anarchist Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 A futile gesture. Pathetic really. Envy, pure and simple. Goodwin attracts the wrath of the feeble minded. He is seen as a person to blame for the current crisis. He played his part but it's the hoi polloi who are to blame for swallowing the "live now pay later" mentality hook, line and sinker. As if a few bricks will make the slightest difference to him. He has been put forward by Brown, Darling and Harman to try to take the heat off them. Now it has backfired and the loonies are out on the streets, after the target the politicians suggested. I genuinely feel sorry for Goodwin. Ignore the size of his pension and look at the facts. His pension was negociated by a Government minister and the bank as a severance deal to persuade him to stand down from his job. Everyone agreed to the deal. Now the Prime Minister and his henchmen are saying, "Ignore the fact that our idiots gave him this money, he is a greedy useless ******* who doesn't deserve the rewards that we bestowed on him"... "Oh and you might like to ignore the fact that we put him up for a knighthood as well". I'm sorry, but this just doesn't wash. If I'd been given a pension in return for me taking early retirement then I would expect the people who offered it to keep up their side of the bargain. If I were in Sir Fred's shoes I would take the money. It makes no difference to him where his pension is paid. He can easily clear off and live in the Bahamas where the money he spends will benefit the local economy and not ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 How spectacularly naive. How spectacularly cretinous The Law is the same for all. Legal practice and enforcement aren't - never have. Feel free to revert when you can appreciate the difference I thought that as well,listening to BBC national radio this morning I was told that forensic officers had taken away his car for further examination.They did'nt take away my Toyota Yaris when it was broken into last July. Mmm, gee, let me think ...maybe because you were not likely to be a member of a terrorist organisation, which is reportedly intent on performing criminal acts against every other person (banker or otherwise) they perceive to be responsible for the global financial crisis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treatment Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 And ignore it.. OOf, that was very incisive, and also so true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rioja Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 As an aside why the hell are RBS paying for his security? Either RBS protect him and his property or the police do it - both ways it's the taxpayer who ultimately pays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blurt Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 A futile gesture. Pathetic really. Envy, pure and simple. Goodwin attracts the wrath of the feeble minded. He is seen as a person to blame for the current crisis. He played his part but it's the hoi polloi who are to blame for swallowing the "live now pay later" mentality hook, line and sinker. As if a few bricks will make the slightest difference to him. of course their envious he,s got an house some of these who have had a go will be standing to lose theirs and as for the bricks not making the slightest difference to him they will if the next lot are aimed at him theres a lot of angry people out there with nothing left to lose they maybe one or two more on the hit list Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 The Law is the same for all. Legal practice and enforcement aren't - never have. : Oh I'm sorry, when you put forward the argument The Law is the same for all I thought you believed it actually meant something in reality, rather than just being a theory, beacause if it's only true as a statement of principle, it doesn't actually serve the purpose of backing up the point you were trying to make, which is that nobody is above the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cressida Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 It's wrong to attack someone or their property, he has a family who would have had to suffer this as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 For the record....should Sir Fred ever have to return any of the monies he robbed us blind of, he is insured for it. Most CEO's & major Dirs are protected by a specialist insurance policy known as "Directors & Officers Insurance (D&O)". And guess who was the biggest insurer in this market.... AIG Grrrrr... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Oh I'm sorry, when you put forward the argument The Law is the same for all I thought you believed it actually meant something in reality, rather than just being a theory, beacause if it's only true as a statement of principle, it doesn't actually serve the purpose of backing up the point you were trying to make, which is that nobody is above the law. That point does not need making. It is a statement of fact, not a subjective or rethorical question. The extent to which a person will be penalised for breaching the law will vary, in no small proportion, in dependence on the quality of legal advice they are able to afford. An that's saying nothing of any 'influence' affecting the enforcement in the first place, of course - and that only matters for people in position of influence indeed. In that respect, legal practice and enforcement makes a difference. It doesn't chage the fact that a person, pauper or millionaire, would have to infract the same Law in the first place, for these issues to arise. So. Your stance appears to be that you believe Goodwin is somehow 'above the law'. Prove that, and I might actually start to take you seriously. Until then, to my knowledge, the only people who have broken any laws are those idiots who saw fit to resort to vandalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scabbydog Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 For the record....should Sir Fred ever have to return any of the monies he robbed us blind of, he is insured for it. Most CEO's & major Dirs are protected by a specialist insurance policy known as "Directors & Officers Insurance (D&O)". And guess who was the biggest insurer in this market.... AIG Grrrrr... I'm sort of puzzled as to why you accuse Goodwin of robbing anyone. His pension was negotiated by a Government appointee and the banks board as a severance deal. Goodwin gave up his right to a years salary and lucrative share options as part of the deal. It might seem that a pension of £700K is an awful lot of money in the circumstances, but it was all legally obtained, and no amount of gesture politics from Harriet Harman will alter that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.