Reform of the financial services sector?

Don't 'bank' on it....

Financial services industry spent £92m on lobbying last year

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The British Banking Association alone spent £6m, and boasted of 'lobbying wins'

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So how serious are ANY of the major political parties in reforming the banking sector?

Its all beyond me!

Bring back manufacturing, destroy the banking sector, jail the scum criminal bankers and seize their criminally gained assets for redistribution to the workers. Death to capitalism. F*** thatcher and her desciples cameron and blair.

Freathy wrote:

Bring back manufacturing, destroy the banking sector, jail the scum criminal bankers and seize their criminally gained assets for redistribution to the workers. Death to capitalism. F*** thatcher and her desciples cameron and blair.

Sounds like a plan

Are you a Lib Dem Freathers...................

Freathy wrote:

Bring back manufacturing, destroy the banking sector, jail the scum criminal bankers and seize their criminally gained assets for redistribution to the workers. Death to capitalism. F*** thatcher and her desciples cameron and blair.

Lets have a bloody revolution, with a Banker or Tory hanging from every lamppost.

I am sure the HSE would have something to say about hanging them too high.

Not if there's a Risk Assessment.

Freathy wrote:

Bring back manufacturing, destroy the banking sector, jail the scum criminal bankers and seize their criminally gained assets for redistribution to the workers. Death to capitalism. F*** thatcher and her desciples cameron and blair.

Can't argue with that. They're desparately worried and haven't a clue what to do, so are spending all their time trying to find ways to make their own huge capital stocks safe when the West really goes into meltdown.. not easy and takes years of bullshit. Commonly known as transferring huge private losses that are just sitting there waiting to explode onto the taxpayers of Western democracies run by the people they've been sponsoring.
The last much smaller shiift in 1976 ( just oil prices ) they got away with it in this particular country by blaming the lazy workers. This time they're blaming the lazy non workers .. you couldn't make it up... does anybody really fall for that crap deep down ? Apparently it's all the fault of a couple of million lazy gits. Somebody should tell these numbskulls that over 50% of the population don't work... that's a fact ... and it's been that way for all of my lifetime.

Anybody who has studied economics and has half a free brain knows their model is doomed to failure... it's a mathematical impossibility.... and we haven't the institutions and accepted cultural norms to do anything about it at the moment ... we are in a mess.

'They' might get away with it for another 5 years by creating a REAL underclass of 25% of the population, but I dread to think where that will lead.... civil strife and worse probably. Best eat the rich I think, far safer and far less violent than other possible outcomes. Then a change to social economics where need trumps greed, with Argyle being given a premiership league title every 15th year..... stuff Tony .... vote for me.

Too big to fail is the worst mantra anyone has ever come up with. Capitalism says they should have been left to fail. It would have taken care of all the Bob Diamonds and their Libor fxing shenanigans. As we have it state intervention to keep the banks going = good indeed very very good. State intervention anywhere else = bad unless you can palm it off to some pfi chummy who will pay minimum wage on temorary contracts to bump up profits.

Penz wrote:

Freathy wrote:

Bring back manufacturing, destroy the banking sector, jail the scum criminal bankers and seize their criminally gained assets for redistribution to the workers. Death to capitalism. F*** thatcher and her desciples cameron and blair.

Can't argue with that. They're desparately worried and haven't a clue what to do, so are spending all their time trying to find ways to make their own huge capital stocks safe when the West really goes into meltdown.. not easy and takes years of bullshit. Commonly known as transferring huge private losses that are just sitting there waiting to explode onto the taxpayers of Western democracies run by the people they've been sponsoring.
The last much smaller shiift in 1976 ( just oil prices ) they got away with it in this particular country by blaming the lazy workers. This time they're blaming the lazy non workers .. you couldn't make it up... does anybody really fall for that crap deep down ?

Anybody who has studied economics and has half a free brain knows their model is doomed to failure... it's a mathematical impossibility. They might get away with it for another 5 years by creating a REAL underclass of 25% of the population, but I dread to think where that will lead. Best eat the rich I think, far safer and far less violent than other possible outcomes. Then a change to social economics where need trumps greed.

You don't even need to have studied economics. The model is based on exponential growth (or at least increasing growth). Given that the world is finite, and can therefore support a finite population, any model based on exponential growth is doomed to fail; you can't indefinitely support exponential growth in a finite space!

The whole 'blame Gordon Brown for the deficit' line is only half the story. Growth can only be achieved by either spending less to produce your product, or selling it for more (or both). At a macro scale this requires prices to inflate while wages are (relatively) depressed. The inevitably consequence of that is that people having less money to buy products. The only way a growth model can therefore survive is either by creating money out of nothing, i.e. through debt, or through increasing the pool of people available to buy the products via immigration.
We have seen both of these. Debt has been increased via both public debt (e.g. the disasterous PFI schemes, and privitisation, where public money effectively gets shovelled into the hands of private businesses) which has caused the increased level of government debt, and also private debt (the fake 'boom' is the mortgage market, lax lending from banks). It is rarely mentioned that the level of private debt is actually far higher than that of public debt, and is also a huge problem for growth. I often wonder how many of those who regularly chastise Nu Labour for running up a huge debt, have effectively done the same, or have otherwise benefitted from the house price inflation that has landed others with increased debt. In the case of both public and private debt it has become unsustainable and the market has crashed when people realised that this debt was ever increasing and never going to get paid back.

As for immigration it is largely unpopular with the electorate, but none of the main parties will do anything about it because our economic model relies on it. Of course the country has a finite capacity, and we lose things of incalculable value by continually digging up and concreting over our 'green and pleasant' land, not that any of that matters to those who run the country when their beloved free-market economic model is at stake. 'Getting tough' on immigration would be a sure-fire vote winner for the Tories, but they won't do it because they (like Labour) are too tied to an economic model that requires significant immigration, and are sponsored by corporations that require a continuation of the current immigration policy to maintain growth.

pepsipete wrote:

Freathy wrote:

Bring back manufacturing, destroy the banking sector, jail the scum criminal bankers and seize their criminally gained assets for redistribution to the workers. Death to capitalism. F*** thatcher and her desciples cameron and blair.

Lets have a bloody revolution, with a Banker or Tory hanging from every lamppost.

Nope, only the lampposts outside schools and playgrounds to teach the kids, our future, what greed and capitalism can lead to.

The banks/ finance industry is now just an elaborate ponzi scheme where the operators Bob D and co make huge "legal" cash mountains.

i think youll find mr d has been scapegoated, but hes not worried, YET, until his payoff becomes worthless, along with all the lucre gathering cnuts of this planet. the monitary systems are fecked and un sustainable and WILL fail.

before you say, 'but theres nothing to replace money with', i think youll find skills and knowledge and FOOD will become the new currency and all those toffs will feckin starve. smaller population, equal society, no global economy as there will be feck all to transport goods around the world in or with.

grow your own in your gardens on your roofs, up your walls, youll be fine

I've been posting on pasoti and ATD for over 10 years. And this is the first time ever that I've read a thread that makes me feel that maybe I'm not quite radical and left-wing enough

I can fish, sea or river, sail, row, garden, cultivate soil, and work wood and rope, perhaps such skills will be useful in the future?

I forgot brew beer...................

You should get back down on the street Andy. Your trouble is living in that expensive Devonport refurb.

Penz wrote:

You should get back down on the street Andy. Your trouble is living in that expensive Devonport refurb.

You're right Penz, Demport is just a yuppy enclave these days. It makes Kensington and Chelsea look like Harlem

I've been waiting with bated breath for Lee Jameson to jump in and comment on something that should be right up his street, but alas he is only interested in the best real ale tavern in Dorchester

He's off reading what the party manifesto has to say before running it past his constituency chair and checking with Brewer's Green. He will then issue a statement.

knecht wrote:

He's off reading what the party manifesto has to say before running it past his constituency chair and checking with Brewer's Green. He will then issue a statement.

No he won't. He'll publish a photo of himself shaking hands with Harriet Harman. It's what passes for political activism in Noo Labour these days.

Did anyone see the lady on How To Live Beyond 100? She was over 100 and still on anti war marches after becoming an activist when she saw the state of soldiers returning from the First World War. It was heart and soul activism. Totally brilliant.

A random photo ....
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Can't see anything and youme a bleddy MOD

No.