Biggest financial scam in history

Generali

lostinrates wrote: »

I get that many, many people feel regulation isn't sufficient. i don't pretend to know. Where I gaze over is where people say there is no or no real regulation. I've ''lost'' DH to too many hours working here, or on the phone, dealing with regulation to think its non-existant.

Banking was one of the most regulated industries in the UK. The problem wasn't under regulation, it was bad regulation.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

Banking was one of the most regulated industries in the UK. The problem wasn't under regulation, it was bad regulation.

Agreed.

I think the remit of the FSA was too wide, covering all sorts of consumerist issues, which in the greater scheme of things, didn't have a big impact.

It's been well covered elsewhere, but how exactly do you stop banks poaching staff from the FSA, and in essence staying one step ahead of the regulators? Salaries of FSA investigators were still below what they could earn outside.

Generali

kabayiri wrote: »

Agreed.

I think the remit of the FSA was too wide, covering all sorts of consumerist issues, which in the greater scheme of things, didn't have a big impact.

It's been well covered elsewhere, but how exactly do you stop banks poaching staff from the FSA, and in essence staying one step ahead of the regulators? Salaries of FSA investigators were still below what they could earn outside.

The only way is to pay people working for the FSA what they'd get at a bank (possibly adjusted for pension and higher job security). It'll never happen as people moan when anyone working for the State earns more than a pittance.

dopester

Generali wrote: »

The only way is to pay people working for the FSA what they'd get at a bank (possibly adjusted for pension and higher job security). It'll never happen as people moan when anyone working for the State earns more than a pittance.

In a way that sort of thing reminds me of Fred Goodwin type of arguments justifying an outrageous salary, for his expertise in blindly boom-head buying whatever took his fancy at ever more risky . If we're not prepared to pay such mega-salaries then he could be "poached" by a US bank. :rotfl:

The FSA should concentrate on attracting sharp intelligent minds who are driven by beliefs they are "doing good" at the FSA, instead of those who are easily turned by a bank flashing a tempting higher salary at them for their FSA experience.

Sean Martin
What makes you stay at the FSA?
I enjoy it. The pay is less than one would receive in private practice (at least in a city law practice), but the work is more interesting and the environment is better. Most of my colleagues feel that their work is important and that it is capable of making a difference. I have not encountered the cynicism that sometimes infects lawyers in private practice or, for different reasons, those in civil service.

Also if you're not happy with the FSA... just leave. You can be replaced easily enough. There are going to be fewer regulatory secrets to stay one step ahead of regulators, or do things to remain on their sweet side. Leave and take your chance with the banks. There are more than enough fine people to replace you with, very happy with FSA pay rates, and ever more people who have belief in making a real difference.

(BTW Afriend, I don't believe debt-liquidation was a short sharp shock in the US Great Depression. Debt liquidation was significantly resisted.)

purch

With what would you replace fractional reserve banking, please?

No answer I see !!!

What a shock !!!! :eek:

Fractional Reserve Banking = BAD cos they saw it in a stupid video on YouTube.

Before they saw that video (5 minutes ago) they hadn't even heard of the concept.

samclam

Before I mention a better alternative to our Fractional Reserve Banking system let me outline a few of it's major failings:

Banks have the rather unusual privilege of being able to conjure new money out of thin air, which they lend to us and charge interest for! Ok they have to keep 10% or so of what they have lent in reserve but what was lent is used as the basis for more lending so it winds done to more like 1% in reserve, which is almost zero. Wouldn't you be laughing if you could make something out of nothing and charge people for using it? So the banks have a grossly unfair advantage and level of control over us.

In a fair system money is nothing more than lubrication for the trading of goods and services. It should not be attributed any special qualities in it's own right. And banks should merely provide a service to help with it's storage and movement. They should not be the creators of our Money and they should not charge us 'Rent' for using it!

The public should own all the money in circulation not the banks owning 99% of it! The Treasury being publicly owned (at least I hope it is) should produce and regulate the exact amount of money available. It would be regulated to keep inflation at a minimum and employment at a maximum.

The current set up, with the dubiously owned & managed Bank of England and the High St banks etc, pretends to do this but collectively owns 99% of our money and charges us various levels of interest to use it. Now if you don't think that is a con, God help you!

Not only that, if they decide to contract the money supply, bang, instant recession - which is just what we've got. And the canny ones go on a spending spree buying up real world assets at rock bottom prices.

The Fractional Reserve Banking system is inherently flawed because there can never be enough money available to repay both the loans and the interest. So the system keeps growing by making more loans to pay old interest. As the amount of money (really debt) grows we get inflation and people's savings loose their value.

purch

It is normally good manners to at the very least, give 'props' to the author of the stuff you post on a forum.

Nobody would want to see MSE get into trouble for breaching copyright laws :eek:

samclam

purch wrote: »

... give 'props' to the author ..

The very informative "Money as Debt" video was made by Paul Grignon.

Conrad

samclam wrote: »

banks should merely provide a service to help with it's storage and movement. They should not be the creators of our Money and they should not charge us 'Rent' for using it!

If there was no demand, we would'nt pay the interest.

Why don't you set up a new money storage company and show us all how it should be done.

nearlynew

Conrad wrote: »

If there was no demand, we would'nt pay the interest.

Why don't you set up a new money storage company and show us all how it should be done.

congratulations on completely missing the point.