aintforever Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 I don't have a problem with bankers or others getting big bonuses, although morally I find the level of greed utterly repulsive. The thing I have a problem with is the fact that our government is completely powerless to do anything. Soon, when the cuts kick in, we will be laying off police, nurses, our armed forces and other vital workers in their thousands while the banks continue to make billions for themselves. They are ruthless money making machines devoid of any morals or decency, they should not be in control of our governments, it should be the other way round - for all our good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 I don't have a problem with bankers or others getting big bonuses, although morally I find the level of greed utterly repulsive. The thing I have a problem with is the fact that our government is completely powerless to do anything. Soon, when the cuts kick in, we will be laying off police, nurses, our armed forces and other vital workers in their thousands while the banks continue to make billions for themselves. They are ruthless money making machines devoid of any morals or decency, they should not be in control of our governments, it should be the other way round - for all our good. will you be cheering on saints in the premier league and idolising our best players.....who will earn a **** load of cash for playing a game and not really doing much more..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 will you be cheering on saints in the premier league and idolising our best players.....who will earn a **** load of cash for playing a game and not really doing much more..? I don't remember us, the tax payer, bailing out SFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 I don't remember us, the tax payer, bailing out SFC. but then banks create wealth also...football players do feck all.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilko Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 I think it's not so great that the publicly-owned banks are giving out big bonuses. It's not quite like your local council giving officers a bonus, but it's almost like it. As for the completely private banks, I'm not sure I have such a problem with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solentstars Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 I don't have a problem with bankers or others getting big bonuses, although morally I find the level of greed utterly repulsive. The thing I have a problem with is the fact that our government is completely powerless to do anything. Soon, when the cuts kick in, we will be laying off police, nurses, our armed forces and other vital workers in their thousands while the banks continue to make billions for themselves. They are ruthless money making machines devoid of any morals or decency, they should not be in control of our governments, it should be the other way round - for all our good.good post somes up the way greed has taken over rather than doing the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 Greed is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 but then banks create wealth also...football players do feck all.. Football creates wealth as well, just look at Peter Storrie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 Football creates wealth as well, just look at Peter Storrie. indeed..and you also feed football too (sky, tickets, shirts etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerBadger Posted 13 January, 2011 Share Posted 13 January, 2011 Unfortunatley the sort of people the banking industry attracts and the sort of people that do well are by their very nature driven by the need to accumalate wealth which by and large means they are self centred, competitve to a fault individuals that have very little time for the bigger picture. That's why it's so heavily incentivised. Salvation Army people do their job because they're essentially programmed to help other, bankers help themselves. Would like to see the government grow some balls but would that drive them away, banking is a huge industry in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 14 January, 2011 Share Posted 14 January, 2011 Without knowing the bank involved its hard to be specific, but I'd be exteremely surprised if that bank werent benefitting from the continuing central banks provsion of guarantees and liquidity. JPMorganChase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mao Cap Posted 14 January, 2011 Share Posted 14 January, 2011 Very amusing, but if you believe in Socialism you do not care for Britain. Ask yourself why Germany is the strongest economy is Europe. In case you don't know i'll tell you. It is because they are fruegal and right wing. If you care about our country and it's people you'd never ever want us to be like Mediteranian Europe or the old eastern block. And i'll repeat that the reason that China and India are now booming is because they are taking their inspiration from great civilisations of old. We have lost our way in this country thanks to Socialism and until the electorate wake up to historical precedents our decline will not be reversed. Woah woah woah woah woah, back up...you what??? Even with Merkel and the CDU in charge Germany is far to the left of the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefunkygibbons Posted 14 January, 2011 Share Posted 14 January, 2011 I will be happy for the Government to regulate banker's bonuses when they also regulate wages to Underground train drivers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 14 January, 2011 Author Share Posted 14 January, 2011 According to IFS its 12.8% of income tax not 27% of total tax take - two very different figures. They do however own 22% of UK wealth. So the owners of 22% of the wealth pay 12.8% of the tax. Hmm. According to that right wing loudhailer of hated - the BBC - they have quoted HMRC at saying the top 1% pay 24.1% http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm - that was using financial year 2008's figures. Since then, with tax rises the figure has gone up to 27%. So the owners of 22% of the nation's wealth pay (at least) 24% of the nation's taxes, hmm. Face facts, without these Banker's (I'm talking about the vast, vast majority that work for non bailed out banks) taxes we wouldn't have anywhere near the level of public services we currently "enjoy"! As for those that work in branches not getting the same level of bonuses well..... These individuals on the counter or selling you a mortgage, life insurance, Credit Card etc make their company £000's a year and they get a profit share bonus of around 10% of their salary, not bad I'd say. The Investment bankers (who work double the hours, no lunch breaks, half the holiday, 100x the stress and huge amounts of knowledge and qualifications required to trade other individual's and institution's money) get paid based on the £000000's the company and their clients make. If those in the branch have a problem with this there is absolutely nothing stopping them asking their HR department about what is involved in that job. For what it's worth I walked into a job at Nationwide at 17 years old and only GCSE's for qualifications, for my mate with the bonus it has taken 12 years of hard work, exams, sacrifices and a bit of luck to get where he is. By 40 he will most definately be burnt out and will be playing catch up with his kid(s). We should be celebrating bankers bonuses, the taxes on these (rightly pointed out earlier - both by employer and employee) pay for our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services. Good on them, keep up the hard work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 14 January, 2011 Share Posted 14 January, 2011 According to that right wing loudhailer of hated - the BBC - they have quoted HMRC at saying the top 1% pay 24.1% http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm - that was using financial year 2008's figures. Since then, with tax rises the figure has gone up to 27%. So the owners of 22% of the nation's wealth pay (at least) 24% of the nation's taxes, hmm. Face facts, without these Banker's (I'm talking about the vast, vast majority that work for non bailed out banks) taxes we wouldn't have anywhere near the level of public services we currently "enjoy"! As for those that work in branches not getting the same level of bonuses well..... These individuals on the counter or selling you a mortgage, life insurance, Credit Card etc make their company £000's a year and they get a profit share bonus of around 10% of their salary, not bad I'd say. The Investment bankers (who work double the hours, no lunch breaks, half the holiday, 100x the stress and huge amounts of knowledge and qualifications required to trade other individual's and institution's money) get paid based on the £000000's the company and their clients make. If those in the branch have a problem with this there is absolutely nothing stopping them asking their HR department about what is involved in that job. For what it's worth I walked into a job at Nationwide at 17 years old and only GCSE's for qualifications, for my mate with the bonus it has taken 12 years of hard work, exams, sacrifices and a bit of luck to get where he is. By 40 he will most definately be burnt out and will be playing catch up with his kid(s). We should be celebrating bankers bonuses, the taxes on these (rightly pointed out earlier - both by employer and employee) pay for our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services. Good on them, keep up the hard work! I would agree with you in normal circumstances But if the Tax Payer had not helped to bailout the banks they would not be able to earn large bonuses So for a year or two I think the bonuses should be taxed highly for large amounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 15 January, 2011 Share Posted 15 January, 2011 We should be celebrating bankers bonuses, the taxes on these (rightly pointed out earlier - both by employer and employee) pay for our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services. Good on them, keep up the hard work! Except the greedy ****ers wouldn't even have a job if the taxes of our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services hadn't have bailed them out. Now because of the banks our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services will be made redundant in their thousands while the banks continue to suck billions out of the economy. We bailed them out, only fair they do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 According to that right wing loudhailer of hated - the BBC - they have quoted HMRC at saying the top 1% pay 24.1% http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm - that was using financial year 2008's figures. Since then, with tax rises the figure has gone up to 27%. So the owners of 22% of the nation's wealth pay (at least) 24% of the nation's taxes, hmm. Face facts, without these Banker's (I'm talking about the vast, vast majority that work for non bailed out banks) taxes we wouldn't have anywhere near the level of public services we currently "enjoy"! As for those that work in branches not getting the same level of bonuses well..... These individuals on the counter or selling you a mortgage, life insurance, Credit Card etc make their company £000's a year and they get a profit share bonus of around 10% of their salary, not bad I'd say. The Investment bankers (who work double the hours, no lunch breaks, half the holiday, 100x the stress and huge amounts of knowledge and qualifications required to trade other individual's and institution's money) get paid based on the £000000's the company and their clients make. If those in the branch have a problem with this there is absolutely nothing stopping them asking their HR department about what is involved in that job. For what it's worth I walked into a job at Nationwide at 17 years old and only GCSE's for qualifications, for my mate with the bonus it has taken 12 years of hard work, exams, sacrifices and a bit of luck to get where he is. By 40 he will most definately be burnt out and will be playing catch up with his kid(s). We should be celebrating bankers bonuses, the taxes on these (rightly pointed out earlier - both by employer and employee) pay for our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services. Good on them, keep up the hard work! That must be one of the most idiotic arguments I've seen on here, and when you think of the crap that Dune posts on a regular basis, that really is saying something. Remind me how many billions the taxpayer paid to save the banks.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 That must be one of the most idiotic arguments I've seen on here, and when you think of the crap that Dune posts on a regular basis, that really is saying something. Remind me how many billions the taxpayer paid to save the banks.... I agree...those bank who were bailed out should not be handing out massive amounts of money till they repaid their debt. however...those banks who did not get bailed out can dish out what ever bonus they like......right..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 Except the greedy ****ers wouldn't even have a job if the taxes of our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services hadn't have bailed them out. Now because of the banks our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services will be made redundant in their thousands while the banks continue to suck billions out of the economy. We bailed them out, only fair they do the same. All these workers that you have named are in the Public Sector so the taxes that they pay are taken out of their salaries which have been paid by taxes on the private sector, which includes bankers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 That must be one of the most idiotic arguments I've seen on here, and when you think of the crap that Dune posts on a regular basis, that really is saying something. Remind me how many billions the taxpayer paid to save the banks.... At the moment the British taxpayer is about £20bn up on the deal, and rising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 I will be happy for the Government to regulate banker's bonuses when they also regulate wages to Underground train drivers Good point. That just about sums it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjwills Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 That must be one of the most idiotic arguments I've seen on here, and when you think of the crap that Dune posts on a regular basis, that really is saying something. Remind me how many billions the taxpayer paid to save the banks.... I agree...those bank who were bailed out should not be handing out massive amounts of money till they repaid their debt. however...those banks who did not get bailed out can dish out what ever bonus they like......right..? TDD I agree with you totally on this banks that were not bailed out should have the right to pay their employees what they want, but those that fecked up should have bonuses seriously capped until the debt is paid off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 At the moment the British taxpayer is about £20bn up on the deal, and rising. So you will be voting Labour next election? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 So you will be voting Labour next election? Now you're being silly... The £20bn is more than offset by the wasted billions. Besides, there's more to sound government than a Profit & Loss account. As far as bank bonuses go, I find them deeply repulsive. They also encourage excessive risk-taking which was one of the main causes of the collapse in financial confidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 A good friend of mine that works for a well known Investment Bank in the City has been told his bonus today. over £300k, a record for him thanks to the hard graft on top of high intelligence and a knack of making his clients and his emplyers millions of pounds. The disgusting thing is that he will be paying 52% tax on it, bang out of order when the workshy types that can only be bothered to get a crappy job after failing at School pay less than 20%! The top 1% of earners (anyone over £150k per year) will pay 27% of the tax in this country according to HMRC. If I was him I'd move to Switzerland! A ?? I fall into the 40% tax bracket, it sucks but at the end of the day i take home more than i did when i was paying 20% tax. I don't see what the fuss is, no doubt he is very very comfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 Now you're being silly... The £20bn is more than offset by the wasted billions. Besides, there's more to sound government than a Profit & Loss account. As far as bank bonuses go, I find them deeply repulsive. They also encourage excessive risk-taking which was one of the main causes of the collapse in financial confidence. I would like to see more bonuses paid out in shares (which can't be cashed in for 5-10 years). This still gives the renumeration, but links it to the success of the bank over the medium to long term. This would put an end to the short term gambling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 Even a bank boss thinks bankers get paid too much! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12209241 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 All these workers that you have named are in the Public Sector so the taxes that they pay are taken out of their salaries which have been paid by taxes on the private sector, which includes bankers. I only named those workers because they were who he named, all our taxes (public and private) bailed out the banks when they ****ed up and it's just a matter of time before we have to do it again because nothing has changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 Even a bank boss thinks bankers get paid too much! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12209241 I think most people are in broad agreement that they get paid "too much" (or sentiments to that effect) The difference is that some people accept it as a necessary evil and others want to reign in their wealth earning potential. And, as always, there are valid arguments on both sides of that particular debate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 17 January, 2011 Share Posted 17 January, 2011 Even a bank boss thinks bankers get paid too much! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12209241 ... and they draw comparisons with Premier League players http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 18 January, 2011 Author Share Posted 18 January, 2011 Except the greedy ****ers wouldn't even have a job if the taxes of our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services hadn't have bailed them out. Now because of the banks our Armed Forces, Nurses, Teachers, Doctors, Bin men and social services will be made redundant in their thousands while the banks continue to suck billions out of the economy. We bailed them out, only fair they do the same. Eh? What taxes of yours or mine bailed out JPMorgan? Only RBS and Lloyds were bailed out - I love the way everyone blames ALL bankers when the vast, vast majority are creating massive wealth for their companies, clients, shareholders and themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 Even a bank boss thinks bankers get paid too much! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12209241 I wonder how much he gets paid? I am sure that it is a lot, and that he has a comfortable lifestyle that allows him to say this. Interesting bit. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/25/bonus-rbs-bankers What I find strange is that people go on and on about bonuses painting a picture that seems to suggest that every banker gets millions, which really isn't the case. From the link above, I like this bit; "The RBS bonus pot equates to an average of £80,000 each for the 16,800 investment banking staff, on top of an average salary of £80,000. "Quite a few" bankers did not get a bonus, Hampton added." I know that it is an average, but still, less than Wayne Bridge earns in a fortnight. Or what Tevez earns in a couple of days from his basic wage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 Eh? What taxes of yours or mine bailed out JPMorgan? Only RBS and Lloyds were bailed out - I love the way everyone blames ALL bankers when the vast, vast majority are creating massive wealth for their companies, clients, shareholders and themselves. You're being VERY economical with the truth. £137bn went on actual bailouts, but the British taxpayer's total liability for the bailout is £512bn - the remainder (and obviously the far larger amount) having been committed in the form of guarantees to prop up the creaking banking system. Interest payments alone on funds actually committed is currently costing the taxpayer about £5bn a year. All of which is why I assumed you were joking when you started this thread. Bankers are the state-handout spongers nonpareil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 Eh? What taxes of yours or mine bailed out JPMorgan? Only RBS and Lloyds were bailed out - I love the way everyone blames ALL bankers when the vast, vast majority are creating massive wealth for their companies, clients, shareholders and themselves. Taking wealth, not creating wealth. If I manage to grab loads of cash for myself I havn't created anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 I only named those workers because they were who he named, all our taxes (public and private) bailed out the banks when they ****ed up and it's just a matter of time before we have to do it again because nothing has changed. Fair enough. Things have changed. Banks now have to have a greater credit margin, or whatever it's called, a larger part of their assets has to be in cash. They are gradually rebuilding their balance sheets and are unlikely to make the same mistakes as before... ... until the next time. It was a failure of regulation as much as slack banking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 (edited) I wonder how much he gets paid? I am sure that it is a lot, and that he has a comfortable lifestyle that allows him to say this. Interesting bit. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/25/bonus-rbs-bankers What I find strange is that people go on and on about bonuses painting a picture that seems to suggest that every banker gets millions, which really isn't the case. From the link above, I like this bit; "The RBS bonus pot equates to an average of £80,000 each for the 16,800 investment banking staff, on top of an average salary of £80,000. "Quite a few" bankers did not get a bonus, Hampton added." I know that it is an average, but still, less than Wayne Bridge earns in a fortnight. Or what Tevez earns in a couple of days from his basic wage. The average figure is deceiving. The majority of people working in investment banking are doing ordinary routine jobs. I know somebody who works for UBS as a PA to a banker (not director level) who earns £65,000pa and gets a bonus - over £100,000pa as a secretary. The actual bankers are on way more, typically pushing £1m pa by their early 30s. Edited 18 January, 2011 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 Taking wealth, not creating wealth. If I manage to grab loads of cash for myself I havn't created anything. That's very true. Banking services are an essential catalyst for trade, but they are as much an overhead as insurance and in no way are they wealth that has been created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 (edited) Even a bank boss thinks bankers get paid too much! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12209241 And now it seems some of them even get a good wedge just for joining http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jan/17/lloyds-banking-group-bonuses So, they get paid for starting work, they get paid extra (on top of their huge salaries) for doing their jobs properly (or not, in some instances) and some of them get paid handsomely for leaving. Jeez! Edited 18 January, 2011 by bridge too far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 And now it seems some of them even get a good wedge just for joining :shock: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jan/17/lloyds-banking-group-bonuses So, they get paid for starting work, they get paid extra (on top of their huge salaries) for doing their jobs properly and some of them get paid handsomely for leaving. Jeez! good point...I assume you despise football and most other sports too..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 bankers don't create wealth - they just shuffle other peoples money around dressed up as complex financial instruments. And make shedloads of money making leveraged bets with taxpayers money. The bonus levels are completely indefensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 good point...I assume you despise football and most other sports too..? You're right Delldays. The comparison with Pompey is uncanny. Excessive wages leading to collapse and the tax payer getting screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 good point...I assume you despise football and most other sports too..? No but I deplore the ridiculous wages some sportsmen and women earn. But then that's Sky for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 You're being VERY economical with the truth. £137bn went on actual bailouts, but the British taxpayer's total liability for the bailout is £512bn - the remainder (and obviously the far larger amount) having been committed in the form of guarantees to prop up the creaking banking system. Interest payments alone on funds actually committed is currently costing the taxpayer about £5bn a year. All of which is why I assumed you were joking when you started this thread. Bankers are the state-handout spongers nonpareil. The banks have to pay very high levels of interest if they draw on the reserves on offer. The maximum liability will never need to be paid, just having the government's signature at the bottom is enough to ensure that. We have picked up a couple of major banking enterprises for a song, becuase they were on their knees and nobody else could afford it. We shall cash in nicely on the deal, at the right time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 No but I deplore the ridiculous wages some sportsmen and women earn. But then that's Sky for you which would be nothing if we never paid for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 which would be nothing if we never paid for it You going to start the ball rolling then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 I agree...those bank who were bailed out should not be handing out massive amounts of money till they repaid their debt. however...those banks who did not get bailed out can dish out what ever bonus they like......right..? Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 The banks have to pay very high levels of interest if they draw on the reserves on offer. The maximum liability will never need to be paid, just having the government's signature at the bottom is enough to ensure that. We have picked up a couple of major banking enterprises for a song, becuase they were on their knees and nobody else could afford it. We shall cash in nicely on the deal, at the right time. You sound like one of those soothsayers in CNBC. There is no guarantee of anyone 'cashing in nicely'. It's wishful thinking - especially with a government hellbent on double-dipping. The National Audit Office - a rather more reliable judge than you or me - puts the paper loss to the taxpayer, in December 2010, at £90bn. Most of these losses are bound up in toxic assets, much of it in disaggregated and now busted mortgages in the American West and Midwest. The ghost towns and dereliction (have your SEEN Detroit recently?) are as good an indication as you'll ever get just how long a crawl out of the hole it really will be. Recovering taxpayers' 'investments' is going to be a long, painful, fraught process. There is no light at the end of the tunnel yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 You sound like one of those soothsayers in CNBC. There is no guarantee of anyone 'cashing in nicely'. It's wishful thinking - especially with a government hellbent on double-dipping. The National Audit Office - a rather more reliable judge than you or me - puts the paper loss to the taxpayer, in December 2010, at £90bn. Most of these losses are bound up in toxic assets, much of it in disaggregated and now busted mortgages in the American West and Midwest. The ghost towns and dereliction (have your SEEN Detroit recently?) are as good an indication as you'll ever get just how long a crawl out of the hole it really will be. Recovering taxpayers' 'investments' is going to be a long, painful, fraught process. There is no light at the end of the tunnel yet. Once the RBS share price reaches about 56p then we have broken even on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 Once the RBS share price reaches about 56p then we have broken even on it. A very narrow view which ignores the fact that massive UK bank losses on bad speculative investments in the US and Ireland have lost billions for pension funds - yours and mine, increased the cost of government borrowing necessitating higher taxes and £200bn of quantitative easing which has deflated the pound and pushed up the cost of imports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 18 January, 2011 Share Posted 18 January, 2011 (edited) A very narrow view which ignores the fact that massive UK bank losses on bad speculative investments in the US and Ireland have lost billions for pension funds - yours and mine, increased the cost of government borrowing necessitating higher taxes and £200bn of quantitative easing which has deflated the pound and pushed up the cost of imports. That's a different argument. We were looking at the direct cost to the British Government of underwriting the british banking system, on which we shall come out ahead of the game. The global recession has cost almost everybody one hell of a lot more than that. My pension fund is unaffected by any of this, but only because I don't have one. I think you'll find that the colossal overspending in the last 10 years plays a far greater role in the need for higher taxation than dodgy bank investments. Edited 18 January, 2011 by Whitey Grandad typos - I blame the keyboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now