How can we save £60 billion?

[SimpyTimpy]

I am tempted to say that the bankers help fund the record increases in public spending over the last 15 years, and the amount they contribute to the economy is immense.

 

What people seem to be ignoring is that it's the job of the government to regulate and be guardians of the economy. The banks will only do what all other businesses do, and put the interests of their shareholders first.

[donkey]

One way of looking at it. Alternatively, they'll just move overseas - leaving a lot of the more lowly paid staff redundant and the country worse off.

 

There would be no point if developed nations wouild act in a co-ordinated way to make them pay back the bail outs they have had.

[Stormy]

For starters stop giving 40 million pounds a day to Europe.

 

Hear hear. And next year, it'll be £60 million per day

[brianthedog]

I am tempted to say that the bankers help fund the record increases in public spending over the last 15 years, and the amount they contribute to the economy is immense.

 

What people seem to be ignoring is that it's the job of the government to regulate and be guardians of the economy. The banks will only do what all other businesses do, and put the interests of their shareholders first.

 

Precisely. And the crux of the "credit crunch" was mortgages - you and I borrowing more than we could afford. People seem to forget that they - along with the banks - have a collective responsibility to borrow/lend within their means.

 

There would be no point if developed nations wouild act in a co-ordinated way to make them pay back the bail outs they have had.

 

But there's no sign of that happening. It was talked about when the bail-outs were happening, but since then no firm commitments. But in spite of that you'd still support increasing tax on one specific industry and it's employees?

[erebus]

PFI contracts in which one pays a minimum of double for hospitals, schools and other public works. The Costs to date are over 150 Billion, and all are off book, in other words not on government records as privately funded, but paid by you.

 

Nukes for bombing China, or is that a village in Afghanistan, anyway maybe its time to reconsider our world role, we do not rule the waves anymore, or so it seems, and pretending to might be seen in retrospect as foolish.

 

Getting M.P's who actually know anything instead of relying on advisors who have their own agenda.

 

Stop privatization of the various bits, Defense, NHS, Education, Tax and so on, as the who thing is a paper myth that they are more efficient and cost less, they bid less but eventually cost mush more, they are businesses anyway.

 

Tax evasion, 60 billion is just peanuts, and the bankers bonuses, well they are all registered abroad, through made up companies.

 

The UK is the Tax and business tax haven for the world, which is why so many rich criminals want to live here. Fraud capital of the world is not a title one should be known for, maybe?

[SimpyTimpy]

Couldn't agree more Brian, there's a couple of things:

 

- The money spent on aquiring shares from RBS, Lloyds Banking Group etc should be viewed as long term investments which should bring considerable profits to the UK government

 

- The economy falling into recession seems to be the effect of the end of the class system, where people spent beyond their means to live the lifestyle they couldn't realistically afford. The main part being the amount of borrowing based on property value, which was inflated due to people living beyond their means.

 

Where the banks come into this is that they lent to home buyers, then re-packaged the 'sub-prime' debt and sold it on the market. Those banks that bought such debt did it unwisely. However, every investment has a risk and if that risk was excessive, it was the job of the regulators to manage.

 

Don't get me wrong, some banks were reckless, but applying a blanket tax on all banks, including those that did not require bailouts is unfair. HSBC and Barclays spring to mind here.

[brianthedog]

Don't get me wrong, some banks were reckless, but applying a blanket tax on all banks, including those that did not require bailouts is unfair. HSBC and Barclays spring to mind here.

 

Interesting you mention HSBC here... Massive employer in the UK and head-quartered in Canary Wharf. And yet they've opened a head office in Paris (two hours away by train) and moved their chief exec back to Hong Kong. £50 says any government starts taxing them unfairly and they'll be gone...

[SimpyTimpy]

Interesting you mention HSBC here... Massive employer in the UK and head-quartered in Canary Wharf. And yet they've opened a head office in Paris (two hours away by train) and moved their chief exec back to Hong Kong. £50 says any government starts taxing them unfairly and they'll be gone...

 

The move of the Chief Execs to HK was purely political - showing that the emphasis is as much on the east of the world as it is the west.

 

Most of HSBC's growth is attributed to the east, so it made sense to move the Chief Exec there whilst keeping the chairman in the UK.

 

The head office in Paris is simply another office for European banking, there's a number across the world including New Jersey, Vancouver, Sheffield, London, Hong Kong etc.

[donkey]

But there's no sign of that happening.

 

Nor will there be while there is widespread acceptance and apathy of the way we've all been screwed over.

 

you'd still support increasing tax on one specific industry and it's employees?

 

I don't think Anna was refering to the cashiers and clerks when she said tax the banks and the bankers. It wouldn't be so much a tax as a repayment. With enough public pressure, it could happen. It's early days yet. I wouldn't be suprised if there was some internationally co-ordinated action against the banks once the chaos caused by the recession settles down a bit.

[brianthedog]

The move of the Chief Execs to HK was purely political - showing that the emphasis is as much on the east of the world as it is the west.

 

Most of HSBC's growth is attributed to the east, so it made sense to move the Chief Exec there whilst keeping the chairman in the UK.

 

The head office in Paris is simply another office for European banking, there's a number across the world including New Jersey, Vancouver, Sheffield, London, Hong Kong etc.

 

Very true, but I thought it interesting that they should do that when Paris is physically so close to London...