Emily Moore Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Manchester United! No, it's more like Mansfield's Manager and Players expecting the same salary as Manchester United's and then saying, if we don't get what we want, we'll take our balls elsewhere. Well, I wish they would. You should probably address your concerns to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. They were the people who bought billions of pounds of shares at double their current value. They are the ones who set up the quango to oversea the running of the bank and put in place not only Steven Hester, but also his remuneration package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 You should probably address your concerns to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling. Wouldn't that be pretty pointless, as they're not in a position to do anything now, are they? And haven't been for some time. We all know Labour didn't do as good a job at taking on the banks as they could/should have but at least the economy had started to pick up with their policies for growth. Now we've got a double dip, that the Tories have been warned about time and time again, but they don't care, they won't lose their homes or jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Wouldn't that be pretty pointless, as they're not in a position to do anything now, are they? And haven't been for some time. We all know Labour didn't do as good a job at taking on the banks as they could/should have but at least the economy had started to pick up with their policies for growth. Now we've got a double dip, that the Tories have been warned about time and time again, but they don't care, they won't lose their homes or jobs. What policies for growth did they have other than quantitative easing which can only stimulate growth for the period of stimulus. Once the stimulus stops so does the growth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Wouldn't that be pretty pointless, as they're not in a position to do anything now, are they? And haven't been for some time. We all know Labour didn't do as good a job at taking on the banks as they could/should have but at least the economy had started to pick up with their policies for growth. Now we've got a double dip, that the Tories have been warned about time and time again, but they don't care, they won't lose their homes or jobs. Not to mention the fact that the tories are going to try and bribe people with tax cuts but they'll say it's to stimulate the economy, which is crackers because it will just drive up inflation and increase the deficit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emily Moore Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Wouldn't that be pretty pointless, as they're not in a position to do anything now, are they? And haven't been for some time. We all know Labour didn't do as good a job at taking on the banks as they could/should have but at least the economy had started to pick up with their policies for growth. Now we've got a double dip, that the Tories have been warned about time and time again, but they don't care, they won't lose their homes or jobs. In that case isn't it a bit rich for the people who set him on and set up his remuneration package to be saying that the terms of the package were too generous and shouldn't be honoured? It isn't a case of whether Hester is doing a good job that seems to be the issue because the concensus appears to be that he is. It isn't even that he was offered a lot of money to do the job. The problem is that the markets are seeing politicians interfering with the way a private business is being run and that is adversely affecting the share price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 Not to mention the fact that the tories are going to try and bribe people with tax cuts but they'll say it's to stimulate the economy, which is crackers because it will just drive up inflation and increase the deficit. If you gave people earning £15k or less per annum a tax cut would that cost more than giving people earning less than £30k a year increased benefits? If you give lower-paid earners a tax cut, would that encourage some of those on benefits to get a job? If you wanted to 'stimulate the economy' through personal tax cuts, would it not make more sense to increase the higher rate tax threshold? - After all, if you give a low-paid worker an additional £10 a week, all you're going to do is make it a bit easier for him to pay his existing bills. If you give a higher-rate taxpayer an additional £10 a week, you are probably going to increase his discretionary income and he'll go out and buy a new imported car. If tax cuts are going to be used to stimulate the economy, wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the tax burden on small businesses and make it easier (and cheaper) for them to offer new jobs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 The problem is that the markets are seeing politicians interfering with the way a private business is being run. Hiya Emily. RBS isn't a private business it's a plc. As such it is owned by its shareholders. The government are the representative of the majority shareholder. Do you think it incorrect that a majority shareholder of a plc has a say in the running of the business? ...and that is adversely affecting the share price. Are you aware that, apart from a high on the 23rd of January, the RBS share price is now higher than it has been at any time since last July? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 If tax cuts are going to be used to stimulate the economy, wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the tax burden on small businesses and make it easier (and cheaper) for them to offer new jobs? No, if small businesses got tax breaks they would not employ more people. More people would mean more products and services, therefore the business would have to shift more goods in markets which already run at full capacity. All it would do is increase profit for small businesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 No, if small businesses got tax breaks they would not employ more people. More people would mean more products and services, therefore the business would have to shift more goods in markets which already run at full capacity. All it would do is increase profit for small businesses. More people in work equals more demand.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 No, if small businesses got tax breaks they would not employ more people. More people would mean more products and services, therefore the business would have to shift more goods in markets which already run at full capacity. All it would do is increase profit for small businesses. You think? How much does it cost a small business (plumber, electrician,painter & decorator, shop etc) to employ somebody? If you were running a small business (one which was doing well; a business which [if you were lucky] had customers queueing up) and the government said to you: "If you hire an additional employee, we will give you additional tax relief", might you be tempted to do so? If you did hire the additional employee, then your business might grow even further, that new employee would have a job, the economy would expand (even if only a bit) and both you and the employee would pay more in taxes (If the employee was any good, (s)he would bring in more than (s)he cost you.) If you chose not to hire the additional employee, how would you get richer from the tax break you didn't receive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.