When Bankers Were Good: BBC2 Tues 9pm

vivatifosi

This looks an interesting programme, so thought I'd start a thread to flag it, then review it.

Here's an article about the programme from the Indie:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/when-bankers-were-good-6265087.html

And here's the BBC page:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2011/47/ian-hislop-when-bankers-were-good.html

TruckerT

vivatifosi wrote: »

This looks an interesting programme, so thought I'd start a thread to flag it, then review it.

Here's an article about the programme from the Indie:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/when-bankers-were-good-6265087.html

And here's the BBC page:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2011/47/ian-hislop-when-bankers-were-good.html

This one will run and run....

But, even before the programme airs, the title is easy to understand

That would not have been true only a year or five ago...

TruckerT

1984ReturnsForReal_2

That was in the age of the belief of being able to buy your place in heaven.

Now most rich bankers don't believe in heaven & don't have a conscience about it.

They should be forced to either cough up or have the word "tw@" engraved on their tombstones.

bendix

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

That was in the age of the belief of being able to buy your place in heaven.

Now most rich bankers don't believe in heaven & don't have a conscience about it.

They should be forced to either cough up or have the word "tw@" engraved on their tombstones.

At a time when banale and stupid generalisations are becoming de rigeur on MSE, I would like to nominate this post as a new low.

You're just making noise, aren't you? There are so many ways to rip this post to shreads for being trite and pathetic, that it's difficult to know where to start.

But let's try at least; let's start with your almost childishly invective comment that most rich bankers don't believe in heaven.

Could you determine, for a start, who precisely these rich bankers are, and how you happen to know the substance of their belief systems?

There's a good boy . .

DaddyBear

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

or have the word "tw@" engraved on their forehead.

Fixed for you.

chewmylegoff

The point seems to be that back in the day the super rich were all philanthropists and nowadays they would all sell their own mother. To prove their point the independent list five Victorian philanthropists and then five modern day bankers / chief execs who are not philanthropists.

This is just pathetic. Whilst there is no doubt that many bankers are completely amoral and care only about how much they can earn damn the consequences, they had their Victorian counterparts. The fact that some Victorians were philanthropists proves not a lot, unless you can also say how many were not.

Further, the independent seem to have forgotten their own article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/the-giving-list-britains-leading-philanthropists-1212441.html

Also no mention of e.g. Bill Gates, Warren Buffet.

It's probably not possible to prove either way but I expect things really aren't all that different now to how they were previously.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

The Victorians were great moral handwringers though, and it was a time when public opinion could be hugely influenced (eg the publication of Black Beauty). Obviously there was a strong religious undertone to the concept of charity then, but I think it is interesting to compare it to modern attitudes. Ian Hislop's programme about WW1 deserters was very good, so I shall be watching.

purch

Sounds like it might be a program about Victorians and their attitude to society, more than anything else.

If we are to draw conclusions and parallels to current times, I think we should do that across the whole of society, not just the Banking Industry.

IronWolf

Sounds like an elaborate "back in my day, things were different...." speech

A lot of the richest men in the world are philanthropists

Generali

Banks still do a lot of generous stuff. HSBC used to (still do?) pay staff six quid an hour for any charity stuff they do outside work with the money being paid to the charity not to the individual.

Goldman Sachs encourage all staff to take a day out of the office (paid, including for temps) to take part in GS organised charitable works.

The Rothschilds give huge amounts of time and money to charity, for example:

http://www.rothschildfostertrust.com/miriam_rothschild/introduction/
http://www.fo-rothschild.fr/100_fondation

BNP Paribas support the Garvan Institute and also give staff a volunteer day of leave in addition to their annual leave each year.

UBS support the LSO (having provided them with a large building in Central London) and also support their staff in mentoring children in East London schools.

Lloyds TSB used to give huge amounts to amateur rugby (no idea if they still do).

StevieJ

bendix wrote: »

At a time when banale and stupid generalisations are becoming de rigeur on MSE, I would like to nominate this post as a new low.

You're just making noise, aren't you? There are so many ways to rip this post to shreads for being trite and pathetic, that it's difficult to know where to start.

But let's try at least; let's start with your almost childishly invective comment that most rich bankers don't believe in heaven.

Could you determine, for a start, who precisely these rich bankers are, and how you happen to know the substance of their belief systems?

There's a good boy . .

There we go, any criticism of Bankers and Bendix is in like a shot

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

for a legal eagle and not a banker.