Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
roger/baz
you may if you read so many posters on this one subject find im not alone in disagreeing with baz's comments.
you will note in my postings i have acknowledged browns faults, but the banking crisis goes on with no light at the end of the tunnel.
so maybe you two share those glasses?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
No I don't share Barry's glasses; we are both Conservatives - right of centre, perhaps Barry is a little more right than I am, but what he has said about Brown and the Banks is true, no matter how you dress it up.
Roger
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
roger;
what your politics are is neither here nor there, not realy that bothered,
what is important that all posters views are seen, there have been some realy good postings by
reg, ross, marek, alexander, jan
plus many more
i realise you need to have a smokescreen to save your embarressment on leaderless dave
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Everyone is entitled to their view and there are some very intelligent postings from all those you have mentioned and many others too.
I don't need a smoke-screen for anything Keith, least of all your incessant nonsense about "Leaderless Dave" and "Cobbled together Government".
Under the present circumstances - which Labour created, they are doing very well.
Roger
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
It is true that Gordon Brown was the latest in a long line of Chancellors to tinker with the regulatory environment of financial services with almost universally disastrous results from all of them. What the others managed to do, which GB failed to do, was to rectify (partially in most cases) the level of regulation and avert significant disaster - well except Black Wednesday of course...
Absolutely banks need some degree of special regulation to control their behaviour and to ensure that they have adequate risk capital etc. but much of this is covered by international agreements such as Basel II, the currently under negotiation Basel III & Solvency II etc. Domestic regulation needs to ensure adequate segregation and ring-fencing of retail banking and commercial business lending from both traditional asset/investment management and the more speculative investment banking type operations; it is the latter that created and carried the bulk of the toxic debt in the recent crisis and almost lead to disaster for RBS amongst others. There is also a need for some form of statutory (but not necessarily state funded) guarantee/compensation system for retail and business customers in case a retail bank were to ever fail.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Ross, 'black Wednesday' or rather 'white Wednesday' as I prefer, was not so much a failure of regulation but more a result of the failed first attempt at European Monetary Union. Lamont was obliged to take all possible measures under the terms of EMU to defend the £ hence the three interest rates hikes that day, rises that were never going to last the day out and he knew that. Our exit that day from EMU was the catalyst for the UK recovery to start. Like Greece now our interest rate and exchange rate was not right for our economy so we were suffering appallingly in that recession while a member of EMU, exactly what Sir Alan Waters and Mrs T warned about in those long battles that led to our joining EMU.
On your general point. The much needed Financial Services Act was not properly enforced in time to prevent a disaster, the appalling pension mis-selling scandal and endowment over-selling of 1988/89 through to the early 90's.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
roger;
you are correct on this and many subjects many posters have given there opinion, many disagreeing with baz
what a healthy forum we have
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 65.............Realism surfaces.
# 66.............Black and White ?..............Same old confusion.
Rumour has it Mr Osbourne is drastically searching for a Royal Wedding and snow storm.
Ossie now tells us his plans for economic growth have taken another dive.
IMF say drastic cuts (Ossie ) on spending will not permit economic growth.
What is Ossies next plan?............a rebate in Tax for the wealthy to keep them interested in working........When Joe Public is only interested in ........getting work.
All round the world the Bankers and Finance gambling johnies are blamed for the global finance crisis except for a few in this principality and Ossie who blame Mr Brown.
Ossie is gambling on Plan `A` when it all goes pear shape what will be his next excuse?....You guessed it Mr Brown.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
and whilst mr osbourne blames others
the country continues to go under
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Reg Hansell - the only man who really does think that a problem cause by excessive spending and huge levels of debt can be solved by more spending and even higher levels of debt!!!
Not even Ed Balls really believes all that despite what he says, Darling certainly does not though Brown, being deluded enough to think he banned boom and bust might well think it.
Try it with your own finances Reg and see what happens.
That is not financial advice by the way, as a professional financial adviser I would warn everyone against exccessive borrowing and also spending more than your income. Common sense really - pity that for some common sense flies out of the window when it comes to government spending.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
the misery is far from over
we are in it for years to come
well us that suffer will be
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Banking Reform Bill next week.
Banking Reform means safety for `our` money.Keeping it safe from the Finance Casino Johnies.Ossie might try to slow proceedings which will please the gamblers.
Banking Reform Bill will stop another global finance crisis..................Caused by the Bankers and Investment players.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
If that bill is passed into law our strongest bank (HSBC) will move its head office to Paris or back to Hong Kong. Would that be good for the economy?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
Peter of course it wont
In the case of HSBC they are most likely to move back to HK as that is their biggest growth market
Reg to be honest - the Bill wont make a blind bit of difference to the next global financial crisis, as it will be fundamentally the same as the last one and driven by excessive government debt that the issuers cannot pay back when it falls due
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
The difference the Bank Reform Bill will make is Joe Public can walk into their Bank and be told the `Casino` is next door.
Ossie is in favour of the Bill but has not had the bone transplant yet.
However on this occassion he might agree to have the operation.
Have to wait and see................Would be a good `U`turn.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
It's unlikely that any of the banks would move any more than their HQ abroad and, while this would have an impact most financial experts report that other businesses that are currently squeezed out would come to the fore and make up the losses. It would seem to be more about posturing and demonstrating 'potency' which is so important for these testosterone fuelled.
Interestingly the Independent Commission on Banking's Final Report, issued today, "sets out the Commission's recommendations on reforms to improve stability
and competition in UK banking" and reports:
"The provisional conclusions of the Interim Report were that the impact of the recommendations on the competitiveness of the UK would be broadly neutral, and that increased financial stability would be positive for the UK's role and reputation as a financial centre as well as for the wider economy. The Commission believes that the final package of recommendations has strengthened this conclusion".
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
The only major banks capable of moving out of the UK are the only ones currently paying corporation tax here, Barclays and HSBC. As global institutions they presently pay UK tax on their global earnings. The UK forms a small part of their total earnings so the UK will lose the tax on their overseas profits. As company taxes are lower in the US (Barclays' likely destination) and HK, the UK will be a net loser and the banks a big net gainer.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Ossie and Cable approve Bankers Reform Bill.
Should be on the Statute Book this Parliament.Excellent.
Not happy about 2019.Needs to see the Fast Track.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
Before we all start a collection for the bankers let us recall that:
In 2010, HSBC paid £236 million in UK corporation tax despite Europe-wide profits of nearly £2.65 billion.
In 2009, Barclays paid £113m in UK corporation tax - a year when it rang up a record £11.6bn of profits.
To date British taxpayers have stumped up about 1 trillion (£1,000,000,000,000) to make good their incompetence and greed.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Also like Cable`s recommendation that the Banks costs are paid from Bankers Bonus Fund.
That way Joe Public will not be the Pay Masters again