BBC Blog Network

User Profile

anothermrmicawber

Listed below are comments made by anothermrmicawber between Monday, 1st December 2008 and Friday, 5th June 2009.

«Newer
Older»

We get £2.3bn back from Lloyds 5:42pm on 05 Jun 2009 The direct link to that article is:

http://ganeshinthecity.blogspot.com/2009/02/synthetic-money-brings-house-down.html
We get £2.3bn back from Lloyds 5:41pm on 05 Jun 2009 Sorry, article on Syntheic CDOs at:

http://ganeshinthecity.blogspot.com/2009/02/synthetic-money-brings-house-down.html
We get £2.3bn back from Lloyds 5:36pm on 05 Jun 2009 It seems premature to be sitting anything but uneasily on the value of banks. In the Great Depression there was a suckers rally just like we are having now and it was the collapse of an Austrian Bank which triggered a massive new collapse similar to the one we have all just been through.

The banks have stretched accounting rules to the limit and possibly beyond to get off the critical list; the reality of deleveraging is now hitting home in the Eastern European countries and their currencies are devaluing at a truly astonishing rat; German banks have only dealt with about 20% of the losses they know are on the books. And remember derivatives, and synthetic CDOs (concise and clear article at www.ganeshinthecity.blogspot.com) - well they haven't gone away and as loan defaults are rising this particular house of cards is set to come down like the twin towers.

I am not being alarmist. These are facts. Unlike the banks, we cannot simply pass these issues to the public purse and start calling them "legacy assets" like they came from someone else. It was the banks who created these "assets" (puhlease), and we are the beneficiaries of the will of the deceased.

The news seems to have been skewed to green shoots - has a call gone out fron on high to editors. Robert, what is going on in the Eastern European countries has all the making of the next wave of crisis. Why are you not on the case?
Should we save building societies? 8:47pm on 12 May 2009 And who gets to choose who gets saved?

In the US its the "Fed", and we ar eled to believe that is the Government. But as Bloomberg reports today "The trustees..(of AIG) were appointed in January by the New York Fed, a private institution owned by member banks...".

It is time that shouts of "conspiracy theorist" were met with the question "Which one of the facts do you dispute?".
Royal Mail and HMG's creative accounting 5:38pm on 11 May 2009 With a "culture" of expenses claiming as it is in Westminster is it lesurprising that a "fiddle" seems like a good idea to a Minister?

More seriously, the Government appears to have been learning its tricks from its run ins with bankers. It is, indeed, a fiddle - like so much of the fractional reserve banking system, and the "profits" banks are able to claim they are making on the back of their own declining credit ratings.

Never in my near 50tear life have I watched so slack jawed as the future is so willingly torched for the sake of short term expediency. Its sticks in my throat, and the fact that certain ministers take the "whatever it takes" attitude to these proposals leaves me without hope for anything I believed in called a democracy, parliament, public service, collective responsibility, or indeed any responsibility for anything other than short term fixes.

This has got to stop. Only so much can be swept under the carpet of the rather near future.
Should Lloyds pay a bonus? 4:18pm on 06 Feb 2009 Enough.

The iniquity of these bonuses stops now. RBS is crippled. No one except us, the UK taxpayers, will lend money to it. The money we’ve given it exceeds the total of all tax paid by it since 1998. We, the owners, are propping it up while it hemorrhages money. And the bankers want a bonus from the company. Because they’re worth it. And our politicians are more worried about the PR than the actuality.

No. You bankers take a hit as an employee like anyone else. Stay and work your butt off to rebuild the company, and repay the taxpayer who is keeping you in a job. In no other “business” would the bits that make a profit be ring fenced for hefty bonuses when the company is effectively insolvent, the shareholders are wiped out and the taxpayer subsidises the loss making bit and takes on the risk of further losses.

It is time as a society to decide whether we will tolerate this behaviour and do nothing. If you feel moved, please click on a link below to sign an e-petition to 10 Downing Street. Politicians apply a multiplier of several thousand to each signature. This is your chance to be heard.

This one is a petition to stop the banks we are supporting paying bonuses. http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Antidote/

The other is to windfall tax the bonuses http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Taxbankers/
Should bankers repay bonuses? 4:30pm on 05 Feb 2009 The Centre for Economics and Business Research calculates that U.K. bankers alone have reaped more than 31 billion pounds in bonuses over the past four years.

That’s GBP 31,000,000,000. Personal pay. On top of salary.

With no personal risk. And no personal financial investment. In 48 months.

I find it difficult regard this amount of money arriving in bankers personal pockets in such a short time as other than a misappropriation of the assets of the non-banking community, whether legal or not. While technically legal, SIVs, derivatives, CDSs, the off balance sheet charade, and the blind eyes willfully turned to risk management have purposely made a farce of moral hazard and regulation. Regulation that was not the enemy of so called free enterprise, but regulation that was put in place on behalf of society to stop the very things that have happened and to provide stability to a system on which all of us are dependant.

Each and every one of us (and that will include our children) is being forced through taxes to recapitalise banks which are crippled in part because so much cash has been taken out by the people who work(ed) there, and in part because the so called assets created by the bankers (paid commission up front) turn out suddenly to actually be worth pence in the pound.

I deeply resent the economic carnage and personal pain this has caused, and will continue to cause to the people around me and the country I live in. And it is utterly galling that in such a short time many bankers have become rich forever on the proceeds of the very deals we are all having to pay for now.

It is time as a society to decide whether we will tolerate inactively such pain for the many for the excesses of so few. Excesses made in breach of the spirit, if not the letter, of regulation and fiduciary duties owed. It is time to decide whether these same bankers should be publicly shamed or legislated into returning at least a proportion of enormous amount of money extracted up front from deals which have proven cataclysmic for everyone else.

I suggest a six year retrospective tax hike to 50 per cent on all bonuses up to GBP 2 million, and 75 per cent over that. Fair? After all, we are all being asked to retrospectively pay for these excessive bonuses by government borrowing on our behalf to get capital back into the banks.
All banks are safe 5:10pm on 01 Dec 2008 The Centre for Economics and Business Research calculates that U.K. bankers alone have reaped more than 31 billion pounds in bonuses over the past four years.

That’s GBP 31,000,000,000. Personal pay. On top of salary.

With no personal risk. And no personal financial investment. In 48 months.

I find it difficult regard this amount of money arriving in bankers personal pockets in such a short time as other than a misappropriation of the assets of the non-banking community, whether legal or not. While technically legal, SIVs, derivatives, CDSs, the off balance sheet charade, and the blind eyes willfully turned to risk management have purposely made a farce of moral hazard and regulation. Regulation that was not the enemy of so called free enterprise, but regulation that was put in place on behalf of society to stop the very things that have happened and to provide stability to a system on which all of us are dependant.

Each and every one of us (and that will include our children) is being forced through taxes to recapitalise banks which are crippled in part because so much cash has been taken out by the people who work(ed) there, and in part because the so called assets created by the bankers (paid commission up front) turn out suddenly to actually be worth pence in the pound.

I deeply resent the economic carnage and personal pain this has caused, and will continue to cause to the people around me and the country I live in. And it is utterly galling that in such a short time many bankers have become rich forever on the proceeds of the very deals we are all having to pay for now.

It is time as a society to decide whether we will tolerate inactively such pain for the many for the excesses of so few. Excesses made in breach of the spirit, if not the letter, of regulation and fiduciary duties owed. It is time to decide whether these same bankers should be publicly shamed or legislated into returning at least a proportion of enormous amount of money extracted up front from deals which have proven cataclysmic for everyone else.

I suggest a six year retrospective tax hike to 50 per cent on all bonuses up to GBP 2 million, and 75 per cent over that. Fair? After all, we are all being asked to retrospectively pay for these excessive bonuses by government borrowing on our behalf to get capital back into the banks.

«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

anothermrmicawber