Any other industry would see prosecutions over such mis-management
Bankers should, every single one of them, be absolutely ashamed of themselves and their industry. Any other industry would see prosecutions over such mis-management
It seems they've taken one load of taxpayer's cash, said 'thanks very much', pocketed it, and are now coming back for more billions.
As we pay much of our spare money to the Govt in taxes, then if the Govt gave out loans and did bank accounts, we wouldn't need Banks at all... cut out the middle man as it were...?
As we pay much of our spare money to the Govt in taxes, then if the Govt gave out loans and did bank accounts, we wouldn't need Banks at all... cut out the middle man as it were...?
Simpo Two said:
It seems they've taken one load of taxpayer's cash, said 'thanks very much', pocketed it, and are now coming back for more billions.
As we pay much of our spare money to the Govt in taxes, then if the Govt gave out loans and did bank accounts, we wouldn't need Banks at all... cut out the middle man as it were...?
Ahhh..... what a joyous thought.As we pay much of our spare money to the Govt in taxes, then if the Govt gave out loans and did bank accounts, we wouldn't need Banks at all... cut out the middle man as it were...?
Maybe we could nationalise the utilities as well, just look at how they are 'ripping us off' by not passing on the collapse in whole sale gas/electicity prices...
On and on it goes.....
How about blaming the people not paying their debts? Toxic, in this context, means peoples attitude, expecting a life style they can not afford. Sure there is a generic problem of government believing crazy inflation sustainability, and sure there is scope for more regulation (how many people lie on CC applications when disclosing other debts?), but looking for a single fall guy is naive.
Do you think I, as a "banker", am happy at my tax pounds going to fund banks, who funded people with the "must have it now attitude"? Am I happy that I will have to pay more tax?
Let the fun begin
Do you think I, as a "banker", am happy at my tax pounds going to fund banks, who funded people with the "must have it now attitude"? Am I happy that I will have to pay more tax?
Let the fun begin
madala said:
.....banks and bankers.....bunch of 'feckin b'stards the lot of them......
I would be interested to hear what people's definition of a banker is. The guys at the top, those who make the strategy, well they're bankers (quite often in both senses of the word 
) but what about the people who work in IT or contact centres, are they bankers too?Ultra Violent said:
How about blaming the people not paying their debts? Toxic, in this context, means peoples attitude, expecting a life style they can not afford. Sure there is a generic problem of government believing crazy inflation sustainability, and sure there is scope for more regulation (how many people lie on CC applications when disclosing other debts?), but looking for a single fall guy is naive.
Do you think I, as a "banker", am happy at my tax pounds going to fund banks, who funded people with the "must have it now attitude"? Am I happy that I will have to pay more tax?
Let the fun begin
With 10 years of evidence about irresponsible lending practices I think the banking sector has no leg to stand onDo you think I, as a "banker", am happy at my tax pounds going to fund banks, who funded people with the "must have it now attitude"? Am I happy that I will have to pay more tax?
Let the fun begin
CobolMan said:
madala said:
.....banks and bankers.....bunch of 'feckin b'stards the lot of them......
I would be interested to hear what people's definition of a banker is. The guys at the top, those who make the strategy, well they're bankers (quite often in both senses of the word ) but what about the people who work in IT or contact centres, are they bankers too?
No, of course not! They are IT specialists and call centre operatives! If you are the IT guy at a school are you a teacher?It does not include info on your assets that were used as "collateral". My misses claimed to own cars that she didn't, she even claimed to own her parents house. I had (yes really), the FBI ring me up when she moved to the US. It was only at this stage did I see the full extent of how easy it was to play the market.
Adrian W said:
can I have one just in case any of my customers don't pay?
I'd guess the government will end up becoming a trade indemnifier of last resort.The French government have.
Focussing on the banks, even though they do make up a significant amount of our GDP is somewhat short sighted I feel.
Consider how many businesses use property backed security. If businesses are keeling over left, right and centre due to not being able to obtain insured credit lines, the debt potentially left by those businesses that were underwritten by property at n value leaves a somewhat glaring hole if property falls back to the 3.5x multiplier that many expect it to which represents something like a 45% fall from peak.
Edited by Plotloss on Sunday 18th January 12:06
Adrian W said:
I don't pretend to fully understand the workings of the banks or how they have got the govement by the balls, but the thing that is starting to bug me is, when they were ripping us all off right left and centre, making fortunes out of current accounts, excessive charges and then publishing huge profits, the goverment didn't do a thing, but now it's gone the other way we are expected to do something. we have given them cash to enable them to lend more money, from what i have read all they have done is kept it to bolster their balance sheets.
Now fatboy brown is talking about insurance to underwrite the toxic debts.
How? Why? can I have one just in case any of my customers don't pay?
Sorry, but you clearly understand NOTHING about the banking industry. The problems here have not arisen as a result of Dave the branch manager and Tania behind the counter. They are utterly irrelevant to this.Now fatboy brown is talking about insurance to underwrite the toxic debts.
How? Why? can I have one just in case any of my customers don't pay?
Edited by Adrian W on Sunday 18th January 10:43
Soovy said:
Sorry, but you clearly understand NOTHING about the banking industry. The problems here have not arisen as a result of Dave the branch manager and Tania behind the counter. They are utterly irrelevant to this.
But it's a lot easier to blame them than the feckless borrowers who saved nothing and borrowed everything.Bing o said:
Soovy said:
Sorry, but you clearly understand NOTHING about the banking industry. The problems here have not arisen as a result of Dave the branch manager and Tania behind the counter. They are utterly irrelevant to this.
But it's a lot easier to blame them than the feckless borrowers who saved nothing and borrowed everything.Soovy said:
Sorry, but you clearly understand NOTHING about the banking industry. The problems here have not arisen as a result of Dave the branch manager and Tania behind the counter. They are utterly irrelevant to this.
quite right, however, there is a strong argument that the directors etc should be acountable - after all, they (supposidly) set the lending policies etc..for example, the clown (Sir Fred Goodwin) at RBS that lent £2.5B to Leonid Blavatnik (another Russian so called billionare), now written off as his company (chemical giant LyondellBasell) is some £18B in debt and about to go under.
Bet he's not exactly worriying where his next meal is comming from or paying his mortgage etc...
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff