Help to buy? Yes please, say bankers!

TruckerT

chucky wrote: »

That's fine but doesn't mean it looks pretty dodgy.

Sorry? The government's support for the banks, against all odds, strikes me as extremely dodgy.

There is considerable hardship and unrest in Europe (Ireland, Iberia, Greece) which only occasionally gets mentioned on the UK news.

TruckerT

chucky

TruckerT wrote: »

Sorry? The government's support for the banks, against all odds, strikes me as extremely dodgy.

There is considerable hardship and unrest in Europe (Ireland, Iberia, Greece) which only occasionally gets mentioned on the UK news.

TruckerT

What would you rather? The banks collapsed along with the financial system and you had to live in a tent?

No didn't think so.

TruckerT

chucky wrote: »

What would you rather? The banks collapsed along with the financial system and you had to live in a tent?

No didn't think so.

But the banks won't collapse, will they? The banks ARE the financial system - since Ms T, they have felt no need to serve anyone's interest but their own. When you and I are reduced to living in a tent, the banks will still be providing houses for their bonus-winners.

Why does everyone hate GD so much?

TruckerT

chucky

TruckerT wrote: »

But the banks won't collapse, will they? The banks ARE the financial system - since Ms T, they have felt no need to serve anyone's interest but their own. When you and I are reduced to living in a tent, the banks will still be providing houses for their bonus-winners.

Lehmans says otherwise.

TruckerT wrote: »

Why does everyone hate GD so much?

You reap what you sow...

TruckerT

chucky wrote: »

Lehmans says otherwise.


You reap what you sow...

I seem to recall that Lehmans was allowed to collapse as a warning to others. There have been lots of others...

But how many names can you recall except Lehmans?

Please answer the question without consulting Google (etc)!

But please ask Google, if you can be bothered, how many senior employees of the minor banks which failed are currently living on social security.

TruckerT

ps - here is a quote from a 2008 bbc news article - "By not giving UK bank Barclays a guarantee for Lehman's trading obligations as part of a deal to buy the business, analysts say the US Treasury has put a line under its willingness to use public money to rescue banks which have made wrong decisions."

Loughton_Monkey

TruckerT wrote: »

But the banks won't collapse, will they? The banks ARE the financial system - since Ms T, they have felt no need to serve anyone's interest but their own. When you and I are reduced to living in a tent, the banks will still be providing houses for their bonus-winners.

Banks are Jekyll and Hyde. Their 'front end' will not collapse. They are inefficient, not very competitive, and have (up until now) been feathering their nests in a big way with PPI etc. and rip-off selling of investment products to old ladies. At the Head Office, you will find tired, old, long serving 'chaps' who scratch each others' backs, and who detest their branch networks as complete 'low life' and a necessary evil.

Then behind that, you will find the 'Casino' in which all sorts of shady characters dwell. This is where the whizz kids get their £1 million bonuses for dreaming up the latest 'scams'. One of these is to set up complicated 'hedge funds', that will do very well if X,Y, and Z happen. The commission for just setting it up is reasonable, but then selling the fund to punters brings them icing on the cake. But the killer is then to set up an alternative 'hedge fund', the reverse of the other one, which will do well if X,Y, and Z doesn't happen.

... large gin & tonics & bonuses all round...

TruckerT wrote: »

Why does everyone hate GD so much?

Beats me! It's one of those imponderables, like

• Why does Sour Cream have an expiration date?
• Do chickens think rubber humans are funny?
• If a seagull flew over the bay, would it be called a bagel?
• If a turtle loses its shell, is it considered naked or homeless?
• What is another word for thesaurus?

Maybe it's the wrong question. Should you ask, instead, Why does GD hate everyone who disagrees with his unique views so much?

TruckerT

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Banks are Jekyll and Hyde. Their 'front end' will not collapse. They are inefficient, not very competitive, and have (up until now) been feathering their nests in a big way with PPI etc. and rip-off selling of investment products to old ladies. At the Head Office, you will find tired, old, long serving 'chaps' who scratch each others' backs, and who detest their branch networks as complete 'low life' and a necessary evil.

That's the retail side, I guess, which they keep telling us makes no profit except by charging a stupidly high price for taking the trouble to print off a standard letter and posting it to one of their customers (for example)...

Then behind that, you will find the 'Casino' in which all sorts of shady characters dwell. This is where the whizz kids get their £1 million bonuses for dreaming up the latest 'scams'. One of these is to set up complicated 'hedge funds', that will do very well if X,Y, and Z happen. The commission for just setting it up is reasonable, but then selling the fund to punters brings them icing on the cake. But the killer is then to set up an alternative 'hedge fund', the reverse of the other one, which will do well if X,Y, and Z doesn't happen.

... large gin & tonics & bonuses all round...

...and that's the bit, I guess, which the politicians can do nothing about because, like the press barons, they are all interdependent, and all jolly good chums around the dinner tables



Beats me! It's one of those imponderables, like

• Why does Sour Cream have an expiration date?
• Do chickens think rubber humans are funny?
• If a seagull flew over the bay, would it be called a bagel?
• If a turtle loses its shell, is it considered naked or homeless?
• What is another word for thesaurus?

Maybe it's the wrong question. Should you ask, instead, Why does GD hate everyone who disagrees with his unique views so much?

I really like unique views

TruckerT...

Loughton_Monkey

TruckerT wrote: »

I really like unique views

In that case, <GD mode on> so you clearly agree with everything Graham says.<GD mode off>

It would be boring if we all agreed with everything, but it's a bit perverse to twist what someone writes and disagree with that.

TruckerT

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

In that case, <GD mode on> so you clearly agree with everything Graham says.<GD mode off>

It would be boring if we all agreed with everything, but it's a bit perverse to twist what someone writes and disagree with that.

I have never read a GD post with which I strongly disagree.

I wish I could say the same about the LM posts which I have read.

TruckerT

chucky

TruckerT wrote: »

I seem to recall that Lehmans was allowed to collapse as a warning to others. There have been lots of others...

But how many names can you recall except Lehmans?

Please answer the question without consulting Google (etc)!

But please ask Google, if you can be bothered, how many senior employees of the minor banks which failed are currently living on social security.

TruckerT

ps - here is a quote from a 2008 bbc news article - "By not giving UK bank Barclays a guarantee for Lehman's trading obligations as part of a deal to buy the business, analysts say the US Treasury has put a line under its willingness to use public money to rescue banks which have made wrong decisions."

Lehmans crashed and it caused carnage in the markets, it's not something that the powers that be want to go through again. You know this, I know this.

The way that the financial markets are/were structured does nothing for you and me if the banks collapse. If anything it could us as individuals much harm. Therefore the governments stepping in supporting the banks has to be a good thing unless you want to be living in that tent...