Posted June 2, 200916 yr To be honest, I think that this is the way it's becoming.... Look at the case of Alistair Darling... Is fiddling his expenses actually the worst thing he's done to the people of this country....? Or is it the fact that he did away with the 10p tax rate, dithered over Northern Rock, talked complete sh!te during his budget speech and the fact that he is probably the worst, most incompetent Chancellor in living memory....? And we're actually talking more about a few hundred quid he may or may not have fiddled on his MPs expenses... Sorry, but if Darling goes over such a relatively trivial matter, it's just a bit like sending Fred West down for not paying VAT on the cement on his crazy paving, dont you think....? Also, what seems to have been getting forgotten about is the fukkin' BANKERS who are living the life of Riley at our expense far more than bloody MPs are.... WE are paying for Fred Goodwin and Gordon Pell's huge, inflated pensions seeing as how it's US, the taxpayer, who bailed out the banks and now own the majority of shares in the likes of RBS, Northern Rock, HBOS and the rest, and now WE are paying for another bunch of superannuated Fat Cats to replace the other Fat Cats who got us in this sh!t to begin with.... We talk about the House of Commons and the political system needing fundamental change... Great, but why is practically no bugger talking about the bloody BANKING system needing equal and probably even more radical overhauling.... It's the banking system which fukked us up in the first place, Politicians were accessories almost certainly and should be punished, but they were NOT the main bad-guys.... They're already attempting to water-down the "tight regulation" promised, in a report made to Darling by Citibank former chief Sir Win Bischoff suggest that no serious change is necessary and even suggests that nothing actually went wrong.... "regulation must not stifle responsible financial innovation", the report bleats.... Yeah, well, such things as CDOs (Collateralised Debt Obligations) were bloody well TRIPLE A rated, something Triple A rated is the sort of "responsible financial innovation" that the report talks about, so, WTF, how can there NOT be a problem within the system if the thing which led to all these problems were considered as being a 'sure thing'.....? Seems to me that the banking sector has no intentions of learning from their mistakes, and we'll likely be in this position again in 20 years time if politicians just give the banks a clean bill of health and nothing fundamental is recommended.....
June 2, 200916 yr Author Something else to think about - The Daily Telegraph who brought this whole thing to light is owned by the Barclay twins..... As in Barclays BANK..... -_-
June 2, 200916 yr Yes, it is rather irritating that this smokescreen has been set up with a few Labour sacrificial lambs, who would have lost their marginal seats at the next election anyway, taking a minor fall and walking off with their golden handshake (that numbers way above their ill-gotten claimed gains) while the bankers breathe a sigh of relief and get back to profiteering. The fact Labour has managed to deal the Tories a blow too (although Cameron is jumping in and using it to improve his own image) will also have pleased them. Duck Island or the collapse of a banking institution that has remained solid for half a millennia? I know which is the bigger issue.
June 2, 200916 yr interesting point scott... tbh i think its we can do something about the people we put in office, rather then which is the greater crime. bankers are just some shadowy figures in some big building somewhere, we can really change them..
June 2, 200916 yr Author interesting point scott... tbh i think its we can do something about the people we put in office, rather then which is the greater crime. bankers are just some shadowy figures in some big building somewhere, we can really change them.. Well, that's the impression anyway... I rather think we can tbh... We basically own most of the banks now, or are at least majority shareholders, and I think pressure needs to be brought to bear on Politicians to make banks act in our best interests; and if that means nationalising them to stop them from acting contrary to the interests of their customers, so be it.... Something can certainly be done in a regulatory capacity as well... It's our MPs who decide how strictly banks are regulated through the FSA... Why else would those whose interests are in making sure banks aren't regulated too strictly making out reports for the bloody Chancellor.... Darling has the power, he's just too bloody gutless to use it.... Send for Vince Cable....
June 2, 200916 yr Something else to think about - The Daily Telegraph who brought this whole thing to light is owned by the Barclay twins..... As in Barclays BANK..... -_- They've got nothing to do with the bank though. That would be like using Fred West as a reason to boycott John West foods. :lol: More to the point is the fact that the Barclay brothers are based in the Channel Islands so avoid paying any tax. Plus the fact that the Telegraph won't exactly be sheeding any tears over the fact that this is damaging Labour more than any other party. And, of course, it gives "Dave" another bandwagon to jump on.
June 2, 200916 yr Something else to think about - The Daily Telegraph who brought this whole thing to light is owned by the Barclay twins..... As in Barclays BANK..... -_- Who lets not forget actually made money last year. They are one of the few EU/US banks to have made money. I'd rather give them my money than HBOS/Llyods.
June 2, 200916 yr I don't see it as a distraction as such, just a symptom of the people who are running big organisations or the Country. The similarities between them is breathtaking. Both have no moral scruples, neither of them have any integrity, they are only in it for as much as they can get. Gordon Brown was happy to point the finger at Fred Goodwin to take him of the front pages a few months back, now I suppose the bankers are off the front pages due to the Mp's. We have the greedy MP's for the greedy society we have become. Gordon Brown can pretend all he wants that he didn't know what the big banks were up to, but as PM and chancellor he was in the pole position to know what was going on for 12 years, and if he didn't then he is more of an idiot that I thought. Plus who owns the banks now, supposedly the taxpayer, but in reality it's the Government, who I wouldn't trust with a whelk stall. The bankers were greedy, but you kind of expected it somehow, but as for the Mp's these are our elected parliamentary representatives, who are charged by example to set a moral and democratic compass for all of us to follow. So in a nutshell they are as guilty as each other. Only the amounts are different. Edited June 2, 200916 yr by brian91
June 2, 200916 yr Well it did make me think, What about this "world wide economic crisis" we're in. The hype of the exposed MP expenses has kinda overshadowed the "recession", and made me forget all about it. Now I just think that it's not actually that bad anymore. It's hard to explain. :lol:
June 3, 200916 yr Author Who lets not forget actually made money last year. They are one of the few EU/US banks to have made money. I'd rather give them my money than HBOS/Llyods. That's not the issue though mate... If stringent regulation were to be brought in, it would affect Barclays as much as RBS... Obviously, they wouldn't want regulation, and would want to try to take the focus off the banking industry and onto something else.... The whole point is, that the MPs' expenses issue has been a godsend to the banking sector, who are breathing huge sighs of relief right now that the focus is almost certainly off them.... At the end of the day, the Corporate Banking sector has inflicted the greatest economic damage on this country since Hitler....
June 3, 200916 yr Author Well it did make me think, What about this "world wide economic crisis" we're in. The hype of the exposed MP expenses has kinda overshadowed the "recession", and made me forget all about it. Proves my point doesn't it....?
June 3, 200916 yr Author So in a nutshell they are as guilty as each other. Only the amounts are different. Very true Bri, but in terms of economic damage inflicted, the recession will be felt for a generation to come and has put millions out of work, whereas, MPs expenses has done relatively little damage to people in those terms... Which is the reason why I think that the likes of Broon and Darling should be raked over the coals for far greater sins than just putting in a few dodgy expense claims.... Yeah, bankers are greedy, but that's hardly an excuse for the damage they've done.....
Create an account or sign in to comment