BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Whistling_Neil

Listed below are comments made by Whistling_Neil between Thursday, 19th November 2009 and Tuesday, 1st December 2009 (13 Hours Ago) .

«Newer
Older»

Shouldn't banks work for us? 3:48pm on 01 Dec 2009 #47

Think the original point still holds water since in your example all the different stages can be adequatedly covered by the original phrase:
via an act of labour on a commodity:
by the acts of manufacture, shipping and sale all of which I would describe as acts of work upon the 'commodity'.

The 'useful' function of a bank would be described as it's interaction between the stages - as in provision of the LOC, facilitation of the payments and conversion of currencies, facilitating the transfer of the money between each stage. A fee being taken at each stage.

They are useful but at each stage they do not add value - they only facilitate the process and take their reward out of the process. IN their own right they create nothing.

What banks and financial markets do very successfully is try in interpose themselves in as many stages as possible, even where there is no real need for them, why does a bank need oil or copper - it doesn't but does not stop them playing in those markets.

Where the systemic fault lies is that our systems allow the bank to lend the customer the money to buy the LCD TV. This inflates demand for the TV so the maufacturer needs to make more, they borrow from the bank to fund the expansion. Each place in the chain the bank seeks to lend to create demand where none existed. This is where banks/bankers come to believe they create wealth, for if we had not lent the money then no LCD TVs would have been bought and no LCD TVs made.

In small scale and isolated markets this is broadly beneficial, this is simplistically the whole purpose of FRB to increase the stock of wealth.
However the more money they lend the more they make - so there is an intrinsic and systemic risk of over exuberant lending which is why they need regulating in these activities.

If they are not regulated properly then they blow bubbles and bubbles always go pop.
Shouldn't banks work for us? 2:30pm on 01 Dec 2009 #38

Collectively our government/institutions have become beholden to the financial industry so completely that they have no plan B. From the 80's onwards we have been beholden to the city and financial industry as the driver to economic growth.
Having abandoned a balanced economy in favour of a service based one focussed on the city (net balance of payments benefit to offset the huge sucking in of imports) we are left in an unenviable position, what else to do as a country to pay our way in the world?

Our government is tied at the hip to the finance industry - how else are we to fund PFI, organise asset sales, privatise publicly held assets and companies, fund government debt, funnel funds to needy companies - banks, banks, banks and more banks.

So don't be astonished - one of the earliest lessons in life is never to bite the hand that feeds you.
Banks feed the government and it would be churlish to bite its' hand too hard - so a gentle gumming is all that is ever likely to happen.
Shouldn't banks work for us? 1:02pm on 01 Dec 2009 Shouldn't the banks work for "us"?

Technically no they should not, they are publicly listed or privately held companies and therefore they are bound to work basically solely for the benefit of their shareholders or owners, first and only. That is the foremost legal requirement that is placed upon the boards.

All the things that could be percieved as benefits of banks business to "us" are a by-product of this goal and all industrial processes seek to minimise the unwanted by-products. Local employment, such taxes as they cannot actually avoid/evade, community donations/sponsorships, the very little money they deign to bestow on local suppliers etc. are all just by-products of this one and overriding goal to gather as much money as possible for the benefit of the 'owners'. It is capitalism in it's purest form and without adequate regulation is inherently unstable and prone crashing.

You can see in all these reviews and ideas even after the huge bailouts made to prevent disaster for these private business' that they still throw their weight around. Governments becuase they cannot get together to agree how to do it are being held ransom with basic threats to move our business elsewhere if you put regulations we don't like in place.

You have to view all input from the industry in this light.

What however is patently obvious from the weak kneed response of the worlds governments is that still the various national treasuries are still buying the banks threats to take their business elsewhere. The banks are effectively playing divide and conquer and on current evidence winning handsomely.

The government has the prime opportunity with it's owenership of RBS to redefine how banks should operate - unfortunately they cannot afford to do it. They have to have it run like the gambling houses of old to maximise the resale value for a later date otherwise it will not recover it's money, money it could not afford.
Scotland: Devolution-max or independence-lite? 4:59pm on 27 Nov 2009 A politician actually keeping a promise, whatever next!

p.s. could you not have found a worse picture of him? He may not be an oil painting but that is a really bad photo - was he standing next to Nick Griffin at the time?
Why did Bank of England keep shtoom? 08:15am on 25 Nov 2009 The reason it was secret is obvious, to mangle a well known quote.

To lose one bank is unfortunate but to lose three would look like carelessness.

Without this prop both banks would not have been effectively bust they would have been actually bust which is a very different kettle of fish to consider. Probably the right call but not good for trust in the system long term.
Introducing green cuts 07:43am on 25 Nov 2009 #162
Since you ask I prefer, the fine those who do not do what is right than bribe people with their own money for doing what they should be doing anyway.

Grown up people which is the majority of our population do not need to be bribed to do the right thing and recycle, they just need the councils to make it easy to do it. The rest need prompting in the right direction.
Introducing green cuts 6:01pm on 24 Nov 2009 #126

You could also spin out the line that Nicks blog is doing precisely what it's supposed to which is take attention away from the consequence of Georges headline plan which is to reward people who recycle with vouchers. Bribe them with their own money in other words.

The upshot of which is that every single household in the land would have to have their bins chipped and monitored constantly, administration of the vouchers and scheme be required, and money to pay for it be found. Worthy goal but rubbish idea (sorry).

This separate and basically greenwash idea is the least contentious of his proposals.
Introducing green cuts 5:22pm on 24 Nov 2009 #133

No Gordons plan has already been implemented, wrecking whats left of heavy manufacturing will make a substantial dent in the target. Dither about long enough until the nuclear and coal stations have to shut and job just about done. We won't have any emissions becuase we will have little left to emit them.

Though of course this could just be the result of incompetence rather than a solid greenhouse emissions reduction strategy.
Britain lands key EU foreign policy post 09:19am on 20 Nov 2009 What and inspiring choice the EU council have made in choosing Baroness Ashton. It should provide much inspiration to the legions of unemployed here that you can infact get a job despite having no actually relevant qualifications for it nor a great deal of experience in any relevant area.
Perhaps the Government could run a short course on diplomacy for beginners to get them some basic skills at the Westmonster Jobs (for the party faithful)Center Plus. Ashton could join with Milliband and Amos to provide a quorum for such a course to be run.

This is just a further illustration if one was needed that it is in fact who you know and not what you know that counts in these things as it has ever been.
If you thought it was all over... 1:15pm on 19 Nov 2009 Love the update, I can see David Cameron drafting the letter for Gordon right now.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Whistling_Neil