Icesave - please think before you apply

ashtondav

ICICI

Indian authorities routinely turn a blind eye to both child labour and the killing/aborting of baby girls (girls being a liability and boys an asset in India because of dowries).

Sounds worse than whaling.

I vividly remember as a student in the '70s boycotting barclays because of their activity in apartheid South Africa. Did it bring apartheid down? did it b****cks - it just reduced employment for poor south africans.

lidlest

Chrismaths wrote:

I have to say that I would be far less likely to save/invest with a company if they were so far up their own bums as to have a policy on something that has nothing to do with them!
Landsbanki have nothing to do with whaling, if you don't like whaling and want to make some grand gesture, write to the Icelandic government, or the fishermen who's livelihoods depend on it, and tell them they are naughty, naughty people. But don't think that not putting your tuppence ha'penny with a bank totally unrelated to their government's decisions has any logical basis.

It's the same as saying if you don't like the war in Iraq, don't shop in British shops.

The fishermen, who you say have livelihoods that depend on whaling, have managed just fine (not great, fine) for 15 years. This is just human arrogance on a large scale in effect, we have no right to deplete the worlds resources for our own gain. The animal kingdom is very balanced, and no animal will by itself, eat its prey into extinction. Human's are different, we take and take and take, we destroy habitats and there associated flora and fauna and think everything will be ok tomorrow.

And before I am asked, I eat organic meat and Veg from sustainable (and if possible small-scale, fairtrade) farms. I will pay extra to do so, I offset my carbon emissions and recycle. I do everything humanly possible to live sustainably whilst still living. I believe I will get the argument that i should be living in a hut, off the land with no computer, vehicle etc... however, i would argue back that problems in the world are not caused by my one-car environmentally concious home.

pksaraf

if we take the same view point as the whaling issue, then whoever amongst us does not support the war in iraq, shouldnt support anything in UK as the uk govt supported it, which in turns means all the businesses in uk support it, including all the residents of uk. does this mean we should stop working/living supporting our country?... please dont flame, its just a thought / opinion...

lidlest

pksaraf wrote:

if we take the same view point as the whaling issue, then whoever amongst us does not support the war in iraq, shouldnt support anything in UK as the uk govt supported it, which in turns means all the businesses in uk support it, including all the residents of uk. does this mean we should stop working/living supporting our country?... please dont flame, its just a thought / opinion...

Well I won't be voting Labour

Paul_Herring

I think that legal murder of people who have committed terrible crimes is a lot more justified than killing whales.

As far as I can make out, humans aren't an endangered species. Capital punishment isn't going to wipe out an entire species.

Did you both miss the word 'parody' in my post? Pehaps the omission of lots and lots of smileys failed to get across that I was having a dig at people who think that *others* shouldn't use a company if the country the company started in does or condones something the poster considers 'wrong.'

(And for some reason you both seem to think that killing animals is a worse 'crime' than killing other humans[1][2]. How strange.)


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution
[2] http://news.google.co.uk/news?q=Mirza-Tahir+Hussain

[Deleted User]

I thought 'clean' payer just meant that there were no hidden bonuses in the headline rate. Silly me.

Chrismaths

I can't take any more of this self-riteous wrong-headed clap trap. As soon as someone says that state sanctioned murder is better than hunting whales, you know there is no point listening to that person. I'd actually quite like some of these environmental loonies to get elected, just so that their true beliefs get exposed to the oxygen of debate, and go down in flames. Mad as a box of frogs. :eek:

I think hunting endangered species is spectacularly stupid, and responsible governments would ban it. I don't particularly like whaling either. But I can't come up with a decent argument for why because I don't like something, it should be banned. That's just fascism. If they hunt sustainably, there's no reason they shouldn't. Animals are not human beings. Some are meat, some are clothes, some are pets. Whales are meat.

How this relates to banking is beyond me. I'm off to shoot something furry.

Rafter

ashtondav wrote:

Indian authorities routinely turn a blind eye to both child labour and the killing/aborting of baby girls (girls being a liability and boys an asset in India because of dowries).

Sounds worse than whaling.

I vividly remember as a student in the '70s boycotting barclays because of their activity in apartheid South Africa. Did it bring apartheid down? did it b****cks - it just reduced employment for poor south africans.

Actually the boycott of Barclays, and their subsequent withdrawal from South Africa is credited with being a major turning pouin a major impact on the apartheid movement in South Africa.

Sure it was a kind of sanction and the isolation of South Africa probably hurt both rich and poor but it did show that consumers in the UK could influence the international policy of a company as big as Barclays Bank and that UK consumers would not support companies who tacitly supported the apartheid reguime.

As for ethical moneysaving, unless you boycott all international banks with commercial lending, you are going to end up investing in 3rd world dam projects, sweat shops in India or China and a whole host of global warming activities by energy and transport companies.

If you really want an ethical home for your money look at the co-op bank or a UK building society, then you money will be invested ethically or will just be lent out to uk housebuyers to fund mortgages.

Being a full blown 'moneysaver' is in itself inherently unethical though isn't it?

1. You buy the cheapest possible goods and produce made in the 3rd world and transported unenvironmentally friendly for 1000's of miles by sea or air rather than local, organic but more expensive sustainable goods?

2. You exploit all the marketing loopholes going which means that unsavvy consumers have to pay more or companies make less margin to pay their employees or shareholders (usually pension funds)

3. You invest or borrow where you can get the best returns at the top of the best buy tables, rather than caring about the ethics of the organisation.

Nice to see more and more people on here being more creative about moneysaving though and recycling or reusing stuff rather than fueling consumerism and global warming.

R.

martyn4764

Chrismaths wrote:

As soon as someone says that state sanctioned murder is better than hunting whales, you know there is no point listening to that person.

Absolutely, it struck me as an appalling comment.:mad:



Shoot one for me

DocProc

Additional considerations here, once the ICESAVE account is up and running, and this takes 8 days to happen, might be that

1. You CANNOT PUSH funds into an ICESAVE account from your Nominated Account.

2. There is only one way to use the ICESAVE account and that is by doing ALL PUSHING and ALL PULLING into and out of the ICESAVE account from within the ICESAVE online account itself.