PDA

View Full Version : Banks?


tony draper
1st Aug 2011, 08:48
Another Bank announces record profits of nine billion and no doubt will be paying out millions in bonuses to the pinstriped scumbags sitting on their fat arses in plush offices thence,summat puzzles,why dont' we or rather those other pinstriped scumbags who govern us demand the thieving feckers start paying back the billions they owe the tax payers?
:suspect::rolleyes:

sisemen
1st Aug 2011, 08:53
Banks and bank robbers - they deserve each other. :yuk:

shedhead
1st Aug 2011, 08:56
but Mr D these are the wealth creators! (or so we are told) Surely we must do what the Conservative party wishes to do and cut the top rate of tax for them so that they can get even more of the benefit from these bonuses!

tony draper
1st Aug 2011, 09:00
Trouble is as we have found to our cost the wealth they created was a illusion.

Parapunter
1st Aug 2011, 09:10
On a related note, one of my suppliers factors his invoices via Lloyds-TSB what of course we 'own' & today they sent me four copies of the same letter announcing this fact & a nice copy of the data protection statement.

Would love to see their stationery bill.

Sallyann1234
1st Aug 2011, 09:49
Trouble is as we have found to our cost the wealth they created was a illusion.

The wealth they kept for themselves wasn't!

radeng
1st Aug 2011, 10:31
I don't believe that HSBC (who announced their profits today) had ANY money from the government i.e. taxpayer. I believe Barclays didn't, either.

But the thing to do is make sure they pay tax - should be 40%! However, also remember that they pay nice dividends - to insurance companies and pension funds.

Blacksheep
1st Aug 2011, 12:11
Pension Funds? Don't make I larf. My pension fund went the same way as all the other bankers loot. Straight into their pockets. That's why I'm still working - and will be until I drop dead. :(

Checkboard
1st Aug 2011, 12:24
Mr D these are the wealth creators! (or so we are told) Surely we must do what the Conservative party wishes to do and cut the top rate of tax for them so that they can get even more of the benefit from these bonuses!
They don't create wealth! They swap shares, bonds and the like around and about for ever greater prices in a huge Ponzi scheme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme). The only time that isn't true is when a company actually does increase in real-world value - and that is because the workers on the shop floor/miners in the dirt (the REAL wealth creators) have done a hard day's work. :*

Blacksheep
1st Aug 2011, 12:50
Aye, Cap'n. Wealth creation lies in converting raw material into something useful that did not exist before. It may be the case that money is required to support the process, but that support is merely the means by which the use of scarce economic resources is prioritised.

The financial services industry is in the business of buying and selling money - money being just a medium of exchange and a store of wealth.

Existing wealth, that is.

birrddog
1st Aug 2011, 13:00
Another Bank announces record profits of nine billion
Good to see at least someone making a profit in these times; might inspire others to get off their jacksies and do same.
and no doubt will be paying out millions in bonuseswhich means millions in revenues to pay for those who wont get off their arse except to stand in the dole queue
to the pinstriped scumbags sitting on their fat arses in plush offices thence,

Clearly you have not been inside a bank lately.

Though pinstripes are still fashionable (I wear them myself from time to time); you won't find many (read any) in a bank these days sitting on their chesterfield with pipe in hand watching the money flow through the door.
It's far too cut-throat an environment for that - they earn their money.

Now for the record I'm not standing up for those who spend their days scheming to rob from Grandma Millie, and we know there are plenty of those, though the idea that every banker is a parasite is a bit of a laugh.

I don't see you calling Angels or Stockpicker parasites, and there are plenty of quality folks like them in the industry who are active contributors to society; once again, to pay for all those wonderful chavs in the dole queue.

Windy Militant
1st Aug 2011, 14:32
I fear that I am about to come into direct conflict with the banking system.
Years ago my Parents opened an account for me at what was then our local branch. As time progressed I remained with that Bank even when I moved away to work I kept my accounts there, mainly due to the fact that I knew the staff, two of the girls went to the same school as me. As work was scarce around home I felt keeping my business there would help keep the branch going.
However they have no branches near my new abode and are about to close the branch holding my account.
So I am now steeling myself to move to another bank, a move I'm not looking forward to, having heard nightmare tales of direct debits and standing orders being buggered up.
I must admit that my current bank has not been too bad but there are signs that things are changing, my request not to be cold called was recently removed from my information, and hastily replaced when I suggested they if they did that again I was moving my business.
I'm also not impressed by their ethical standards, a point reinforced by my cousin who briefly worked for them after returning to the world of work after having kids. She found the pressure to sell unwanted and in some cases unaffordable products to people she knew, to be intolerable. As she said it's all about selling these days and not at all like it was when she started out in banking. She now does locum work as a post mistress, less money but she's happier with the job.
As for what's happening to my school friends, I don't know but I suspect it's probably going to be redundancy.

sisemen
1st Aug 2011, 15:22
Group name for bankers? A wunch.

D SQDRN 97th IOTC
1st Aug 2011, 17:47
Mr Draper

I am assuming you have never borrowed money from scum before then?
To pay for your house...you buy a car...

It was stupid lending that caused a lot of the problems...and especially in the USA. 7 times salary sir? No problem. That was Northern Rock. 125% the value of the property?....etc.

City profits have very little to do with the tax payer funded bailouts of retail banks with poor risk management. HSBC and Barclays....not them to blame.

Yes we own Llloyds pretty much...but they had to buy Halifax otherwise it would have gone bust.

Will the government get its money back? Probably, and with some profit to show for it.

Did the government do anything to blame for this crisis? When they tied their revenues and votes to the value of the housing stock, what do you think?

So bashing banks was last year's story......move on. Nothing to see here.
Yawn.

tony draper
1st Aug 2011, 18:08
That's the trouble,last years news,divert the public to some other outrage and its back to same old same old, back to noses in the trough, the greedy shite at the top of the finacial industry should have had their arses kicked utill their noses bled then stuck behind bars instead of being shuffled off to early retirement with enormous pension deals,
I have nowt against the poor buggas that worked behind the counters and were made redundant,it is the golden monkeys, the degenerate bastards at the top,they never pay the price the untouchables I despise.

D SQDRN 97th IOTC
1st Aug 2011, 18:22
The politicians thought it a good idea to find someone for their blame....so they went after the banks.

And some members of the public lapped it up. Apparently the wealth of the banks was the reason they were so poor...and for them being taxed so much. Blame transfer is a funny English pastime. People have a culture of envy in England, whereas over the water in the USA they have a culture of ambition.

You think the bonuses paid out to the most senior few people at HSBC are any different in reason from the bonuses paid out to BMW executives, Xstrata executives, Astra Zeneca execs.....do they all make you sick? The execs at IBM, Apple? All on large amounts of money. What makes them any different?

How about the government employees in councils? In the NHS? Lots making well over 100k. I would tell my children...."get off your arse, get into a decent job, and provide the best for your family and children. Take them on nice holidays, drive them around in large safe cars, and clothe them well. And look at that tramp over there. He is a down and out. He hates you. He blames you for getting off your arse and looking after your family for his own poverty. His attitude is poison."

finfly1
1st Aug 2011, 18:25
Over on this side, sixty one banks have failed.

This year.

So far.

D SQDRN 97th IOTC
1st Aug 2011, 18:38
Good. Let badly run banks that can safely fail, fail.

Mr Chips
1st Aug 2011, 18:51
Ummm D Sqdn. let me get this right

It wasn't the banks fault, it was lending that was to blame
By the banks I assume?
Halifax had to be bought to stop it going bust
But banks should be allowed to go bust

The public are annoyed by bank bonuses and especially those paid by the bailed out banks. I don't recall the government bailing out BMW, Xstrata, Astra Zeneca etc so they are welcome to their bonuses

"And look at that tramp over there. He is a down and out. He hates you. He blames you for getting off your arse and looking after your family for his own poverty. His attitude is poison"

Where did you dredge that idea up from?

arcniz
1st Aug 2011, 19:13
TSB what of course we 'own' & today they sent me four copies of the same letter announcing ...

That would be "THOROUGHNESS" a quality much to be desired in bankers and bean-cunters.


Wealth creation lies in converting raw material into something useful that did not exist before....

The loaves & fishes work being done in the the DofC and in Bruxelles, etc. would seem to fall under that rubric. Imaginitive bankers can make money day & night by just imagining it is there -- especially with help from amenable politicians to keep said bankers out of the clink.

GGR
1st Aug 2011, 19:45
Here is the motto of the banks

''You play ball with us and we'll shove the bat up your arse!''

Simples......

I like the one about WUNCH of.......what is the collective noun for a group of receivers?

A Rug

GGR

birrddog
1st Aug 2011, 20:26
Cap'n Draper, can you please explain your outrage?

Is it?
a) Government is broke and it's the banks fault
b) You don't like people who earn lots of money
c) Some other reason I'm not privy to? (if c, please elaborate)

D SQDRN 97th IOTC
1st Aug 2011, 20:27
Mr. Chips

a famous film character that...

yes, poor lending decisions. By some of the retail banks, especially in the USA, but also in the UK. Poor borrowing decisions from adults, who knew they could barely afford the loans. Poor regulation from the government who wanted to keep property prices high.

Halifax was too big to fail safely. So it was bought. Read what I wrote please about allowing banks to fail.

The public may well be annoyed with the bonuses paid to senior executives of bailed out banks - but in case you hadn't noticed, HSBC which announced its results today, and it was the results of this bank that started this thread, it took no tax payer money. In fact most banks / building societies in the UK did not take any tax payer money - there were a handful of exceptions.

Yet the banks get all tarred with the same brush. People go into rant mode at the very thought of banks and bonuses. Well the majority of bonuses are not in the millions - I bet the bankers wish they were but too many people believe what they read in the Daily Mail and Daily Express. A lot of bonuses are very mediocre, and are simply another way of rewarding performance with incentive pay...like a saleman gets commission. Or is that unethical?

Now Mr. Chips comes from an old school teacher from one of England's top public schools. Well maybe it once was. I doubt however you are from that school...but happy for you to correct me if you are.

A lot of the ranting, in my opinion, is simply transferred blame and some of the public having swallowed the rubbish of politicians hook, line and sinker.

CYPR
1st Aug 2011, 20:55
This may cause Mr Tony Draper to ignite!!!!!!.

Today the HSBC announced that tey will be laying-off 30,000 employees worldwide; what was the comment about not receiving govt help and making a good profit??????

hellsbrink
1st Aug 2011, 21:33
Today the HSBC announced that tey will be laying-off 30,000 employees worldwide

Mainly because they are pulling out of countries where their business is not performing as well as expected. That means they are pulling out of 20 of the 87 countries they operate in.

Of course, everyone just thinks of HSBC's UK arm as the actual company, so I can see where people can get all flustered over something that isn't actually happening in the UK, there won't be 30,000 job losses in the UK (in fact, of the original 5000 jobs going worldwide as we speak, only 700 were in the UK out of a workforce of 52,000. The next 25,000 will be going due to the pulling out from 20 countries. Of course, most of these people will not be out of a job as other banks will be likely to step into the gap, buying up these banks being split from HSBC, so whether there will be 30,000 unemployed, out of a total workforce of 300,000 with HSBC worldwide, is open to question).

TBirdFrank
2nd Aug 2011, 00:06
I got a letter from "my" bank the other day apologising for an error - they didn't say what it was, or how it had been made - just that it was their fault!

So why did they break banking regulations and misdirect funds coming in via a bankers order that had worked perfectly well for a year to somewhere else that they have not yet divulged - or whether the money still exists - and yes - we are into four figures!

I smell sport!!!

Krystal n chips
2nd Aug 2011, 04:53
" I bet the bankers wish they were but too many people believe what they read in the Daily Mail and Daily Express. A lot of bonuses are very mediocre, and are simply another way of rewarding performance with incentive pay"

As some of don't read the above rags and get our information from a variety of more accurate sources, would you care to define your perspective of mediocre...in financial terms and quantity please....just so we can all be made aware as to the difference betweem largesse and avarice you understand.

With regard to the "banks are full of nice people" philosophers, presumably you haven't actually had any dealings with their perception of "customer service" re the High St outlets then ?.

radeng
2nd Aug 2011, 05:02
Banks are like sewers - you can't like them, but you have a problem doing without them.

Blacksheep
2nd Aug 2011, 10:48
There's some stout defending of the indefensible going on, but the plain fact is that Alan Greenspan and his coterie of financial wizards seems to have originated the idea that the financial services "industry" were perfectly capable of regulating themselves and that all a central bank needed to do was set the interbank lending rate to control the supply of money and thus inflation. Finance Ministers the world over thought this was a good idea - free the financiers to make huge profits and reap the benefit in taxation. Here in UK, Gordon Brown, advised by his Chief Economic Adviser Ed Balls, was among those taken in by this falsehood. Banking regulation was removed from the Bank of England and our own financiers were set loose to do pretty much as they pleased.

As may be expected, the financial services industry began the creation and sale of "products". Savings schemes, pension schemes - and the key word here is "scheme" - abounded along with financial packages. Put your money into our little scheme and we'll manage it while you reap the profits in years to come.

Unfortunatley it was all a dream. The world's biggest pyramid scam was based upon lending vastly more money than was actually held on deposit. When central banks had controlled the industry, banks were typically limited to lending between 8 and 12 times as much money as they held on deposit. But in the newly deregulated world they began lending sometimes as much as 30 times the value of their assets. Paper mountains with no substance. To keep the grand pyramid scheme going, the financiers had to lend to increasingly risky borrowers, while bundling packages of valueless "assets" were sold on in a futile attempt at hedging. Until, inevitably the whole edifice collapsed.

The anger expressed by tony draper and many like him, is directed at those who were responsible for mismanaging the fiasco, while awarding themselves multi-million pound salaries and "bonuses" - and who walked away with their loot intact. Those same people who, by and large, still run the financial services so-called "industry".

larssnowpharter
2nd Aug 2011, 11:24
Blacksheep:

The financial services industry is in the business of buying and selling money - money being just a medium of exchange and a store of wealth.

Existing wealth, that is.

I recall learning the same thing in Economics 101 at school. The problem now is that it simply ain't true.

I cannot, after tax, get an interest rate higher than inflation in any 100% safe investment that I am aware of. If this is true - it may well be that some Ppruner has some magic account that will beat the system but I doubt it - this means that money is no longer a store of wealth, existing or not and has, therefore, changed its nature in some magical way.

tony draper
2nd Aug 2011, 11:36
Item on the news this morning re Barcleys not making as much profit this year and the talking head bemoaning the fact that they have to pay back cash to people they have scammed and defrauded with the loan insurance scams,ahhh poor didums.

Parapunter
2nd Aug 2011, 11:40
There is Lars, no such thing as a 100% safe investment, so no money has not changed it's nature.

larssnowpharter
2nd Aug 2011, 11:50
One was under the impression that bank deposits up to a certain amount were protected by someone. Presume the government i.e the taxpayer.

Parapunter
2nd Aug 2011, 12:09
Take Icesave as an example. Deposits there guaranteed up to 35,000 only & the bank had a 'passport' scheme meaning an opt out of that protection scheme.

Net result, when they bailed, the money was repaid to UK investors only through the largesse (read political expediency) of the UK governement. I should know, I had most of my savings in there & for a while, thought I was staring into the financial abyss.

D SQDRN 97th IOTC
2nd Aug 2011, 18:40
The "products" banks sold....pension schemes, er...sold mostly by insurance companies. Savings schemes, that would be fund managers, insurers (again), and some banks. (Note the government of most countries, the UK's included, sell saving schemes.)

Biggest ponzi scheme of them all is the Uk government's public pension scheme and its unfunded liabilities. That will come back to haunt the tax payer as you fork out for the gold plated pension of your ex civil service neighbour.

The product that banks sold to the public that was so risky and caused most of the damage? Er...that would be the fiendishly complex product called a mortgage. And banks were stupid in that they lent money to people who couldn't pay it back.....adults...who should be responsible for their debts. And the government let them do it....in fact in the USA if some banks didn't lend to underpivileged parts of the community they were threatened with withdrawal of their banking licence.

Am I defending banks? No. Did they get it wrong? Yes. In spades? Yes. But only a handful took tax payer money in the UK. You want to name a bank that got bailed out? I'll name two that did not for every one you name.

Do some bankers get overpaid? Yes. But I don't understand why the HSBC chairman attracts such hate for being well paid....please explain. As for the average bonus paid at HSBC....google it.

Am I a banker? No. May have been once, but so have a large number of this population. And the banks still employ a large number of this population. Am not trying to defend the mis selling of insurance by the banks....some of their sales forces are little better than double glazing salespeople. Or worse even.
It wasn't until recently that the sale of mortgages became a regulated product, as government thought that the average person in the street could understand them, and manage their money without getting into debt. Isn't that right K&C ? or so they thought and changed the rules.

And then they got so clever when making dumb lending decisions that they figured out a way, through the securitisation of mortgages, through CDOs, to sell mortgage risk to someone else and make more dumb lending decisions to peolple who got turned down the first 2 times they applied for a mortage so that people who wouldn't even make the first payment got approved. Now how dumb is that?

What I don't understand is how little people actually understand of what happened in the banking crisis....the majority of this country read tabloids....and they throw invective at the banks collectively.

So how much tax income do you think HSBC contributes to the UK economy?
How many people does it employ in the UK? How much money does it give to charity? And some people who are less than wise would have them out of the country......well be careful. You might get what you wish for.

onetrack
8th Aug 2011, 02:32
The unfettered greed of banks is such, that in Australia, we have had "Unconscionable Conduct" laws put in place, specifically targeting banks and lenders, as far back as 1913.
In 1941, legislation was enacted to prevent lenders charging excessive interest rates and charging compound interest, to people who had fallen into arrears, often because of no fault of their own.

Unfortunately, Unconscionable Conduct legislation has been watered down, under pressure from Banks, so that it is now nearly impossible to win any action against a Banking institution.
Add in the fact that banks will spend unlimited amounts of money and indulge in a myriad of legal tactics to avoid any judgment against them, and you have the ultimate untouchable power group.

The conduct of banks with regard to lenders is absolute abysmal, and generates hatred on a worldwide basis. Australian banks borrow money at figures as low as .01% in Japan, and lend it out on credit cards in Australia at figures up to 23%... when official interest rates are averaging less than 6%.

In addition, banks offer "pre-approved" credit cards to lower income people who do not have substantial repayment ability.
Once issued with a credit card, these people are then freely offered increases in the card limit, without any application by the credit card holder, or any investigation as to repayment ability. This is financial slavery at its finest.

The banks are noted for lending beyond a borrowers ability to repay, then withdrawing funding at a moments notice, thus resulting in a fire sale of the borrowers assets, and generally ensuing bankruptcy for the borrower.

The banks are guilty of excessive and unwarranted charges such as AUD$600 application fees for a housing loan. It's not enough that they make money from lending the money for a house, they actually charge you to make an application!
They charge you, as the recipient, for dishonoured cheques, even though you are guilty of no wrongdoing. They charge you to make withdrawals of your own money!

In Australia, a class action is currently in place, charging that banks have been profiting excessively from "late payment" and "over-limit" fees on credit cards. The law states that banks are only to charge what it actually costs them when a late payment is made, or a limit exceeded... but they have been charging flat fees ranging from AUD$35 to AUD$50 for these fees, when the actual cost to the bank has been as low as AUD$2.

Needless to say, the banks are bitterly contesting this class action, and will spend hundreds of millions of dollars, and as many years as they can possibly draw out the action, in delaying and obstructionist tactics, to ensure that full satisfaction is never gained by the litigants.
Their initial obstructionist action has been trying to prevent access to bank documents needed by the litigants lawyers, citing "client confidentiality" as a reason for not producing those documents.

The banking industry is littered with stories of unfettered greed, conspiracy, illegality, lying, unwarranted foreclosure, and excessive financial rewards to senior executives, over dozens of decades.
The greed of banking institutions is such that hundreds of books have been written about it... the law cases records are full of cases of people trying to right the wrongs of illegal, unconscionable and downright evil actions of banks... and bumper stickers abound about banks collective greed.

I have no doubt the amount of tax paid by HSBC in the U.K. is about 10% of what the average worker pays, in relation to earnings. This is because banks are global corporations, and can utilise offshoring of profits to ensure that they pay the most basic minimum of tax in the countries where they operate, and where they would normally face a heavier tax bill.
The typical actual tax rate of a global corporation is around 2% of actual profits, due to the use of subsidiaries, relocation of operating entities to low-tax locations, and generally creative accounting that ensures that profits shown are minimal... when in fact they are substantial.
Naturally, the simplest tax avoidance "lurk" is to pay a massive salary or bonus to a senior executive, which immediately becomes a full tax deduction against profits.
These salaries and bonuses are generally larger than any substantial lottery win, that the average person dreams of... yet they are not "one-off" wins, that people regard as enough money to set them up for life. These salaries and bonuses are paid ANNUALLY, on a REPEAT basis!

Banks are a necessary evil in a properly-constituted fair and democratic society. However, when banking regulations and controls are poor, and close relationships develop between bankers, the legal profession and politicians... the common people are the losers.

THE FINANCIAL ABUSE OF AUSTRALIA (http://sosnews.org/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,print,0&cntnt01articleid=84&cntnt01showtemplate=false&cntnt01returnid=93)

bugg smasher
8th Aug 2011, 03:15
+1 onetrack.

BILLING CYCLE MANIPULATION

On a much smaller scale, but very much in the same vein, our credit cards were billed on the 25th of each month, something that had not changed for ten years. Suddenly, and without warning of any kind, they began billing us on the 1st, and charging late payment fees, after sending our usual and accustomed payments on the previously agreed upon dates. With the resultant compromise in credit scores.

Might want to check your credit card statements carefully, VERY CAREFULLY.

flyingfemme
8th Aug 2011, 06:30
The typical actual tax rate of a global corporation is around 2% of actual profits, due to the use of subsidiaries, relocation of operating entities to low-tax locations, and generally creative accounting that ensures that profits shown are minimal... when in fact they are substantial.
Naturally, the simplest tax avoidance "lurk" is to pay a massive salary or bonus to a senior executive, which immediately becomes a full tax deduction against profits.
How is this "tax avoidance" when the recipient of this "tax free" largesse pays tax (and probably NI) on it? Is company payroll a tax avoidance measure?
The same applies to company profits.....they are only made in order to dividend the money to shareholders........who then pay the relevant tax on them.
When large rates of corporation tax are applied to profits which are paid out to shareholders, and taxed again, the actual amount of tax is so large as to be be "obscene".
Companies are set up to make profits - that is their whole, and only, raison d'etre. Taking money out of a company puts the tax liability onto the person receiving the money. Simple.There is a good argument for having no corporation tax at all. Think how much easier life could be if one didn't have to think about "tax avoidance" and just got on with running the business.

onetrack
8th Aug 2011, 07:03
There is a very good case for increasing the tax rate on corporations, as they do not pay their fair share of tax revenues, and the greatest burden of taxes falls on the everyday, average wage earner.

Meantimes, the corporations transfer their mind-boggling profits to elite groups such as shareholders and senior executives... who often also have substantial tax-minimising avenues available to them, that are not available to average wage earners.

And don't give me that crap that corporations must be protected and nourished, because they are job-creators. They are only job creators when it suits them... and most times they are looking to reduce jobs to a minimum, and export jobs to 3rd world countries... all in the name of maximising returns to shareholders and senior executives. How many times have we seen where a corporation reduces its workforce by 5,000 or 10,000 people... whereupon the CEO is promptly awarded another $10M in his "salary package" as a substantial reward for his "excellent managerial skills". :yuk:

The financial problems in America can be substantially sheeted home to excessive protection for, and low taxes on, corporations and large companies... who do not make up any substantial amount of tax revenues to Uncle Sam's IRS.
The greatest employers, and the most productive part of any nation, is in its small businesses and middle class... who usually bear the brunt of any "financial pain" inflicted on the nation, by the corporations nation-reducing, and not nation-building, efforts.

cameltruck
8th Aug 2011, 12:16
Can't wait for bankers to start jumping out the window of their tall office buildings like the good old days.

Neptunus Rex
8th Aug 2011, 13:20
I think that "Alex" in the Torygraph seems to have it right.