Hard to explain how bad economic crisis is, says Cable

sabretoothtigger

They had to be bailed out and they knew it.

granting them impunity for their actions is the real failure of our government.

This is contradictory. There is a variety of actions that could be taken, I think the best would have been do nothing.
The point is banks already suffer consequences to their actions levied largely by the people they borrow from.
We took that away from them and lent them even more

that they should be held to account.

Sure, let them go hang themselves on their own stupidity.

When Lehmans went broke, Barclays bought up their business from the bankruptcy court
If Lloyds had gone broke or RBS even it would be a dark day but not the end of those businesses just the owners and some of the operators



Special laws add to the problem because you will always favour some people over others.
All people are equally flawed in their desires to be rich and powerful, you must therefore give all people an equal opportunity to make a profit and equally to lose it all no matter who they are

Do not give them special powers in the economy nor lending privileges courtesy of the commoners currency ala BOE.
Trust must be earnt and maintained not legislated for.

Special anything 'they must be saved' will always end in betrayal and failure of that favour, make them work for it every day and it'll involve and benefit all of society


The fallacy is the more of a special case we try to make bankers, the worse it will get. They are apt to fail or succeed same as anyone

kabayiri

There was an article recently which listed the growth in billionaires in different parts of the world.

The truth is that these billionaires from different countries have more in common with each other than their own people.

Perhaps we are witnessing the decline in the influence of the state in many economies? After all, truly wealthy corporations and individuals can shift work and therefore income about the globe nowadays. Once upon a time, it was only the Western countries which made high tech of guaranteed quality, that technology is now available across the globe.

If an organisation no longer has an allegiance to any given country, doesn't that present a problem for governments like ours? They will just look to operate in those places which generates the most profit.

Joe_Bloggs

Somebody has found somebody else to blame:-
‘Complacency’ of auditors contributed to financial crisis

Are wise monkeys any wiser after the facts ?
J_B.

[Deleted User]

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

This is contradictory. There is a variety of actions that could be taken, I think the best would have been do nothing.

You mean just let them fail? Problem with that is we would still have suffered the fallout.

The point is banks already suffer consequences to their actions levied largely by the people they borrow from.
We took that away from them and lent them even more

Sure, let them go hang themselves on their own stupidity.

When Lehmans went broke, Barclays bought up their business from the bankruptcy court
If Lloyds had gone broke or RBS even it would be a dark day but not the end of those businesses just the owners and some of the operators

It wasn't as simple as that the banks stopped lending even to each other.

Special laws add to the problem because you will always favour some people over others.
All people are equally flawed in their desires to be rich and powerful, you must therefore give all people an equal opportunity to make a profit and equally to lose it all no matter who they are

Do not give them special powers in the economy nor lending privileges courtesy of the commoners currency ala BOE.
Trust must be earnt and maintained not legislated for.

Special anything 'they must be saved' will always end in betrayal and failure of that favour, make them work for it every day and it'll involve and benefit all of society


The fallacy is the more of a special case we try to make bankers, the worse it will get. They are apt to fail or succeed same as anyone

We will just have to agree to disagree on this.

From my point of view if someone broke into my home and stole just £50 from me for their own gain I would grievously hurt that person if at all possible. I doubt I'm alone in that.

When I see the people and the country suffering massively from the actions of these b@stards I want to see them punished. Real punishment. Unfortunately, government has sold out and failed us.

On here it seems there are many who work for or otherwise have reason to be apologists for the banks. However I think their guilt is pretty plain to see and I doubt I'm alone in my feelings towards them.

Some sentimental rubbish about human fallibility so lets forget the ruined economy, the job losses, the lower standards of living and let bygones be bygones doesn't really make me feel any better about the issue.

[Deleted User]

Joe_Bloggs wrote: »

Somebody has found somebody else to blame:-
‘Complacency’ of auditors contributed to financial crisis

Are wise monkeys any wiser after the facts ?
J_B.

I think you need to look up the word 'contributed' monkey.

chucky

worldtraveller wrote: »

They continued their prostitution to easy credit. QE just continued the smoke & mirrors illusion, for a time.

so what did you [STRIKE]expect[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]hope[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]wish[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]pray[/STRIKE] want to happen - a complete banking collapse and not try to fix the issues at hand...

sabretoothtigger

Vincie is my favourite nominee for the Nobel Prize for 'saying the bleeding obvious 5 years after everyone else'.

Vince is fairly consistent, more then five years ago he was one of a few mp who warned big debt was a risk to the UK. Brown brushed this advice off
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnpzpGz9xO4

You mean just let them fail? Problem with that is we would still have suffered the fallout.

In bankruptcy the people who suffer worst are the backers of that person or company.
I thought we'd agree that making people pay is a good idea.

The fallout would have been suffered by those bank bond holders most of all. They lose their money, burnt fingers aplenty.

The UK, the government and people via taxes would have lost less if we had taken that route, we would not be paying that bad debt. Im not saying this like its happy days for all but you punish the people closest to the mess first.
What does the common guy know anything about banking, why should he pay higher taxes for politics to save a bank.

A total collapse was used as fear to those who dont know finance, banks can fail and business around it would continue within a week. They sift through the crap and the lies and the good stuff is sold on and reused. Its extremely healthy to throw out rubbish
You cant turn the crap into anything better then it would have been, its best left to rot instead we kept it all alive

ILW

How have the banks caused unemployment?
That is over and above employment that would never have been there in the first place if they had not facilitated it.

[Deleted User]

ILW wrote: »

How have the banks caused unemployment?
That is over and above employment that would never have been there in the first place if they had not facilitated it.

The financial crisis they created caused a major recession. Its been called 'The great recession' by some pundits. One of the consequences of this was unemployment hitting about 2.5 million in the UK alone.

Its all been in the news, you must have missed it. Searching for 'Financial Crisis', 'Credit Crunch', 'recession' with your search engine will probably get the info you need.

ILW

[quote=[Deleted User];43849062]The financial crisis they created caused a major recession. Its been called 'The great recession' by some pundits. One of the consequences of this was unemployment hitting about 2.5 million in the UK alone.

Its all been in the news, you must have missed it. Searching for 'Financial Crisis', 'Credit Crunch', 'recession' with your search engine will probably get the info you need.[/QUOTE]

How many of the lost jobs would have been there in the first place if it had not been for the banking system?